Bill C-13 | Even more teeth to protect the tongue

The new version of the modernization project of Official Languages ​​Act tabled Tuesday in the House of Commons has more teeth than the previous one. The Minister of Official Languages, Ginette Petitpas Taylor, did not distort the work of her predecessor, Mélanie Joly. On the contrary, it improved it.

Remember that the purpose of Bill C-13 is to modify the Official Languages ​​Act. It further enacts the Act respecting the use of French within private enterprises under federal jurisdiction in addition to making changes to other laws, for example with respect to the appointment of bilingual judges to the Supreme Court of Canada.

M^me Petitpas Taylor has obviously heard the criticism from French language groups, such as the Federation of Francophone and Acadian Communities (FCFA), who have been calling for a law with more teeth. But the minister could go even further.

It could, among other things, give more latitude to the Commissioner of Official Languages. The latter claimed the power to impose financial penalties on offenders. The current bill grants him an “administrative monetary penalty power” that will apply to companies like Air Canada and VIA Rail, as well as to all airport authorities.

Except that the reason for a complaint can only be sanctioned once, and the sanction is capped at $25,000. Will this sum really have a deterrent power? It is permissible to doubt it. Why not provide, for example, more severe measures for repeat offenders?

The FCFA also demanded that the coordination of the application of the Act be entrusted to a single central agency. Instead, the law provides for entrusting this responsibility to four bodies: Canadian Heritage, the Treasury Board Secretariat, the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages ​​and the Minister of Official Languages.

In our opinion, the sharing of responsibilities opens the door to disempowerment. A single body could very well take on the task alone.

Finally, many are those who raise, as does the Conservative MP Joël Godin, the lack of specific targets for Francophone immigration, an avenue to counter the decline of French in the country.

Canada is already behind on the goals it has set itself. However, the law remains vague on this subject and promises more specific measures in a future action plan. We believe specific targets could have been enshrined in legislation. It’s fine to promote the French language, but if there’s no one to speak it, we won’t be any further ahead.

Regarding the Act respecting the use of French within private enterprises under federal jurisdiction, remember that last November, the National Assembly unanimously adopted a motion reiterating the importance of applying the Charter of the French language (Bill 101) to federally chartered businesses. Knowing that two-thirds of businesses already voluntarily comply with Quebec law, Minister Petitpas Taylor will absolutely have to come to an agreement with Quebec on this issue in order to avoid any unnecessary confrontation and a possible duplication of administrative work for businesses.

In the end, and beyond all the measures that we could adopt in an eventual action plan on official languages, Ottawa must demonstrate a real political will to defend and promote French throughout the country.

Remember that a year ago, our colleague Joël-Denis Bellavance revealed that the Privy Council Office itself had not complied with the Official Languages ​​Act since he had distributed thousands of pages of documents related to the management of the pandemic in English only in the House of Commons. A month later, our colleague made public a document showing that nearly half of the federal departments and agencies were also breaking the law by not transmitting the progress report on the application of this law within their organization.

If the Trudeau government does not behave in an exemplary manner in the language file, it is difficult to see how it will be able to apply a new law, however restrictive.