ARCHIVED - Report of the Task Force on Government Transformations and Official Languages

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page

This page has been archived.

Chapter 6 - Recommendations
Recommendation No. 1: No turning back

Rationale:

• Official linguistic duality is written into the Constitution and is further set out in an Act that has quasi-constitutional status.
• An overall assessment of government transformations shows that official linguistic duality has not been an essential consideration in these transformations.
• The resulting general perception is that official linguistic duality and the rights that sanction it are not of high priority in the eyes of the government.
• The government must take a strong stand in order to demonstrate unequivocally and very publicly its firm commitment to official linguistic duality and to the communities that embody it across the country.

Recommendation:

That the government take necessary measures in order to:

• reiterate its formal commitment to linguistic duality in Canada as a fundamental value of our society, and reaffirm its role as a steward and promoter of this value enshrined in the Constitution;
• take into account the needs of minority official language communities in any transformations of the federal government; and
• clearly establish the measures to be taken further to this undertaking with regard to principles, structures and funding, to the point of discussing linguistic duality in Canada in Cabinet at least once a year.

Recommendation No. 2: Ongoing awareness program within institutions subject to the Official Languages Act

Rationale:

• In order for government transformation initiatives to be implemented effectively in terms of official languages, institutions subject to the Official Languages Act that enter into a transformation must be made aware of the fundamental nature of their obligations under the Act.
• On March 19, 1998, the Treasury Board issued a directive requiring that departments and agencies appoint a senior level official to report to the head of the institution on the attention being given by the institution to official linguistic duality and to the communities that embody it.
• Steps must be taken to ensure that the institution that has first and foremost responsibility is fully aware of its duty to do everything possible to ensure that requirements related to official languages and support for minority official language communities are met and have full impact.

Recommendation:

That the government:

• institute an ongoing general awareness program for institutions subject to the Official Languages Act with a specific government transformations component, and that senior officials designated as official languages champions in institutions have a specific responsibility in this regard;
• ensure that all other institutions subject to the Official Languages Act also designate senior level official languages champions who would report to the head of the institution and have a specific responsibility in matters of government transformations.

Recommendation No. 3: Provincial governments and the private sector

Rationale:

• Section 43 of the Official Languages Act stipulates that measures involving collaboration with provincial governments and the private sector may be taken to foster progress towards the equality of French and English, including support for minority official language communities.
• Through solid and appropriate financial support, the federal government can help official linguistic duality take root in new organizational cultures following privatization or transfers to provincial governments.

Recommendation:

That the government take advantage of the proposed transfers of responsibility to encourage provincial and territorial governments or their agents, on the one hand, and the private sector, on the other, to participate in, and collaborate on, the development of minority official language communities and to promote the use of both official languages in Canadian society.

 
Recommendation No. 4: Government transformation parameters

Rationale:

• It is worth emphasizing again that official linguistic duality is one of the country's fundamental values and is enshrined in the Constitution and set out in the Official Languages Act.
• In the case of government transformations relating to functions incumbent upon the federal government as such, the government must require the application of a linguistic regime that closely mirrors the one applicable under the Constitution and the Official Languages Act.
• In the case of transformations relating to functions that the federal government, while having exercised them, legitimately considers as being outside its purview, the scope of applicable linguistic obligations should be negotiated in light of the particular circumstances of the situation.
• In situations where the government is withdrawing from an area for which it legitimately does not consider itself responsible, and the government transformation results in a linguistic regime that is less favourable than the previous one, the federal government needs to take measures to support official linguistic duality otherwise, and in a compensatory manner.
• At the moment, the Framework for Alternative Program Delivery (Treasury Board Secretariat, 1995) does not accord official linguistic duality its rightful place and, for the purposes of the linguistic regime to be required, it needs to reflect the distinction to be made between the functions for which the federal government considers itself responsible and those for which it does not.

Recommendation:

That the government review the Treasury Board Secretariat's Framework for Alternative Program Delivery so that:

• respecting the language rights and commitments set out in the Constitution and the Official Languages Act appears as an essential and primary consideration in cases where the government transformation relates to a function for which the federal government is responsible;
• where a function is legitimately considered as being in a purview other than that of the federal government, the Framework specifies that the applicable linguistic regime must take the particular circumstances of the situation into account and that, inasmuch as this regime is less favourable than the previous one, compensatory measures must be provided to affirm official linguistic duality otherwise;
• more rigorous criteria be set out in the Framework with regard to support for the development and vitality of minority official language communities; and
• the Framework stipulates that it is necessary to consult with minority official language communities.

Recommendation No. 5: Consulting with communities

Rationale:

• According to organizations that represent minority official language communities, government transformations attest to a weakening of the federal government's commitment to them.
• They have asserted that the federal government failed to consult the communities on the potential impact of the transfer of responsibility to the provinces under certain agreements.
• The communities have expressed their strong desire to be consulted in future, from the outset of the process, on any transformation that could affect their rights.

Recommendation:

That the review of government transformations that affect language rights include a process of consultation with minority official language communities that is suited to the circumstances and that ensures that the communities can fully argue their position so that it may be taken into consideration.

