LANG Committee Meeting

Proceedings of the Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages

Issue 17 - Evidence

OTTAWA, Thursday, December 3, 1998

The Standing Joint Committee of the Senate and House of Commons on Official Languages met this day at 9:10 a.m. to examine the role of the Commissioner of Official Languages.

Ms Sheila Finestone (Mount Royal) (Joint Chairman) in the Chair.

[Translation]

The Joint Chairman (Ms Sheila Finestone (Mount Royal)): We are here today to meet our new Commissioner of Official Languages.

[English]

Welcome, Ms Adam. This is a welcome piece of information for all of us. We have been on hold for a while.

[Translation]

This morning's meeting is really a meeting with Ms Adam. If you have any relevant questions about the responsibilities she will be shouldering soon, feel free to ask them.

Ms Adam, we will certainly have some questions for you if only to know what you think about your new job. How do you see your new position as Commissioner of Official Languages? How do you perceive the future of this responsibility and the vision of Canada as defined in the Constitution?

You have the floor. Your presentation will then be followed by questions from members of the Senate and the House of Commons.

[English]

I will not call these minutes accorded, but I hope that within a five-to-seven minute period, each member will find the circumscribed time so that I do not have to call order.

[Translation]

Ms Adam, we will be pleased to hear your comments.

Ms Dyane Adam, Principal of Glendon College, York University: Dear parliamentary members, it is an honour for me to come before this committee and, of course, to be considered for the position of Commissioner of Official Languages for Canada.

I was told that today I would be here only to answer questions concerning me, in other words what expertise and experience can I bring to successfully play the role expected of Canada's Official Languages Commissioner.

I will not pretend to give you a very enlightened view of how I am going to do my job, that would be pretentious of me because it is a recent appointment, but in hearing me you will see that linguistic duality has always been main theme in my personal as well as my professional life.

You have received copy of my CV. Academics do not have the reputation of being very concise in writing their CVs and you will probably realize that I am no exception to the rule. So I will try to draw from this lengthy document the experience and expertise which, in my opinion, are most relevant to the commissioner's position.

[English]

I will try to be brief because I really want to have more time to hear your questions and try my best to respond to them or to any concerns you may have.

The role of the commissioner is one I think of being the ombudsperson for all Canadians and to ensure that their linguistic rights, as defined by the Official Languages Act, are respected. To be effective as an ombudsperson, to listen to people's complaints and concerns, one has to be in tune with people. One has to be able to listen, to often read beyond the words and make sense of what these particular persons are trying to convey to you.

As you may have seen in my CV, I was trained as a clinical psychologist and have practised over five years in different settings from hospitals to community settings.

My training and experience have certainly made me a person-centred individual. I found those skills most useful later in my career as I embarked upon administrative work. Basic to the training and the practice of psychologists, we learn that the fundamental approach to life is to hear well, identify issues correctly, analyse them, put them into context, try to find solutions or corrective measures, and make recommendations for treatment. We then get involved in treatment.

When complaints are received from whatever parts of Canadian society, the commissioner has to do fundamentally that type of work -- with the probable exception that he may not execute the recommendations. The commissioner's role is an advisory one. He is involved in the whole process to the final stage of recommending and working with people.

[Translation]

The Joint Chairman (Ms Finestone): You may address us in your mother tongue.

Ms Adam: Fine, I will do that. Another one of the commissioner's roles is to inform and educate the Canadian public and officials, the managers concerning the role of the legislation, the language rights of Canadians and also to promote linguistic duality.

Of course, I am also an educator. Through my experience, as you have seen, I have worked with different community groups, very near to the bottom, the "grassroots" as they say in English. At the same time, I have worked with people from the academic environment, departmental representatives and the ministers. I could certainly do that part of the job successfully.

Another one of the roles of the commissioner, of course, is to see to all the investigations and to make sure that the facts are properly documented, that appropriate examinations are done and that reports are written. Once again, this process lies at the heart of any academics life. I have undertaken research myself, written many articles and written reports for ministers. I will get back to that function that was entrusted to me as Chair of the Advisory Committee on Francophone Affairs for the Ontario Minister of Education and Training.

However, I would prefer to concentrate on the matter that lies at the heart of the position and that concerns not only that expertise which can be transferred but also linguistic duality and the mandate entrusted the commissioner to help the development of official language communities in a minority context.

