Montréal, February 14, 2007
Bilingual by Choice: Canada's Vision
Speech delivered at the Canadian Constitutional Club
Graham Fraser – Commissioner of Official Languages
Check against delivery
Ladies and gentlemen,
As the new Commissioner of Official Languages, I was asked to come speak to you about the evolution of language rights, starting from the establishment of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism.
I was very happy to accept the invitation, especially since I researched this subject when I was writing a book that was finally published last spring. It is a fascinating topic.
However, it is hard to talk about the Commission and the events following the publication of its famous reports without first taking a look back at the events leading up to the establishment of the Commission. So let me refresh your memories of some of these events, starting with a personal anecdote.
In the early 1980s, I was living in the city of Québec with my family, working as a newspaper correspondent. When my sons were about eight and ten, they loved to go on their own to a small military museum just inside the walls of the historic fortifications. What they liked best was a cartoon history of the city of Québec, which was filled with anachronisms. For example, when it described how many of Montgomery’s men deserted him during the frigid siege of Quebec in the winter of 1775,1 the film showed men with golf clubs waving goodbye to their freezing fellow soldiers. Humourless dad here was appalled at this, and at one point I said sternly: “Right! Tell me what, if anything, you learned from this!”
“Well,” said Malcolm, who was ten: “There were a lot of battles, and the French won and then the English won, and then the French won.”
“The French won?” I said. “What do you mean, the French won?”
“Dad, look around you,” Malcolm said, with the particular patience that ten year olds demonstrate when they realize they have idiots for parents. “What language is everyone speaking?”
Indeed, when we were living in the city of Québec, from 1979 until 1986, there were some 600,000 Francophones in the city, most of whom spoke no English—and 15,000 Anglophones. There are now six million French-speaking Canadians in the province of Quebec—63 per cent of whom are unilingual Francophones—and 920,000 English-speaking Quebeckers, 65 per cent of whom also speak French.2 In 1961, there were three million unilingual French-speaking Canadians; there are now four million.
The military battle that my young son assumed must have happened never took place. But, there has been struggle and conflict as French-speaking Quebec transformed itself from a traditional, conservative and deeply Catholic society into a culturally dynamic, economically vigorous and socially inclusive one, beginning in the 1960s.
Over the last 40 years, the relationship between Canada’s language groups themselves and between the linguistic minorities and the federal government has been transformed—largely in response to the rise of Quebec nationalism.
Faced with an increasing number of Quebec nationalists—who received international attention in 1967 when General de Gaulle pronounced “Vive le Québec libre”—the federal government realized that French language rights had to be defined, recognized and enforced. In 1963, the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism was established, and in 1965, in its preliminary report, it shocked many English-speaking Canadians by stating that Canada was passing through the greatest crisis in its history.
The public hearings of the Commission always started the same way. André Laurendeau or Davidson Dunton would sum up the three questions that the Commissioners were trying to address:
- Can English-speaking and French-speaking Canadians live together, and do they want to?
- Under what new conditions?
- And are they prepared to accept those conditions?
Laurendeau himself seriously doubted that the answer to the first question would be yes. Throughout the Commission’s work until his death in 1968, before his work was finished, Laurendeau felt torn by his desire to build bridges between the “two solitudes” and his deep understanding of his fellow Francophones’ frustrations within the Canadian federation. This struggle is reflected in the preliminary report's famous “blue pages,” which were written by Laurendeau.
In the reports, the Commission proposed building a new, close partnership between English-speaking and French-speaking Canadians. The Government of Canada would function in both languages and the provinces would be encouraged to offer services to the public in the language of the minority, where demand was sufficient. Also, more would be done to recognize the contribution and heritage of cultural communities. The outcome of the Commission was a compromise between the different visions of its members, particularly those of Laurendeau and Frank Scott. These debates established, in large part, how the language issue was handled in the next few decades.
In 1967, when he was Minister of Justice, Pierre Trudeau defined language rights as two-fold: the right to learn and the right to use. The entire edifice of language rights constructed over the next four decades rests on these two pillars.
Since then, people have often said that official bilingualism was established in Canada by Pierre Elliott Trudeau. This is not true. In 1966, the previous prime minister, Lester Pearson, outlined what would become the federal government’s obligations with respect to official languages, in terms that were remarkably similar to the texts of the acts adopted in 1969 and 1988. Pearson was unilingual, but planned on being the last unilingual prime minister of Canada, and this was exactly what happened.
The first federal official languages act was adopted in 1969.3 This act proclaimed the equality of status of English and French in all federal institutions. It spelled out the demographic criteria for the delivery of bilingual services. It also created the position of Commissioner of Official Languages, an ombudsman above politics who was to be the “active conscience” of Canadians in official language matters.
The Government of Canada also implemented a policy on multiculturalism, a theme that rapidly came to the forefront during the hearings of the Bilingualism and Biculturalism Commission. The policy recognized the equal value and dignity of all cultural communities within the general framework of linguistic duality. This in turn led to the adoption of a multiculturalism policy in 1971 and the Canadian Multiculturalism Act in 1988.4
Today, Canadian society is made up of many identities, but English and French remain its main languages of communication, without regard to ethnic origin or first language learned. Our bilingualism and multiculturalism policies work in symbiosis to foster respect and to promote equality of opportunity. These policies are rights-based—but they are also values-based.