 
Recommendation No. 6: A mechanism for joint action

Rationale:

• Government transformations have not proceeded according to an overall plan and have not been based on a pre-established joint action and approval mechanism, something that is all the more true in the area of official languages.
• On each occasion, it was up to the institution concerned to evaluate the official languages situation and propose a suitable framework.
• From this point of view, the Task Force feels that an organizational mechanism must be set up to analyse proposed transformations with regards to official languages.
• Without going so far as holding approval authority or a right of veto, this mechanism must promote the full consideration of official languages and the involvement of minority official language communities, and must establish itself as a "provider of advice" to decision makers.

Recommendation:

• The government should create a joint action mechanism to review all proposed government transformations from the standpoint of official languages and support for communities.
• The Privy Council Office, the Treasury Board Secretariat and the Department of Canadian Heritage should be the key players in this concerted approach to transformations.
• The review of proposed transformations should also involve ensuring that the process of consulting minority official language communities as required by the circumstances has been carried out effectively.

Recommendation No. 7: Partnerships with communities

Rationale:

• Some submissions by associations that represent official language communities encourage the establishment of partnerships with communities in certain situations for the delivery of particular programs and services.
• It is important to be cautious in adopting this type of approach, which entails the creation of a new, parallel program delivery mechanism that has not necessarily proven itself. That is why this approach must undergo limited trials that are supported in terms of both expertise and funding.

Recommendation:

That the government implement pilot projects to explore the possibility of establishing partnerships with minority official language communities with a view to the delivery of certain services by the latter.

 
Recommendation No. 8: Single window

Rationale:

• The obligations of federal institutions with respect to service in both official languages are clearly set out in the Official Languages Act and its Regulations. When offering service in a sustained and effective manner, there are often major difficulties in terms of the allocation of bilingual resources, given the limited number of employees.
• The concept of consolidating services through a single window holds a great deal of potential. The adoption of the single window approach as a means of providing services to minority official language communities in their own language has often been raised by the associations that represent the minority groups consulted.

Recommendation:

• The government should explore and, as the case may be, take full advantage of opportunities for innovation and improvement in service delivery to minority official language communities, and show that it is sensitive to the special challenges raised by the single window approach.
• The government should take special precautions when such cooperation is to take place with provinces and municipalities in order to ensure that language rights are respected.

Recommendation No. 9: Mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating the application of language requirements

Rationale:

• Real accountability requires effective monitoring and evaluation mechanisms.
• According to representations made by the organizations representing minority official language communities, these communities are sceptical about compliance with official languages provisions in the context of government transformations.
• This concern is centred around both existing situations and those that may arise in the future.
• There is a need for monitoring and evaluation mechanisms, to determine whether or not expected results are being obtained and to ensure that official languages requirements are complied with following government transformations.

Recommendation:

That, in cases where government transformations have already been carried out, the government:

• ensure that all organizations accountable to Parliament are under an obligation to report on their performance in matters of official languages; and
• order a review by an independent third party of existing monitoring and evaluation mechanisms to see whether organizations are fulfilling their obligations and what results have been achieved, so as to recommend corrective action where necessary.

That, with regard to transformations that are currently taking place, and those yet to come, authorities responsible for joint action work, through careful analysis, to ensure the effectiveness of mechanisms.

 
Recommendation No. 10: Remedies and redress mechanisms

Rationale:

• With respect to government transformations and their effects, the government must acknowledge that it is accountable to Canadians and that Canadians need a means of recourse and redress.
• In situations that result from government transformations and where the Official Languages Act will continue to apply, the remedies available to the public for ensuring fulfilment of the applicable obligations are those set out in the Act.
• In situations where obligations do not result from the Official Languages Act, but rather from agreements under which the provinces or the private sector, for example, have made commitments with regard to official languages, the remedies available in the event those commitments are not fulfilled will be those stipulated in the agreements.
• In cases where a redress mechanism has not been provided for, another mechanism to this effect must be accessible to people who think their language rights have been infringed.

Recommendation:

That, in the case of transformations that have already been completed, in the absence of redress mechanisms, the President of the Treasury Board agree to evaluate complaints and to take measures within the applicable legal and administrative parameters to obtain redress where necessary.

That, for future transformations, under agreements for transfer of responsibilities to provinces or municipalities, the government ensure that there is recourse to a federal authority.

Recommendation No. 11: Report to Parliament

Rationale:

• At the end of each fiscal year, the President of the Treasury Board is required to submit a report to Parliament on the status of official languages programs.
• Government transformations have aroused concern and scepticism among various political stakeholders that attach a great deal of importance to official linguistic duality.
• There is thus an obvious need to improve the means available for assessing the situation with regard to government transformations from an official languages standpoint.
• Accordingly, the government must adopt a policy of transparency and should make available to the public, by way of a report to Parliament, all the information required for a critical assessment of the situation.

Recommendation:

That the President of the Treasury Board, in his annual report to Parliament on official languages, report on the effects of government transformations on official languages, and that he be able to rely in this regard on the support of all the federal organizations concerned. 

 

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
• Next Page