LANG Committee Meeting
Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
37th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION
Standing Committee on Official Languages
EVIDENCE
CONTENTS
Tuesday, November 4, 2003
| ¿ | 0910 |
 |
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault (Saint-Lambert, Lib.)) |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau (Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs, Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs ) |
| ¿ | 0915 |
|
The Clerk of the Committee (Mr. Marc-Olivier Girard) |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
| ¿ | 0920 |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Ms. Suzanne Labbé (Deputy-Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs, Office of the commissioner for Federal Juducial Affairs) |
| ¿ | 0925 |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau (Repentigny, BQ) |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
| ¿ | 0930 |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
| ¿ | 0935 |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. Eugène Bellemare (Ottawa—Orléans, Lib.) |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Eugène Bellemare |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Eugène Bellemare |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Eugène Bellemare |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Eugène Bellemare |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Eugène Bellemare |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Eugène Bellemare |
| ¿ | 0940 |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Eugène Bellemare |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Eugène Bellemare |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Eugène Bellemare |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Eugène Bellemare |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
| ¿ | 0945 |
|
Mr. Eugène Bellemare |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard (Saint Boniface, Lib.) |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
| ¿ | 0950 |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Ms. Suzanne Labbé |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
| ¿ | 0955 |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
| À | 1000 |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
| À | 1005 |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Ms. Suzanne Labbé |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Ms. Suzanne Labbé |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
| À | 1010 |
|
M. David Gourdeau |
|
Mr. Raymond Simard |
|
Mr. David Gourdeau |
|
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault) |
CANADA
Standing Committee on Official Languages |
|
l |
|
l |
|
EVIDENCE
Tuesday, November 4, 2003
[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]
¿ 
(0910)
[Translation]
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault (Saint-Lambert, Lib.)): We now have a quorum and can begin this morning's meeting.
The point of this meeting is to find out more about the judicial appointment process and what role bilingualism and linguistic duality play in this process. We want to find out whether these two criteria are applied.
The Chair of the committee, Mr. Bélanger, had another commitment this morning. I've been told that he may come a little later on. But we can get started right away with Mr. Gourdeau.
Mr. David Gourdeau (Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs, Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs ): Madam Chair, members of the committee, my name is David Gourdeau and I have been the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs since December 2001. Today, I am accompanied by Ms. Suzanne Labbé, who, since 1996, is the Office's Deputy Commissioner.
[English]
We are pleased and honoured to have this opportunity to inform you about the mandate of our office, to make a short presentation, and to answer your questions. We will concentrate on the appointment process and on language training, and these are the areas of interest identified by the committee.
[Translation]
The mandate of our office, as described in section 74 of the Judges Act, is threefold: first, to apply Part I of the Judges Act, which includes the administration of salaries and compensation paid to federally appointed judges; second, prepare budgetary submissions for the requirements of our Office and the Canadian Judicial Council; third, to do such other things as the Minister may require, within the framework of its mandate, for the proper functioning of the judicial system in Canada.
[English]
The current federal judicial appointments process was announced by the Minister of Justice in 1988, and it was fully implemented in 1989 when the advisory committees created under the process became operational.
The process was designed to enable all interested and qualified individuals to be considered for appointment and to provide a means by which the Minister of Justice could receive broadly based and objective advice about their qualifications for appointment. All information and documents related to the application and assessment process are available on the FJA website at www.fja.gc.ca,
[Translation]
or www.cmf.gc.ca.
[English]
This judicial appointment process has been working well, it is generally viewed as an improvement on the former process, and it enjoys the support of both the bar and the bench.
In 2001, 460 applications for the bench were received, 42 advisory committee meetings were held to assess these applicants in every province and territory, and 53 applicants were appointed to a provincial superior court, the Federal Court, the Federal Court of Appeal, or the Tax Court of Canada.
[Translation]
However, it must be pointed out that our office is not responsible for the appointment of Canada's Supreme Court judges, nor for the appointment of chief justices or superior court judges who may wish to sit on a court of appeal. These three types of judgeships are the prerogative of the Prime Minister.
Our office manages the applications of candidates, be they lawyers or provincially appointed judges, who wish to be appointed to a federal court.
[English]
In 2002 we received 499 applications, and there were 47 advisory committee meetings and 53 appointments.
Independent judicial advisory committees constitute the heart of the appointments process. It is the committees that have the responsibility of assessing the qualifications for appointment of the lawyers who apply. There is at least one committee in each province and territory. Because of their larger populations, Ontario has three regionally based committees and Quebec has two.
Candidates are assessed by the regional committee established for the judicial district of their practice or occupation, or by the committee judge most appropriate, by the commissioner.
Each committee consists of seven members representing the bench, the bar, and the public. The selection is made taking into account the factors appropriate to the jurisdiction, including geography, gender, language, and multiculturalism.
The committees are made up of a member of the judiciary, a representative from the provincial or territorial law society, a representative from the provincial or territorial branch of the Canadian Bar Association, a representative from the provincial Attorney General's office or a territorial Minister of Justice, and three members of the general public.
Committee members are appointed by the Minister of Justice to serve two-year terms, with the possibility of a single renewal. The ministers meet each year with the chairs of all the committees for an exchange of views concerning the operation of the process and with all the committee members as a group at the beginning of their mandate.
¿ (0915)
[Translation]
The Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs bears the full responsibility for the administration of the appointments system on behalf of the Minister of Justice. The commissioner himself has this responsibility, or he may delegate it to the secretary for judicial appointments. The commissioner or the secretary for appointments is responsible, on behalf of the minister, to ensure that evaluations be carried out thoroughly and in a timely manner.
