LANG Committee Meeting

STANDING JOINT COMMITTEE ON OFFICIAL LANGUAGES

COMITÉ MIXTE PERMANENT DES LANGUES OFFICIELLES

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Tuesday, May 29, 2001

• 1530

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier, Lib.)): Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to our meeting.

We are continuing our study of the national air carrier, Air Canada, and services in both official languages. Appearing before us today is Mr. Watson, accompanied by other witnesses that he will introduce to us himself. Mr. Watson is the President of the Canadian Tourism Commission. It is a new Crown corporation, but the organization itself is not new.

Mr. Watson, thank you for having taken the time to be with us today, and the floor is yours. After your presentation, we will have a question and answer session until our time expires. Mr. Watson.

Mr. Jim Watson (President, Canadian Tourism Commission): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Honourable senators and members of the House of Commons, as Mr. Bélanger has already said, I am Jim Watson and I am the President of the Canadian Tourism Commission. With me today is the Vice-President, Information, and Corporate Secretary, Ms. Chantal Péan, and our Director of Communications, Mr. Pierre Gauthier.

I am delighted to be here today in the historic Centre Block of the House of Commons to speak to bilingual services offered by Air Canada, in the context of your study of the issue pursuant to Standing Orders 108(1)(a) and 108(2).

[English]

As you will know, passenger air transport services represent a significant part of the tourism industry in Canada.

[Translation]

Last year, expenditures on passenger air transport totalled 12.9 billion dollars, or 24 percent of total tourism expenditures of 54.1 billion dollars.

[English]

So it is an industry subgroup of importance to the industry, and certainly to the Canadian Tourism Commission. As the chair of the committee pointed out, we are Canada's newest crown corporation, and our mandate is very straightforward, to market Canada as a tourism destination.

Recent developments in the structure of the passenger airline industry in Canada have had a noticeable effect on tourism. With a dominant airline serving the domestic market, as well as offering on-line connections to non-Canadian international carriers, complaints have been heard regarding fare increases and reductions in services. These have to be a worry to the CTC and its partners as we try to promote Canada as the premier four season tourist destination.

[Translation]

Yet, this is not the purpose of my appearance before this committee today. Rather, I am here to speak to the language services offered by Air Canada.

[English]

I am fully aware that with the merger of Canadian Airlines and Air Canada, Air Canada has faced many challenges in ensuring the smooth transition of services to the public. Air Canada is a very important partner with the CTC in the promotion of tourism in this country. I do commend Air Canada for its level of bilingual services in the past. From the CTC's perspective, we would like to see the continuation of increased bilingual services, to ensure that both linguistic groups are treated fairly.

[Translation]

Let me begin by recalling that one of Canada's strengths as an international tourism destination is its cultural diversity.

[English]

This has been recognized by the vision statement the industry has adopted for itself. The vision statement reads, in part, “Canada will be the premier four season destination, to connect with nature and to experience diverse cultures and communities”.

Without a doubt, our official bilingual status is one of Canada's primary distinguishing attributes. That fact alone separates us from the pack. Cultural diversity is a characteristic we use consistently in our advertising and promotional campaigns. The bilingual nature of the country is certainly a plus for us as we compete in the very competitive international tourism marketplace.

Let me turn to the issue of language services provided by Air Canada. A significant thrust of the CTC's Canada marketing program is the promotion of travel in Canada by Canadians.

[Translation]

In particular, we seek to encourage interprovincial travel by Canadians.

[English]

In other words, we would like to encourage residents of Quebec to travel to Alberta, for example, and the residents of Alberta to travel to Quebec. Travel by Canadians in Canada remains the primary market for the tourism industry in Canada.

• 1535

[Translation]

It accounts for 70 percent of total tourism spending in Canada.

[English]

Last year domestic spending amounted to $37.9 billion of the $54.1 billion total. In other words, a substantial amount of money was spent by Canadians to travel within their own country. So you can see that domestic tourism is big business. Yet it can grow, and at the commission we believe we have an obligation to to see that it continues to grow. It can grow by promoting the benefits of Canada to those who travel little or not at all and by promoting Canada as an alternative tourism destination to foreign destinations, such as the United States.

[Translation]

To facilitate trans-Canada travel, it seems essential that the national air carrier provide services in each of the two official languages—French and English.

[English]

It surely makes eminent sense for a resident of Quebec travelling outside of the province to have access to services in French aboard Air Canada flights. It makes equal sense for a resident of Alberta travelling to Quebec to have access to services in English aboard Air Canada flights.

Experience with Air Canada's regional carriers in the Ottawa-Toronto market suggests that the provision of services in both official languages need not be onerous or costly. In many instances public announcements are made in one or the other of the official languages, and a recorded announcement is then played in the other official language.

My experience has been that at least one flight attendant has been able to speak both languages. This is essential not only because we are a bilingual country but also for safety reasons you want to have more than simply a recorder outlining the standard messages. The net effect is to provide service and comfort to the travelling public in each of Canada's official languages.

The availability of each official language on Air Canada's service is also a benefit to international travellers to Canada. Think of residents of France travelling to British Columbia, for example. To give senators and members of Parliament an idea of this, in 1999 we had 414,000 visitors from France visit Canada. It can only enhance the tourism experience if inflight services are available in French. Think of the residents of the United States travelling to Quebec. The tourism experience is surely enhanced if inflight services are available in English.

Thus, from a tourism perspective, the availability of inflight services in English and French on Air Canada flights is highly desirable, as is the case with counter services throughout the country.