As you have seen, I was born in a francophone community in Ontario, not so far from here, about 40 kilometres away. In those days, we lived totally in French, like in the heart of Quebec. It is only when I showed up at the University of Ottawa that I started living in a totally bilingual environment and, to date, I have always lived in a bilingual context except, perhaps, for the three years I worked as a psychologist in Northern Quebec, up in Rouyn-Noranda and Baie Comeau. That is when I found out about the reality of Quebec's anglophone minority as I was made aware of the fact that even up in Rouyn-Noranda or Baie-Comeau there are actually English speakers who need services and I acted as a clinical psychologist in both languages.

It is clear then that this fact of life, living together and trying to develop as a minority francophone in an anglophone majority context was an integral part of my personal and professional life. Of course, having held down positions in different areas of the province of Ontario, in the north, the east and now in the centre, I have seen that this reality varies enormously from one context to another. One must be sensitive to those peculiarities.

I could point out, as someone who was involved in community development through my volunteer activity and personal interest, because I always held the cause of the people in my own community dear to my heart, that this reality does vary. Different measures in different areas of the province or of Canada were developed to adequately respond to the needs of these communities.

As far as my professional activities are concerned, I have seen a lot of service, of course, with bilingual universities. I was often a little bit like a downsized commissioner. I have had to get along with different organizations and sometimes take on a role as minority rights defender in my own corner of academia at Laurentian University where I had a specific mandate to develop French teaching and services.

At that level, I had to develop a policy for bilingual service at the university to make sure that corrective measures were in place and that they were being applied as well as developing appropriate study programs for that community.

[English]

I would like to mention that it is quite a leap to move from community, health and university work to the federal government. I now work with Parliament, and with different organizations and federal institutions extending across Canada. I will have a learning curve in finding out about the complexities of the federal bureaucracy, as well as of the position itself.

Over the years I have been asked by other governments and mostly in my own province, in Ontario, to serve. My experience with this has been quite enriching. I have enjoyed it. In the 1990s, I was asked to chair the advisory body, or committee, on francophone affairs. Basically it was to advise the Minister of Education in Ontario as to the future and all issues linked to post-secondary education in French in Ontario. This body is more or less a type of buffer organization that is at arm's length to the government. I spent three years acting and serving my government at that time.

Another recent function was when the current government asked me to serve on the privatization panel for TVO/TFO. The panel was to participate in community consultations across the province, in order to get the sense of people and their needs. The report was quite instrumental in the decision that the minister made with respect to the TVO/TFO portfolio. These are some of my experiences.

I would like to conclude now and allow you to ask any questions you may have, concerning either my qualifications or how I see myself as commissioner.

The Joint Chairman (Ms Finestone): I must say that it is quite exciting to see for the first time a woman as Official Languages Commissioner.

Mr. Chuck Strahl (Fraser Valley, Ref.): You mentioned you had done some work developing French language services in certain locales. Have you done similar work to develop English language services in French-only jurisdictions?

Ms Adam: No. I have spent most of my career in Ontario. I did spend approximately three years in Quebec where the majority of the population is French. My function there was as a clinical psychologist and, therefore, I was less involved in issues such as program development. However, even then, as a clinical psychologist, I was in the northern part of Quebec, Baie-Comeau and mostly Rouyn-Noranda. In this area there is a group of anglophones. At that time I observed and offered services in my own area to that particular group. I did get a sense, in fact, that although we do not have the same languages as a minority group, many of our concerns and our realities are similar.

Mr. Strahl: How do you see the difference between the role that you would play as Official Languages Commissioner in what is predominantly English-speaking Canada versus Quebec? In Quebec, you have the language laws that you have to work with and around and through. In English Canada you are basically operating often in a vacuum; there is no language law in place in most of the rest of Canada.

Given that you have a federal role, do you think that that will make the job in Quebec easier or more difficult?

Ms Adam: How will it be different? The role of the commissioner is in fact to ensure that the linguistic rights are respected as defined by the Official Languages Act.

We are talking about jurisdiction here. There are matters that are definitely provincial and others that are federal. Even English-speaking Canada is not monolithic in the sense that there are varieties in terms of provinces. As commissioner, I see the need to take into consideration the realities of the different provinces and ensure that each group is treated equally. Whether it is the English-speaking minority in Quebec, or the French-speaking minority in other parts of the country, it is necessary to ensure that there is equality and equity.

Mr. Strahl: I have one last question. In the last Parliament, the chairman of the official languages committee got himself in some hot water with many people, including his own caucus, by proposing that we needed to do an in-depth study concerning, I think it was the use of French in the National Capital Region in Ottawa. His proposal was to find ways to increase its usage. Many of us say that this is a pretty bilingual area. Services or shops that do not provide services in both official languages are just cutting themselves out of half of the commercial enterprise. Why on earth would they do it? Therefore, it never went ahead.

