Statement made on 08 February 2011 by Senator Maria Chaput
Hon. Maria Chaput:
Honourable senators, I rise today in support of Senator Tardif's motion. I believe that, in the current circumstances, it is absolutely necessary for the Commissioner of Official Languages to appear. To be fair and as a sign of respect, we must give the commissioner the opportunity to respond, here in this chamber, to the criticisms that have been made.
As an officer of the Parliament of Canada, the Commissioner of Official Languages has a very important role to "ensure respect for English and French as the official languages of Canada and ensure equality of status and equal rights and privileges as to their use in all federal institutions."
According to section 56 of the Official Languages Act:
It is the duty of the Commissioner to take all actions and measures within the authority of the Commissioner with a view to ensuring recognition of the status of each of the official languages and compliance with the spirit and intent of this Act in the administration of the affairs of federal institutions, including any of their activities relating to the advancement of English and French in Canadian society.
That is the commissioner's duty.
It was suggested that Bill C-232 "has nothing whatsoever to do with the Official Languages Act," and that the commissioner had gone outside his mandate by supporting this legislative initiative, which would ensure that all judges appointed to the Supreme Court of Canada understand both official languages, without exception.
But a seasoned expert on the matter told me, and I quote:
The Commissioner of Official Languages must promote the rights of the defendant and equal access to the services of the Supreme Court. He should intervene to force the government to not make exceptions to the equal status of languages with respect to their use in an institution as fundamental as the Supreme Court.
It has been said that Bill C-232 "clearly goes against the principles of the Official Languages Act and the constitutionally protected rights of Canadians."
I would suggest that Bill C-232 is an affirmation of the principle of the substantive equality of the two official languages, pursuant to the Official Languages Act and the constitutional rights of Canadians.
A prominent legal scholar recently explained to me that:
Institutional bilingualism . . . means that the entire judicial or government machinery must be able to meet the demand for service delivery equally in both official languages across the entire organization; that Parliament clearly can require that judges speak both official languages as a condition of their appointment and can force them to use both languages; and that this is done in other multilingual countries and does not violate any Canadian laws.
It has also been suggested that "the commissioner [should have to] publicly justify" his decision to support Bill C-232. I think that is an excellent idea and I completely agree. There would be nothing unusual about it.
As a result of a motion by the Honourable Senator Comeau, the Senate did resolve into a Committee of the Whole on October 4, 2006, in order to receive Graham Fraser regarding his appointment as Commissioner of Official Languages. On that occasion, Mr. Fraser graciously answered our questions and gave his point of view on several topics related to official languages. He said, and I quote:
As you know, the commissioner has six roles or functions in the enforcement of the Official Languages Act — a promotion and education role, a monitoring role in terms of the impact of government initiatives, a liaison role with minority communities, an ombudsman role in dealing with complaints, an auditing function in terms of the public service and a judicial intervention function.
Some have alleged that the commissioner has exceeded his mandate, as set out by law. I think it is time we heard from the Commissioner of Official Languages, so he may respond to the criticisms that have been levelled against him and so he may explain his expertise regarding this issue.
It is clear that some confirmation is needed and therefore it would be only logical for the Senate to resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole in order to welcome Mr. Fraser again, so he may respond to the questions that have come up recently in the Senate.
I thank Senator Tardif for having moved this motion and I encourage all honourable senators to support it so that the Senate may resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole in order to receive Mr. Fraser again.
Please click here to read the full text of this debate