[Translation]

The benefits would seem to far outweigh the costs.

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I want to thank you for the opportunity to present the perspective of the tourism industry on this important matter. I would be more than happy to answer any questions you may now have.

[English]

I'd be delighted to answer questions along with my colleagues.

[Translation]

Thank you.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you.

Mr. Sauvageau.

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau (Repentigny, BQ): Ladies and gentlemen, it is with great pleasure that I welcome you here this afternoon.

You seem to be quite generous in your approach to Air Canada, but you do not seem to be very demanding of them. You are looking at the situation through rose-tinted spectacles, and you are saying that if everything works well you will be satisfied with that. However, I don't think that is any way to go about correcting a situation that we deem to be relatively unacceptable. I am going to ask you several questions on that.

In your presentation you said the following:

It surely makes imminent sense for a resident of Quebec travelling outside of the province to have access to services in French aboard Air Canada flights.

The other day we heard from an Air Canada representative. I would like to point out to you, as representatives of the Canadian Tourism Commission, that she told us that there were in fact no problems and that all passengers could have service in both official languages, especially on flights originating in Quebec. She also told us that if there were indeed complaints, they had to be put forward.

I'm sorry, but I would like it read into the minutes that on Air Nova flight AC 8713 from Mont-Joli to Montreal and on to Ottawa, no service in French was available. Neither the pilot nor the cabin and crew were francophones. This was the situation experienced by my colleague, Suzanne Tremblay. It is the same type of situation that my friend, Mr. Godin, experiences on a regular basis. Consequently, I'd like to hear what you have to say on that issue, among others.

• 1540

In your presentation, you state that information announcements are made in one or the other of the official languages and that a cassette is used to give the same information in the other official language. You state that this way of doing things is satisfactory. I'm sure that my friend, Yvon, will ask you which cassette is used in an emergency situation. Do you really believe that a cassette can replace announcements in the other official language?

Have you heard many complaints from anglophones who were unable to get service in English, no matter where they were going in Canada?

Mr. Jim Watson: Mr. Sauvageau, on page 4 of my presentation, I added an extra comment just because I am not satisfied with the fact that recordings are used to make announcements. I stated the following:

[English]

My experience has been that at least one flight attendant has to be able to speak in both languages.

[Translation]

I talked about safety issues and problems of that order. At the very least, it is important that announcements be made in both official languages. For passenger safety, it is very important that at least one member of the crew speak the other official language. Unfortunately, I have not had the opportunity to correct the text of my presentation, but that is the point of view of the Canadian Tourism Commission.

In terms of your other question, this is not an issue on which the Canadian Tourism Commission receives complaints. Air Canada receives these complaints.

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Might that happen?

Mr. Jim Watson: I'll leave that question to Chantal. I only took up my position with the Canadian Tourism Commission eight months ago. Chantal has been with the organization for much longer. Have you received any?

Ms. Chantal Péan (Vice-President, Information and Corporate Secretary, Canadian Tourism Commission): We have not received any complaints on that. You were talking about complaints from anglophones, weren't you?

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Yes.

Ms. Chantal Péan: No, we have never received any complaints from anglophones. We haven't received any from francophones either, for that matter.

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: No, no. That isn't what I meant. However, it doesn't matter.

This committee is studying the bilingual services provided by Air Canada. You are a federal body. You are aware that the federal government is required to enforce the Official Languages Act and you are also aware that the federal government has never shown the political will to make Air Canada comply with the Official Languages Act.

In light of what I have just said, if you are in a position to put forward a single recommendation to assist the Canadian Tourism Commission in promoting bilingual tourism—which, in my opinion, is a mirage, but you are entitled to promote it—and which would force Air Canada to comply with the Official Languages Act, what would it be?

Mr. Jim Watson: That's an easy one. It would be to provide services in both official languages throughout Canada, not only on flights themselves, but also in airports, at ticket desks, etc. Air Canada must provide services in both official languages, and not just in cities or regions where 5 percent of the population speak both languages or the minority language, but throughout the country.

I find it easy to say that because this suggestion is aimed at a body other than my own. The Canadian Tourism Commission is very proud of the fact that it provides services in both official languages. I think that it is good business.

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Now, you are aware that there is legislation which set out restrictions. For example, when you are driving on the highway, legislation stipulates that you must not exceed 100 km an hour. If you do go over the speed limit, you are liable to be fined, and these fines can be hefty sometimes. I've seen that firsthand.

The Official Languages Act is also a law. You want Air Canada to comply with the Official Languages Act, and everybody agrees with you on that. But what will happen if it does not comply? Well, in five or ten years' time, we will be meeting here again as we did in the 1970s, when it was decided that Air Canada should provide services in both official languages on all its flights. So, in your opinion, what will happen or what should happen if Air Canada does not comply?

Mr. Jim Watson: In my opinion, that is a question you should probably put to the Heritage Minister, to the minister whose portfolio covers the Official Languages Act, or to Mr. Dion.

• 1545

I heard the question that you asked today in the House of Commons, and I believe That is the person responsible for this act. Unfortunately, as I have already said, I am responsible for tourism marketing and not the implementation of Canadian legislation.

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Therefore, you are encouraging us to require Air Canada to provide services in both official languages aboard its aircrafts, in airports, everywhere in fact.

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes.

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Thank you.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you, Mr. Sauvageau.

Senator Gauthier.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier (Ontario, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Is the witness appearing before us today here strictly to discuss the Air Canada issue and may we ask him questions concerning the Canadian Tourism Commission?