However, this showed me that, at times, there is a misplaced emphasis on what the official languages policy should be. There are services that need to be provided in both official languages, but there are times when, frankly, the silly season takes over and people start trying to make an issue out of something that is just not there. I think that was the case in that situation.

I would like your feelings on how you separate the wheat from the chaff. How do you determine what should be pursued and what should just be left to market forces? In some cases, as I say, there is a role for ensuring that the services are there. At times, though, it is just a case of letting a certain number of market forces be brought to bear. How do you decide where you will spend your time and put your emphasis?

Ms Adam: It is a judgment call as to when to get involved and when not to. The act itself defines quite clearly what is under the law and the federal obligations towards the services to be granted. However, the commissioner's role is also to promote linguistic duality, and that is probably the situation to which you refer.

Ottawa is the capital of Canada, a country recognized around the world as a bilingual country, where the two official languages are recognized and have equal status. These are issues on which the commissioner can give his opinion and encourage any efforts. However, I think it would be inappropriate to get involved in trying to enforce things, especially in terms of commercial issues or commercial jurisdiction.

[Translation]

Mr. Louis Plamondon (Richelieu, BQ): It is a pleasure to welcome you to this committee, Ms Adam. In my party's name, I would like to say that we agree with the government's choice putting your name forward as Commissioner of Official Languages. Yes, you are the first woman. We were quite enthused with your CV: you lived three years in Quebec and you lived for quite a while in Ontario where you were the head of organizations defending the French language in Ontario, and you have lived in English in the rest of Canada. You know Canadian and Quebec reality well. You were a part of the grassroots founding of some movements like the Table féministe francophone de l'Ontario and you strongly advocated the founding of the Regroupement des intervenants et intervenantes francophones dans le domaine de la santé et des services sociaux en Ontario.

Concerning your position and the Official Languages Act, should we perhaps not so much be giving a new orientation, but rather a stronger orientation to this position? We often hear about services, but little about rights to education or health. In Ontario, we have seen what happened with the Montfort Hospital. Is that not what we should be setting out to do, especially for francophones outside Quebec? I am not excluding Quebec's anglophones. They can ask for the same thing. They already have a good portion of it.

If one wants to live in French and in English in Canada, one must have sacred rights in matters of education and health. We should not insert on services like having a bilingual passport agent in Jonquière or a bilingual postmaster in Manitoba. That does not change much on the face of this earth. What is your position on rights in health and education?

Ms Adam: I would like to use the present commissioner's results as a starting point and in his last report, he mentioned that when he took up the job, there were only two provinces whose communities had control over their education. Now, all of the provinces and territories have acquired this control. In his eyes, that is one of the most important accomplishments. We know full well, as you have said, that if a community does not have its own training institutions, it will be very difficult for that community to develop.

It is not over, in the field of education. I am speaking as an academic responsible for French-speaking universities outside Quebec. This group now counts 13 members, all those universities offering services and programs in French outside the province of Quebec: the Faculté Saint-Jean, in Edmonton, St. Boniface College, Ontario and its bilingual universities and so on.

In the post-secondary area and at the college level, the programs and services offered to those official languages communities living in a minority context are not comparable, of course, to what is being offered to the English-speaking community. But between themselves, they are setting up a network of university teaching in French and through sharing their courses, their programs and their staff, their objective is to offer a range of services and to broaden those that already exist. In my opinion, this question deserves support although post-secondary education and the area of education and health, as we all know, come under provincial jurisdiction.

Contrary to education, health is not entrenched in the Charter. I believe it is more difficult for the commissioner or the federal government to play as "proactive" a role, as active a role as it has managed to play in education.

I know that Mr. Goldbloom was very interested in the Montfort matter. You have mentioned it. He suggested projects or potential solutions that did respect provincial jurisdictions. I do not yet know whether there will be developments or an outcome to all that.

Is it real? I do not know as it has not been confirmed by the government or the departments concerned. In my opinion, health care is very important for any official language community living in a minority context. When you're sick, it is important to be served in your own language. This question deserves to be closely followed.

The Joint Chairman (Ms Finestone): I must advise you that you have already gone beyond the time we had allocated, but if you have another question, go ahead.

Mr. Plamondon: In a conference that you gave to a forum entitled "Visible and Partners", you applauded two great accomplishments: the francophone feminists' consultation group and the Franco-Ontarian post-secondary education network. In priding yourself on the accomplishments of those tables and different spokespersons in matters concerning francophones, you said, in conclusion, that this effervescence of new provincial groupings in French Ontario point to a fundamental movement in the community's traditional leadership. Although ACFO, thanks to the support of the federal authorities, has recently managed to maintain its position as official spokesperson for Ontario's francophone community, that role is being questioned and the basis of its leadership remains precarious. In my opinion, it will not be long before other groups come to this table to ask for a new leadership in French Ontario which will reflect this diversity.

