Canada Gazette, Part I, Volume 160, Number 29: Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Regulations

July 18, 2026

Statutory authority
Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act

Sponsoring department
Department of Canadian Heritage

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Summary

Issues

For several years now, the general public, stakeholders, official language minority communities, and organizations active in the official languages space or promoting the use of French have expressed concerns about the decline of French in Canada, including Quebec. Given the minority situation of French in Canada and North America, the Government of Canada recognized, in its 2021 reform document, that the private sector has a role to play in promoting and protecting the French language in Canada.

The UFPBA seeks to address these concerns by establishing new language rights involving FRPBs in Quebec and in RSFPs: the right of employees to work in French and the right of consumers to be served in French. However, implementing the UFPBA (not yet in force) will require the adoption of regulations specifying a number of key elements, including what constitutes an RSFP, the minimum number of employees for a business to be subject to the Act, and a number of other procedural details, including those necessary for FRPBs in Quebec to be able to choose whether to be subject to the provincial regime (under the CFL) or the UFPBA regime.

Background

Federal official languages legislative framework

Established in 1963, the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism was a response to concerns from Francophones, especially in Quebec, about linguistic inequalities in the federal administration. The Commission’s work led to the adoption of the first Official Languages Act (OLA) in 1969, establishing English and French as official languages at the federal level and guaranteeing the right to communicate with and receive services from federal institutions in the official language of one’s choice.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms of 1982 (the Charter) declared English and French to be the official languages of Canada and established the right to education in the language of the minority. The 1988 reform of the OLA sought to better reflect the provisions of the Charter, strengthen official languages in the federal public service and foster the use of the two official languages in Canadian society. In 1993, the principle of the equality of the two linguistic communities in New Brunswick was enshrined in the Canadian Constitution.

In the summer of 2018, the Minister responsible for Official Languages^{footnote 4} was mandated to begin an examination towards modernizing the OLA. Following a series of cross-Canada consultations^{footnote 5} that culminated in a national symposium in the spring of 2019, the Minister released Summary Document: Engaging Canadians as a Step Towards Modernizing the Official Languages Act, in which she reported on the issues and suggestions that had been raised. One of the proposals called for extending language-of-work and language-of-service obligations to federally regulated businesses.

In the 2020 Speech from the Throne, the Government of Canada recognized that French is in a minority situation in Canada and North America. Indeed, today, of the 381 million inhabitants of Canada and the United States, 14 million are French speakers. According to Statistics Canada, the Francophone share of Canada’s population is steadily declining and could reach 20.4% by 2036 (down from 27.5% in 1971).^{footnote 6}

In 2021, the Minister tabled a reform document entitled English and French: Towards a Substantive Equality of Official Languages in Canada. That document laid out the Government of Canada’s vision for official languages reform and a plan to modernize the OLA. Emphasizing the importance of protecting French in federally regulated private businesses, the document proposed giving workers and consumers in Quebec and RSFPs the right to work and receive services in French.

On June 20, 2023, the Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada’s Official Languages received royal assent, modernizing the OLA and enacting the UFPBA. The UFPBA introduces new duties for FRPBs and new rights for consumers and employees. Under section 68 of the Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada’s Official Languages, the Minister may, until the coming into force of the UFPBA, promote the rights with respect to French as a language of communication with and service to consumers and as a language of work, and provide education and information to FRPBs in relation to those rights.

Legislative framework in Quebec

Adopted in 1977, Quebec’s CFL makes French the official language of Quebec and the normal and everyday language of work, instruction, communication, commerce and business. In the commercial context, the CFL guarantees consumers the right to use and receive services in French in any business operating in Quebec. Before 2025, businesses with 50 or more employees needed to undertake an administrative process with the Office québécois de la langue française (OQLF) to obtain a francization certificate. Further to the modernization of the CFL in 2022, this threshold was lowered to 25 employees on June 1, 2025. The CFL also requires businesses with 100 or more employees to establish a francization committee to generalize the use of French. In the event of a violation of the CFL, recourse to the OQLF and the Quebec courts is available. A number of FRPBs, including most large banks, have agreed to adhere to the CFL regime.

Scope and main provisions of the UFPBA

The purpose of the UFPBA is to foster and protect the use of French in FRPBs. The UFPBA will be implemented in two phases: first in Quebec, on a day to be fixed by order-in-council, then in RSFPs (as defined by regulation), two years later. RSFPs include regions where the concentration of Francophones and their collective vitality warrant such designation. In Quebec and RSFPs, all rights and duties relating to communications and services and language of work will apply, except as otherwise provided in the regulations.

The UFPBA requires FRPBs to ensure that consumers have access to service—including oral and written communications, documents and transactions—in French. It also gives employees the right to use French as a language of work without being subject to adverse treatment. Employers will have to actively foster the use of French and, in some cases, establish committees for that purpose.

Certain entities are excluded, namely, federal entities performing functions on behalf of the Government of Canada; businesses already subject to the OLA under another Act; entities in the broadcasting sector; and businesses owned by an entity, such as a council, government, corporation or other entity authorized to act on behalf of an Indigenous group, community or people that holds rights recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.

