|
|
|
93-8E
Prepared by:
Marion Ménard
Marie-Ève Hudon
Political and Social Affairs Division
Revised 27 April 2007
PDF (128 Kb, 25 pages)
Since the time of the Royal Commission of Inquiry on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, federal official languages policy has been linked to the preservation of Canadian unity. The enshrinement of language rights in the Constitution in 1982 opened a new chapter in the evolution of these rights in Canada. Since that time, language issues have continued to attract public interest and have even created tension. On the one hand, demands for implementation and full enforcement of the language rights protected under the Constitution have given rise to conflicts between official language minorities and their respective provincial governments; from time to time, these conflicts have resulted in legal challenges, some of which have reached the Supreme Court. On the other hand, a significant majority of Canadians continue to base their attitudes toward Canada’s linguistic duality on false perceptions of federal official languages policy. This means that opposition to so-called official bilingualism has crystallized into a perception that bilingualism is imposed on all Canadians; however, since the obligations under the Official Languages Act apply first and foremost to federal institutions, the federal approach to official languages is based on the principle of institutional bilingualism.
Institutional bilingualism is the capacity of the government and its institutions to communicate with the public, and within these institutions, in the two official languages. According to the Canadian model, the responsibility assumed by the federal government to communicate with its citizens is coupled with a commitment to serve its citizens in their own official language. Having adopted French and English as official languages, the government recognizes that it must adjust linguistically to the needs of the public. In doing so, the government confirms that it is not incumbent on citizens to adjust linguistically to the workings of government.
This Current Issue Review will examine the three basic components of federal official languages policy:
It will also present a summary of the Action Plan for Official Languages announced by the federal government on 12 March 2003.
With the passage of the Constitution Act, 1982, the concept of official languages was enshrined in the Constitution. Section 16 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Charter) establishes English and French as the official languages of Canada and confers equal status and equal rights and privileges with respect to their use in the institutions of the Parliament and the Government of Canada. Sections 17, 18 and 19 set out the principle of equality of the two official languages in the proceedings of Parliament, in parliamentary papers, and in courts established by Parliament. Section 20 deals with the use of English or French in communications between federal institutions and members of the public. Section 23 deals with minority language education rights. In addition, section 24 provides that anyone whose Charter-protected rights or freedoms have been infringed upon or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain a remedy. (The text of sections 16 through 23 of the Charter is included at the end of this paper.)
At the express request of New Brunswick, sections 16 through 20 of the Charter apply to that province; however, for section 20, an important exception applies, i.e., the right to receive communications or services from any office of an institution of the Legislature or Government of New Brunswick in English or French is not subject to any limitation based on sufficient demand or the nature of the office. As well, a constitutional amendment was passed by the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick in December 1992 and by Parliament in February 1993. This amendment to the Charter extends New Brunswick’s Act Recognizing the Equality of the Two Official Linguistic Communities, passed in 1981 by the Legislative Assembly of that province by proclaiming that New Brunswick’s English-speaking and French-speaking linguistic communities have equal status, rights and privileges – in particular, the right to the separate educational and cultural institutions necessary to preserve and promote those rights and privileges. The amendment also confirms the role of the Legislature and Government of New Brunswick in preserving and promoting this status and these rights and privileges.
As might be expected, the years following the coming into force of the Charter were characterized by numerous court challenges aimed at enforcing the spirit and the letter of the supreme law of Canada with respect to language rights.
The Court Challenges Program was essential to the development of jurisprudence relating to language rights protected under the Constitution. This program, introduced in 1978, provided financial assistance to official language minorities wishing to have their constitutional rights clarified and asserted through the courts (section 133 of the Constitution Act, 1867 and the Manitoba Act, 1870); since 1982, it has also covered the language rights set out in sections 16 through 23 of the Charter. Lastly, since 1985, it has also applied to individuals and groups that have challenged federal legislation, policies and practices in test cases invoking: section 15 of the Charter, concerning equality rights; section 27, on Canadians’ multicultural heritage; and section 28, on equality of the sexes. The program, funded by the federal government, has been brought to bear on test cases of national importance. For example, it helped ensure that French-speaking Manitobans’ language rights, which had been denied since the adoption of Manitoba’s Official Language Act of 1890, were recognized by the courts and the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba; it also furthered the battle to enforce the minority language education rights enshrined in section 23 of the Charter.
