French has no official status at the provincial level of government in British Columbia—any more than does English. This is because the province has never ruled on matters of language, and no language legislation has ever been passed. However, even though English is not recognized as an official language by law, it has, like in most other provinces, acquired this status in fact.
The Absence of Language Policy
British Columbia is not subject to the provisions of section 133 of the Constitution Act, 1867 as concerns the languages used in Canada's houses of parliament and courts. In fact, in 1986, the province's Court of Appeal ruled on this question, stating that sections 16 to 22 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (concerning the languages used in government debates and proceedings and the publication of legislation) do not apply to this province, which means that members of the Legislative Assembly cannot be required to use French when debating in Parliament or drafting statutes. Members are entitled to speak French if they wish, but simultaneous interpretation services are not provided. Therefore, the use of French in Parliament is a privilege, not a right.
As concerns British Columbia's provincial government services, they areoffered in French only on a token basis, with the exception of certain offices of the Ministry of Education. Even the representatives of the Inter-Cultural Association of Greater Victoria are of the opinion that the provincial government does little for French speakers, stating, "I don't know anyone in this government who speaks French. If someone from Quebec contacts the health insurance board or another service, he or she is referred to our association." Moreover, government literature is available in English only; no provision is made for translation services, which are few and far between. A CROP survey conducted in 1983 showed that less than 3% of French speakers were able to obtain services in French in the province, and nothing has changed since that time.
In courts of civil jurisdiction, it is possible to request the services of an interpreter. The provisions of Canada's Criminal Code came into force in 1990. In January 1996, the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique (a provincial French-language federation) published a report criticizing British Columbia's criminal justice system. The report (entitled L'accès à la justice en français en Colombie-Britannique: les obstacles institutionnels et systématiques) concluded that services in French were not easily accessible and that measures were required to make the criminal justice system more aware of the rights of the linguistic minority, advocate minority language rights, and integrate French-speaking staff into the system.
Educational Rights
In fact, the only veritable rights granted to French speakers are in the field of education. Instruction in French is allowed at the elementary level, but at the secondary level, it is difficult and often downright impossible to assemble enough students to warrant the provision of French-language instruction. Since 1979, the provincial government has authorized instruction in French from kindergarten to Grade 7. Under section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, all school districts must offer instruction in French in areas where there are 10 French-speaking children or more.
In 1986, there were fewer than 500 students in French classes divided among three schools. Only French speakers who are Canadian citizens may avail themselves of such instruction, but it is also offered to anglophones wishing to learn French. The classes intended for francophones have been a resounding success with English-speaking pupils, who are 40 times more numerous. In 1989, 21,000 children in British Columbia were enrolled in French immersion, only 2,000 of whom were of French mother tongue. In 1992, the province still had no French-language school board, but the government voiced its intention of rectifying this situation in the near future, although when the daily newspaper The Province asked its readers, in a non-scientific poll, whether the government should grant control of French schools to French speakers, 75% of respondents answered NO.
However, a report published by the B.C. Ministry of Education in 1992 proposed new school legislation and the creation of three francophone school boards by 1994, one in Vancouver, another in Nanaimo, and a third in Prince George. In the fall of 1994, the British Columbia government refused to allow French speakers to manage their schools, a right mandated by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, thereby forcing francophone parents to take their case to court in order to have their rights recognized. In 1996, the Supreme Court of British Columbia swore in the first trustees of the Conseil scolaire francophone (CSF), the province's first French-language education authority, created in July 1995 pursuant to a regulation made under the School Act.
However, on August 14 of the same year, British Columbia's Supreme Court invalidated the regulation establishing the Conseil scolaire francophone. The judgment found that the provincial government had failed to meet the obligations imposed by section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and gave it a certain timeframe in which to enact legislation putting in place an appropriate school management and control structure. The government had claimed to hold the powers necessary to adopt the Règlement sur l'éducation francophone (Francophone Education Regulation), invoking section 5 of the School Act, which stipulates, in its opening paragraph, that all students are entitled to receive English-language instruction:
Article 5
Language of instruction
(1) Every student is entitled to receive an educational program that is provided in the English language.
(2) Students whose parents have the right under section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to have their children receive instruction in a language other than English are entitled to receive that instruction.
(3) Subject to the approval of the minister, a board may permit an educational program to be provided in a language other than as provided under subsections (1) and (2).
(4) The Lieutenant Governor in Council may make regulations
(a) respecting the provision of educational programs in languages other than English,
(b) to give effect to section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and
(c) determining the manner in which a power, duty or function of a board may be performed or exercised under this Act with respect to students referred to in subsection (2).
(5) For the purposes of subsection (4), the Lieutenant Governor in Council may make different regulations for different circumstances.
In 1996, the Ministry of Education published policy circular no. 96-12 pertaining to the French immersion program. Under this policy, the provincial government recognizes that French immersion programming benefits the cognitive and social development of students, as well as their opportunities for career advancement. The objective is to provide the opportunity for non-francophone students to become bilingual, that is, to achieve oral fluency and literacy in both English and French. Bilingualism is achieved by providing instruction of the basic curriculum entirely in French during the first years. Once a firm base in French has been established, instruction in English language arts is added, and instruction in the English language gradually increases. Students continue to receive instruction in certain subjects in French so that by the end of Grade 12 proficiency is achieved in both languages. Thus, British Columbia, by offering its French-speaking minority instruction in French, has succeeded in complying with the provisions of section 23 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but it should be noted that this instruction is actually designed for second language learners, most of whom are members of the province's well-to-do English-speaking population.
The situation of francophones in British Columbia remains vulnerable and their rights, symbolic rather than vested. In any case, these rights are limited to the education sector and are imposed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The linguistic situation in the province thus bears telling witness to a non-interventionist policy.