Role of the Minister

The Minister of Canadian Heritage is responsible for the administration of the UFPBA, providing education and information to businesses, and promoting the language rights guaranteed by the Act. A comprehensive review of the UFPBA and its regulations is to be undertaken every 10 years.

Remedies

Consumers and employees in FRPBs will have access to remedies to assert their language rights. They will be able to file complaints with the Commissioner of Official Languages for Canada, who will oversee the handling of those complaints. Complex language-of-work complaints may be referred to the Canada Industrial Relations Board under certain conditions.

Under the Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada’s Official Languages, the UFPBA is to come into force by order-in-council, allowing for gradual implementation. As soon as the UFPBA comes into force in Quebec, the Commissioner will be empowered to manage complaints about language rights. Two years later, these powers will be extended to RSFPs.

Objective

The primary objective of the proposed regulations is to establish a regulatory framework for the implementation of the UFPBA. More specifically, the proposed regulations would specify several key operational aspects of the new federal regime, including the definition of “RSFP” and the minimum number of employees that a business must have to be subject to the Act. By defining the key elements, the regulations would optimize the benefits and coverage of the regime to the extent reasonable while keeping it in line with the legislative framework. The rules established by the proposed regulations would contribute to the smooth operation of the UFPBA, both in Quebec and outside Quebec, ensuring that consumers and employees have the opportunity to receive communications and services or work in French in FRPBs.

The proposed regulations would align federal language obligations with those under Quebec’s CFL to spare FRPBs from regulatory disparities and inconsistencies. The proposed regulations would establish effective mechanisms for monitoring and enforcing FRPB compliance with the UFPBA, ensuring that persons wishing to obtain communications and services in French from an FRPB or to work in French in an FRPB are able to exercise those rights and that they receive adequate services in French. By strengthening language obligations, the proposed regulations would reduce inequalities and help level the playing field for the two official languages.

Description

The proposed regulations would

• (1) specify the minimum number of employees that an FRPB must have to be subject to the UFPBA;
• (2) set the conditions that FRPBs in Quebec must meet to choose the applicable regime (CFL or UFPBA), establish the administrative procedures to register to the UFPBA regime, and specify the duty to inform the Minister of Canadian Heritage; as well as the Minister’s new responsibilities regarding registration;
• (3) define and clarify certain key terms;
• (4) provide for exemptions;
• (5) set requirements concerning the committees for the fostering of French as well as the Minister’s new responsibilities regarding certification; and
• (6) require the Minister to review the provisions and operation of the regulations in conjunction with the 10-year review contemplated in the UFPBA.

(1) Minimum number of employees that an FRPB must have to be subject to the UFPBA

The proposed regulations would fix the minimum number of employees at the following:

• In the province of Quebec: 25 or more employees in Quebec (unless the FRPB chooses to be subject to the CFL regime under section 6 of the UFPBA).
• In RSFPs: 100 or more employees in Canada on January 1 of the preceding year.

(2) Choice of regime in Quebec (CFL or UFPBA), administrative procedures to register under the UFPBA regime, and new responsibilities of the Minister of Canadian Heritage

Choice of regime

Under section 6 of the UFPBA, FRPBs operating in Quebec may choose to be subject to the CFL by sending a written notice to the Minister. Subsection 6(3) also empowers the Minister of Canadian Heritage, with the approval of the Governor in Council, to enter into an agreement with the Government of Quebec, on behalf of the Government of Canada, to facilitate the implementation of the choice of regime in Quebec.

Thus, the UFPBA and the regulations provide that if the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Quebec sign an agreement with the approval of the Governor in Council, FRPBs already registered with the OQLF at the time the agreement comes into force would be deemed to have given notice to the Minister indicating that they are choosing the CFL regime, including its associated recourse mechanisms.^{footnote 7}

Registration procedures for the federal regime in Quebec

FRPBs operating in Quebec that have 25 or more employees and that opt for the UFPBA language regime will need to provide the Minister of Canadian Heritage with a written declaration including

• the number of employees they have in Quebec or in a position assigned to Quebec; and
• the number of workplaces they have in Quebec,

within six months after the day on which they become subject to the UFPBA.

On receipt of that declaration, the Minister would provide the FRPB with a certificate of registration. Starting in the year following the provision of its declaration and on an annual basis, the FRPB would provide the Minister with a statement confirming that it continues to carry on business or have workplaces in Quebec. The proposed regulations would clarify that the Minister of Canadian Heritage may also provide the Commissioner of Official Languages for Canada or Quebec’s Minister of the French Language with a list of the FRPBs that provided a declaration during the previous year. The Minister of Canadian Heritage would also be permitted by the proposed regulations to publish on a Government of Canada website a list of businesses in Quebec registered under the federal regime.

Registration procedures for the federal regime in RSFPs

In RSFPs, where the choice of regime would not apply, the proposed regulations would provide that FRPBs with 100 or more employees in Canada would have to self-declare to the Minister of Canadian Heritage and provide the Minister with the following information:

• the number of employees they have in an RSFP or in a position assigned to an RSFP;
• the number of workplaces they have in an RSFP; and
• except in the case of New Brunswick, the addresses of those workplaces.