The Court Challenges Program was cancelled initially in February 1992, and then restored in October 1994. It was cancelled again in September 2006. The Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages is currently investigating this situation in response to the more than 100 complaints received by the Office about the program’s cancellation. In October 2006, the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada, supported by other community organizations, made an application to the Federal Court to declare null and void the federal government’s decision to cancel the program’s funding.
The Official Languages Act of 1969 followed upon the recommendations of the Royal Commission of Inquiry on Bilingualism and Biculturalism to broaden the scope and application of section 133 of the Constitution Act, 1867. Its purpose was to give English and French equal status, not only in Parliament and before the courts of Canada (as provided by section 133), but throughout the federal administration as well.
The Official Languages Act had not been amended since its passage in 1969, despite several requests by the Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages and the commissioner of Official Languages. The coming into force of the Charter in 1982 made reform more urgent. The government had to adapt federal legislation to the Charter, and it had to define the terms and conditions of implementing the Charter. It also wished to provide a broader legislative basis for its language policies and programs. In light of the scope of the amendments being considered, the government opted to repeal the existing statute and replace it with Bill C‑72. The new statute is also entitled the Official Languages Act (the Act).
Parliament remedied one weakness of the former statute – its declaratory nature – by making the Act enforceable. The Act provides for judicial remedy through the Federal Court; under certain conditions, a plaintiff may apply for a remedy either alone or jointly with the commissioner of Official Languages, who is also authorized to apply to the Court for a remedy.
A general provision corrects another shortcoming of the former statute, i.e., its lack of primacy over other federal statutes. This general provision states that the provisions of Parts I to V of the Act – which deal with the proceedings of Parliament, legislative and other instruments, the administration of justice, communications with and services to the public, and language of work – have primacy over all other federal legislation or regulations except the Canadian Human Rights Act because the principles underlying these Parts flow directly from the Constitution.
The Act requires the minister of Canadian Heritage and the president of the Canada Public Service Agency, acting under the aegis of the president of the Treasury Board, to report annually to Parliament on their respective responsibilities concerning official languages. It also requires Parliament to strike a parliamentary committee specifically responsible for following up on the implementation of the Act and its accompanying regulations and instructions, and on the implementation of reports by the commissioner of Official Languages, the president of the Treasury Board, and the minister of Canadian Heritage.
In the Act, Parliament specifically provided for eight cases in which implementation may give rise to regulations, notably with respect to health and safety, communications and services, language of work, and equitable participation. The government undertook to draw up regulations on communication with and services to the public after the Act was passed.
The Act defines the responsibilities of federal institutions concerning communication with and services to the public. The government adopted the Official Languages (Communications with and Services to the Public) Regulations on 16 December 1991, concluding a parliamentary process that had begun on 8 November 1990 with the tabling of proposed draft regulations in the House of Commons. The Regulations clarify the linguistic obligations of federal organizations and specify the circumstances in which Canadians may expect to be served in the official language of their choice.
The Regulations guarantee service in the majority official language. “Official language majority” and “official language minority” are defined in relation to the total population of a province or territory. The Regulations complete key provisions of the Act concerning: federal offices where there is “significant demand” for service in both official languages; federal offices where the “nature of the office” makes service in both official languages reasonable; and, contracted services for travellers.