The commissioner or the secretary for appointments attends every meeting of the advisory committees and is responsible for the liaison between the minister and the committees, as well as between the candidates and the committees.
Any lawyer or provincial or territorial court judge who is duly qualified and who wishes to sit on a provincial or territorial superior court, on the Federal Court, on the Federal Court of Appeal or on the Canadian Tax Court must submit their application to our office. Apart from the candidates themselves, any member of the legal community, or any interested person or organization, may submit the name of a person they feel is qualified to sit on the Bench.
Candidates must fill out an application form, which, when filled out, contains the basic information to be assessed. The form would also contain information which goes beyond the normal information found in a resume, such as any professional experience outside of the legal field which a candidate may have, other professional responsibilities, civic and community activities, suitable personality traits, personal information such as the candidate's health and financial situation, as well as on the ability of a candidate to listen and to preside over a trial in both official languages.
Of the 1,270 candidates who have passed the evaluation, 401 have stated they are able to preside over a trial in both official languages. Furthermore, candidates are asked to provide any other relevant information which may help the committee assess their application.
The criteria candidates to the judiciary must meet are spelled out in the Judges Act, the Federal Court Act and the Tax Court of Canada Act. We generally require that candidates have been members in good standing of a provincial or territorial bar association or that they have been members of a bar association for at least 10 years, and that they have worked full-time in a legal position under federal, provincial or territorial charter. Under section 97 of the Constitution Act of 1867, any person appointed to a provincial superior court must have been a member of the Bar of the province in question.
The candidate's file is handed to the relevant committee for assessment after the Bar association has confirmed that the candidate is a member in good standing and after the commissioner or secretary for nominations has assured himself or herself that the candidate meets the conditions as set out under the Constitution and under the legislation regulating federal court appointments.
[English]
Lawyer candidates are assessed by the committees. Extensive consultations in both the legal and non-legal community are undertaken by the committee in respect of each applicant. The list of assessment criteria included in the material we have distributed to you this morning,
[Translation]
—the forms for potential candidates—
[English]
has been drawn up to facilitate the assessment of the candidate. Professional competence and overall merit are the primary qualifications.
Committee members, would you rather I wait to distribute the documents?
[Translation]
The Clerk of the Committee (Mr. Marc-Olivier Girard): No, go ahead.
[English]
Mr. David Gourdeau: Parfait.
Committee members are provided with assessment criteria for evaluating fitness for the bench. These criteria relate to professional competence and experience, linguistic competency in both official languages, personal characteristics, and potential impediments to the appointment. Committees are encouraged to respect diversity and to give due consideration to all legal experience, including that outside a mainstream legal practice. Broad consultations by the committees and community involvement through these consultations are essential elements of the process.
The committees assess candidates and make recommendations in one of the three following categories: recommended, highly recommended, or unable to recommend for appointment. These categories reflect the advisory nature of the committee process. Once the assessment has been completed, candidates are notified of the date they were assessed by the committee, but they are not provided with the results of the assessment. The results are kept confidential and are solely for the minister's use. Each candidate's assessment must be certified by the commissioner or the appointment secretary prior to its submission to the Minister of Justice.
The files of all candidates are maintained in a separate and confidential databank in the Judicial Appointments Secretariat in the office of the commissioner for the sole use of the Minister of Justice. Lawyer candidates are notified of the date they were assessed, and the assessments are valid for a period of two years from that date. During that period of time a recommended or a highly recommended candidate remains on the list of those available for judicial appointment by the Minister of Justice.
Provincial or territorial court judges who wish to be candidates must also notify the commissioner in writing of their interest in a federal judicial appointment and they must complete a personal history form. The names of these candidates are automatically placed on the list of those available for appointment. They must, however, renew their expression of interest every five years, failing which their names will be withdrawn from the list.
Committees set their agenda as required, depending on the number of applications received and the judicial vacancies to be filled by the Minister of Justice.
¿ (0920)
[Translation]
Appointments to the federal judiciary are made by the Governor General on recommendation by Cabinet. Recommendations with regard to the appointment of puisne judges are submitted to Cabinet by the Minister of Justice, but it is the prerogative of the Prime Minister to appoint chief justices. The candidates which have been recommended to Cabinet are taken from a list submitted to the Minister of Justice by the committees and which have been certified by the commissioner or by the secretary for nominations.
Language training for judges.
[English]
This program was instituted in 1978, at the time of the creation of our office, when language training for members of the judiciary was transferred from the Public Service Commission training program to our office. The program's main objective is to improve the ability of judges to carry out their duties in either official language.
[Translation]
In 1969, shortly after the official languages bill was introduced in the House of Commons, the language training program was created on the request of the federal judiciary.
Then, when the provisions guaranteeing the linguistic rights of persons subject to trial were incorporated into the Criminal Code, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and into various provincial statutes, the language training program suddenly became much more important.
Since 1978, there has been a special section within our office which is responsible for the administration of the language training program for judges.
[English]
The objectives of the language training are twofold: first of all, general, to enable judges to understand the different levels of language and to communicate effectively in the second language; and also functional, to enable judges to be more effective communicators in the carrying out of their professional duties, such as to preside in court, to understand testimony, to read legal texts, to write judgments, and to participate in conferences on the law.
In order to reach these language training objectives, the language training program of our office offers to judges both immersion sessions in the second language and private courses.
[Translation]
French as a second language immersion courses are given each year in two 60-hour immersion sessions in January and in August for basic, intermediate and advanced levels. Course content is based on the need of each class. As it now stands, about 75 judges are enrolled in this program.