On receipt of that declaration, the Minister would provide the FRPB with a certificate of registration.

In addition, FRPBs, except those in New Brunswick, would be required to provide certain information concerning their points of service (websites, social media platforms and telephone numbers).

The proposed regulations clarify that the Minister of Canadian Heritage would also be permitted to provide the Commissioner with a list of the FRPBs that provided a declaration during the previous year. In addition, the Minister would be permitted to publish on a Government of Canada website a list of businesses in RSFPs registered under the federal regime.

(3) Definition and clarification of certain key terms

“Region with a strong francophone presence”

The proposed regulations would fix the list of RSFPs as follows:

• The province of New Brunswick
• The following census divisions (CDs):^{footnote 8}
  • Nova Scotia:
    • Yarmouth
    • Digby
    • Richmond
  • Ontario:
    • Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry
    • Prescott and Russell
    • Ottawa
    • Nipissing
    • Sudbury
    • Greater Sudbury
    • Timiskaming
    • Cochrane
• The census tracts (CTs) below:^{footnote 9}
  • The following CTs in the Winnipeg Census Metropolitan Area (CMA),^{footnote 3} in Manitoba:
    • 6020595.01
    • 6020595.02
    • 6020600.00
    • 6020100.01
    • 6020100.02
    • 6020100.09
    • 6020100.10
    • 6020102.02
    • 6020104.00
    • 6020105.00
    • 6020110.02
    • 6020110.04
    • 6020111.00
    • 6020112.01
    • 6020112.02
    • 6020113.00
    • 6020114.00
    • 6020115.00
    • 6020116.00
    • 6020117.00
    • 6020500.02
• One CT in the Edmonton CMA, in Alberta: 8350020.00

Communications with and services to consumers

The proposed regulations would require FRPBs to actively offer their services in French and to inform consumers that they can communicate in French with the FRPB and obtain services in French at all points of service located in Quebec or in an RSFP. Entities acting on behalf of an FRPB would have the same duty.

The proposed regulations define “communications” as including all documents that are intended for consumers, in whatever form (paper, electronic or other), and provide an illustrative list of examples of what would be included: brochures, leaflets, purchase orders, catalogues, contracts, invoices, receipts and acquittances. The business would be required to ensure that, when any consumer documents are available in French and in a language other than French, the use of French is at least equivalent to the use of the other language.

FRPBs in Quebec would need to ensure that, on any commercial signs, posters and advertising that are in French and another language, the French is markedly predominant.

Lastly, the proposed regulations specify that the rights and duties under the UFPBA with respect to communications with and services to consumers apply to air, coach, bus, train and ship (including interprovincial ferry) routes terminating in Quebec or an RSFP. The regime would also apply to the transportation of passengers from Quebec or an RSFP to another point in Canada. International routes would be excluded.

Key definitions involving language of work

The proposed regulations would define “employee” in the same way as the Official Languages Act does (even though the UFPBA targets an entirely different group of employees).

The proposed regulations would indicate that means of transportation (including those transporting goods) linking Quebec or an RSFP to another location are not considered workplaces.

In addition, the proposed regulations would define “many years of service” as 20 or more years with the same employer. It would also define “conditions that could impede the learning of French” as “any long-term or recurring physical, mental or learning impairments that could, despite accommodation, impede the learning of French.”

(4) Exemptions

The proposed regulations would also contain additional exemptions from the UFPBA. Exceptions also exist under Quebec’s CFL regime.

The UFPBA already excludes a council, government, corporation or other entity that is authorized to act on behalf of an Indigenous group, community or people that holds rights recognized by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. The proposed regulations would take this a step further, exempting any business under their control from the language-of-work provisions under the UFPBA.

In addition, the proposed regulations would fully exempt from the UFPBA any business under the control of such an entity. The proposed regulations would also fully exempt FRPB activities and workplaces located in an “Indigenous territory,” defined as “(a) a reserve, as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Indian Act, or any lands that are to become a reserve under a treaty land entitlement settlement agreement” or “(b) any settlement areas or settlement lands — including Category I or Category I-N lands within the meaning of the Act respecting the land regime in the James Bay and New Québec territories, CQLR, c. R13.1 — that are referred to in a modern treaty.”

Similarly, any FRPB that meets the following definition would be exempted from the language-of-work requirements: a business registered as a First Nations, Inuit or Métis business by an Indigenous organization that is recognized under a modern treaty.

The proposed regulations would fully exempt FRPB activities that are directly related to the production or distribution of cultural property with linguistic content that is exclusively in a language other than French.

The proposed regulations would further exempt, from sections 9 to 11 of the UFPBA (language of work), FRPBs whose activities are exclusively related to the conduct of international business, where the use of a language other than French is predominant in the conduct of such business. In addition, the proposed regulations would exempt, from those same sections, workplaces where the activities carried out are governed primarily by research protocols or international standards, and where those protocols or standards require the use of a language other than French.

The relevant businesses that intend to invoke one of these exemptions (cultural property, international business, or research protocols and international standards) will need to inform the Minister, and the exemptions will need to be renewed every five years. Upon receipt of a complaint in this regard, the Commissioner would be responsible for validating whether or not an exemption was warranted.