In your role, you will have to work with those people. Is that position flexible? What are your relations?

Ms Adam: I will be working with all elements of the community. I am an academic and a critic. As I do my work trying to develop communities, I am an observer of what goes on. I will be speaking as someone from the Franco-Ontarian community. When one is aware of the new developments concerning Ontario's crisis with its leadership, that sentence is rather relevant.

There are -- and this is the lot of just about every minority -- groups that have diverging interests. We often ask minorities to agree on everything and to all try to have the same opinion. We sometimes forget that communities show the same diversity as the greater community; even though their numbers are smaller, it still has the same diversity. If I take the Toronto community with whom I work as an example, it might be difficult to gather around the same table everyone from the world of business, education and health from anglophone Toronto and get them all to have a common position, as a group, on any given question. That is sometimes what is required of minority communities. We forget the diversity and that creates problems within the community. I will be very sensitive to that aspect.

Mr. Denis Paradis (Brome--Missisquoi, Lib.): I would like to mention the fact that this kind of committee is a first. I do not think this process was ever used before. I think it is healthy that we can get together to examine the view of candidates for this position. We are doing it in our examination of the commissioner's role. Eventually, we should provide for this kind of mechanism more formally within our committee and other committees of the House. I congratulate those people who took the initiative of having us meet with Ms Adam.

Your CV is impressive for this job. I come from the Eastern Townships where we have perfect harmony between our country's two main linguistic groups. In Canada, we have two linguistic majorities rather than minorities. That is what makes our country an international force. The Sommet de la Francophonie will be held in Moncton in the fall of 1999. We are members of the Commonwealth. We have several parliamentary associations, both in French-speaking and English-speaking countries. It is one of Canada's great strengths.

During the last year, we raised the problem of the Ottawa airport. It is difficult to let market forces take over in our national capital airport, an area that is so populous and central, at the heart of the country. French parliamentarians said that, at one time, they had problems getting service in French. Would you take this kind of question to heart? How do you perceive this linguistic duality in the national capital area?

Ms Adam: It is definitely important in my eyes that the national capital be a showcase reflecting Canada as closely as possible, a country where two official languages have the same status before the law. I will certainly be interested in promoting that, in studying it, in examining it and recommending changes once those jurisdictions come under federal jurisdictions subject to the law.

For all the other sectors, there is no doubt that I will be very active in pointing out the advantages and showing that it is all to Canada's advantage to be seen as a country enriched by both languages. Sometimes I think that in certain circles, the fact of having two official languages was perceived as being a negative rather than an advantage or an asset. If I am appointed, I would like to work at educating people on the value added whether it be economic, personal or social, to being a country with two official languages. Yes, it is a fundamental value for me, so it is an easy thing to do.

The Joint Chairman (Ms Finestone): We have four minutes left. Ms Fraser.

[English]

Senator Joan Fraser (De Lorimier, Lib.): Welcome, Dr. Adam, you are joining a long line of illustrious commissioners.

I should like, in particular, to pay tribute to your immediate predecessor, Mr. Victor Goldbloom. He comes from my community. I have known him for many years. Every job he has ever done he has done with dignity, distinction and intelligence and we are very proud of him. I am glad to see you stepping into his footsteps.

[Translation]

I was a bit astonished -- perhaps astonished is too strong a word. I am perplexed by your answer to the first question. It seems to me quite appropriate for Canada's official languages commissioner to investigate the general situation concerning official languages in the national capital area as well as across the country. You will be the only one in this country whose sole job will be to take care of the fate of the linguistic minority in this country. If you do not take care of it, no one will. Everyone of your predecessors, to a greater or lesser degree, have used what Theodore Roosevelt called "the pretty pulpit", the beautiful platform your position offers. Is your intention not to do as much? to follow in this tradition? Because if you do not do it, who will?

Ms Adam: I have certainly done that in previous areas. I certainly intend, as the commissioner, to serve and make sure that the rights of minorities and official language groups living in a minority context are shown respect. Perhaps I gave the impression I did not see that aspect of the commissioner's position as a central one. If that is the impression I gave, it certainly was not my intent. The commissioner's role is a defender's role. The "ombudsperson" is essentially that, someone ready to evaluate complaints brought forward for non-respect of rights and measures.

Senator Fraser: I am not just talking about the Official Languages Act. Take Montfort Hospital for example -- an institution that is not under federal jurisdiction. You will have a position no one else will have. So should you not have a role to play in such cases?