The Regulations concerning “significant demand” include provisions based on the most recent decennial census data on the size of the minorities (either absolute size, or number and proportion, whichever is appropriate) and, where local demographic data are not relevant, provisions based on the volume of demand in the minority language. The Regulations on the “nature of the office” apply to specific federal services, regardless of level of demand, and include provisions on health and safety signage, national parks, embassies, the main federal offices located in the Northwest Territories and the Yukon, and popular national or international exhibitions.
The Regulations on contracted services at facilities for travellers apply to federal airports, railway stations and ferry terminals where demand is significant. Services covered include restaurant, car rental, foreign exchange and air carrier services provided at these facilities. The Regulations also specify the terms and conditions of providing these services.
Most provisions in the Regulations came into effect on 16 December 1992; the most recent came into effect on 16 December 1994. The Regulations apply to all institutions covered by the Official Languages Act, including departments, Crown corporations, and Air Canada (under the Air Canada Public Participation Act). They do not apply to federal offices located in the National Capital Region or to federal head offices, both of which are already required to serve the public in both official languages by a provision of the Act.
In 2001, the Commissioner published a summary of the audits carried out between 1996 and 2000 on federal offices designated to deliver services in both official languages.(1) The summary revealed that the situation had not improved since 1994 (in nearly 30% of cases, service in French was not available). The Commissioner then made 22 recommendations to political and administrative authorities; these were intended to ensure that the provision of services of equal quality in both English and French would become integral to the corporate culture of federal institutions. Nearly one year after the release of this report, a follow‑up was conducted to monitor the implementation of the recommendations by the Treasury Board Secretariat, to which most of the recommendations applied. Four of the 22 recommendations have already been implemented, 13 are in the process of being implemented and 5 have not been implemented.
In October 2006, the government published draft regulations in the Canada Gazette in response to a Federal Court of Canada order in Doucet v. Canada.(2) The object of these draft regulations was to amend the Regulations such that a Royal Canadian Mounted Police detachment (in Amherst, Nova Scotia) would be required to offer bilingual services. The Commissioner and the Senate Standing Committee on Official Languages are of the opinion that these draft regulations take a minimalist approach. Along with a great many minority community organizations, they would like the government to undertake a thorough revision of the Regulations to better reflect current realities and to ensure that members of the public receive services of equal quality in the official language of their choice. The government has not yet made a formal commitment in this regard.
A review of official languages policies began in the fall of 2003 and was concluded in the summer of 2005. This renewal exercise sought to reduce the number and clarify the function of policies relating to official languages.
Twenty-two policy instruments were reduced to one framework (Official Languages Policy Framework), three policies (Policy on the Use of Official Languages for Communications with and Services to the Public, Policy on Language of Work, and Policy on Official Languages for Human Resources Management) and five directives (Directive on the Use of Official Languages on Web Sites, Directive on the Use of Official Languages in Electronic Communications, Directive on the Linguistic Identification of Positions or Functions, Directive on the Staffing of Bilingual Positions, and the Bilingualism Bonus Directive).(3)
The new policies introduce significant changes to bilingualism standards in the federal public service. First, imperative staffing(4) is the norm for all bilingual positions. The new policies also tighten the rules on bilingualism for managers in the federal public service: all bilingual positions must be filled by “bilingual persons.” Imperative staffing becomes mandatory for the staffing of bilingual positions at the EX-05 to EX-02 levels in bilingual regions, and also in unilingual regions if the incumbents supervise staff who hold bilingual positions in bilingual regions.
The changes also affect language training, which becomes a professional development tool for employees who want to advance their careers and eventually fill a bilingual position. Institutions are called upon to encourage this type of training and integrate it into employees’ professional development plans, taking into account available resources. Members of the EX category who are appointed to bilingual non‑imperative positions are typically necessary to take any required language training before assuming the duties of their new position. Non-EX employees appointed to bilingual non-imperative positions are required to take language training as soon as possible after their appointment.