(5) Operation and responsibilities of the committees for the fostering of French and the Minister’s new responsibilities regarding certification

The UFPBA requires FRPBs in Quebec to establish a committee to support the business’s management group in the fostering of French and its use within its workplaces. This duty will be extended to RSFPs two years after the UFPBA comes into force in Quebec. The proposed regulations would set criteria for the establishment and operation of such committees.

• In Quebec:
  • FRPBs subject to the UFPBA with 100 or more employees in Quebec would be required to establish a committee for the fostering of French.
  • FRPBs with fewer than 100 employees would be exempt from this requirement.
• In RSFPs:
  • FRPBs with worksites and points of service in an RSFP and 500 or more employees across Canada (with 100 or more of these working in an RSFP) would be required to establish a committee for the fostering of French.
  • FRPBs with fewer than 500 employees across Canada or with 500 or more employees across Canada but fewer than 100 employees in an RSFP would be exempt from this requirement.

More specifically, the proposed regulations would indicate that an FRPB must establish a committee within six months of the coming into force of the UFPBA or within six months after the day the FRPB becomes subject to this obligation. The committee will be required to meet at least twice per calendar year.

There must be an equal number of employer and employee representatives on the committee—chosen by the employer and the employees, respectively—with at least two members representing the employer and two members representing the employees.

In Quebec, the committee would have special obligations. Within six months of its establishment and every three years thereafter, the committee would be required to prepare an overview of the language situation within the FRPB, including a description of its programs intended to generalize the use of French. After preparing the overview, the committee would have three months to provide the Minister of Canadian Heritage with a copy. If, on the strength of the information provided, the Minister considers that the programs to foster the use of French generalize the use of French through the means referred to in subsection 10(1.1) of the UFPBA, the Minister would issue a certificate of generalization of the use of French.

If the programs are not in compliance with the UFPBA concerning the generalization of the use of French in the FRPB (subsection 10(1.1)), the Minister would provide the committee with feedback on the programs, along with the reasons for refusing to issue the certificate. This information would need to be included in the committee’s first annual report that follows. If the Minister refuses to issue the certificate, the committee would update its programs in the year following the refusal, and every year thereafter, and would send that update to the Minister.

The Minister would also be permitted to suspend a business’s certificate of generalization of the use of French in the event of non-compliance with the UFPBA (subsection 10(1.1)). In that event, the Minister would provide the committee with an explanation of the reasons for the suspension and an opportunity to make written representations in this regard. If the situation that gave rise to the suspension has been corrected or if the reasons for the suspension were unfounded, the Minister would reinstate the certificate.

If, on the other hand, the suspension lasts three months or more, the Minister would be permitted to revoke the certificate, which would trigger an obligation for the committee to develop and provide to the Minister, within three months of the revocation, an action plan for ensuring the generalization of the use of French.

In Quebec, the committee would be required to prepare, on an annual basis, a report on the measures it has taken to carry out its mandate. However, if the committee already holds a certificate of generalization of the use of French, the report would need to be prepared only every 3 years.

Each report would need to be retained by FRPBs for at least 12 years and a copy provided to any employee who requests one.

The proposed regulations provide that a francization committee established under the CFL may serve as the committee for the purposes of the UFPBA for its workplaces in RSFPs.

The Minister may publish on a Government of Canada website a list of FRPBs whose committee for the fostering of French holds a certificate of generalization of the use of French.

(6) 10-year review of the regulations

The proposed regulations contain provisions whereby the 10-year reviews of the UFPBA would also apply to the regulations.

Regulatory development

Consultation

Pre–Canada Gazette consultation strategy

PCH’s pre-consultation strategy was rolled out in two phases: pre-consultations with the various stakeholders and an online questionnaire for the general public. The pre-consultations addressed issues involving the coming into force of the UFPBA, how it would apply to FRPBs, the criteria for establishing RSFPs, exemptions and accommodations, definitions relating to communications with and services to consumers and language of work, the size of FRPBs subject to the “fostering of French regime,” and the operation of the committee to be established under that regime.

Questionnaires

From May 9 to July 17, 2024, an online questionnaire was made available to all Canadians, offering them the opportunity to answer a series of questions and comment on various aspects of the UFPBA and the administrative monetary penalties (AMP) regime under the Official Languages Act. By the end of the pre-consultation period, that questionnaire had been completed by over 1 300 respondents, of whom roughly 800 (58.3%) completed the UFPBA section. Some respondents, particularly in Quebec, noted an inability to obtain service in French, even when they specifically requested service in that language. Wait times for service in French were often longer than for service in English, prompting some to opt for English. The poor quality of service in French and the lack of consultation on language preference were also major concerns. Some respondents also expressed various concerns about the UFPBA, including perceived discrimination against the English-speaking communities of Quebec and the potential costs of meeting language obligations. Some felt that the criteria for designating RSFPs and the quality of French translations were inadequate. Many respondents felt that private businesses should be able to choose the language of service, noting how complicated it would be for small businesses to provide bilingual services. In addition, a certain proportion of respondents did not support the objectives of the UFPBA.