Ms Adam: Of course. The commissioner's role is primarily to educate. The commissioner's a promoter, who has a duty to encourage and influence. He has the power to influence and persuade. Experience has shown me that the best way of influencing and persuading is to study an issue in context, to ensure that any action taken is intelligent, and is of course in line with our actual responsibilities. At the same time, however, we must not make the kinds of mistakes that make the government accuse us of interfering, and so on. This is a role that requires careful judgement. We often work in very ambiguous areas. Often, we act on a case-by-case basis.

Senator Gérald-A. Beaudoin (Rigaud, PC): I have always said that the Official Languages Act is not like any other act. It is an organic act; in my opinion, it is a quasi-constitutional act, which is very important to the future of this great country, Canada. In my opinion, the Commissioner's role is paramount.

I never miss an opportunity to point out that we are not playing with numbers -- the number of francophones and anglophones. That is not what the Official Languages Act is about. The OLA is an organic statute that puts French and English on an equal footing. That is what an official language means, under the Constitution.

I also never miss an opportunity to talk about Part VII of the Official Languages Act. You mentioned it indirectly by talking about promotion. I am of course always interested in ensuring that the two official languages are put on an equal footing. Obviously, that is our starting point, but it is really more than that. In my opinion, we must promote the equality of French and English.

According to your curriculum vitae, you come from a university background, an environment which I'm very familiar with. You have written a great deal. What are your views on the promotion of the two official languages in Canada?

Ms Adam: There are many ways of promoting a value: there is one context where that value comes up daily for some people in this country, there is another context where perhaps it is not not a daily issue, as it is for us in the House or Senate. Let us not forget that many Canadians live either exclusively in French, or exclusively in English, because of circumstances. For them, the concept of linguistic duality is less organizational, and less internalized.

Promoting the concept of linguistic duality is very important in ensuring that all Canadians -- regardless of whether they are bilingual -- internalize it as one of their basic characteristics. We can promote the notion through actions, educational lectures, conferences, research or reports.

We must encourage dialogue with those Canadians who are less exposed to linguistic duality in Canada. We must find ways of doing this, so that linguistic duality becomes more immediate in their lives, rather than simply remaining a theoretical concept. One way or another, through promotion, we must foster the kinds of experiences that help people relate to each other.

I cannot say everything I would like to. I realize I should perhaps keep my answers a little more brief, because I can see the list. In my opinion, studying measures and procedures is one way of promoting these objectives.

Senator Beaudoin: The situation varies among provinces. We forget that some provinces are officially bilingual -- for example, Quebec under article 133, and New Brunswick under Constitution. Manitoba is a bilingual province, thanks to the Supreme Court. I never doubted that. In the other provinces, the situation varies. This might make the commissioner's role somewhat more difficult.

That is why my question is on promotion. In some provinces, it is just a question of doing what the Constitution stipulates. In other provinces, it may be a question of promoting something that is not as well established. I would just like some details from you.

Ms Adam: Let me refer to my clinical experience, which I have mentioned. Promotion is an attempt to change someone's attitude, to foster something. Action designed to bring change must be thought out in the local context, if it is to be effective. And as you point out, circumstances here in Canada vary from province to province.

The commissioner and his team must define action in absolute terms. This is something Canadians will appreciate. To promote change, or movement, we must take people as they are, and not impose procedures in ways that make them uncomfortable. In that sense, we agree.

[English]

Ms Val Meredith (South Surrey--White Rock--Langley): Madam Chairman, I have so many questions that it will be hard to keep it to one or two.

The Joint Chairman (Ms Finestone): Then make them short.

Ms Meredith: I wish to follow up on what you have just finished saying, that is, that there must be respect for the different nature of communities in this country.

I come from British Columbia, just around the Vancouver area. I have asked this question before in this committee because we are taking about the Commissioner of Official Languages. Over 50 per cent of students in the Vancouver school district are taking English as a second language. It is not because they are francophone. Given the changing realities of this country, they bring with them a language from somewhere else.

The reality in my area is that French ranks tenth in terms of the languages used; it comes after Urdu. The reality on the West Coast is not the bilingualism of Ottawa and the National Capital Region; it is a bilingualism of languages that are new to Canada. They see the government walking away from respecting that there are pressures on official languages within their communities.

It concerns me that the Official Languages Commission and this committee are mainly concerned about French outside of Quebec, without broadening its awareness that there are other pressures on our official languages within the French and English communities. I would like to feel that you, as a commissioner, would respect the great differences in this country and the pressures being put on both official languages, whether it is French in English-speaking Canada, English speakers in Quebec, or this new reality in our country of other language groups in such numbers that they are demanding services in hospitals and schools in our communities.