Section 41 of the Official Languages Act sets out the federal government’s commitment to “enhancing the vitality of the English and French linguistic minority communities in Canada and supporting and assisting their development and fostering the full recognition and use of both English and French in Canadian society.” This section of the Act has been the subject of considerable debate and interpretation since 1988. The Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages has repeatedly expressed dissatisfaction with the implementation of Part VII of the Act, arguing that federal institutions have made little effort to implement this part of the Act and that the Department of Canadian Heritage has shown little leadership in this regard. Since 2001-2002, the Commissioner has recommended that the government clarify through legislation or regulations the scope of the commitment set out in section 41 of the Act and take the necessary measures to effectively fulfil its responsibilities under this section.
On four occasions between 2001 and 2005, a private member’s bill was introduced in the Senate to strengthen the binding nature of federal institutions’ responsibilities under Part VII of the Act. The bill died on the Order Paper three times. The Act to amend the Official Languages Act (promotion of English and French), better known as Bill S-3, finally received Royal Assent on 25 November 2006. Three amendments, which apply to all federal institutions, were made to the Act:
Under section 42 of the Act, the minister of Canadian Heritage is responsible for encouraging and promoting a coordinated approach to the fulfilment of the commitments of federal institutions as set out in section 41. Currently, the Department of Canadian Heritage is carrying out its responsibilities through programs and activities in three broad areas: federal–provincial/territorial cooperation; support for linguistic communities; and promotion and dialogue.
Since 1970, the federal government has cooperated with the provinces to allow members of the official language minority communities to study in their own language and to enable young Canadians to learn French or English as a second language. The Official Languages in Education Program (OLEP) is one of the Department of Canadian Heritage’s largest in financial terms. OLEP is widely regarded as a model of effective and harmonious federal–provincial cooperation in an area of provincial jurisdiction. About $6.4 billion was invested in this program between 1970-1971 and 2005-2006. Under bilateral agreements, the federal government reimburses the provincial and territorial governments for part of the additional expenditures they incur to provide education in the minority official language (programs and services, program development, teaching materials, teacher training, and student assistance) and to allow students who speak the majority official language (Francophones in Quebec and Anglophones in the rest of the country) to learn their second official language.
These agreements entail action plans with performance indicators that are intended to keep the public apprised of the measures implemented and results achieved in the area of official languages education. The action plan approach was adopted in February 2000 in response to ongoing criticism concerning a lack of accountability on the part of provincial governments and a lack of information available to the public with regard to the use of federal funds and the results achieved.
A protocol governs the general functioning of OLEP and determines the federal government’s financial investment. The protocol is signed with the Council of Ministers of Education (Canada), the body that represents the interests of the provinces and territories with respect to education in their dealings with the federal government and abroad. The current protocol covers the fiscal years 2005-2006 to 2008-2009 and commits the Department of Canadian Heritage to provide $1.02 billion in funding. The federal government reserves the right to approve additional contributions for the development of postsecondary education, the promotion of research and the growth and enhancement of minority language or second language programs at all levels. In 2002‑2003, OLEP was the subject of an evaluation and external audit.(5)
The federal government funds provincial and territorial governments that want to create new services or improve existing services in the minority language and to promote greater understanding between the country’s two linguistic communities. Multi-year agreements with the federal government with respect to health and social services, legal services and municipal affairs are in effect in almost every province and territory. Action plans describing planned measures and expected results are annexed to the bilateral agreements. These agreements are generally signed for a five‑year period, and costs are shared equally between the two levels of government.
The Department of Canadian Heritage launched an initiative in 1994 to reposition direct support to official language minority communities. This made it possible to institute new mechanisms for cooperation and funding in a context of diminishing resources. The new strategy uses “collaboration accords” (formerly, Canada–Community agreements) to encourage individual communities to take greater control.
A collaboration accord is an agreement reached between the Department of Canadian Heritage and an organization or organizations representing a provincial or territorial official language minority community. Such agreements set multi-year funding for the entire community and outline the Department’s commitments with respect to community development, federal–provincial cooperation and interdepartmental coordination. Such accords also establish mechanisms through which community organizations together set their own priorities and suggest how available funds should be allocated.