Between December 10, 2024, and January 24, 2025, a questionnaire was sent to FRPBs belonging to different industry associations to collect information on the costs and impacts associated with the UFPBA. The purpose of the questionnaire was to collect meaningful data to inform the cost-benefit analysis and the ultimate provisions of the proposed regulations. The industry associations included businesses of various sizes, and a total of 18 respondents completed the questionnaire. A brief summary of the information gathered through this consultation exercise is presented in the “Regulatory analysis” section.

Consultations with key stakeholders

PCH took into account the different views expressed during the consultations, as evidenced in the “Rationale” section.

In addition, the period between April and July 2024 saw a total of 23 meetings, either virtual or face-to-face, with key stakeholders—including community organizations, sector-specific advocacy organizations, representatives of the provinces and territories, and federal institutions, among them the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages for Canada (OCOL)—as well as tripartite consultations with organizations representing employers and employees, in collaboration with the Labour Program (Employment and Social Development Canada). These meetings brought together a total of 150 organizations and upwards of 250 individuals. Five briefs were subsequently received and analyzed. The discussions highlighted the specific concerns of the participants regarding the needs of linguistic communities and the real-world circumstances facing FRPBs. They helped identify priorities, obstacles and opportunities for the effective implementation of the proposed regulations. They also provided a roadmap for how the UFPBA could be implemented pragmatically and inclusively, taking into account the range of circumstances facing the regions and sectors involved.

Between August and September 2025, targeted discussions were also held with key implementation partners to validate certain technical and operational details. This ensured that the regulatory proposal took into account specific implementation considerations. Between September and November 2025, discussions were held with the Government of Quebec’s ministère de la Langue française in support of the harmonious coexistence of the federal and Quebec regimes for FRPBs. These discussions aimed to establish collaboration based on trust, integrity and respect for businesses’ choice of regime. They also aimed to ensure a common understanding regarding the implementation of clear, consistent oversight, ensuring smooth administration as FRPBs in Quebec make their choice of regime. These discussions were limited in scope and do not replace the broader consultation opportunities that will follow prepublication in the Canada Gazette, Part I.

Topics discussed at meetings and positions expressed by the parties consulted

Current situation

Some stakeholders, including organizations for the advancement of French, have noted the decline of the French language, both in Quebec and outside Quebec, stressing the need to require businesses to communicate with and provide services to consumers in French and to respect the language preferences of consumers, thereby strengthening the presence of French within and outside Quebec. In their view, the UFPBA could play a key role in transforming mindsets and offering a new approach to advancing the French language across Canada.

Coming into force of the UFPBA and administration of the regime within and outside Quebec

The UFPBA will come into force first in Quebec, by order-in-council, then in RSFPs, two years later. Several spokespersons for language promotion organizations stressed the importance of preventing the “flight” of businesses already subject to the CFL (in Quebec) to the federal regime, seen by some as more lenient. However, others noted that some aspects of the UFPBA were more stringent, as the Act covered both oral and written interactions. These stakeholders raised the importance of proper coordination between the federal and provincial governments to avoid any confusion for businesses when implementing the UFPBA.

Most stakeholders and organizations recommended gradual implementation and a transition period for RSFPs over and above the two-year period provided for in the UFPBA, given the novelty of such a regime outside Quebec, particularly in terms of language of work. Some respondents felt that a gradual approach might be the way to go for language of service as well. Another suggestion was that the duties of businesses with fewer customer interactions could be tailored to need.

Criteria for defining “RSFP”

Concerning the implementation of the new statute outside Quebec, most stakeholders stressed the importance of establishing clear definitions for “Francophone” and “region.” They wanted to see a quantitative approach that reflected community vitality while incorporating certain qualitative criteria, without one being at the expense of the other.

For their part, businesses raised the potential challenges of implementing the UFPBA outside Quebec, particularly the language-of-work requirements. Small businesses pointed to the burden that the new regime would impose on them in RSFPs.

Some stakeholders from organizations representing communities wanted the UFPBA regime to have the same geographic scope as the OLA or the provinces’ French language services legislation, or to apply to all telephone or online services available to consumers across the country.

Exemptions and accommodations

Many stakeholders representing businesses and spokespersons for specific sectors noted that while all sectors in RSFPs were important, if it were necessary to prioritize, language of service to consumers was of greater importance (at least initially). Some of these stakeholders also said it was essential to prioritize activities involving health and safety, activities that have a financial or monetary impact on individuals, and activities that affect vulnerable populations. In addition, most stakeholders emphasized that the regulations needed to provide additional clarity on the services to be protected. Expectations were just as high for the passenger transportation sector.

Stakeholders were also concerned about the high cost of UFPBA compliance for small businesses, wanting to avoid imposing new costs within the broader context of rising costs.

In addition, spokespersons for specific sectors suggested that certain exemptions in the CFL (for example for activities that are highly specialized or are carried on in Northern Quebec) could also apply to the federal regime in Quebec.