Second, an immersion session is given each September for judges who need to perfect their French. This class helps judges master the legal terminology, teaches them how to speak the legal jargon, and helps them improve their legal writing skills and their ability to understand lawyers and witnesses, to speak effectively during a trial, and to improve their public speaking skills, be it in a formal or informal setting. There are about 60 hours of formal class time for judges. About 30 judges are signed up for this session.
What's more, there is a session for those wishing to improve their French legal terminology. This session, which is given each April, lasts a week, which amounts to 30 hours in the classroom. This course is targeted to francophone judges hailing from common law provinces who have not had the opportunity to use French on a regular basis and who need to review basic grammar, French legal terminology and French legal writing skills. There are about 60 judges in this immersion class.
[English]
The English immersion session courses are designed for francophone judges who wish to learn English or to acquire better knowledge and use of the English language. The courses are given in one immersion session of 60 hours every February. Each level includes aspects of general language study as well as an aspect of legal language study within specific areas of the law.
Besides the immersion sessions, all judges registered in the program may benefit from private courses in order to review the notions acquired during the immersion session or to improve their language skills.
In order to encourage the judges to write their judgments in the second language, our language training program offers a judgment review service.
[Translation]
On top of the material developed and sold by the Public Service Commission of Canada's language training program, the language training program for judges also develops courses tailored to the needs of its clients in order to provide top-level classes in legal terminology, as well as in general language skills.
In conclusion, not every judge enrolled in the program will reach their objective of presiding over a trial in the second language, but all judges will improve their skills and thus, as an individual and collectively, contribute to bilingualism within the Canadian judiciary.
Thank you, Madam Chair, for having given us the opportunity to appear before your committee today. Ms. Labbé and myself would now be pleased to take any questions you may have.
Thank you.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): Thank you very much, Mr. Gourdeau.
Would you like to add anything, Ms. Labbé, or should we go directly to questions?
Ms. Suzanne Labbé (Deputy-Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs, Office of the commissioner for Federal Juducial Affairs): I think we can go to questions.
¿ (0925)
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): Mr. Sauvageau.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau (Repentigny, BQ): Good morning Mr. Gourdeau and Ms. Labbé. I apologize for coming in late.
My questions are based on a section of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and on a section of the Official Languages Act, which I will read to you, if I may. Subsection 19(1) of the Charter says:
| 19.(1) Either English or French may be used by any person in, or in any pleading in or process issuing from, any court established by Parliament. |
Section 14 of the Official Languages Act, Part III, says:
| English and French are the official languages of the federal courts, and either of those languages may be used by any person in, or in any pleading in or process issuing from, any federal court. |
Are these sections currently being enforced in the federal courts? Is this act applied and respected?
Mr. David Gourdeau: As far as I know, yes.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Do you think you could send us a breakdown, by province, of the number of bilingual judges?
As regards appointments to the judiciary, I took a look at the document entitled "Personal History Form", and it seems that, with the exception of the following on page 3, which says "Language(s) in which you are competent to hear and conduct a trial: English, French, other", that there are no significant language requirements imposed on judges.
My questions are as follows. Since subsection 19(1) of the Charter, as well as section 14 of the Official Languages Act, require the courts to provide services in both official languages, how important do you think it is for potential judges to be bilingual? Of the 1,029 or 1,069 judges currently presiding, how many are bilingual and how many are not? I have other questions. Is every single position on the judiciary designated bilingual, in accordance with the federal definition of a bilingual position? If not, how many positions within the judiciary are designated bilingual, and why are they not all designated as such?
I will let you answer these questions, and then, if I still have time, I have some more.
Mr. David Gourdeau: You began by saying "when judges are hired". Permit me to correct you: judges are not hired, they are not employees, they are appointed.
As for your question about the number of bilingual judges broken down by province, I will be frank and admit that we cannot give you a specific answer, since we don't even have that information in our files. We really don't have the tools to assess the situation, because a judge's degree of bilingualism is examined when a candidate's application is assessed. As you can see for yourself in the application form, there are several criteria, including bilingualism, but there is no formal test when the application form is evaluated. There is neither a written nor an oral exam.
Some judges may be bilingual or functionally bilingual when they are appointed. They may end up in a province where they preside over trials in English or in French only, and over the years, because all they do is hear cases in one of the two official languages, their degree of bilingualism weakens due to a lack of opportunities and practice. It's not necessarily because there is a lack of willingness.
I would say, however, that in every province and territory, there are judges who can preside over trials in either official language, but not every judge is bilingual.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Are there any positions in the judiciary which are designated bilingual?
Mr. David Gourdeau: I don't think so.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: If you cannot say how many bilingual judges there are in each province, how can you say that sections 19 and 14 are respected? I have nothing against accountants, I often consult with accountants, but if I do not know how many accountants there are in my company, for instance, nor even if there are any, it's hard for me to say whether accounting audits are even being carried out. If you don't know how many bilingual judges there are in the Northwest Territories, if you do not know how many bilingual judges there are in Manitoba, how can you claim that everyone has access to services in both official languages?
It says here: "[...] in any pleading in or process issuing from, any court established by Parliament [...]". If there happens to be a bilingual judge in Manitoba, but it happens to be his week to preside... Yes, there may be a bilingual judge, do you have to deal with the court the week he happens to be there, or can you always have access to the courts in French?
I think it is important, with regard to positions designated bilingual, not to say that there is a bilingual judge somewhere, but, rather, that, yes, citizens have the right to bilingual services at all times, in any legal matter or procedure.
Here is my question: Is the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms being upheld, and is the Official Languages Act being upheld? How can you claim they are, if you do not even know how many bilingual judges there are in each province?