Ms Adam: I also live and work in an environment in Toronto similar in many ways to the Vancouver experience, where we see an influx of new Canadians who share different languages. I can honestly say that I have heard in Toronto, and especially in my function in a bilingual institution -- that French is passé with respect to Ontario. With all the other languages, I hear that it is just a question of time and that Canada may not retain its bilingual character. We have all kinds of views.

I think it is key that Canada is definitely becoming a most diverse, multicultural country.

Ms Meredith: We do not understand the duality, I think, of taking it too far. B.C. has more students learning French than anywhere else in this country. There is a great growth in young people wanting to learn French, so I do not think it is passé. However, the reality is that it is not a working language in some areas of this country.

Ms Adam: Yes. I was talking more about perceptions. It is up to us to make sure that we encourage -- if it is under our jurisdiction -- a development of mechanisms and programs to ensure that all Canadians, whatever their origin, embrace the fundamental values of Canada as a bilingual country, where the two official languages are French and English, without undermining the rights of individuals to keep their mother tongue if it is not French or English. In that sense, the commissioner has a definite role to educate with respect to the history of Canada.

In European schools, students are really taught their history. The concept of bilingualism today is really grounded. If people are left with an understanding that they are bilingual because there is the Official Languages Act, I think that is the worst approach. We need to focus on educating all Canadians, not necessarily Canadians who were not born here. I have seen Canadians born here who still do not know a lot about where we come from and why we are configured today as we are. That is one area in which I would like to get involved, if I can.

The Joint Chairman (Ms Finestone): You would be most welcome in that regard.

Ms Meredith: Do you see the role of your commission going beyond government services, starting to push the private sector entities into becoming bilingual and providing bilingual services?

Ms Adam: One of the last reports published by the commissioner, which dealt with the transformation of the federal government and the devolution of powers from the federal government to either the provinces or the private sector, has raised major issues with respect to that. In the past, it may not have been necessary for the commissioner to be too concerned about the involvement of other bodies that were servicing Canadians. However, the commission has clearly indicated that transfer payments and devolution of powers must be addressed immediately.

There is already a working group looking at strategies and policies that should be considered and perhaps implemented to ensure that, in any transfer of responsibility from the federal to other jurisdictions, we establish the measures needed to ensure that services are provided in the two languages.

The Joint Chairman (Ms Finestone): I wish to underscore the observation Ms Adam has just made. As you know, this committee will be hearing from Yvon Fontaine, who has a mandate from Treasury Board to review Part VII of the act and the application of the Official Languages Act as written, within that part of the law. He will be appearing here in February. We will have an organizing committee meeting next week when we will hear from the Eastern Townshippers. The steering committee will meet just prior to that hearing.

Ms Meredith's question is a good one and the answer is very enlightening. We will be hearing from that committee as to the application of the result of downloading.

[Translation]

Senator Eymard G. Corbin (Grand-Sault, Lib.): I see that the award and honours you have received include one for being a Woman of Change. I find that very impressive. It makes you eminently qualified for this position. You are a psychologist, and will tend to take a well-thought out approach. In any case, you have already said so. Nonetheless, there are times when an official languages commissioner has to bring about change, to stir things up.

Keith Spicer, the first official languages commissioner, made a lot of changes. It had to be done. Other commissioners have sometimes taken a gentler approach, and sometimes missed the target as a result. So I would encourage you to be a woman of change, Ms Adam. After all, the Official Languages Act has been around for ages, and it still has fundamental problems. Do you plan to be a woman of change, Ms Adam?

Ms Adam: As the saying goes, our true nature always comes back to the surface. I may be a woman of change by nature, but that is only when I have clear objectives. I do not take that approach for just anything, or just any cause. Those who have known me in the course of my career know full well that I do not always vote with the majority. I have often taken a controversial stance, and in defending francophones -- particularly in Ontario -- I can be pretty persuasive. I know how to set up the issue, and usually, I achieve my goals. Now, I do not think I would disappoint anyone in that regard.

Mr. Eugene Bellemare (Carleton--Gloucester, Lib.): Welcome, Ms Adam. I think I will like your style. My question is on a particular issue. In Ottawa, which is the capital of Canada, a country with two official languages, radio and television broadcasting statutes designate the city as a unilingual English region. Surprisingly enough, that's how it is.