Communications with and services to consumers

During the consultations, most stakeholders said it was crucial to define the term “consumer” to keep businesses from construing the rights too narrowly. They stressed that the definition of “consumer” should be broader than “an entity that executes a monetary transaction” but narrower than “a person” or “a member of the public.” They felt similarly about federally regulated passenger transportation (air, road and water), where the rights and duties with respect to language of service to consumers needed to be clarified.

Against the backdrop of labour shortages and rising costs, some associations representing businesses argued against imposing new costs. There were concerns that UFPBA compliance costs would be high for small businesses. Most stakeholders therefore recommended a gradual approach and a transition period, given the novelty of such a regime outside Quebec, particularly in terms of language of work, but also in administration (e.g. written communications and technological tools). Provincial and territorial stakeholders also indicated that regional specificities needed to be taken into account. Of note, most stakeholders and a majority of respondents to the online questionnaire believed in the importance of requiring FRPBs, both in Quebec and outside Quebec, to provide communications and services to consumers in French and a work environment in French.

Language of work for services to consumers

In general, stakeholders said that the definition of “employee” needed to include all relevant categories of salaried workers to avoid inadvertently excluding certain categories of workers, executives, etc. from the scope of the language-of-work rights. They also mentioned the importance of exercising the power in the UFPBA to define other language-of-work terms, such as “many years of service” and “conditions that could impede the learning of French.”

Most of the transportation businesses consulted indicated that how the regime applies to federally regulated passenger transportation (air, road and water) needed to be clarified in order to ascertain the rights and duties involving language of service to consumers. In addition, logistics businesses operating in Quebec reported that they were highly integrated with Ontario and the United States. The regime would need to reflect this.

Size for the purposes of applying the “fostering-of-French” regime and operation of committee

Most stakeholders proposed that worksites in sectors where customer service was less of an issue be subject to different or deferred obligations, as appropriate. They also stressed ensuring that there were no legal loopholes available to businesses.

Road transportation and provincial and territorial representatives said that the regime could not be designed as a “one-size-fits-all regime” as many businesses might be too small to comply. Size should be defined asymmetrically.

Some stakeholders representing businesses called for harmonization with the CFL regime and suggested a threshold of 100 employees for the committees for the fostering of French under the UFPBA in order to avoid duplicating the requirements with the CFL francization committees in Quebec.

In RSFPs, most stakeholders agreed that the committees for the fostering of French would need to play a decisive role and exert meaningful influence in these regions.

Recourse

One crucial point raised by most stakeholders was the need to prevent businesses subject to the CFL from migrating to the federal regime, often seen as more lenient.

In addition, they stressed the importance of deterring businesses from attempting to circumvent the requirements of the new regime. They emphasized that, in light of concerns regarding a lack of seriousness in meeting obligations, it is crucial to demonstrate that compliance enhances their image as exemplary employers and providers.

Indigenous engagement, consultation and modern treaty obligations

An assessment of the modern treaty implications of the proposed regulations conducted pursuant to the Cabinet Directive on the Federal Approach to Modern Treaty Implementation found that those regulations would introduce new regulatory requirements on modern treaty lands. However, the proposed regulations are not expected to affect the rights protected under the Constitution Act, 1982 or those set out in modern treaties.

The UFPBA already excludes from the definition of “FRPB” a council, government, corporation or other entity that is authorized to act on behalf of an Indigenous group, community or people that holds rights recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982. The UFPBA also stipulates that nothing in the Act abrogates or derogates from any right with respect to any language other than English or French, including any Indigenous language, and that nothing in the Act is to be interpreted in a manner that is inconsistent with the reclamation, revitalization and strengthening of Indigenous languages.

The proposed regulations are not expected to affect modern treaties, as they contain a series of exemptions. The following would be exempt from the UFPBA:

• FRPBs, in relation to activities that are directly related to the production or distribution of cultural property with linguistic content that is exclusively in a language other than French — exempt from sections 7 through 11;
• all FRPB activities and points of service and workplaces situated within an Indigenous territory, including reserves, Category I or I-N lands within the meaning of the Act respecting the land regime in the James Bay and New Québec territories ^{footnote 10} or any other territory of equivalent legal status further to the adoption of a modern treaty or other equivalent legal instrument; and
• for language-of-work provisions, businesses registered as a First Nations, Inuit or Métis business by an Indigenous organization that is recognized under a modern treaty, as well as businesses owned or controlled by an entity such as a council, government, corporation or other entity that is authorized to act on behalf of an Indigenous group, community or people that holds rights recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.

For greater certainty, nothing prevents an exempt business from offering services or workplaces in French or any other language; however, such offerings will not be regulated by the Government of Canada.

Indigenous consultation/engagement

Pre-consultations conducted in the spring and summer of 2024 with key stakeholders—including community organizations, sector-specific advocacy organizations, representatives of the provinces and territories, federal institutions and organizations representing employers and employees—informed the development of the Indigenous engagement strategy and yielded relevant topics to be addressed with Indigenous communities and organizations.

Indigenous engagement was carried out jointly by PCH and the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat for its own regulatory proposal clarifying the duties of federal institutions subject to Part VII of the modernized Official Languages Act (Advancement of Equality of Status and Use of English and French).