Mr. David Gourdeau: Because when the parties arrive in court and indicate that they wish to be heard in the language of their choice, the machinery of justice in each province makes sure there is a judge available to hear the case in that language. If, for instance, a person shows up to enter a plea of “guilty” or “not guilty”, and if that person wishes to do so in the language of their choice, the person gives notice, and if there is no judge available that day, I imagine that the case is re-scheduled for the next day or...
¿ (0930)
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: But you're the commissioner and you imagine that the case will be rescheduled for the next day. Has a study ever been carried out to find out whether the Official Languages Act is respected by the Department of Justice? Under Part III of the Official Languages Act, the Department of Justice is one of four key players. One of these players falls directly under the Official Languages Act, namely the Treasury Board Secretariat, which has not respected the act and which has been the object of a complaint filed with the Official Languages Commissioner. The complaint was upheld because one of the four players did not respect the Official Languages Act.
I am asking whether the Department of Justice respects the Official Languages Act, and all you can tell me is that you imagine that people have the right to these services.
Second, let's say you are right and that people do have these rights. This committee has often heard that divorcing in English in a mostly anglophone province is a lot less expensive and much shorter than getting divorced in French in a province which is mostly anglophone.
So, sure, I have my rights—I'm sure people also have their rights in the province where my friend Mr. Simard is from—but do I have the same rights? I am going to be told to come back in a week or to wait until they find someone, and that they'll get in touch with me : don't call us we'll call you? Are you familiar with this expression?
So, this is my question. In your capacity as Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs, can you tell me whether section 14 of the Official Languages Act and section 19 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms are upheld within the judicial appointment process, and if I, as a Canadian citizen, have the same rights across the country?
Mr. David Gourdeau: As regards your first question about the Department of Justice, allow me to clarify something. The mandate of our office is to help members of the federal judiciary to deal with the Department of Justice from a distance. I do not work for the Department of Justice, I am not an employee of the Department of Justice.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Are you correcting me?
Mr. David Gourdeau: No, I say that because I cannot answer on behalf of the Department of Justice. I believe your other question had to do with whether the provisions of the Charter and the Official Languages Act were being respected. As I said earlier, my answer, to the best of my knowledge, is yes.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Fine. May I conclude by asking you a question? To help us both find out, do you think you could find out how many bilingual judges there are in each province and send us the study so that we may both find out whether the act, at least in that regard, is being upheld?
Mr. David Gourdeau: What I can commit to doing... As I said, it's hard for us to find out how many bilingual judges there are. Let me give you an example.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: You can't if you do not know how many judges...
Mr. David Gourdeau: No, no, but I will explain why that's hard to find out. I'm thinking of the particular case of a Saskatchewan judge who was a unilingual anglophone when he was appointed. He took language training through our office several years ago and now he is almost perfectly bilingual. He can preside over trials in both languages. I know that he even took a sabbatical year and I think he taught at the Université de Montréal in French; he has a good command of the French language. That's only one case, but when he was appointed, he was not considered bilingual. Today, he is. Conversely, there are people...
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: There are assessment tests; it is quite simple.
Mr. David Gourdeau: Yes, yes.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: You take an assessment test and you know whether or not the act is being complied with, I think. In any case, if you need a consultant, I could offer you my services. It will only take 15 minutes. I would tell you to have an assessment test every five years, like the Treasury Board Secretariat used to do, and then to check it. If you take 60 hours training, at the end you may well be bilingual or, at least, able to pass an exam. However, five years later, you may well have forgotten some things. It is entirely within the realm of the possible. Pursuant to section 19 of the Charter and section 14 of the Official Languages Act, it is mandatory to respect this.
You say that you don't know how many judges, if any, are bilingual. It seems to me that an assessment every five years would allow you to say that, in a given province, the rate is zero per cent, which would mean that the francophone citizens of that province would not have their rights respected, rights arising from the Charter and the act. If you don't know how many judges are bilingual... You don't know; there is no assessment process.
Of the 75 that are in training, how many are francophones taking bilingual training compared with anglophones who wish to learn French? This is another matter. In any case, I think it is a little slack; there is a problem there. That is my opinion, but I may be wrong. Would you agree with conducting assessments and sharing the results?
Mr. David Gourdeau: I for one would be willing to conduct assessments, but there is a practical problem. All the members of the bench demonstrate, I might say, a certain independence, given the notion of judicial independence. It is not the same context as when you deal with employees of the federal government. There is no chain of command; you cannot impose the same obligations. Assessment tests like you are proposing could only be done on a voluntary basis for the entire bench. "Judges have no boss".
¿ (0935)
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: I will come back on the second round.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): All right, Mr. Sauvageau. Thank you.
Mr. Bellemare.
Mr. Eugène Bellemare (Ottawa—Orléans, Lib.): Thank you, Madam Chair.
Today we are debating the process leading to the appointment of judges put forward by the federal government as well as the issue of bilingualism. However, you have an assessment committee and not an appointment committee. Someone might be "highly recommended, recommended, or unable to recommend". The list is then submitted to the governor in council.
Mr. David Gourdeau: It is submitted to the Minister of Justice.
Mr. Eugène Bellemare: We know the way that people are appointed. Recommendations are made by various people, perhaps politicians, which are then transmitted to the Minister of Justice and finally to various Cabinet committees. A Cabinet committee deals with the matter, in the presence of the Prime Minister, and approves, or not, the recommendations. The Prime Minister can intervene and have the person he chooses appointed.
Do you agree or not?
Mr. David Gourdeau: The committees only make recommendations. I do not participate in the appointments process. So, your understanding of the matter is probably as good as mine. I am not in a position to agree or disagree.