Cable distributors, which here in Ottawa is Rogers, have the authority to decide whether they will carry a certain number of French-language television channels on cable. Sudbury and other Ontario regions are designated bilingual, because the numbers of francophones and anglophones there are roughly equal. In the National Capital Region, 25 to 30 per cent of the population is francophone. But we should not look at the actual number of francophones in Ottawa and its suburbs. Rather, we should look at the number of people willing to promote French and bilingualism. So in Ottawa, Gloucester and Nepean, 98 per cent of people want to promote French, while only 2 per cent do not. As for bilingualism, it is probably favoured by over 75 per cent of people. So should the CRTC not designate the Ottawa-Carleton as a bilingual area for the purposes of broadcasting?

Ms Adam: This is something new to me. I was not aware that a region could be designated bilingual on a percentage basis. That seems to be a fairly interesting notion.

Mr. Bellemare: I would like you to describe how you operate in a conflict situation like that. I am interested in your style, and your intentions.

Ms Adam: In a situation like that, I would study the issue.

Mr. Bellemare: That is being done. Your commission is ready to present its findings. What do you decide?

Ms Adam: I need additional information. There is a great deal I do not know. Who designated the national capital as being a unilingual region? Who is responsible for that?

Mr. Bellemare: The CRTC.

Ms Adam: And who does the CRTC report to?

Mr. Bellemare: It comes under the Broadcasting Act.

Ms Adam: I am told it is Heritage Canada. At present, the CRTC is theoretically subject to the Act.

Mr. Bellemare: No, it is independent. I would like to come back to your attitude towards this issue -- I am not looking at the regulations, or your lack of experience, or your lack of knowledge about the issue itself.

Ms Adam: By asking you these questions, I am telling you something about my style. One has to be well informed. If you are not well informed, you tend to miss your target. So getting information is the first stage. After that, real opportunity for action must be assessed, and we must make strong recommendations to the CRTC, or apply pressure elsewhere. There are people who have an influence. We must take action on this.

I strongly believe this is a value. We must ensure that services are accessible in both official languages, as far as possible, and we must also ensure that this region is recognized as being bilingual. I will do it, but not blindly, not without knowing what the options are, and what the best strategy to reach my objectives might be.

The Joint Chairman (Ms Finestone): I should just point out that there will be a vote at 10:35 a.m. So I would like everyone who wants to speak to let me know. Go ahead, Mr. Muise.

Mr. Mark Muise (West Nova, PC): I was very impressed both by your curriculum vitae and by your answers. I am happy to see you know the place I come from in Nova Scotia.

I have a fairly specific question, which will help me understand how you see your role. At present, we are having problems in Clyde-Argyle, Nova Scotia. We are a francophone community in an anglophone environment. For many years, anglophones and francophones lived harmoniously together. But about five or six years ago, a small group decided they wanted a homogenous school because of the Charter. I do not think that it is a bad idea as such. However, the then commissioner caused a problem by listening to only one of the parties, and basing his decisions on that party's claims alone. I believe in the principal of two official languages. We need harmony if we are to live in, work with and represent this community. But we are having problems at present, because one group, which constitutes an overwhelming majority in that francophone minority, is saying that their opinion has been neither heard nor respected. The smaller group, which really is very small, is setting the agenda.

What I am trying to say is that we must listen to all parties in that community. I really do not believe we can live in harmony as we did in the past, yet I would so much like to.

I want that harmony to ensure the well being of my communities -- not only as a politician, and not only as a business person, but also as a community member myself. I have a great deal of trouble with the way things are today, and I would like to know whether you would be prepared to listen to both parties.

Ms Adam: It is a little difficult for me to comment on this, since I do not really know the background. I need some clarification. When you say harmony, do you mean harmony within the francophone community, or harmony between the two groups?

Mr. Muise: There was harmony within the francophones community, and between francophones and anglophones. But now, because of what happened, there is a lack of harmony both within the francophone community, and among anglophones and francophones -- they see a group within the minority causing problems.

Ms Adam: I will restrict my answer to the francophone community, which has to make choices. If a group wants to exercise its right under the Charter, that is a very legitimate course.

How does the community deal with it? Some groups in the community decide on a course that is not favoured by the other groups. This harks back to the issue that I believe was raised earlier: a francophone community has the right to express diverse opinions. In my view, that is not always unhealthy.

You are in a state of change. Perhaps the community needs to be brought together, instead of polarized. We have to ensure that the parties come together, talk, come up with their own solutions.

[English]

Mr. Cliff Breitkreuz (Yellowhead, Ref.): Good morning, Ms Adam. You certainly have an interesting and impressive CV. You have studied at various universities. I also see from your biography that you have been very active in organizing and promoting francophone groups and organizations not only in Ontario but, I understand, also across the country.