Initial meetings with representatives of Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (ITK) and the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) were an opportunity to make contact and introduce the regulatory project. Those meetings also gave rise to discussion on potential collaboration in engaging with other groups and organizations. PCH adopted an approach based on trust and respect to gain a better understanding of the perspectives, issues and values of these communities and take note of their comments and concerns. In this regard, the following engagement opportunities were proposed:

• Opportunities for ITK and the AFN to comment on a preliminary version of the various sets of regulations to identify the impacts on Indigenous communities.
• Discussions to identify non-exempt Indigenous FRPBs and establish exemption measures during the implementation of the regulations.

In its official communications announcing the beginning of the engagement exercise, PCH provided an opportunity for 13 national Indigenous and entrepreneurial/economic organizations (including ITK, the AFN and the Métis National Council) to participate in discussions and comment on the preliminary version of the regulations.

In the absence of a response, PCH renewed the invitation to the 13 Indigenous organizations to comment on the direction of the regulatory proposal. No comments were received from the organizations during this phase of engagement.

Following these communications, PCH held initial meetings with the First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Economic Development Commission^{footnote 11} and with the Métis National Council (MNC), presenting an overview of the regulations, the status of the work and the timelines, while initiating a dialogue on potential collaboration on engagement.

In October and November 2025, discussions continued with ITK, the MNC and the AFN to answer their questions regarding the impacts on Indigenous communities. The objective of these discussions was to better identify non-exempt Indigenous FRPBs and to gather feedback on the proposed exemption measures.

These organizations indicated that they were currently consulting with their members and that they would pass on the results of these consultations in writing.

Further to a recommendation from ITK, engagement efforts are underway with Makivvik Corporation, given the direct impact of the regulations on the Inuit of Nunavik in the Quebec context.

It was agreed that dialogue with these organizations would continue during the process of tabling the draft regulations in Parliament and following prepublication of the proposed regulations in the Canada Gazette, Part I. Broader Indigenous engagement might continue at that time.

Instrument choice

The UFPBA, enacted by the Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada’s Official Languages (formerly Bill C-13), is not yet in force; it will come into force by order-in-council. The UFPBA was designed to be accompanied by regulations providing the necessary framework for consistent and effective implementation. It is therefore crucial that the coming-into-force date of the proposed regulations coincide with the UFPBA coming-into-force date specified in the enabling order-in-council. Absent such coordination, many of the key principles of the UFPBA—such as the exact geographic boundaries of RSFPs and the number of employees that an FRPB must have to be subject to the regime in Quebec and in RSFPs—will remain undefined, resulting in implementation inconsistent with the intent of Parliament. Parliament did not provide for binding policy instruments on the use of French in FRPBs, so regulations are the only way to bring the UFPBA regime into existence.

Regulatory analysis

Benefits and costs

Analysis framework

The cost-benefit analysis^{footnote 12} covers the period from 2027 to 2036. All amounts are expressed in constant 2024 dollars and discounted to the base year 2027 using a rate of 7%. The impacts on the federally regulated private sector were assessed by comparing two scenarios: the baseline scenario and the regulatory scenario.

Under the Constitution Act, 1867, certain classes of subjects fall within federal jurisdiction, others within provincial jurisdiction. The UFPBA and its regulations are the first attempt by the Government of Canada to regulate language—specifically, language of work, and language of communications and service to consumers—in FRPBs.

Baseline scenario

In the baseline scenario, it would be unreasonable to expect the UFPBA to be implemented, as the proposed regulations fix key parameters of application, such as the definition of RSFP and the employee thresholds at which FRPBs become subject to the UFPBA. Without the UFPBA and its regulations, the status quo would continue to apply in FRPBs, both in Quebec and in RSFPs, as regards service to consumers and language of work.

In Quebec, the CFL governs the use of French in FRPBs. It has applied to all businesses operating in that province since June 1, 2022. Many FRPBs had already been voluntarily following the CFL regime since it came into force in 1977. As of June 1, 2025, the obligation to comply with the CFL’s francization standards now applies to all businesses with 25 or more employees, whereas it previously applied only to those with 50 or more employees. Thus, the prevailing situation in Quebec—the situation on which the baseline scenario is based—is one where the availability of customer service in French, French-language proficiency of front-line staff and the opportunity to work in French is generalized in such businesses. As of January 2026, approximately 49% of Quebec FRPBs, which employ 73% of the FRPB workforce in total, held a francization certificate. In the baseline scenario, FRPBs with 25 to 49 employees could choose to maintain their registration with the Office québécois de la langue française and pursue the francization process. The share of Quebec businesses holding a francization certificate might therefore continue to rise. Moreover, even businesses without such a certificate are generally able to provide communications and services in French and to offer a French-language work environment due to Quebec’s demographic characteristics.

In regions with a strong Francophone presence, contrary to the prevailing situation in Quebec, customer service offerings, direct communications between staff and customers, and jobs available to workers in FRPBs are at the mercy of market forces, with English tending to dominate.

