Mr. Chairman, honourable members of Parliament, it is my pleasure to be here today to speak to you about how we are addressing the concerns raised and to describe the steps that we are taking to improve service in both official languages at our missions abroad.
Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada is committed to promoting Canada's linguistic duality, communicating with and serving the public in Canada and abroad in both official languages and to creating and maintaining a work environment conducive to the effective use of English and French so that our staff feel comfortable using the language of their choice.
We recognize bilingualism as an important component in Canada's international relations and would like to take this opportunity to assure this committee that the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade is devoting great efforts to promoting linguistic duality. As the face of Canada abroad, DFAIT takes these issues regarding service in French at some of our missions seriously.
[English]
Allow me to first take the opportunity to tell you about some of the positive practices we've had in place for many years to ensure provision of bilingual service.
We ensure that Canadians are served worldwide at any hour of the day, 24 hours a day and seven days a week, by providing visitors to our missions with contact information for the Consular Operations Centre, which is staffed by fully bilingual employees.
Our public servant heads of mission are bilingual, and we operate on the principle that no Canadian employee is assigned abroad without first meeting the required level of bilingualism or taking the necessary training.
Prior to being posted, all heads of mission receive awareness training on their official language responsibilities. This includes a specific section in their head of mission manual on their responsibilities as heads of mission in ensuring the delivery of services in both of our official languages. Once at the mission, the heads of mission take steps to raise awareness regarding the importance of linguistic duality by regularly communicating to all staff on the need to ensure that an active offer of bilingual services is made at all times. This responsibility is part of their annual performance management agreement.
[Translation]
All of our locally engaged staff are instructed to provide active offer of service in both official languages to all visitors to our missions. Every effort is made to recruit locally engaged staff who speak both English and French. However, in some countries it is a challenge to recruit locally engaged staff who are fluently bilingual in both official languages. Locally engaged staff who are not fluently bilingual are instructed to always refer visitors to a Canada-based employee or to a locally engaged employee who is able to provide bilingual service.
The department also regularly conducts audits which include a review of the provision of bilingual services at missions. Questions asked during an audit are, for example, explain the mission’s capacity to serve the public in both official languages. They are asked whether they have an official languages coordinator, if training is available for Canada-based and locally engaged staff, whether reception services, signage and phone messages are offered in both languages. If an audit reveals deficiencies, the head of mission will rectify the situation.
[English]
Canada-based staff and locally engaged staff have access to online official language courses via Campusdirect at the Canada School of Public Service. These courses are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and many missions offer official language training to their locally engaged staff. I'd be happy to give you some examples of that later on.
The department also offers a specialized course to locally engaged staff receptionists, our front line of interaction with the public. This course is designed to sensitize them to Canada's linguistic duality. The program is called “Introduction to Canadian Society and Culture”, and it includes a session on bilingualism in Canada and the requirement to make an active offer of service. All groups that come to Ottawa have the opportunity to spend two weeks in our National Capital Region's bilingual environment.
[Translation]
Last fall, the department held a leadership conference that brought together 350 senior officials from headquarters. Our heads of mission also joined by phone. On that occasion, we were pleased to welcome the Commissioner of Official Languages, who gave a speech on the critical role played by our department in the promotion of Canada’s linguistic duality in the world. He effectively sensitized our executive cadre on the pivotal role they each have to fulfill that commitment. He will return to address our executive committee next month, on December 20.
Last February, DFAIT made numerous efforts to ensure that Canada showed an exemplary level of bilingualism in its activities at the 2010 Winter Olympic Games. For example, all promotional products related to the 2010 Reasons to Do Business program were in both official languages. We have already started to focus on ensuring linguistic duality during the Pan American and Parapan Games which will take place in the Toronto region in July and August of 2015. We will do our part to ensure that Canada demonstrates an exemplary level of bilingualism. Our staff, promotional products, signage, key messages and speeches will be bilingual.
[English]
I'd now like to address the issues regarding service in French at some of our missions that were raised during Mr. Graham Fraser's presentation to the standing committee on November 4, 2010, and I'd like to thank you for bringing those issues to our attention.
We communicated immediately with the missions identified and asked them to look into the situation. We have discovered, and it's been brought to my attention, that at one mission, in London, a document was returned to a client in the wrong official language. In another, during the absence of the consul and vice-consul for meetings and consular emergencies, an active offer of service may not have been offered by locally engaged staff. This was in Kampala. Elsewhere, visitors might not have been served in French in Bogotá and Santo Domingo.
Again, thank you for bringing those cases to our attention.
[Translation]
We have responded by directing these missions to implement corrective measures immediately to ensure that this does not happen again. As a preventive measure, all missions will be asked to provide employees who deal with the public with a glossary of basic French terms and phrases. Management will be asked to regularly remind all employees, especially replacements for reception, about the tools at their disposal and the importance of locating a French-speaking employee should a visitor require service in French. And we will increase the signage that indicates that we offer bilingual services.
To reinforce these measures, we will ask managers to conduct a regular verification of active offer of service and to meet with all staff to discuss the importance of providing an active offer of bilingual service at all times. They will review procedures with staff to ensure that all employees understand the steps to be followed. Supervisors will be responsible for monitoring the situation regularly and for reinforcing the procedures during staff meetings.