The Support of Official Languages Program, under which the collaboration accords are funded, was evaluated by the Office of the Auditor General in 2001. The Office identified improvements that were necessary for the program’s sound management: the management framework, performance information, project evaluation and analysis of the results obtained.(6) The program was the subject of an outside evaluation in 2003. The evaluators noted a top-heavy management process, a lack of clear results and indicators, and a lack of transparency in funding decisions. (7) It was in response to these findings that the decision was made to replace the former Canada–Community agreements with the current collaboration accords.
For the five-year period from 2004-2005 to 2008-2009, $151,880,000 (or an average of $30,376,000 per year) was allocated to collaboration accords and divided among the organizations representing official-language minority communities. Under each agreement, a minimum of 20% of the funding must go to specific projects, while the balance goes toward the community organizations’ annual activities.
On 16 August 1994, the Minister of Canadian Heritage announced that the cabinet had approved the establishment of an accountability framework for the implementation of sections 41 and 42 of the 1988 version of the Act. This government initiative followed appeals by the commissioner of Official Languages and organizations representing official language minority communities for more vigorous leadership by the Department in fostering interdepartmental cooperation.
The announced measures concerned key institutions in areas of intervention that are vital to official language minority communities and that have the greatest impact on their development – notably, institutions involved in the areas of economic, human resource and cultural development. Each of the 32 designated institutions is required to develop an action plan for the implementation of section 41, taking into account the communities’ specific needs. Ministers responsible for key institutions must submit these plans to the minister of Canadian Heritage and report to him or her once a year on the results attained. Finally, the minister of Canadian Heritage’s annual report on official languages must highlight the action plan of each key federal institution and the results achieved during the previous year.
On 18 November 1996, the minister of Canadian Heritage published the government’s response to the Second Report of the Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages. Acknowledging the need for greater accountability, the government announced that the Treasury Board Secretariat would henceforth encourage federal departments and agencies to include activities relating to the implementation of section 41 of the Official Languages Act in their strategic planning and evaluation processes. On 20 March 1997, the minister of Canadian Heritage and the president of the Treasury Board signed a memorandum of agreement making this new partnership official.
A new program announced in the 1999 Budget, the Interdepartmental Partnership with the Official-Language Communities (IPOLC) program, encourages federal departments and agencies to promote the implementation of section 41 in their respective programs. The IPOLC provides financial leverage to facilitate the establishment of sustainable partnerships and new methods of cooperation by strengthening the organizational culture of the federal and community partners. Since the program’s inception in 2000‑2001, twenty or so agreements have been signed between the Department of Canadian Heritage and various federal institutions, including Health Canada, the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, Telefilm Canada, the Canada Council for the Arts and Industry Canada. From 2001‑2002 to 2004-2005, $65 million was invested in the communities: $21.7 million by the Department of Canadian Heritage, $29.3 million by federal partners and $14 million by other sources.
The Department of Canadian Heritage funds a range of activities to promote linguistic duality and greater understanding between Anglophone and Francophone Canadians. These activities are divided into the following components: bursaries for summer language courses, official language instructors, language acquisition development, administration of justice in the two official languages, support for linguistic duality, and cooperation with the voluntary sector.
On 25 April 2001, the prime minister of Canada assigned responsibility for official languages issues to the Honourable Stéphane Dion, President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. In carrying out his mandate, Mr. Dion was to develop a new blueprint for action to strengthen the official languages program.
On 12 March 2003, after two years of consultations, the Minister announced his action plan,(8) which revolves around three major axes: education, community development and the federal public service. In the area of education, additional funding was announced for education in the French and English minority languages and for second-language instruction. The second axis focuses on measures in seven priority areas to promote community development: early childhood development, health, justice, immigration, economic development, the strengthening of intergovernmental cooperation or partnerships with the provinces and territories, and community living. The third axis focuses on strengthening bilingualism at all levels of the federal public service. The main pillar of the Action Plan is the accountability framework, which makes official languages a priority for the government and for public servants. This accountability framework clarifies the responsibilities of departments and agencies, and aims to enhance coordination among the organizations involved. In financial terms, the federal government is committed to investing $751.4 million over five years to support the plan’s implementation. As shown in Table 1, half of this investment will be devoted to education.