In 1982, a new constitutional document, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, consolidated equality and language rights.5 It also recognized that the English or French linguistic minority communities of a province have a right to primary and secondary instruction in their language and to the management of their school systems, where numbers warrant. Language rights are a fundamental part of the Charter and are enshrined in section 16. Recently, I found out how that occurred. Senator Serge Joyal, then a member of Parliament, was asked by then-prime minister Pierre Trudeau to be the co-chair of the parliamentary committee examining the Charter. He agreed—but on the condition that the principles of the Official Languages Act be included.
The Official Languages Act was revised in 19886 to comply with the Charter.
It also aimed to outline in more detail the language rights of citizens and to elaborate on the new rules and standards, including the following:
- Bilingualism in Parliament;
- The use of English or French in federal courts and in criminal trials;
- The right of citizens to receive federal government services in their preferred official language, under a flexible sliding scale of “significant demand” criteria;
- The right of federal government employees to work in their preferred official language in designated regions;
- The equitable participation of English-speaking and French-speaking Canadians in federal institutions;
- A commitment by the federal government to foster the full recognition and use of English and French in Canadian society and to enhance the vitality of minority language communities.
Finally, in November 2005, the Parliament of Canada reinforced the part of the Act that pertains to minority community development.7 The Act now requires federal institutions to take positive measures to implement this commitment. Furthermore, an aggrieved citizen or group may now turn to the courts for a remedy if this obligation is not met.
In practice, this means that federal departments and agencies must ensure that they take official language communities into account in the planning and delivery of their programs and activities. It is worth nothing that this amendment was not driven by governments, but rather by parliamentarians.
The duties of the Commissioner of Official Languages are also defined in the Act. Reporting directly to Parliament, I am like an orchestra conductor: I have a staff of 168 and a budget of 19 million dollars. My various functions fall logically under two headings: promotion and protection. I am thus part cheerleader, part nag. The trick is to be both fair and tough in making assessments and recommendations for change. I think clarity is very important. I carry out my duties with the support and guidance of two parliamentary committees: one in the Senate and one in the House of Commons.
I would now like to add a few words on how it all works in practice.
Today, members of minority language communities can receive all—or, at the very least, key—federal services in their preferred official language at specially designated bilingual offices, about three times out of four. The situation is far from perfect, but it is a great improvement from 15 to 20 years ago.
Federal government employees have the right to work in the official language of their choice in the National Capital Region, in all of New Brunswick and in regions designated for this purpose in Quebec and Ontario. Yet again, the studies and audits my office published over the past few years show that this right is not always fully respected.
The proportions of Anglophones and Francophones employed in federal institutions are balanced on the whole with those of the Canadian population. However, the representation of Anglophones in Quebec is below what it should be.
One clear sign of the profound change in attitudes regarding language that has taken place in this country is the increase in individual bilingualism. In Quebec, more than four in ten French-speaking teenagers are bilingual, as are 83 per cent of English-speaking teenagers. The 2001 Census showed that the rate of bilingualism among English-speaking teenagers aged 15 to 19 outside Quebec is now about 15 per cent. This is more than twice the bilingualism rate of their parents and this trend continues.
There has also been a change in the Canadian political landscape. All four party leaders are fluent in English and French—and must face the challenge of a two-hour debate in one official language followed by a two-hour debate in the other official language the next night. I know of no other country that tests its political leaders in such a manner. It seems that Lester Pearson will indeed remain the last unilingual prime minister of this country.
Federal institutions must now apply the new provisions of Part VII of the Official Languages Act. This is a major challenge, both because of the scope of the required changes and because of the possible consequences for official language communities.
It will take some time to see the effects of Part VII. While the federal government does need to act quickly, the public service also needs some time to adapt to such major changes. Therefore, the goal should be to ensure that this adaptation period is as short as possible while still trying to maximize the benefits.
A lot has been done over the last 40 years. However, the three questions of the Commission have remained relevant and will probably continue to be so.
- Can English-speaking and French-speaking Canadians live together, and do they want to?
- Under what new conditions?
- And are they prepared to accept those conditions?
Thank you. I would like to spend the remaining time answering your questions or hearing your comments.
1 The Battle of Quebec itself took place on December 31, 1775. The British garrison, local militias and Canadian weather stopped the American force. The siege was lifted on May 6, 1776, with the arrival of British reinforcements.
2 Louise Marmen and Jean-Pierre Corbeil. New Canadian Perspectives: Languages in Canada 2001 Census, Ottawa: Canadian Heritage and Statistics Canada, 2004. Available online at www.pch.gc.ca/progs/lo-ol/pubs/census2001/index_e.cfm.
3 R.S.C. (1970), c. O-2.
4 R.S.C. (1985), c. 24 (4th supplement).
5 Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Schedule B of the Constitution Act, 1982), enacted as Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK) 1982, c. 11.
6 R.S.C. (1985), c. 31 (4th supplement).
7 Bill S-3, An Act to amend the Official Languages Act (promotion of English and French), S.C. 2005.