[English]
I'd also like to take this opportunity to address the recent report card that the department received from the Commissioner of Official Languages. As you know, our department was one of the 16 institutions that received a report card this year.
We're taking this feedback very seriously indeed. We've been reviewing the results and will continue to work in close collaboration with the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages to take the necessary remedial action.
Noted areas of strength were the overall management of the official languages program; awareness sessions for all staff at all levels; an integrated system for monitoring, including official language performance at missions; and promotion of linguistic duality by celebrating
[Translation]
the Journée internationale de la Francophonie.
We are also a member of the Implementation Committee of Citizenship and Immigration Canada’s 2006-2011 Strategic Plan to foster immigration to francophone minority communities.
Through the Speakers Program, DFAIT officials made several outreach efforts to be in contact with the official language minority communities in order to promote our mandate, priorities, programs and services.
To address the areas requiring improvement, we are finalizing a three-year Results-Based Action Plan 2010-2013, related to the official language minority communities, that is to say Part VII of the Official Languages Act. We have also struck a senior-level committee to look at issues related to francophone employees, such as promotion, language of work and so on.
My colleague Roxanne Dubé is here with me today. She is our official languages champion and co-chair of the committee I just referred to.
We have also established a network of official languages coordinators representing headquarters, regions and all our missions abroad and we hold quarterly meetings which are chaired by the official languages champion, Roxanne Dubé.
In closing, I would like to say that we are well aware that there is still work to be done. We would like to assure the committee that we will pursue initiatives already underway and continue to evaluate how we can improve and raise awareness at our missions abroad.
We are prepared to answer your questions. Thank you very much.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good morning, mesdames. I strongly suggest that you pick up your pencils, even though there will be minutes of the meeting. I'm going to be very polite. I'm extremely skeptical about what you said, Ms. Gregson. If we were in the locker room between two periods, I wouldn't believe you at all and I would tell you. Do you understand?
I'm going to give you some examples of places where there are no services in French where they are requested at the embassies. One-third of citizen files in the constituency of Gatineau concern all kinds of immigration issues in general, that is all of its aspects. Few cases involve passports, but a lot of cases are about visas for refugees.
On September 29, a Dominican citizen requested an interview in French, as the interview was supposed to be conducted solely in English, with Creole interpretation. She requested an interview in French. The embassy officer told the lady that was impossible, that this was the last opportunity for her to have the interview and that, if she refused, her case would be rejected.
If that isn't a major violation of that person's rights, it's a slap right in the face. It's utterly unacceptable. The person doesn't want to reveal her name. I understand her. In all the cases I'm going to cite for you here, I understand the people. They're afraid of your department. They're afraid of the embassies because they can deny them entry to the country of loved ones. Is that understandable?
So don't give me any of the nonsense you read me earlier; I don't believe it.
This person believes that a language conflict could be the reason why her request was denied. That's what happens when people don't understand each other; they're not very certain about the language. That happened on September 29, 2010. We were all alive that day. Incidentally, that was in Santo Domingo, in the Dominican Republic.
I'm going to cite you another example, which occurred at the Canadian embassy in Bogota. From September 2007 to March 2008, they handled an important file there for which there was a lot of correspondence. Our information was sent in French, but they answered us in English only. They don't have a translation agency for people. They didn't answer us in French. We have to translate the correspondence for our people. We're in Canada, not in the 51st American state.
In July 2010, again in Bogota, Colombia, a Colombian requested communications in French and received an answer in English only, and the visa application was denied. Would that be because he did not speak good English?
In Kampala, Uganda, in March 2009—I'm not going back to time immemorial—an e-mail communication was sent. We were told that it was impossible to obtain communications in French, that that was done in English only. It's all well and good to tell us it's a former British colony, I don't care. I'm in Quebec and I want to be served in French. The francophone federalists here also have a right to be served in French if they so wish. Do you understand me? That happened at the embassy.
I have another example that concerns London, England. In April 2009, I had the opportunity to chat with Tony Blair on my Palestinian mission to Jerusalem, the purpose of which was to go and observe the situation of the Palestinians. We spoke in French. He's British. And yet the Canadians there—regardless of how they define themselves; that's their choice—were unable to answer us in French. And yet the British Prime Minister spoke French to me. It's quite extraordinary. It was really ugly.
In Teheran, Iran, in August 2007, there was an extremely difficult case involving some sensitive issues; you can't imagine—perhaps you have an idea because you work at the Department of Foreign Affairs. Those people came and cried in our offices. They weren't even able to obtain the information they wanted, in French, from their embassy in Teheran in an extremely sensitive situation.
Mr. Kenney was made aware of that because there was correspondence in place and we didn't want those people to be short-circuited. That's the feeling I get about this. There's no scientific basis for what I'm saying here. Because services weren't provided in French, I get the impression they short-circuited the work or even the possibility for these people to get what we think they were entitled to. There was a lapse of time. We understand all that.
Whatever the case may be, I believe none of what you told me earlier.