Mr. Eugène Bellemare: To get an answer about appointments and compliance with official languages, should we ask the Prime Minister's Office?
The prime minister should be aware of the issues of skills, linguistic competence, visible minorities, and equity between female and male candidates when making appointments, and also of the fact that there should be some balance amongst all these considerations.
Mr. David Gourdeau: To my knowledge, the ministers of Justice have always expressed their desire to reach, not a perfect balance, but the best possible balance with respect to linguistic competence, female and male candidates, and multiculturalism. I think that, insofar as possible, they strive to do so. However, I doubt that that will be achieved overnight.
Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Does the Office of the Commissioner carry out studies?
Mr. David Gourdeau: Pardon me?
Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Do you carry out studies in your Office?
Mr. David Gourdeau: Studies? I don't understand your question.
Mr. Eugène Bellemare: For example, you might already have inquired as to the number of cases heard in French or in English by francophone judges in the Ottawa region?
Mr. David Gourdeau: Quite honestly, I must say that our Office does not conduct studies like that.
Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Why not?
¿ (0940)
Mr. David Gourdeau: I would have to have the means and the staff to do so. I imagine that you are used to hearing this kind of answer.
The Canadian Judicial Council might already have studied this, but I must admit that I am not informed.
What's more, you know the Canadian constitutional system far better than I and so you know that the administration of justice is what one calls a shared jurisdiction. I don't know whether or not such studies have been carried out at the local level by the Minister of Justice of Ontario, or even by the Federal Minister of Justice.
Mr. Eugène Bellemare: We know that in the National Capital Region, on the Ontario side, many francophone judges are regularly assigned to cases that are heard in English. Consequently, cases that are heard in French are delayed.
The PMO and other government bodies cannot intervene. On the other hand, your Office is independent. I would like to know if your Office could do something about this type of situation.
Mr. David Gourdeau: Were we to be made aware of this problem, the only thing that we could do would be to advise the Chief Justice or the Regional Coordinating Justice assigned to that section, just to inform him about the situation. Those responsible for what you might call judicial management have duties that vary from province to province. They could be a Chief Justice or an Associate Chief Justice.
In Ontario, regional justices provide coordination. For all practical purposes, this type of question would come under their authority. As far as we are concerned, aside from informing them about this concern, there is practically nothing that we could do. The fact is, though, that they are reasonable people. I am quite sure that, once alerted to the problem, they would take the necessary steps to correct it.
Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Let's come back to your assessment committee. Does the committee emphasize the fact that a person is a man or a woman, that they belong to a visible minority or, if you like, that they are francophone, anglophone or bilingual?
Mr. David Gourdeau: With respect to belonging to a visible minority, if the candidate so wishes, it will be indicated. You know how that works. On most forms like that, it is left to the discretion of the candidate. If the person so indicates, we would normally mention it.
With respect to linguistic capability, yes, it is indicated in the final assessment whether or nor that person is bilingual.
Mr. Eugène Bellemare: When the committee indicates that a person is bilingual, can it assess the level of bilingualism? In fact, you might have an assessment committee where most, if not all, members, or just certain strong-minded members are unilingual, and they will be the ones making the decision. For example, if someone were to say: “Hello, how are you today?”, they might decide that that person is bilingual.
Is it done in this way, or is there a competent assessment which would comply with my colleague, Mr. Sauvageau's wishes and also with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
Mr. David Gourdeau: You want to know if the committee administers a formal test to the candidates. The answer is easy: no.
Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Why not?
Mr. David Gourdeau: First, I will explain what the committees do and then I will tell you why.
The committees that I mentioned earlier are made up of seven members and I won't up repeat where they come from. However, those people are not paid for that work. They assess all the candidacies and I can assure you that, having attended some of their meetings, everyone takes the work very seriously, especially the three members of the general public. As a rule, they are the ones who check upon community involvement and the veracity of statements. It is very easy to put down on a form that you are bilingual, but, as we say in good French: The proof is in the pudding.
These community representatives verify the candidates statements with respect to that point, for the most part. Since there are 16 committees, all of them do not behave in the same way, but they are all aware of the fact that certain things must be checked. They do that free of charge and they take their work very seriously because they know that they will have to live with the consequences. If there are “recommended” or “highly recommended” candidates, the committee members know that they could live with them as judges for 15, 20 or 25 years. The last thing that they would want, generally speaking, would be to have a judge who had lied on a form. They really wouldn't want that.
In a way, that is part of checking the candidates' credibility, and the people from the whole community conduct the examination. If you look at the forms, you will see that candidates have to give references. There are references, recommendations from people who have dealt with that person as a lawyer over the years, and all that is verified throughout the process. However, there is no check mark made on the form. But the members do check it.
¿ (0945)
Mr. Eugène Bellemare: Thank you, madam Chair.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): Thank you, Mr. Bellemare.
Now we will move on to Mr. Simard.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Madam Chair, might I ask a favour of Mr. Simard?
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): Yes, go ahead.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: I have to leave in five minutes.
Mr. Raymond Simard (Saint Boniface, Lib.): Go ahead, I don't mind.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Thank you. I appreciate it.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): Well, go ahead, Mr. Sauvageau.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: With the assessment and the nominations that you forward to the governor in council, can you tell me how the Office of the Commissioner of Federal Judicial Affairs can be sure that section 19 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and section 14 of the Official Languages Act are being respected?
Mr. David Gourdeau: You want to know how we can be sure when the recommendations of the different committees are forwarded on, but in what way? Is there a systematic verification that is done? No.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: But you have a constitutional obligation with respect to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I have great respect for my friend, Mr. Bellemare, but nowhere in the Charter is there an obligation to appoint a certain number of women or men or visible minorities, or whatever; but, there is a constitutional obligation under section 19 of the Charter and a legislative obligation under section 14 of the act to respect official languages.