Department or Agency |
Financial Commitment |
|---|---|
Canadian Heritage |
|
Education |
$381.5M |
Community Support |
$33.5M |
Treasury Board Secretariat |
$64.6M |
Health Canada |
$119.0M |
Human Resources Development Canada |
$29.3M |
Industry Canada |
$53.0M |
Justice Canada |
$48.0M |
Citizenship and Immigration Canada |
$9.0M |
Privy Council Office, Intergovernmental Affairs |
$13.5M |
TOTAL |
$751.4M |
The government published its midterm report on the implementation of the Action Plan in the fall of 2005.(9) The report showed that the progress made to date varied from sector to sector and from province to province. Significant delays were noted in education, community services and early childhood development. According to the then commissioner of Official Languages, the most obvious progress had been made in the health sector. She noted that, on the whole, “the implementation of the Action Plan has not been as transparent as it could have been.”(10) The midterm report includes a management framework for the official languages program in order to evaluate the measures taken and the results achieved through the action plan. A summative evaluation is scheduled for 2007.
The principal measures adopted over the years by Parliament with respect to official languages are set out in the following chronology.
July 1969 - The Official Languages Act received Royal Assent.
June 1973 - Parliament passed a special Resolution on Official Languages in the Public Service, reiterating the principles of the 1969 statute and confirming the right of public-sector workers to work in the official language of their choice.
June 1978 - Bill C-42 received Royal Assent. It amended the Criminal Code to give accused persons the right to be heard by a judge or by a judge and a jury who speak their official language, whether this is English or French.
May 1980 - Parliament created a Special Joint Committee on Official Languages, responsible for evaluating progress made in the 10 years since the passage of the Official Languages Act.
December 1981 - Parliament passed a Proposed Resolution for a Joint Address to Her Majesty Concerning the Constitution of Canada, including a Charter of Rights that incorporated the language rights provided for in the Official Languages Act and other new rights related to minority language education.
October 1983 - Parliament unanimously passed a resolution on the language rights of Francophone residents of Manitoba; another resolution on the same subject was passed on 24 February 1984.
May 1984 - Parliament struck the Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages Policy and Programs; in February 1986, this Committee became the Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages.
July 1988 - The new Official Languages Act received Royal Assent.
December 1989 - The Standing Committee of the House of Commons on Human Rights and the Status of Disabled Persons tabled a report unanimously recommending renewal of the Court Challenges Program until 31 March 2000.
May 1990 - In its response to this Committee report, the minister of State (Multiculturalism and Citizenship) agreed on behalf of the government to renew the Program until 1995.
June 1990 - The Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages tabled a unanimous report urging the government to table the proposed draft regulations in Parliament as soon as possible.
October 1990 - The commissioner of Official Languages tabled a special report in Parliament urging the government to table the proposed draft regulations on communications with and services to the public immediately and then, with due diligence, to table all the regulations required under the Act.
November 1990 - The proposed draft regulations on the delivery of federal services to the public in both official languages were tabled in Parliament.
May 1991 - The Standing Joint Committee tabled its report, including dissenting opinions, on the proposed draft regulations on the delivery of federal services to the public in both official languages.
- The House of Commons struck the Standing Committee on Official Languages, which replaced the Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages.
February 1992 - In its budget, the federal government announced the elimination of the Court Challenges Program.
June 1992 - The Standing Committee of the House of Commons on Human Rights and the Status of Disabled Persons tabled a report entitled Paying Too Dearly, in which it unanimously recommended that the Court Challenges Program be maintained and restructured in the form of a foundation. In December 1992, the minister of Multiculturalism and Citizenship indicated that the government was not able to re-establish this program.
