Spring is meant to be the season of renewal. Each year, when nature regains its colors, the report of the Commissioner of Official Languages reminds us that bilingualism in federal institutions remains in permanent hibernation.
“The language of service remains a recurring problem. This problem suggests that recalcitrant institutions do not accept the premises that they must serve the members of both linguistic communities in the language of their choice,” laments Raymond Théberge.
He made it clear that this inability to be served in their language mainly concerns French speakers. In fact, we don’t often have to be told “ Sorry I don’t speak English » in departments or other federal agencies. Unsurprisingly, Air Canada once again wins the dunce championship in terms of bilingualism.
It is true that the number of complaints received by the commissioner decreased in 2023-2024, but he himself did not want to see this as an encouraging sign. “I assume it’s an anomaly,” he said. Since no incident like the shocking display of unilingualism by the president of Air Canada, Michael Rousseau, has provoked a wave of indignation, it has been business as usual.
After six years in office, not only has Mr. Théberge not observed any progress, but he sees no desire to improve things. “These federal institutions seem neither to adhere to the vision of a bilingual public service nor to support the creation of work environments in which public servants feel empowered to work in the language of their choice. »
*****
It is true that the bad example comes from above. The traveler unable to be served in French on board an Air Canada plane or the French-speaking civil servant who prefers to speak English so as not to be deprived of a promotion are not the only ones to pay the price for this procrastination which akin to passive Francophobia.
Last week, the Commissioner of Official Languages confirmed that he had opened, following a complaint filed by Senator Claude Carignan, an investigation into contraventions of the Official Languages Act allegedly committed by the Commission of Inquiry on foreign interference chaired by Judge Marie-Josée Hogue.
He deplores that all the documents presented by the commission, except one, were written exclusively in English, while a French version was available on various government sites. “Even the observations of the Government of Canada are only in English,” he denounced in his complaint.
Last year, Mr. Carignan also filed a complaint, for the same reasons, against the Rouleau commission, which was responsible for investigating the use of the Emergency Measures Act to disperse the Freedom Convoy. Mr. Théberge agreed with him.
*****
Fifty-five years after the adoption of the Official Languages Act, we can no longer argue that we must give time time to do its work. If there was any desire to advance bilingualism in federal institutions, it should have started to appear a long time ago. Who still believes this hoax? Poor Mr. Théberge seems to be the only one who is still upset about it.
As the demographic weight of Francophones decreases throughout the country, it is difficult to imagine how the concern to ensure the presence of French could increase in federal institutions. Obviously, being singled out year after year in the commissioner’s report doesn’t keep anyone from sleeping. And no one is punished one way or another for their lack of effort. The new version of the law will in principle give more powers to the commissioner. We’ll see.
Even if they appear insufficient in the eyes of many in Quebec, the measures to protect French taken by the Legault government can also fuel Francophobia, passive or active, in the rest of the country, where the adoption of Bill 101 had already created a concussion.
Obviously, the capping of admissions to English CEGEPs and the increase in tuition fees imposed on Canadian students outside Quebec wishing to enroll in an Anglo-Quebec university arouse both anger and incomprehension, as evidenced by the recent altercation between the Franco-Ontarian Liberal MP Francis Drouin and two Quebec researchers, Frédéric Lacroix and Nicolas Bourdon, who had gone to Ottawa to explain to a committee of the House of Commons the risk of anglicization represented by attending establishments of post-secondary English education in Quebec.
Mr. Drouin, who also chairs the Parliamentary Assembly of the Francophonie, called them “full of crap” and “extremists” for having used “an argument that does not hold water”, himself pleading that the Anglicization is a global phenomenon, also observable in France, Belgium and Africa.
Perhaps he fears that French speakers outside Quebec will be made to pay for the “extremist” measures taken by Quebec. However, we never needed an excuse to ignore them.