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Watson is undoubtedly prepared to answer any types of questions, except personal ones of course.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: The Commission is a Crown corporation, isn't it?

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes, that is correct.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Are you subject to the Official Languages Act?

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: The Commission has not yet filed a report with the Minister of Canadian Heritage, at least as far as I know.

Mr. Jim Watson: Not yet.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I tried to obtain a copy, and I was told that I was too early. There will be a report covering the fiscal year 2000-01, but it has not yet been tabled. Do you have any idea when you intend to table your report?

Mr. Jim Watson: Probably in three or four months' time. That is our goal anyway. That is the responsibility of Pierre Gauthier.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Jim, I have to read what you say. I can't hear what you are saying. That does not matter.

The Commission has a budget of $82 million, give or take. The estimates stand at $82 million. The National Capital Commission has a roughly equivalent budget. Both these bodies have the same business line. Yours promotes Canada and the National Capital Commission promotes the National Capital, which is also a valid function.

If I am not mistaken, your commission has 14 offices outside Canada.

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes, you are right.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Could you provide me with a list of these offices? Could you send it to the clerk so that he may distribute it to other members of the committee?

Mr. Jim Watson: I will do that.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: What is the operating budget of your commission for promoting Canada abroad? What proportion of your budget is given over to promoting Canada outside Canada?

Mr. Jim Watson: Roughly 95%. Most of our promotional activities are conducted outside Canada.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Ninety-five percent.

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Does the Commission have good ties with the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Trade?

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes. We have an agreement with the Minister of Foreign Affairs because the majority of our offices are in embassies.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I have some difficulty with that, because in my opinion, tourism is for relatively wealthy people. Tourists are normally rich people. From what I have been able to glean from specific reports that I have read, you have undertaken publicity campaigns in Germany and in the United Kingdom. Have you done anything in Japan?

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Have you done any advertising in France?

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: What proportion of your overall budget is given over to advertising?

Mr. Jim Watson: By country?

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: What is the percentage of your budget which is earmarked for advertising, in countries other than Canada? You talked about a figure of 95% earlier.

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: According to what I have read, your advertising campaigns mainly target Germany and the United Kingdom and you do very little advertising in Asia. I wanted to know whether you also have advertising in Japan, for example, and in France. I also wanted to know if this is the case, what proportion of your budget is given over to that.

Mr. Jim Watson: We can give you a breakdown of the advertising budget for each country, honourable Senator. However, I do not have that information with me right now. Perhaps Chantal has it.

• 1550

Ms. Chantal Péan: The majority of our budget targets the United States.

[English]

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: You can send that to me or to the clerk.

[Translation]

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes. We will provide you with a copy of our annual report, and I think that this information is included in it. Honourable Senator, we can provide you with the budgets of each of our offices. As Ms. Péan has already said, the largest market for us is the United States. We spend approximately $5.5 million on promoting tourism in Canada.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Fine.

In 1994, Parliament reviewed and tabled a report on foreign policy. Chapter 6 of this report deals with culture and the need to promote Canada abroad.

As the Canadian Tourism Commission President you know as well as I do that culture is a lucrative business. The Americans refer to it as ”entertainment“. If you talk about American culture to an American they do not know what you are talking about, but if you talk about entertainment, American films, Coca-Cola, Camel cigarettes and all those things that they use in promoting their culture, they understand what you mean.

That is of particular interest to me because I am convinced that culture is a major industry for Canada and for Canadians. We have two official languages in this country. You talked earlier about cultural diversity and bilingualism. The fact that there are two official languages in Canada is also important.

My question is a simple one. You have agreements with the Department of Foreign Affairs. You have representatives at embassies. It appears you have 14 of them. Is the main working language of these representatives French or English?

Mr. Jim Watson: That depends. For example, in Japan, it is Japanese. We have employees who speak the language of the country in which they are working. In the United States, our headquarters are in Washington. I think that we have three francophone employees and the others are anglophone Americans working for us.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Fine.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you. We will have to move on to a different speaker. We will have a second round of questioning if we need one.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I have another important question that I wanted to ask.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Godin.

Mr. Yvon Godin (Acadie—Bathurst, NDP): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

In light of the fact that the committee is looking at Air Canada, I would like to ask you where you get your information from. From what I have heard, you seem to be satisfied with Air Canada and the services it provides. The cabin crew aboard some aircraft is made up of one person and that person is unilingual. In such cases, a cassette is used to replace announcements in the other language. This is a safety issue. On flights between Quebec and Ontario, for example, sometimes there are passengers who need a person who speaks their language. On most domestic flights in Canada, everybody speaks English and the second language is French. this is the root of the problem, because all the complaints that have been received were from francophones on the fact that they were unable to obtain service in their own language. You said earlier that there is always one person who speaks the other language aboard the aircraft.

Regional service is normally provided by Dash 8, and the pilot comes out of the cockpit to provide the information. That is why I am wondering where you are getting your information when you compliment Air Canada. I certainly have no compliments for the airline. I travel on Air Canada every week, and I have to make a complaint almost every week. I travel between New Brunswick and Ottawa.

If I am able to see these things, the Canadian Tourism Commission should also be able to do so. It should have a way of checking into these matters, if it wants to promote tourism in Canada and our two official languages.

• 1555

This committee is definitely in favour of promoting the official languages. It is not seeking to promote Air Canada. There must be a way of dealing with the situation described in the complaint. If a person takes a plane from Ottawa to Montreal and does not get service in French and the crew does not speak English, you are ”stuck with a cassette“ as my colleague, Mr. Sauvageau, was saying.