How can you be sure that you are complying with the Constitution and the act when you submit to the governor in council x number of potential appointments?
Mr. David Gourdeau: There is no formal way to do so. The recommendations are the committees' and they are sent on to the minister by our office, but they are not our office's recommendations. You must understand that the committees operate "independently" from our office. We provide them with the administrative services they need to do their work, but the work that is done within the various committees is their own. In the same way, there are two committees in Quebec. I don't think that the two sections that you have mentioned are a major concern for those committees either. However, people always think that the ability to speak both languages enhances a candidacy, and the members of these committees certainly want people who will serve their communities well.
But if you are asking me if there is a systematic, bureaucratic way to do so, the answer is simple. It is no.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: That is precisely the problem with the Official Languages Act. It's not a priority, but it's a plus if you have it. I think that you have just summarized, in a few words, the whole problem surrounding compliance with the Constitution and the act with respect to that matter: if it's there, so much the better, and if it isn't, too bad. However, at some point, it will be corrected.
Mr. David Gourdeau: I would even go further than "if it's there", but that is a matter of personal interpretation.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: What's more, we don't know who is responsible. It's not the Commissioner, it's the committees, but the committees are independent and the judge is his own boss. I don't believe that anyone in Canada is above the Charter, not even the Prime Minister. Judges should respect the Charter if the Prime Minister has to respect it. So, section 19 of the Charter and section 14 of the act, should appear somewhere in the appointments, in the judges' duties.
After discussing it with everyone, the committees, the judges and so on, on an optional basis, would you send us the figures for the number of bilingual judges, of the 1,000, on a province-per-province basis?
Mr. David Gourdeau: We can check that. I am not sure that there will be exact scientific data, but that should give you some indication. However, as for fresh data, as I indicated in my presentation, of the 1,270 applications received during the last two years, 401 candidates indicated that they were able to conduct a trial in both official languages. As you can see, when it can be done, it is done.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Why aren't all appointments drawn from the pool of candidates who are bilingual, since they are the only ones complying with the Charter and with the act?
Mr. David Gourdeau: It's difficult for me to answer that question, because it is not our office that makes the appointments.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: But you are the one suggesting the appointments.
¿ (0950)
Mr. David Gourdeau: No, the committees make the recommendations and we send them along to the minister's office.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: You are not a component of Canada Post; you do have some obligations. Do the 16 committees decide and then hand you a sealed brown envelope that you give to the governor in council, or do you have a little role to play in all that?
Mr. David Gourdeau: No, our office has no input in that. For all practical purposes, it is just a cog in the wheel. You should also understand that these committees were set up by the minister in 1988, but the power of appointment per se still resides in Cabinet. Those committees were set up by the minister and their existence does not arise from a statutory obligation.
Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Simard.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): Thank you, Mr. Sauvageau.
Mr. Simard, go ahead.
Mr. Raymond Simard: Thank you, Madam Chair.
I must say that this is a subject that interests me greatly. I am from Manitoba and I can assure you that there is great concern about the process. I think that it is time to modernize and to change the process.
I will ask a few questions. Some may well be repetitive.
To begin with, concerning structure, are the justices of the Federal Court of Appeal here in Ottawa?
Mr. David Gourdeau: The justices of the Federal Court, the Federal Court of Appeal and the Canadian Tax Court are established in Ottawa. However, the three courts—and I take the liberty of speaking on their behalf, but if I am wrong, someone I am sure will correct me—do travel. They sit here and there throughout the country, a little like some administrative tribunals do. They are higher courts, but the justices, who are settled here, do come from all the regions of the country.
Mr. Raymond Simard: I would imagine that here, in Ottawa, you would want the justices to represent the various regions of the country. Is that in fact taken into consideration when they are chosen?
Mr. David Gourdeau: As I told you I am not involved in the appointment process and I am therefore not consulted on it. If I think of the way these courts are constituted, however, and the places from where their members come, I would be inclined to give an answer in the affirmative.
Mr. Raymond Simard: Your answers make me think that we should perhaps have a second meeting with the Justice Department.
For example, I would like to know if the minister could appoint an individual who had not been recommended by the committees.
Mr. David Gourdeau: In theory or in practice?
Mr. Raymond Simard: In practice.
Mr. David Gourdeau: To the best of my knowledge, this has not happened since 1988. If the person cannot be recommended...
Mr. Raymond Simard: Generally speaking, this would imply that the committees still play an important role.
Mr. David Gourdeau: Yes, it is a very important role. I have seen several members of these committees at work, and they take their responsibilities very seriously.
Mr. Raymond Simard: Do you know whether efforts are made to ensure that some of the members of these committees come from minority communities? If it is true that these committees play a very important role, it is also important to make sure that their members are aware of the need to offer services in both languages.
Mr. David Gourdeau: There are 16 committees, and 7 members on each committee which would mean approximately 120 members, perhaps a few more than that; my figures may not be entirely accurate. I think that the will is there but if you were asking me for the actual names, I would not be able to give them to you. Do we have a list of the members?
Ms. Suzanne Labbé: Yes, and I know that in Manitoba an effort is made to include representatives from minority communities.
Mr. David Gourdeau: Do you want me to give the names?
¿ (0955)
Mr. Raymond Simard: No, I have them. There is one francophone.
I would like to know who is responsible for ensuring these people are represented? Is it you or the Justice Department?
Mr. David Gourdeau: It is the Justice minister's office.
Mr. Raymond Simard: When the committees meet, to what extent do they insist that applicants should be bilingual?
