Protection of French: opposition says fines too weak for violations of Official Languages Act

Air Canada planes are parked at Vancouver International Airport as a flight prepares to land in Richmond, British Columbia, on Monday, August 18, 2025. (Darryl Dyck/The Canadian Press)

The main opposition parties in the House of Commons and organizations defending francophones have denounced the weakness of a regulation proposed by Ottawa to fine violators of the new version of the Official Languages Act.

However, Mark Carney’s Liberal government — which will have the final say — refuses to comment.

“In terms of the amounts of penalties that can be imposed on companies with hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue, a few thousand dollars in fines ... is borderline ridiculous,” said François Côté, lawyer for Droits collectifs Québec, before a parliamentary committee on Tuesday.

The spokesperson did not mince his words. In his view, the draft regulation “misses the mark” because of its “pettiness,” “timidity,” and “toothlessness.”

The six-page document was tabled no less than two-and-a-half years after the law was passed, even though Ottawa had promised to do so a year earlier.

“We held a lot of consultations,” said Julie Boyer, Deputy Minister of the Department of Canadian Heritage.

Under the proposed regulations, a company such as Air Canada — a regular at the top of the Commissioner of Official Languages’ list of offenders — could be fined up to $50,000 per violation.

However, the regulations should automatically provide for “doubling and redoubling” the fines, said Conservative official languages spokesperson Joël Godin. “I often say ‘will and intention.’ I don’t feel it,” he said.

“Why not go up to $1 million, because the deterrent must be financial,” added a representative of the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada (FCFA).

But fines will be imposed as a “last resort,” according to the Department of Canadian Heritage, particularly after an “order” from the commissioner to get back on track has not been complied with.

And even when he is ready to fine a company, the commissioner will have to draw up an exhaustive list of the criteria he has taken into account from among those in the regulations and explain how the amount of the penalty was determined, a cumbersome process that the commissioner himself denounced last week.

“What happens if one of the criteria is not mentioned?” asked John Mark Keyes of the FCFA. “Will that nullify the violation? These kinds of details provide grounds for challenging the commissioner’s decision.”

‘Great recommendations,’ says Ottawa

The regulations also stipulate that the only organizations that can be fined are Air Canada, airport authorities, including concessions (restaurants, retail stores, car rental agencies), VIA Rail, and Marine Atlantic.

However, the opposition parties on the committee were unhappy with such a limited list. Bloc Québécois official languages spokesperson Mario Beaulieu questioned why fines apply to Tim Hortons at an airport but not to security services.

“We considered this at length,” said Deputy Minister Boyer, explaining that the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority is entirely funded by public funds. “If it doesn’t cost you anything because it comes from Parliament and we give it back to Parliament, it won’t have the desired effect,” she said.

As for the idea of applying this regulation to other federally chartered companies, such as banks, telecommunications companies, and other air carriers, Ottawa says it is in the process of developing another regulation.

The Liberals on the committee were very cautious in their questions. When questioned by The Canadian Press, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Official Languages, Madeleine Chenette, refused to say whether changes should be made, limiting herself to thanking the witnesses for their “great recommendations.”

Pressed to say whether the regulations lack teeth, the Liberal representative said that “we would have to look at which parts have more weaknesses than strengths” rather than “making a judgment of that kind—whether they are weak or strong.”

When questioned a few moments later, Beaulieu of the Bloc Québécois did not hesitate to denounce a “very weak” regulation which, once strengthened, should also apply to all federal institutions.

“We can see that for 50 years, the same complaints have been coming back again, and again, and again. Now we’re coming up with this. It has amounted to nothing,” he said.

Ultimately, the parliamentary committee will present a report with recommendations to the House of Commons, but it is solely the executive branch that will determine what will happen to the regulation.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published in French on Dec. 9, 2025.

By Michel Saba, The Canadian Press