Ottawa, May 23, 2001
Official Languages: A changing environment
Notes for a Speech to Section 41 Coordinators
Dr. Dyane Adam – Commissioner of Official Languages
Check against delivery
Thank you Ms. Gosselin for your kind introduction. I would also like to thank Ms. Trahan for inviting me to join you today.
I must admit that I was very keen to meet with you, since you work every day and with such determination for the advancement of the official languages in federal departments and agencies and for the development of official language minority communities.
The belt-tightening exercise imposed on the federal administration by political authorities as of the early 90s has definitely slowed the renewed momentum that the legislator had intended to provide for linguistic duality under the 1988 Official Languages Act. As you surely know better than I, the workings of government have been truly shaken by the staff cuts, especially the decrease in the number of full-time employees in all departments with a responsibility for official languages. This number fell from 225 in 1995 to 111 in 2000, representing a drop of a full 50% in 5 years. The paradox is that the cost of internal and external official languages programs, which was at $564 million in 1990-1991, had fallen to $510 million in 1998-1999, the same as the nominal level of 1977-1978, prior to the 1982 Charter, the 1988 Official Languages Act and recent landmark Supreme Court decisions.
I am confident however that your determination has not only helped to maintain several aspects of what was achieved with regard to official languages in this period, but has also contributed to the recent mobilization of the federal leadership as regards official languages. I have no doubt that your unflagging efforts have maintained the interest of several government decision-makers and have set the stage for the greater openness we are witnessing today.
An environment in transition
I would like, if I may, to share with you my understanding of the official languages environment. I will then invite you to share your own reading of the situation in the discussion following my presentation.
The new Official Languages Act of 1988 gave rise to many hopes. Without Part VII, we would probably not be here today discussing the importance of federal institutions in the development of minority communities. These hopes however soon gave way to the budget cuts of the 1990s. It was nevertheless in this difficult context that Cabinet approved the accountability framework for key departments in 1994.
Given that the official languages have not been a priority for the federal government for several years, the great success of interdepartmental action in this area and the progress made during a time of budget cuts are especially remarkable. An important achievement in this regard is the awareness raising among key institutions of their obligations under Part VII of the Act. The determined work of Canadian Heritage's interdepartmental team has been essential in identifying the stumbling blocks and finding creative ways of getting around them. But things are not all rosy yet and much work remains to be done. One can therefore hope that the recent strengthening of official languages leadership will ensure that the central agencies provide better support for Heritage's horizontal role with respect to section 42.
That brings me to the new environment that is emerging with respect to official languages governance. There has indeed been progress, an initial mobilization of the federal apparatus and of political governance. The strengthening of the mandate of the Committee of Deputy Ministers of Official Languages, CDMOL, has made it possible to engage bureaucrats in reflection that has led to a renewed vision of the federal government with respect to official languages. The reference to official languages in the latest Throne Speech is in my opinion especially promising as regards political leadership.
I am also pleased to see that it is easier to find best practices than it was in the past. The National Committe on Francophonie Human Resources Development and its English-language counterparts come to mind immediately as pioneers in this regard. For their part, Health Canada's consultative committees have ploughed through an impressive quantity of work in the past year. The creation of an interdepartmental committee at Industry Canada is also very promising in view of this department's role in minority community development. The creation of the Network of Champions and the awareness raising of federal councils, several of which created official languages committees, must not only be encouraged but also supported by provinding increased resources.
More recently, the appointment of the Honourable Stéphane Dion as minister responsible for official languages suggests greater future cooperation among the departments in question, and that the federal government will show greater compliance with its constitutional obligations for official languages in federal-provincial agreements on matters crucial to community development, such as human resources, health and early childhood.
Another challenge will be to examine the scope of Part VII of the Act. Section 41 coordinators are in a good position to know that some federal official languages initiatives seem to have come to a standstill as a result of the Department of Justice position on the scope of Part VII, which it deems to be declaratory rather than enforceable. This position apparently stems from a desire on the part of this department to defend its client in legal proceedings and, in my opinion, is completely incompatible with its responsibility to ensure that the State respects the Constitution, which clearly includes obligations relating to official languages. This position reduces the accountability of several departments for the implementation of Part VII and for the development of official language minority communities. Cabinet may perhaps have to examine this matter and consider a reference to the Supreme Court or any other measure required to clarify the matter.
On another topic, I would like to take advantage of the presence of your departmental communications officials here today to speak about the second part of section 41, which pertains to the promotion of the full recognition and use of English and French in Canadian society. Little has been done in this regard for several years and I believe we must heighten public awareness of the richness of our official languages as part of Canadian identity. Initiatives by Canadian Heritage such as the Year of La Francophonie, the Rendez-vous and the upcoming Games are examples of success that should inspire all departments in their efforts to create partnerships and lasting results. The CDMOL also expressed an interest in seeing the federal government as a whole intensify its efforts to promote official languages. The Office of the Commissioner is also considering increasing the resources devoted to this promotional work, and there is a very sound rationale for this.
