Ottawa, October 27, 2003
Bill S-11
Notes for an address to the Senate Standing Committee on Official Languages
Dr. Dyane Adam - Commissioner of Official Languages
Check against delivery
Honorable Senators,
I thank you for giving me this opportunity to appear before you to comment on Bill S-11, a bill to amend the Official Languages Act.
This bill is very important. It will allow us to clarify Part VII of the Official Languages Act and, I hope, ensure that the government will abide by its commitment with regard to the promotion of English and French. As a matter of fact, I have been recommending for two years in my Annual Report that the Act be so amended.
I therefore welcome this new initiative by Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier. As we know, this bill is a successor to Bill S-32, which was brought forward in 2001. I had in fact appeared before the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs on February 21, 2002, to express my position on that bill.
I am pleased to note that Bill S-11 takes into account the three recommendations I made at the time to enhance Bill S-32. As it is worded, Bill S-11 clarifies the scope of Part VII of the Official Languages Act.
- It makes clear the binding nature of the commitment in Part VII by imposing a duty on federal institutions in a more explicit manner;
- It provides for the authority to make regulations so as to ensure that an appropriate system is put in place to implement the Official Languages Act; and
- It provides for access to legal remedies pursuant to Part X of the Official Languages Act.
Of course, in my opinion, Part VII already imposes a binding duty on the federal government. However, this opinion is not shared by all and, in the absence of unanimity, the courts sometimes find themselves with the responsibility to define its scope. The federal government’s duty will be made clearer by the wording proposed in this bill. Moreover, the government will be able to define the manner in which that duty is to be carried out, which gives us reason to hope that an appropriate system will be put in place in co-operation with the official language communities. Finally, I believe that legal remedies are necessary. When legislation imposes an obligation, it must be accompanied by a remedial power allowing the courts to supervise its implementation. For example, recognition of the minority language education right in section 23 of the Charter has resulted in several proceedings to ensure implementation of that right by provincial governments that had not fulfilled their obligations. If the minority language communities had not been able to turn to the courts to ensure compliance with section 23 of the Charter, they might not have their schools today.
As I have already stressed, the time has come to take action... For several years, I have noted with regret a certain stagnation and ambivalence within the federal administration with respect to Part VII of the Act. The federal administration does not know what is expected of it and sometimes has a tendency to act slowly when faced with ambiguity. As a result, the official language communities are disillusioned because they expect more from a government truly committed to promoting their development. I am thinking among other things of the recent judgment in the case involving the Forum des maires de la péninsule acadienne, in which the Federal Court criticized delays on the part of the government.
There is, of course, the recent and long-awaited government Action Plan for Official Languages. However, it focuses on some key institutions, whereas all federal institutions in various areas should be given clear directions about their obligations. That is why I feel that the government’s action plan could not be fully carried out without clarifying the scope of Part VII of the Official Languages Act: it is with the wind in its sails that the government must proceed and take action by eliminating the ambiguities that are reining in the enthusiasm of the federal administration.
Legislative action seems to me to be the appropriate course to correct the situation. In my view, enacting Bill S-11 would lead to a better understanding of the duties imposed on the government by Part VII and would improve the government’s performance in carrying out its commitment. That is why I congratulate Senator Gauthier for having brought forth a bill with much substance, which I am happy to support. This is an ideal opportunity for the government to demonstrate its renewed commitment toward the development of official language communities. As indeed the Action Plan for Official Languages says so well, and I quote:
Vibrant minority official language communities that are proud of their
identity and their culture and able to attract new members constitute an
asset for the country as a whole.
In my view, enacting this bill could help official language communities overcome many challenges and contribute to strengthening their development. In so doing, we would benefit not only these communities, but all of Canada!
I thank you for your attention and I will be pleased to answer any questions.