I went to Ramallah, Palestine. Mr. Bilodeau received us. We're not talking about an embassy in this case because Palestine isn't yet a country. It's a consulate or something like that. Mr. Bilodeau speaks very good English and French. His father was an embassador. In view of the fact that he had to go to Palestine, to the Middle East, he had to spend a year in Ottawa learning Arabic, which he doesn't complain about. I don't speak any Arabic. He was our interpreter for a while there.
If that gentleman had to learn Arabic because he had to go and work in an Arab country—which I entirely understand—how is it that people at our embassies who represent Quebeckers and Canadians answer, "Sorry, we don't offer the service in French?" My employee, in my constituency, deals with those nice people. You'll understand the paradox.
I don't know whether I'm stirring up emotions, but one thing is for sure: today, people will want to know what your have to say in response to this situation and what you're going to do to correct it.
I read the 2007 annual report of the Commissioner of Official Languages and his 2008 recommendations with regard to your department. These people are supposed to have their CBC language levels. However, there are places where the heads of mission can't even be bothered to get them.
I'm waiting for an answer. What do you have to tell me on that subject?
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thanks as well to Ms. Gregson and all the witnesses.
Today I'll be asking a few questions. As you said, the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade was evaluated for the first time and received an overall mark of E. The overall mark was calculated based on the sum of individual evaluations, which represented more than 50% of the final mark.
I'll be brief. DFAIT received the following marks for each of the components: D for Official Languages Program management; C for service to the public; E for language of work; A for participation of English-speaking and French-speaking Canadians; E for development of official language minority communities and promotion of linguistic duality.
My first question concerns the third and fourth categories. In this evaluation, Ms. Gregson, your department received an A, which counted for 10% of the overall mark, and an E for language of work. I imagine you examined the second volume of the annual report of the Commissioner of Official Languages. With regard to the participation of English-speaking and French-speaking Canadians and language of work, how can we—
[English]
How do we bridge that gap between the participation of English- and French-speaking Canadians and make improvements in the language of work? There are other points I would want to go into, but have you thought about that?
:
That's an excellent question, and I think it's at the heart of the preoccupations of the department on a day-to-day basis: how can we better fulfill the spirit of the law so that whether you are francophone or anglophone, you can feel truly comfortable working in the language of your choice?
Ms. Gregson was asked earlier about some of the weaknesses pointed out in the commissioner's report, and she pointed those out.
I think it's important to know that with respect to the language of work, it was mentioned in the report of the commissioner that 85% of our francophone employees felt that the materials and the tools provided for their work, including software, were available in the language of their choice; some 81% of them felt free to use the official language of their choice during meetings in their work unit; and 80% said that the training offered by their work unit in the official language of their choice was there for them to take.
Let's be frank: we live in a global environment. What can you do in an environment in which English is becoming more and more the dominant language? That's why we deliberately approached the Commissioner of Official Languages back in November and asked if he would come to address all of the EX members of our department in our leadership meeting and talk specifically about the language of work.
He did so beautifully. He made it very clear that in order to perform in many foreign languages abroad, your best foot forward is to be prominent in both your official languages to begin with, and he was quite convincing that way.
We also approached eight heads of mission, francophones and anglophones—thoroughly seasoned ones, from different parts of the world—and asked if they would care to tape a little video talking about the importance of official languages in the work that they do. They did so, and we put those vignettes on the home page of the department for all of the employees to see and listen to.
The goal there was to sensitize particularly the young recruits in the department, who hear a lot about foreign languages, about how important it is to perform in both your official languages when you're abroad to better advance the interests of Canada and better speak back to the community of Canada and represent them well when you meet with them.
We also—and this is my last point, because I don't want to take too much of your time—made sure that in our senior management meetings we would almost force a situation whereby both official languages would be the language of work. Not only do we ask for an English and a French version of documents, but we ask for an integrated version to be used as the document for discussion around the table.
We alternate in certain meetings. One week it's French and one week it's English, so that people can be sensitized to look at French, to read French, and to speak French. Those are a few examples.
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would just like to make a few comments before handing over to my colleague so that he can get an answer to his questions.
Earlier we talked about Bogota. First, mesdames, I would like to tell you that I find it unfortunate that the deputy minister is not appearing here today instead of you. Let me tell you that we might have been more vehement with him. You're being sent to the front to answer questions, but it's the deputy ministers who are in fact responsible.
That said, my own constituency office is having problems with Bogota. The service we have with Columbia is so terrible that it is jeopardizing certain extremely important cases, such as family reunifications, cases for which all the applications are legitimate and all documents have been put together. The fact that there is no service in French often causes a problem. Consequently, that sometimes delays case processing by one year or even two. It's quite a complicated situation.
I find it surprising that, although we're talking about free trade with Columbia, we're unable to reach immigration agreements with that country simply because we don't have services in the language of our choice. That creates a major dilemma.
Extremely important things have to be done. I can't wait to meet with the deputy ministers concerned. I don't want to hound you—I know you have a job to do—but an E is unacceptable, especially for the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. You absolutely have to take that into consideration; that's fundamentally important.
Now I'm going to let my colleague finish answering his questions and also let you answer them.