Mr. Jim Watson: No. I see on page 4 of my statement

[English]

that my experience Ottawa to Toronto suggests the provision of services in both official languages....

[Translation]

In my view, there is no problem between Ottawa and Toronto. However, I do know that there are problems with bilingual service from time to time on Air Canada, and I added in my remarks that it was unacceptable to have a single recorded message. What is needed is bilingual staff. I agree with you and I support your position.

I also said: ”commend Air Canada in the past“. I meant that Air Canada offered better service in the two official languages than the other companies, such as Canadian or Wardair. However, I am here because I support the objective. I think this committee should be working to increase bilingual service throughout Canada.

[English]

Mr. Yvon Godin: On page 4 you say “Experience with Air Canada's regional carriers in the Ottawa-Toronto market suggests...”. Normally, the regional carriers use Dash 8s and not 737s. The 737 leaves Ottawa to go to Toronto and Winnipeg. I don't consider that to be a regional carrier, and it has a staff of many people who could provide services in both languages. When we talk about regional carriers, we're talking about Air Nova, Air Alliance, and Air B.C., and that's where you could have a problem of not enough staff. Certainly those carriers should provide both languages.

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes, I understand that. As you pointed out, often the co-pilot is also the steward. I experienced that on a flight from Quebec City to Ottawa last week, where the co-pilot explained the safety features and so on and then got back into the cockpit, and there was no one else there. In a situation like that it's even more essential to have more than a tape recorded message. You should have someone who can communicate, particularly in an emergency.

I met with Air Canada just last week on this issue. They obviously are experiencing a number of growing pains with regard to the airline merger, but I don't feel that should be used for years as an excuse as to why they can't continue the work they're doing and spend the funds to provide services in both languages.

[Translation]

Mr. Yvon Godin: It is true that some adjustments were required as a result of the Canadian-Air Canada merger. However, when it comes to Air Ontario, that has nothing to do with the merger. It has been an Air Canada affiliate for a long time, and it has been subject to the act since July 2000. And yet there are still problems on Air Ontario, Air Nova and Air Alliance.

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes. I gave the example of the Ottawa-Toronto flight, because I did used Air Ontario most of the time for this trip. I was landing at the Toronto Island Airport on a little Dash 8. That is not the case when I fly into Pearson Airport, for example.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you.

Ms. Thibeault.

Ms. Yolande Thibeault (Saint-Lambert, Lib.): Mr. Chairman, you have spoken about the importance of tourism within Canada, of the importance of having Canadians travel elsewhere in the country.

I always encourage people from my region to go and visit the rest of Canada. In my view, that is very important. You do not seem to be too interested in knowing whether these people travel on Air Canada or on subsidiaries. I do not agree with you. Recently, I flew from Winnipeg to Vancouver. You can forget about hearing any French on such a flight, there is none.

• 1600

How can I encourage people from my region to go to more than one province, and not restrict themselves to a Montreal-Vancouver trip? I think there are some problems in this regard. In response to what you started to say, I was wondering whether Tourism Canada has any ways of applying pressure to Air Canada. I would like to know whether you talk to each other on a regular basis. Can you ask Air Canada to behave seriously, and do you do so?

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes. We have a reserved a seat on our board of directors for the president of Air Canada. Our president, Mr. Judd Buchanan, offered Mr. Milton a seat. In the interest of a good dialogue, I think it is important that the president or vice- president of Air Canada be on our board of directors. That is one example. Perhaps we could work with Mr. Milton and his staff to try to improve this situation.

I also think that this meeting is important, not only for tourism, but also to encourage Air Canada to comply with the Official Languages Act.

Ms. Yolande Thibeault: Excellent! You have answered some of my questions. Thank you very much.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Senator Rivest.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest (Stadacona, PC): I am sure you appreciate, Mr. Watson, that committee members are very concerned about Air Canada's compliance with the official languages policy, and particularly, of course, about the service it provides in French.

Moreover, as we have already said, it seems hard to believe that the situation is as rosy as you suggest. Because of the merger with Canadian Airlines, it will take a long time before a number of services are available, particularly services within Canada. We were told that it would take five or six years, because there are not many bilingual employees.

I think the important issue was raised by Ms. Thibeault. You said, quite rightly, that Canada's linguistic and cultural duality and the contributions made by other communities are an extremely appealing tourist attraction and that this was part of your mandate.

From your answers and your presentation, it does not appear that you have any organic ties to a company like Air Canada. Complaints are not sent to you. You said, and we understand this, that people will not complain to you when there is a problem regarding compliance with the policy on official languages. Perhaps the Canadian Tourism Commission should set aside more than one seat on the board of directors for the president of Air Canada. Given that Canada's linguistic duality is a significant tourist attraction, the Commission should set up a unit to deal with Air Canada, specifically on official languages matters and to support the work done in this regard by parliamentarians and minority groups in Canada.

I think it is important that this be done. You have a good reason to do so, one you stated in your brief. The reason is that you consider Canada's linguistic duality as something important for developing tourism in Canada. Unless I am mistaken, I don't think you have a unit at the Commission that deals with this specific matter.

I think it would be a good idea for the Canadian Tourism Commission to have this type of focus. We should not blow this out of proportion, but there should at least be someone in charge, and in constant contact with the airlines, to point out problems regarding official languages. They need to make the airlines aware that such problems are very harmful to domestic and international tourism in Canada.