Have you championed other minority groups in Canada? You must have given some kind of consideration, because of what we hear, to the trampling of English rights in Quebec. How will you promote English rights there? Could you also please give us your views on Quebec's Bill 101?

Ms Adam: You asked whether I have promoted the rights of other minorities besides the francophones. I have worked closely with women. Women cannot be considered as a minority group but they are definitely an under-represented group. I have worked closely and very intimately with this issue.

When I was at Laurentian University, I was involved then in health area as a researcher and a community developer. We developed an organization called Self-Help North/Entrée Nord and also called by an Ojibway name that I cannot pronounce. I was the founder and president of that organization, which brought together all the self-help and mutual support groups in the communities.

The answer is yes. This is a part of my life. Naturally, I will respond to the needs and concerns of individuals, whatever their group or ethnic origin.

Mr. Breitkreuz: How will you be actively promoting the rights of English minority groups in Quebec?

Ms Adam: I will do the same as I would with any other group. They need to be considered in the same way. It is true that their situation is different, as it is for every group. Franco-Ontarians and New Brunswick minorities are quite different from those in the west. Even among English-speaking Canadians in Quebec, I would say that Montrealers are different from English-speaking persons in Northern Quebec.

For all of these groups, I will do basically the same. Each group needs to be treated fairly, equally and as citizens of Canada with equal rights.

Mr. Breitkreuz: Could you give us your views on Bill 101 and tell us if you have ever spoken out against the sign laws in Quebec?

Ms Adam: No. I have never been involved in this type of political opinion, no.

[Translation]

Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa--Vanier, Lib.): There are two things I find very comforting -- one of them I hear, and one of them I read. The first is that the government made an interesting choice in selecting you. This morning, you said that linguistic duality had been a sort of theme in both your personal and professional life. I find that an excellent attitude -- it shows that you are not inward-looking, that you are open to everything linguistic duality can offer. I encourage you, and congratulate you.

The other thing I find comforting is that you are a woman of change. Let me elaborate on that -- I would even invite the media to give you that as an honourary title -- the Official Languages Commissioner, a Woman of Change. They will have to press for you to become a woman of change. All too often, we hear only fear-mongering and pessimism, we hear that this is the end of francophone communities in Canada, or anglophone communities in Quebec. So we should not be too pessimistic, but we should not be too optimistic either. There are indeed problems.

I believe that institutions are sometimes not rigorous enough. This may just be a result of human nature, but in my opinion, the role of the official languages commissioner is to tighten things up. The commissioner's role is to ensure that any time we have decentralization, any time we sign federal-provincial agreements, anytime we pass any statutes amending the Official Languages Act, as we did in 1998, official languages provisions are complied with. Speaking for myself, I would strongly encourage you to indeed be a woman of change. I hope you can live up to that title, which the media are sure to give you as soon as tomorrow's papers come out.

That said, I just wanted to tell you a short story before asking my question.

[English]

Allow me a short story about my by-election. I was elected to Parliament on February 13, 1995, in a by-election. Parliament resumed sitting on the sixth of that year.

Some colleagues from out west came into the riding to give me a hand. It is a tradition that we help each other. The Reform candidate then was campaigning for the Reform Party. I think some colleagues across the way might know him.

I had not fathomed the different perspectives that people have of this linguistic duality, depending on where you come from in this country. You can interpret this story the way that you want. It shows a greater opening from the Reform or perhaps their own duality of discourse, if you will.

My colleagues from out west who came to help all wanted to go home with a sign from the Reform candidate. They all asked for one, and I just could not understand why. They said, "A bilingual Reform sign! We want to show that back home". That is just a funny little story.

[Translation]

Do you have a sense of humour? You'll need it.

Ms Adam: The title "woman of change" is something I was awarded for actions and achievements in other roles. If I am ever awarded that title as commissioner, I hope I will have deserved it. You cannot be given a title before you do the job. I hope to make a difference, I plan to make a difference, and I hope to move Canada forward. That will be my primary responsibility as commissioner.

The Joint Chairman (Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool (Tracadie, Lib)): We have come to the end of this very fruitful meeting. I was very struck by the theme that has guided your life: linguistic duality. And around the table today, there is no doubt many of us that have been guided by the same ideal.

In my view, this linguistic duality is now a part of our history, and is a guarantee of our national unity. I certainly appreciate your grassroots involvement. Promoting linguistic duality and helping it flourish is certainly something the steering committee wants to put on the agenda for next year. This is what Mr. Beaudoin was talking about when he referred to Part VII of the OLA.

I congratulate you, and wish you the very best of luck. Thank you for accepting our invitation to meet with us today. We hope to see you here again.

The meeting is adjourned.