Greater openness in Canadian society to linguistic duality would allow us to much more effectively mobilize federal, provincial, municipal, community and private-sector stakeholders in working toward the full implementation of the Official Languages Act. In another regard, OCOL has an obligation to respond to all media attacks on official languages, although we often feel very alone in doing so. I was very pleased to note recently that Statistics Canada responded to some erroneous data on official languages published in the print media. This is a fine example and all departments should include the promotion of official languages in the communications plans for their respective sectors. In other words, we must be proud of our official languages for the Canadian values they embody and the legacy the represent for future generations.
A final point with regard to communications, I would like to salute the efforts of Canadian Heritage and Public Works and Government Services Canada, which are preparing recommendations on the greater use of the minority press by federal departments and agencies. In my opinion, it is essential that the federal government dramatically increase its share of advertising in these media, first of all to forge closer ties with the minority communities that must otherwise rely on media in the other language for information, and also to support the financial well-being of the minority media by giving them their fair share. The role of section 41 coordinators and communications officials will be essential in implementing the new provisions, which I hope will very soon become official. The same is true for the development of official language minority communities.
New priorities and approaches by the Commissioner of Official Languages
The pride that our official languages should inspire has been at the root of my commitment as Commissioner since I took office nearly two years ago. After becoming familiar with my new duties, I soon realized that I had to sound the alarm with regard to what my predecessor had described in a 1998 study on the impact of government transformations as the "subtle but cumulative erosion of language rights". In my first annual report, I accordingly stated very plainly that the government was not showing adequate leadership in asserting Canada's linguistic duality, in spite of its many speeches on the importance of this duality as a fundamental value of Canadian society.
In reading previous reports, I was also struck by the repetitive nature of the complaints regarding respect for and implementation of the Official Languages Act. In several cases, the measures taken by institutions were superficial or repetitive and did not produce any lasting results. Moreover, several institutions had over the years become almost completely immune to our recommendations, the reminders in our annual reports and in some cases even court proceedings. Unfortunately, passivity and inertia had apparently taken the place of innovation and creativity.
This harsh reality led me to review our traditional approach of conducting investigations and making recommendations that had in many cases been insufficient to produce the desired change. It seemed essential that OCOL's efforts be reoriented so that it may serve as an agent of change and transform the culture of federal organizations.
To this end, I suggested diversifying our modes of action. Accordingly, we continue to investigate complaints, but we are developing new methods of resolving them more effectively. We are making greater use of negotiation, mediation and conciliation in the hope that the results will be more concrete and long-lasting.
It is reasonable to expect that any solutions developed jointly will have a more lasting effect than those put forward by OCOL alone. Rest assured however that there will be no negotiation of our role as defenders of minority official language rights. It is very clear in this respect that any solutions reached must continue to comply with the linguistic guarantees set out in the Official Languages Act.
It is therefore my responsibility to make a difference, to produce lasting results, hoping of course to make your work easier as a result. I am working steadily to bring about a change in approach. As you know, I do not have any enforceable authority, but I can exercise my influence. I try to be pro active, to work on several levels and appear as often as possible before parliamentary committees, since decisions are also made there. My approach also gives me the opportunity to better inform elected official and senior managers, specifically to inform them of the real needs of official language communities.
As I have repeated so often, my ultimate goal is to help contribute to a renewed vision of Canada. I spare no effort to see that the official languages are increasingly integrated into the workings of federal institutions. I want to serve as a facilitator for elected officials, senior officials and communities alike, which means that I must constantly remain attentive to them in order to better understand their needs and realities.
As you can see, the Office of the Commissioner plays an active role in a great many issues involving the rights and development of official language minority communities and the principle of Canada's linguistic duality. OCOL's strategic planning framework therefore includes traditional areas such as service to the public, language of work, the implementation framework for the Act, education and respect for section 23 of the Charter and the principle of equality of English and French in Canadian society in general. It also addresses new challenges such as the place of French on the Internet and in the Government On-Line initiative, as well as the role of immigration in the development of official-language minority communities.
Conclusion
In closing, I would like to draw a parallel if I may between my role as an agent of change and your role. We are all called upon to foster reflection among our colleagues and decision makers, and to suggest courses of action where a shared understanding has emerged and there is a desire to move forward. In concrete terms, the process leading to the preparation of action plans for the implementation of section 41 is the cornerstone of efforts to raise awareness among departments. It is therefore essential that these action plans include the broadest possible range of measures to foster minority community development. It is also important to work closely with the representatives of these communities to increase the number of linkages with their overall development plans. This will in turn enahnce your legitimacy internally.
Although plans relating to section 41 are important tools in laying out the future course of action, the attitudes and responses of your colleagues and superiors, as you well know, make a world of difference in their implementation. It therefore seemed necessary to go beyond legislation, regulations and established plans to ensure that official languages become a natural and integral part of departmental priorities. To this end, we must work to change organizational culture, and the example must come from the highest levels. Your work and mine are complimentary in this regard. Leadership must be mobilized in the departments and among decision makers. Official languages must become a natural reflex in decision making instead of just another obligation to be considered.
Hats off to you once again for your valliant efforts. Thank you for your attention and I now give you the floor.