Mr. Jim Watson: That is a good suggestion, Senator. We have a number of committees, in addition to the board of directors. We have almost 15 committees, and many individuals who work for Air Canada are on these committees.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: That is something they do in addition to 50,000 other things. They're on these committees, but they do 50,000 other things as well.

• 1605

Mr. Jim Watson: But we also have a committee for which Chantal Péan is responsible. It deals with industry issues and product development. Perhaps she can explain the committee's mandate. That would probably be the appropriate committee to discuss such matters, because the other committees handle marketing for the United States, Europe and so on.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: No, we are talking about tourism.

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes, but that would be the appropriate committee. Ms. Péan will explain why.

Ms. Chantal Péan: Thank you. The committee's mandate is to look at industry issues. We identify the issues that affect the tourism industry, and we try to work out solutions in co-operation with the industry representatives. Air Canada is one of the members we would like to include on the issues committee, not only because of the language issue, but also because of the number of interprovincial flights.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: As I am sure you understand, my concern is that the issue of the two official languages be given slightly more priority in your day-to-day functioning. If the Canadian Tourism Commission is concerned about this issue, it must see it as a fundamental value for tourism development, and not make it a mere technical matter among 5,000 other matters. Rather, it must be a major concern. Which committee you choose to handle this does not matter much to me. What I would like to see, and I think the other committee members share my view, is for the Canadian Tourism Commission to be very aware of maintaining and developing service in both languages on Air Canada and elsewhere, because I imagine you do not deal with Air Canada only.

Ms. Chantal Péan: That is one of the industry's concerns. We will put it on the agenda for the next meeting of the issues committee.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Bellemare.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare (Ottawa—Orléans Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to congratulate Mr. Watson on his appointment as President of the Canadian Tourism Commission. I would also like to say that I appreciate the fact that someone of Mr. Watson's calibre accepted this responsibility. From my own experience, I know that when he was the mayor of Ottawa, he promoted the country's two official languages openly and willingly. I would like to thank you for what you did when you were the mayor. Your past actions argue well for your new position.

Now we must talk about Air Canada. In your presentation, you said that you would like to promote interprovincial travel by Canadians. I imagine you say that out of nationalism, out of the feeling of national pride. Or is there, rather, a commercial objective involved?

Mr. Jim Watson: I think it is both. Naturally, it is good for the economy if people travel within their own country, rather than going to the United States or Europe. Moreover, it is good for Canadians to experience life in northern Canada, Nova Scotia or the Laurentians. In my view, travel within Canada is a good experience for young people, and that is one of the reasons why I like programs such as the Forum for Young Canadians.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: And what do you intend to do to ensure that francophones and anglophones who travel within Canada feel at home here?

Mr. Jim Watson: I believe we have a program. We have worked with Heritage Canada to offer French lessons and travel. I would ask Ms. Péan to provide the details of this program we developed with Heritage Canada, the objective of which is to encourage young people to learn both official languages.

Ms. Chantal Péan: Thank you. The educational travel program encourages exchanges between students and between tourists. For example, anglophones may come to Quebec to learn French, and francophones may travel outside Quebec to learn English as well.

• 1610

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: I feel uncomfortable regarding your documents. Ms. Péan has touched on the key point. As was stated in your presentation, she spoke about encouraging travel between Quebec and Alberta and said that bilingual service should be available for this reason. I am a francophone from outside Quebec, and I wonder where I fit into all of this. I am neither fish nor fowl. Can I feel at home in our country when I use my mother tongue, or will I feel like a foreigner in my own land?

What I am trying to get at is this. Does your Commission advocate this for utilitarian reasons? You talk about serving people who do not know the other language. The most conclusive examples can be found in Quebec and Alberta. However, there are bilingual anglophones, or anglophones who have taken immersion courses, or who are in mixed marriages and who switch back and forth between French and English. For them, this is not a utilitarian matter, but rather a question of allowing everyone to feel that they belong in their own country.

It seems that this is something that is missing. Your presentation seems very positive. But Canadians should be able to feel at home in their own country. Canada has two official languages and service depends on the abilities or willingness of people to provide the service. Why is that? Are you doing this for utilitarian reasons or in order to promote Canadianism, as I understand it?

Mr. Jim Watson: That is a good question. Is it the responsibility of the Canadian Tourism Commission to promote bilingualism inside or outside the country? This question was asked by Mr. Buchanan, when he wrote his report for the Prime Minister regarding the creation of the Canadian Tourism Commission. The Prime Minister and the government replied that the Commission had the responsibility not just to provide information, but also to promote Canada. That is why we receive $5 or $6 million to set up programs in Canada. I do not think it is up to the provinces alone to promote their province within the country.

Perhaps we could send out more information about our education programs, Mr. Bellemare. We wrote an important report on learning tourism two weeks ago. I think this is an excellent experience, not only for young people, but also for older people and for the industry as well.

Mr. Eugène Bellemare: I would like to ask one final question. What are you doing or what do you intend to do to promote service in both official languages on European airlines, for example, who come to Canada and take Canadians to Europe?

Mr. Jim Watson: I do not know. We have entered into agreements only with companies like Air Transat and other Canadian companies, to promote Canada as a destination. To my knowledge, we do not have promotional agreements with other countries, such as Air France or British Airways. I do not know what regulations British Airways has regarding the official languages in Canada, for example.

