Thread by @DeanLeckey

Are health and social services exempted from the obligation #Bill96 imposes on the civil administration to use the French language?

I have been asked to clarify, especially after @francoislegault said at a news conference Tuesday that “there is no need to worry about receiving health-care services in English for any Quebecers”.

@JasonMagder reported in @mtlgazette that Legault said “the law won’t change guarantees enshrined in Section 15 of Quebec’s Act Respecting Health Services and Social Services”.

That provision states that “English-speaking persons are entitled to receive health services and social services in the English language”.

It adds the caveat: “in keeping with the organizational structure and human, material and financial resources of the institutions providing such services …”

What do we see in #Bill96?

#Bill96 will amend the Charter of the French language.

It will add s. 13.1: “The civil administration shall, in an exemplary manner, use the French language, promote its quality, ensure its development in Québec and protect it. …”

A new s. 13.2 fleshes out the administration’s duty, providing that even where, exceptionally, another language may be used, the administration may “not make systematic use” of that other language.

What about the exceptions in new s. 22.3?

Section 22.3 will provide: “An agency of the civil administration may depart from paragraph 1 of section 13.2 by using another language in addition to French in its written documents (1) where health, public safety or the principles of natural justice so require”.

Is this a broad carve-out for the sector of health and social services?

To me, it looks much more like a narrow, case-by-case exception, perhaps with a high threshold.

Read alongside the exceptions for public safety and natural justice, the exception for health may be interpreted narrowly – even limited to situations of life and death.

And recall that use of a language other than French may not be “systematic”.

It doesn’t sound to me like a sector-wide general exemption.

What about the recent amendment, referring to s. 15 of Quebec’s Act Respecting Health Services and Social Services?

As mentioned, that provision – itself subject to caveats – is about institutional obligations towards English-speaking persons.

It doesn’t stop Bill 96 from mandating individual service providers in health and social services to communicate with their clients or patients in French, even where communication would be more effective in another language.

It says nothing about a Greek-speaking person who has found a social worker who speaks her language. Or a therapist who can speak the mother tongue of an autistic child from Afghanistan.

So, with respect, I don’t see the premier’s remarks from Tuesday as addressing the larger question.

In any case, in an eventual dispute, what is the interpretive value of remarks at a presser by a premier or minister?

I’m speaking about the weight of such remarks as a legal category of evidence, not about Premier Legault’s sincerity or credibility.

Here’s one way to put it: such remarks and five bucks will buy you a large latté at Starbucks.