February 1993 - Parliament passed a constitutional amendment, previously passed by the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick in December 1992; it proclaimed in the Charter the equality of that province’s English-speaking and French-speaking communities.
January 1994 - The House of Commons amended Standing Order 104 and established a Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages.
October 1994 - The Court Challenges Program was reinstated with an annual budget of $2.75 million.
June 1996 - The Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages tabled a report entitled Implementation of Part VII of the Official Languages Act, which made two recommendations for rectifying the shortcomings noted in the implementation of the strategy announced in August 1994.
November 1996 - The minister of Canadian Heritage published the government’s response to the Second Report of the Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages, announcing that the Treasury Board Secretariat would henceforth be involved in making federal departments and agencies more accountable in implementing Part VII of the Official Languages Act.
April 1997 - The Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages tabled in Parliament its Third Report (The Application of the Official Languages Act in the National Capital Region), accompanied by dissenting opinions from the Bloc Québécois and the Reform Party.
August 1999 - The fifth commissioner of Official Languages, Dyane Adam, took up her duties.
June 2000 - The Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages tabled its Third Report to Parliament, an interim report entitled Implementation of Part VII of the Official Languages Act.
March 2001 - The Federal Court, Trial Division, ruled that measures taken by the Department of Justice Canada to implement the Contraventions Act do not adequately protect all of the quasi-constitutional language rights guaranteed in Part XVII of the Criminal Code and Part IV of the Official Languages Act.
April 2001 - The prime minister of Canada asked Mr. Stéphane Dion, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs and President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada, to coordinate all issues related to official languages within the federal government. An action plan was to be established by 2003.
May 2001 - The Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages tabled in Parliament its second report, entitled The Broadcasting and Availability of the Debates and Proceedings of Parliament in Both Official Languages.
September 2001 - A bill entitled An Act to amend the Official Languages Act (promotion of English and French) is introduced in the Senate for the first time. It died on the Order Paper in the spring of 2002. A new version of the bill was introduced in the next three sessions of Parliament.
June 2002 - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, rendered a decision in Quigley v. Canada (House of Commons) that the House of Commons had contravened its obligations as stated in the Official Languages Act because it had failed to ensure that its proceedings were broadcast in both official languages. The Board of Internal Economy of the House of Commons decided to appeal the decision.
October 2002 - The Senate dissociated itself from the former Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages and created its own standing committee on official languages.
November 2002 - The House of Commons created its own standing committee on official languages.
March 2003 - The government tabled the Action Plan for Official Languages.
December 2003 - Justice John Richard, Federal Court of Appeal, dismissed the appeal filed by the House of Commons in June 2002. The Federal Court of Appeal upheld the ruling that the House of Commons must provide television broadcasts of its proceedings in both official languages.
July 2004 - The Federal Court of Appeal issued a ruling in Forum des maires de la péninsule acadienne v. Canada (Canada Food Inspection Agency), interpreting section 41 of the Act as a commitment.
November 2005 - Bill S‑3: An Act to amend the Official Languages Act (promotion of English and French) received Royal Assent. It made Part VII of the Act binding.
September 2006 - The government announced the cancellation of the Court Challenges Program and other federal programs that have an impact on the development of official-language minority communities.
October 2006 - The sixth commissioner of Official Languages, Graham Fraser, began his term in office.
16
17
18
19
20
21
Nothing in sections 16 to 20 abrogates or derogates from any right, privilege or obligation with respect to the English and French languages, or either of them, that exists or is continued by virtue of any other provision of the Constitution of Canada.
22
Nothing in sections 16 to 20 abrogates or derogates from any legal or customary right or privilege acquired or enjoyed either before or after the coming into force of this Charter with respect to any language that is not English or French.
23
have the right to have their children receive primary and secondary school instruction in that language in that province.