This is very important. As a government, we must make sure that services are available in both languages. If we did not impose any requirements to this effect, it seems to me we would not be meeting our responsibilities.
Mr. David Gourdeau: I cannot speak for the committees; I really find myself on the edge of a slippery slop, and I am not sure that I actually have the right to speak to you about this. In any case, I have attended the meetings of certain committees, and from what I have been able to observe, the provincial context of each committee is determining in this respect. I have the impression that this question is more important for certain provinces or regions of the country.
From my own experience, I would say that all the committees are aware of this need. It is a concern shared by Quebec, New Brunswick and your province, and also British Columbia and the three Northern territories. At the national level, however, this concern varies in terms of the region and the applicants who have been assessed. In the case of applicants who might be called upon to preside in a region where in 98 per cent of cases, only one of the two official languages is spoken, this question would probably not be accorded the same importance as in other regions, even though it is taken into consideration.
I would repeat that this is only my own opinion. It is just my assessment of the situation, based on my own experience. I cannot speak for the committees.
Mr. Raymond Simard: To follow along the lines of Mr. Sauvageau's remarks, I would say that in my opinion, it should be possible to know how many bilingual judges there are in Canada. In the Manitoba Court of Appeal, for example, there is one bilingual judge, two judges who are very bilingual and one judge who is somewhat bilingual. Furthermore, we should note that in the general division of the Court of Queen's Bench in Manitoba, in the family division, not one of the 40 judges is bilingual.
This is completely unacceptable. In Manitoba, when applicants from the francophone community come forward or become candidates, they do not go before the committee. It is quite simple: the majority is not aware of this situation, and as a result there are never any bilingual judges in Family Court.
In practice, this means that in spite of the responsibilities which should be assumed in this regard, you cannot get service in the language of your choice in Manitoba. It is essential that this situation be remedied. I do not know whether we should be working with you or with the Justice department to find solutions. The situation is somewhat confused at the present time.
Mr. David Gourdeau: The committees exist "during pleasure". The existence of these committees as such is not provided for in the act. We can of course pass on your concerns to the minister's office, but effectively this is the responsibility of the Justice minister, and it is up to you to communicate with the minister. There is part of this work where we implement the policies as they are indicated to us.
The world in which our office evolves is one of independence. I will try to explain the context to you. Our office exists for members of the federal judiciary dealing with the Justice department at arm's length. The Canadian Judicial Council, which is made up of the chief justices of Canada, comes under our office administratively speaking, but it is independent of our office. We do not go to see what is going on there, because that is the responsibility of members of the judiciary, and we must always respect the concept of judicial independence.
The committees carry out their work independently so that they are sheltered from being influenced by our office. Everyone operates in this context of independence. So we never find ourselves in a situation where we might have to apply "coercitive remedies" to some... And that is the somewhat delicate side of things.
Now if the Justice minister changes the policy as regards the work of the committees, we make sure it is done.
À (1000)
Mr. Raymond Simard: Do I still have some time left, Madam Chair?
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): Yes.
Mr. Raymond Simard: In Manitoba, for example, we have section 23 of the Manitoba Act, 1870, and in New Brunswick, section 18 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms grants specific rights to minority groups. Once again, I would like to know whether this was taken into consideration when judges were appointed in these provinces, because this would effectively guarantee the right to legal services in the language of our choice, something which is very important. In the case of Manitoba, New Brunswick and Ontario, for example I think it is where numbers justify it.
Is this taken into consideration?
Mr. David Gourdeau: When appointments are made?
Mr. Raymond Simard: Yes. This is the responsibility of the Justice minister.
Mr. David Gourdeau: That is right.
Mr. Raymond Simard: So there would be two or three possibilities. This may not be the responsibility of your office, but you could perhaps give me your point of view. For example, what would you think of requiring committees to have a list of bilingual applicants, what if the committees were to send a separate list of bilingual applicants to the minister?
Mr. David Gourdeau: I imagine that would be a possibility. It would be up to the minister to indicate this to the various committees. I will go back over part of my presentation.
The committees are created for a period of two years. When they are set up, the minister meets with all the members of the committees, as far as possible. Some people have obligations and cannot come to Ottawa, but there is a meeting with the minister in Ottawa for all the members of the committees. At that time they discuss these sorts of things, which may be raised either by the minister or by the members of the committees.
As well, during the second year of these committees, another meeting takes place in Ottawa between the committee chairs and the minister so that they can discuss concerns of this nature.
There again, given the nature of the work, the independence of the work done by the various committees, it is always by way of information, and I think that you probably know better than I how to direct suggestions so that they may be carried out. But perhaps this is a suggestion which could be made when the next committees are set up.
Mr. Raymond Simard: But of course if there are concerns about the committees' not doing their work... This is somewhat the impression I have, and I am speaking for Manitoba because that is the situation which I know best. Perhaps it is time to designate bilingual positions. This is something which we did not want to do in the past, but perhaps it is one of the options to consider.
Mr. Bellemare, among others, was just speaking about formal testing. I think that this is critical, it is really fundamental, because when it is a question of the subtleties of a language, there is no place in the world where this is more important than in court. It can make the difference between winning or losing your case. We have judges who claim to be bilingual, but I can assure you that they are not. They may be able to speak a bit, to get along in the other language, but it would be impossible for them to be up to presiding over a court in French. That is why I think it would essential to have formal testing. It is clear that it would also be necessary to know how many bilingual judges there are in the country. Once again, I don't know whether it is you or the Justice minister's office which should...