• 1615

This is a question that Transport Canada could answer. I am sorry, but if you like, Mr. Bellemare, I will get the answer, because you raised a good question. We have a partnership with hotels and airlines, and most of our agreements are with Canadian companies. From time to time, there are some American tour operators. Unfortunately, I do not have an answer for you, but I will get it.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you, Mr. Bellemare. I am going to ask a few questions now, because I did not see any other expressions of interest from your side. I will then give the floor to Senator Gauthier.

Mr. Watson, could you tell me whether the Canadian Tourism Commission does any surveys of tourists who come to Canada or Canadians travelling within the country, to collect information on which to base your future action? Does the Commission conduct such surveys? How do you assess the degree of satisfaction of visitors?

Mr. Jim Watson: We work with the provinces and Statistics Canada. We use a sort of survey by the name of TAMS, which means

[English]

travel attitude and motivational survey.

[Translation]

This is almost a survey. Statistics Canada and Revenue Canada employees distributed a questionnaire to travellers at the Canada-U.S. border.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): So that TAMS surveys foreign visitors to Canada?

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Do you know, or do any of your colleagues know, whether the degree of satisfaction, either in English or French, with regard to linguistic services is surveyed in that TAMS? It is not?

[Translation]

Ms. Chantal Péan: No. [Editor's Note: Inaudible] That is not one of the questions asked.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Has the commission ever surveyed Canadian tourists travelling within Canada on that matter?

Mr. Jim Watson: No, Mr. Chair, not on official languages. We do use focus groups and market surveys with respect to our marketing campaigns and their effectiveness, but we've never asked the question with respect to official languages.

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Can we assume that the Canadian Tourism Commission complies with the Official Languages Act in all its communications?

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes. Our minister, Mr. Tobin, sent a letter to Ms. Copps on March 26 which states that the Canadian Tourism Commission has agreed to comply with the act. However, we write these publications in English only for the U.S. market, because that is acceptable and there is no need to provide a French version in the U.S. Similarly, we have documents in Japanese for distribution in Japan and...

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): But in Canada, are your documents all in French and English?

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes, of course.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): I want to ask one last question. You said earlier that 95% of your advertising budget was earmarked for advertising outside the country to attract tourists. It seems to me that there is not much left over to encourage Canadians to visit their own country. What does the Commission plan to do in this area? Does it want to keep the same proportion or increase the amount set aside to encourage Canadians to visit their own country?

Mr. Jim Watson: That is a good question. My main objective is to increase our overall budget. Our president discussed a $25 million increase to our budget with the Minister of Finance.

• 1620

My second goal is to increase the percentage of the budget because it is currently at 5 or 6%. I think it would be a good idea, not only for Canada, but also for the tourism economy to increase it to 7 or 9% in the future.

The bulk of marketing inside Canada is the responsibility of the provinces. We include four advertising supplements in the newspapers each year, and we do a television advertising campaign twice a year.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): I want to leave some time for others. I may ask some more questions later.

Mr. Gauthier.

Is there anyone on this side of the room who wants to ask more questions?

Mr. Sauvageau?

Mr. Godin, go ahead.

Mr. Yvon Godin: I just have one short question or a short comment. Earlier on, my colleague Mr. Bellemare asked what you do for carriers from other countries to promote bilingualism, etc. I just want to make the following comment: you should not do too much, because we want to promote Canadian carriers, if we want to help our carriers bring people from other countries here.

I think that other countries will promote themselves, if they want to. I wanted to make that comment without contradicting my colleague. I think it is important to promote our Canadian companies first and foremost. If we promote language, that automatically encourages our people to travel with other carriers.

I also want to say that I too agree that 5 or 6 or even 7% is not much for our country. I think there are many places to visit in our country and promoting them is worthwhile. In recent years in New Brunswick, for example, we have learned how to promote tourism aggressively. We have never seen as many Quebeckers in New Brunswick as there are now. In July, it really seems like there are more Quebeckers than there are New Brunswickers.

I think it is very important for Tourism Canada to promote the entire country, and I join our joint chair in saying that even 7% is not enough. There are many beautiful places to visit in our country. Our country is beautiful, superb, and I think that by encouraging our people to visit their own country, they will be more grateful for it. I would like to use the right words...

Mr. Jim Watson: I agree. I am very familiar with cities like Caraquet. I went to Caraquet as a member of the board of the National Arts Centre. We had a meeting in Caraquet a year ago. We worked with the Province of New Brunswick on marketing campaigns in New York, for example. The Deputy Minister of Tourism is working with our staff in New York to put together a lunch for American journalists to promote your province.

The Canadian Tourism Commission is proud of its partnership with all of the provinces and territories and the private sector. We have a tripartite agreement with the private sector, the provinces, the territories and the federal government. I would like to add that Mr. Gauthier is in charge today, and the tourism deficit is the lowest it has been in two years.

We are very proud of the Commission's activities and of all of the tourism products in all of the regions of Canada.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Senator Gauthier.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to go back to a short question. Earlier on, in response to Mr. Rivest, you said that it would be a good idea to set up a committee within the Commission that would be responsible for relations with air carriers in Canada. I support Mr. Rivest's proposal.

I would also like to see you set up a committee to oversee interdepartmental and interprovincial relations. You are going to say that you do that.

When you advertise in English only in the United States, you are not doing your job, in my opinion. Canada has two official languages. You should advertise in the United States in both official languages, so that at least the Americans know that French and English are spoken here. That is my opinion, for what it is worth.

• 1625

I am concerned about culture. I want to go back to cultural industries. Foreign Affairs is responsible for diplomacy and foreign affairs and not tourism. You have offices that take care of tourism in the 14 embassies where you are present. I understand the importance of that. Does the Commission have the means to ensure that your representatives in the embassies are sending out a consistent, Canadian message that addresses the existence of two official languages and the cultural mosaic? What can you tell us about that?