Mr. David Gourdeau: As I said to Mr. Sauvageau, there is no official registry as such. We could try to find out. As I have told you, the problem resides in the fact that there are individuals who may be bilingual at the time of their appointment, but who in fact have presided over hearings only in one of the two official languages. Thus it would be difficult for us to know if they are still very bilingual, as you say, and capable of understanding the subtleties of the language.
We will see what can be done in this regard, at least to give you an indication, but I am not sure we can give you a very precise answer, for example 43.8 per cent. I think that would be too difficult for us to do.
Mr. Raymond Simard: But if we look at the statistics which indicate that not one of the 40 judges in the Manitoba family division is bilingual, this is quite disturbing, and I imagine you find it so as well.
Mr. David Gourdeau: I am not able to argue figures with you, to say whether you are right or wrong, but I do understand your concern.
À (1005)
Mr. Raymond Simard: Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): Very good.
If I may, I would also like to ask a few short questions.
We will be speaking about the administrative service. You have training programs. You mentioned judges who are in training at this time.
With respect to these individuals who are undergoing training, can you tell us what provinces, what regions they come from? Could you provide the committee with this information?
Mr. David Gourdeau: Yes, we could provide the committee with this information.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): By region as well?
Mr. David Gourdeau: By region within each province?
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): Yes. For northern Ontario, for example.
Mr. David Gourdeau: Just a minute.
Yes that is possible. We could send this information to the committee in writing; that would not be a problem.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): That would be very much appreciated.
Can we know what the budget is for this training?
Mr. David Gourdeau: Yes, we have that figure. I could give it to you from memory, but I will just check it.
Ms. Suzanne Labbé: It is $1.7 million.
Mr. David Gourdeau: It is $1.7 million from our operating budget. It is an annual budget.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): Has this budget increased or decreased over the past 10 years?
Mr. David Gourdeau: I could not say for the past 10 years. It has remained the same over the past few years.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): It has not increased?
Mr. David Gourdeau: Correct.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): When you talk about the last few years, how many years do you mean, three, four, five?
Mr. David Gourdeau: I have been in this position for two years, and I would say to you that it seems to me that it has remained the same for two or three years.
Ms. Suzanne Labbé: It has remained the same for the past two years.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): Can you tell us when it was last increased?
Mr. David Gourdeau: We can provide you with that information, yes. Some of our staff can check that out.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): They would certainly have those figures, yes.
Perhaps you could tell me how effective these programs are. Do you really think they have made it possible to increase the number of bilingual judges in Canada, for example?
Mr. David Gourdeau: The answer to that is yes. I know of some cases which are perhaps exceptional, but among the others there is one I was referring to a little while ago. It is always difficult to master the French language, but in any case his knowledge of French is quite remarkable if you consider where he started.
But success in learning a second language is always determined by the desire of the applicant or language student, and also by the individual's abilities. Some people want to learn but cannot. Some people could learn but do not want to. We always see this sort of thing in life. There is also the great majority of individuals who fall between the two extremes.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): You also mentioned francophones who are studying to improve their English. Are there many of these individuals? Do you have more francophones learning English, or vice versa?
Mr. David Gourdeau: There are more anglophones learning French than francophones who are learning English. From what I have seen, when francophones take English courses, it is primarily to improve their writing skills, for example, or their level of legal terminology. But there is a greater demand from anglophones who want to learn French. That is the way it is.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): Those are all the questions I had.
Mr. Simard, do you have other questions?
Mr. Raymond Simard: I have two short questions to ask, if I may, Madam Chair.
I wanted to know whether your office was responsible for ensuring compliance with section 41 of the Official Languages Act. Would this be part of your mandate or not?
Mr. David Gourdeau: In what respect?
Mr. Raymond Simard: To ensure that there is a certain number of bilingual judges, for example. Would that be part of your mandate?
Mr. David Gourdeau: No.
Mr. Raymond Simard: Not at all?
Mr. David Gourdeau: That depends. You are asking a question which is both general and precise at the same time. Perhaps you could indicate to me what you are getting at, because I do not entirely understand the point of your question.
Mr. Raymond Simard: Being the federal government, we are responsible for ensuring legal services in both official languages. There must be someone who ensures that there are enough judges to do so. Is it you? If it is not you, I would like to know so.
Mr. David Gourdeau: No, it is not our office.
Mr. Raymond Simard: Very good.
We will call in other witnesses.
Mr. David Gourdeau: Yes.
Mr. Raymond Simard: Finally, I would like to know whether there is any follow-up you could do after your appearance here. Do you see some recommendations which you could send to the committee or, once again, is that not one of your office's responsibilities?
Mr. David Gourdeau: You are speaking of the committees?
Mr. Raymond Simard: Would you be able to come back here with some recommendations? After today's discussions, is there some follow-up you could do to make recommendations to us, or would this not be possible?
À (1010)
M. David Gourdeau: It would be difficult, because it is not our office which determines policy in this regard. It would just be a question of some factual conclusions rather than anything else. Our relative weight in the machinery is quite slight.
Mr. Raymond Simard: That is pretty much the impression I got.
Thank you very much.
Mr. David Gourdeau: Thank you.
The Vice-Chair (Ms. Yolande Thibeault): Thank you, Mr. Simard.
Thank you very much, Ms. Labbé and Mr. Gourdeau.
We have finished with this part of our morning's meeting.
Colleagues, I would just like to remind you that we will have another meeting in Room 237-C at 3:30 p.m. tomorrow. At that time we will be speaking about the organization and presentation of the 2010 Winter Olympic Games and the question of linguistic duality.
We will be hearing from the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique and the Société de développement économique de la Colombie-Britannique. The minister Paul DeVillers will also be with us.
Thank you very much. The committee stands adjourned.