Mr. Jim Watson: One of our staff members is exclusively responsible for cultural tourism. His name is Mr. Ernest Labrecque. We published a report on cultural tourism. In the next few weeks, the Canadian Tourism Commission will present a report to all provincial deputy ministers of culture in Montreal to explain what it has done for culture and to promote culture.

I am going to try to answer your question or comment, Senator, on publications in both languages for the United States. We put together a small publication entitled Canada Travel Tips—Information You Need to Know. It exists in both languages. We are currently sending the publication to all Canadian embassies throughout the world, but most of the other publications are in English only, because the Americans, unfortunately, do not understand French. A year ago, we worked with our staff in Louisiana to promote the Francophone Games in New Orleans. In my opinion, providing a publication in the language that the Americans do not understand is not a good idea.

[English]

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I agree with your comments to a certain extent.

I want to give you some figures, because you're in the business of tourism, and I'm in the business of selling culture right now.

In 1990, according to the figures that I have, France spent $26.66 per capita and Germany $18.50 per capita on culture outside their limits—in other words, selling their country. The United Kingdom spent $13.40—always in Canadian dollars—Japan $12.60, and Canada $3. We're at the bottom of the pile when it comes to selling our cultural mosaic or whatever you want to call it—our multicultural heritage.

I'm telling you that I think we have a job to do to convince not only Canadians—I think they're convinced—but it's our representatives across the world, ambassadors, and their staff.... If you're there, then I think you have a job—and a big job—to do to convince them to sell not only peace, order, and good government, but our culture and what makes us Canadian. I would like to have some initiative from you as an example of what you intend to do to improve that position.

Mr. Jim Watson: I wonder if I could just respond to that very briefly, Mr. Chairman.

In the countries that we do have offices in, we have a portion of our budget in those offices that does go to cultural promotion. For instance, when a particular Canadian artist is performing in a city—I think of Liona Boyd, or Cirque du Soleil—we often will go out and purchase a block of tickets that we will then give to our tourism clients and major partners, because we feel it's important, when they are in their hometown, that we boast about them.

• 1630

For instance, when Diana Krall was recently in Paris, I believe, we purchased tickets for major partners to showcase Diana Krall. So we do that, and cultural tourism is something that we feel is a growth industry. That's why we issued this report on cultural tourism, and we'd be pleased to send members of the committee a copy of that report.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I just have two comments, and I'll be brief.

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): I am sorry. Senator Rivest. I will give you the floor later on.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: I am going to illustrate what I was saying. When you talk about linguistic duality, it is purely anecdotal. This is just one example. In your Canada Vacation Guide 2001, the fundamental linguistic duality of Canada is not mentioned anywhere.

I am looking at your initial presentation. It says here that Canada has oceans and mountains. Shakespeare's most famous plays are performed by the seaside, it says. I do not see why a little bit of Molière isn't being performed. It talks about dinosaur skeletons, flowers, etc. Why doesn't this publication state that linguistic duality is a fundamental characteristic of Canada?

The page on Quebec talks about a French touch. You know, there is more than a touch. Sometimes it's a bit touchy, but even in New Brunswick... The description on New Brunswick says that there are Acadians, but what is an Acadian to an American? It says that there is a vibrant French culture, etc. There is no mention of linguistic duality in your advertising, in your presentation. It is very well done, it is magnificent, but basically, we don't detect a concern... I am only talking about this publication, as there are undoubtedly others. Perhaps they contradict what I am saying, but this is nevertheless the Vacation Guide. It talks about everything, but it does not tell people that if they come to Canada... I agree with Senator Gauthier that putting a French touch on advertising for Americans might well be a tourist attraction.

Moreover, the Quebec Department of Tourism and probably the New Brunswick Department of Tourism are selling that, and it works well. Americans like to come to Quebec because they are told it is French. Linguistic duality should be much more at the heart of your concerns. Apart from the magnificent mountains, rivers and valleys, there is a linguistic duality in Canada, and we have inherited two of the greatest cultural traditions of modern civilization: French culture and English culture. That is Canada's reality. There are rivers, bridges, and people are going to come for that. They will come to Quebec. They will come to see Mr. Bellemare, who is a francophone but who does not live in Quebec. They will go to Acadia. That is part of the Canadian reality. Your publications are very well done, but we do not get a sense of that. Do you understand what I mean?

Mr. Jim Watson: You are making an excellent suggestion. I am going to talk to our staff, and also to the provinces.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: It is a matter for Mr. Gauthier. It is a communication problem.

Mr. Jim Watson: As I said in my opening remarks,

[English]

it is a selling point for Canada. That fact alone separates us from the pack.

[Translation]

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: Not many people will be buying those books.

Mr. Jim Watson: You are right. We will naturally mention culture and bilingualism in the next publication. As I said in my opening remarks, and I was speaking frankly when I said it,

[English]

our official bilingualism is one of Canada's primary distinguishing attributes, and we haven't reflected that in the documents—

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: Much more than just French cuisine,

[Translation]

because there is a lot of French cuisine.

Mr. Jim Watson: Joie de vivre.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Are there other committee members who have not had an opportunity to ask questions? A very short question, Senator.

[English]

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I remember John Ralston Saul.... I take it you know him?

Mr. Jim Watson: I saw him this morning.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: He once wrote that the question is not whether we can afford to spend money on exporting our culture or our language; the question is can we afford not to do that, not to spend that, not to promote language and culture? I think the answer to that question is self-evident.

• 1635

The commission, in my view, when you come before our committee next year, must be ready to tell us that indeed you're selling the duality of this country; you're selling the mosaic of this country; you're trying to sell Canada as an entity that is receptive to multiculturalism and to both official languages.

Don't go into France and only write in French. Write in both official languages so they'll know that we also speak English. If you go to the States, write in French also, so they'll know that we have a French component that's very important. My advice to you is use both official languages. Damn it; we're proud of that. It's part of our product.

Mr. Jim Watson: Just on the issue, Senator, with respect to cultural promotion, we'd be pleased to send all committee members a copy of the work we have done—the cultural report. Our last newsletter I believe exclusively featured cultural tourism. We weren't prepared to deal with those questions because we're here to talk about Air Canada. There's no question that we're proud of the work we've done.

I certainly will follow up on the senator's and Monsieur Godin's suggestions with respect to being proud and promoting bilingualism as part of our publications. I disagree with you, though, in that I think we can talk about bilingualism, but I don't think we have to have French publications in the U.S. because, to be perfectly honest, they wouldn't be used, and they wouldn't be read. We can talk about the importance of bilingualism and the fact that it does distinguish us from the United States and put more emphasis on that, because I think that's not only a good marketing idea; I think it's a plain good idea.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I'm sorry, I never used the word “bilingualism”. I used the word “duality”. We have two official languages. This is not a bilingual country, Mr. Watson. There's a conflict here. Two official languages—

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Okay. Time out. Time out. We're going to wrap this up. Another time.

[Translation]

Mr. Watson, I want to make sure that your comments have been well understood. I want to bring that back to the issue of Air Canada.

You said, and I want to make sure I clearly understood you, because the committee is going to be using your comments, that, in your opinion, we should aim for a situation where services offered by Air Canada are in both languages throughout the country, without consideration for the 5% rule for flights and in airports, and that preferably, this service should be offered on board by a flight attendant and not using a cassette.

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes, that is correct.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Those are your remarks.

Mr. Jim Watson: It is very clear. I think it is good not only for the country and for bilingualism, but also for the tourism industry, because we have lots of francophones from France, Belgium and other French-speaking countries.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Without counting the 8 million francophones in the country who travel within their own country.

Mr. Jim Watson: Yes, precisely.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): We understand each other. Okay.

Unless you have any additional comments, Mr. Watson, I would like to thank you on behalf of our committee for your comments. They will be helpful in our future deliberations on air service in Canada.

No one has to leave, but I invite committee members to examine a motion. The week before the break, we met with the Commissioner of Official Languages to examine the Estimates. We did not adopt a motion to approve the Estimates because we did not have a quorum at the time. We now have a quorum.

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: If I remember correctly, you said at that time that if we did not vote, it would automatically be adopted.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Yes, but you will recall that I also said, Mr. Sauvageau, that I thought I saw a desire around the table to share a wish with the government: to increase votes for the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages. We would need a motion for that.

• 1640

If the committee were to adopt the Estimates as presented, it would then have an opportunity to table the report in the House. At the same time, if the committee wished to tell the House that it would like to see votes for the commissioner increased in the future, it could do so. I'm in your hands.

Mr. Sauvageau, and then Mr. Gauthier and Mr. Godin.

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Mr. Chairman, I would like the votes for the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages to be increased, because they are currently the same as they were in the 1970s. Several million dollars were cut. I think we should suggest that they be increased.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Gauthier.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I am prepared to move the motion, Mr. Chairman, if you are ready to receive it. However, before talking about a budget increase, I think we must adopt what we have before us. These are the estimates for the current year. If the estimates are adopted we will talk about increasing them if necessary.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): That is the sequence I presented.

Mr. Godin.

Mr. Yvon Godin: I agree. I think it is very important because major cuts were made. For example, the budget for the official languages office in Moncton was cut to such an extent that employees had trouble dealing with complaints. It would be to give the power to—

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Can we move to adopt the first motion on the budgetary votes for the fiscal year 2001-02 as presented?

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: Yes.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Sauvageau, seconded by Mr. Gauthier, moves the motion. Are there any questions or comments? May I say that it is unanimous?

PRIVY COUNCIL

Commissioner of Official Languages

Vote 25a—Program Expenditures $9,944,000

(Vote 25 is adopted)

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you.

Secondly, may I interpret the wishes of the committee and say that we would like to see votes for the Commissioner of Official Languages increased for next year if possible, but certainly for subsequent years?

Mr. Yvon Godin: Can we move a motion asking for them to be increased for next year?

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): We are masters of our own work. If the House does not want to entertain our motion, it will not entertain it, and that will be that. Mr. Godin, seconded by Mr. Drouin, moves the motion.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: In the same proportion as members' salaries.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Godin moves that votes allocated by government to the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages be increased. That is the wish of the committee. Are there any comments or questions on this topic? Senator.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: The road to hell is paved with good intentions. The committee can propose an increase, but it is not entitled to increase the votes itself.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Yes, we are aware of that.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: If what you want to do is ask the government...

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): It is up to you to decide.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: ... to co-operate with the committee, I think the will to do so exists.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Is this wish unanimous?

(The motion carries unanimously)

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): It is unanimous. Thank you very much.

We will table this report in our respective Houses this week, since the 31st is the deadline.

Is there anything else? We will meet again tomorrow. We will be hearing from les Gens de l'air.

The meeting is adjourned.