The baseline scenario therefore assumes that the status quo would continue in Quebec, with the Government of Canada allowing the province to legislate in areas of federal jurisdiction. Outside Quebec, however, the baseline scenario assumes that in the absence of the UFPBA regulation, the situation would be governed by market forces and any other measures currently in place, and that the UFPBA would prove impossible to implement, given that it is the regulations that define RSFPs.

For the purposes of the analysis, Statistics Canada’s regional language profiles and demographic projections concerning RSFPs are assumed to remain stable until the end of 2036.

Regulatory scenario

The regulatory scenario takes into account the impacts of implementing the UFPBA and its regulations, which, for the purposes of our analysis, is slated to come into force on January 1, 2027. This date is a conservative assumption, as the actual coming into force will depend on how the process unfolds. The regulatory scenario also includes the four orders-in-council^{footnote 13} required in order to coherently and effectively implement the regime. FRPBs located in Quebec would have a choice between the CFL and the federal regime, with no possibility of being subject to both. In the case of RSFPs (outside Quebec), while the duties set out in the Act would not come into force until two years after the coming into force of the regulations, the analysis assumes that the businesses in question would begin working towards compliance as soon as the regulations are adopted, in order to minimize related costs.

The proposed regulations would clarify how the UFPBA is to operate, including by defining the term “RSFP” and what constitutes “communications” and “services to consumers,” including passenger transportation by various modes (e.g. airplane, train, coach, bus, ship or ferry). It would also establish the thresholds in terms of number of employees at which FRPBs would become subject to the UFPBA, and the procedure that FRPBs in Quebec would need to follow to exercise their choice between the federal regime and the CFL regime, and to obtain the required certificates for the committees for the fostering of French. The analyses and estimates of costs and benefits are based on the regulatory requirements.

The regulatory scenario reflects the fact that, in Quebec, a large and growing share of FRPBs hold a francization certificate issued by the Office québécois de la langue française (OQLF). As of January 5, 2026, approximately 49% of FRPBs (252) held a francization certificate. The regulatory scenario assumes that these businesses will choose to remain subject to the Quebec regime. However, given that the federal regime under development is largely equivalent to the existing provincial regime, businesses holding a francization certificate may be excluded from the cost calculations. They will be deemed to be in compliance with the regime, whatever their choice of regime at the coming into force of the UFPBA. For those businesses that do not yet hold such a certificate, the costs in respect of Quebec reflect the businesses’ current capacity, with the analysis aimed at determining the costs to those businesses of achieving compliance with one of the two regimes. The incremental impact (cost or benefit) would be the difference between the federal and provincial regimes. Outside Quebec, the analysis makes assumptions based on socio-demographic characteristics, such as knowledge of French, in order to establish the costs of bringing businesses into compliance with the federal regime, as there are no other regimes to choose from. Indeed, the other provinces that legislate language (or have a language policy in place) generally do so for language of communications and services to the public by provincial government institutions only and do not include the private sector. New Brunswick, the only officially bilingual province, follows this pattern, while also incorporating elements related to language of work of the provincial administration. Thus, businesses’ commercial practices with respect to French-language service offerings generally reflect local market forces, adopting an approach based on the existence of sufficient local demand or sufficient telephone/Internet demand.

Data sources

The main data source for the regulatory analysis is the 2021 Census of Population, which provides detailed information on the workers and populations likely to be affected by the UFPBA, segmented by geographic region and demographic variable. Micro-data from the Employer’s Annual Hazardous Occurrence Report of the Labour Program (Employment and Social Development Canada) were also used to identify FRPBs that could be subject to the Act. In addition, a questionnaire targeting the major industry associations was used to collect data on the costs and impacts anticipated by their members. Consultations with translation experts, language schools and federal agencies also helped validate and refine the assumptions of the analysis.

Consultations as part of the cost-benefit analysis

The questionnaire for the main industry associations representing FRPBs collected detailed data on the anticipated costs and impacts, including for language training, signage and translation. The submissions were considered in the regulatory analysis. At the same time, the assumptions and estimates were honed through consultations with the Translation Bureau, language schools and the Official Languages Centre of Excellence of the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat’s Office of the Chief Human Resources Officer.

The targeted associations represented businesses of various sizes, revealing disparities across sectors, regions and services. Most respondents represented businesses with more than 500 employees, with about 50% of them reporting that they provided services to consumers, though often at a small proportion of their sites located in RSFPs. Most provided in-person or telephone services on a regular basis, but few had instituted tailored language training to address the needs of consumers.

With regard to language of work, most felt that in RSFPs, their supervisory staff were able to supervise in French always or sometimes, though a minority reported gaps. Many had not yet identified concrete measures but were considering recruiting bilingual supervisors or providing language training. In terms of translation, respondents had more translated documents for their employees than for their consumers, both in Quebec and in RSFPs. A large majority used technology or AI-assisted tools for simple content, while a minority favoured human translation for complex documents. Translation budgets varied widely, ranging from less than $10,000 to $2.5 million, with many businesses lacking accurate cost estimates.

Public opinion survey

An online public opinion survey, open to all Canadians, was conducted by Canadian Heritage from May 9 to July 17, 2024. Respondents answered a series of questions and had an opportunity to comment on various aspects of the UFPBA, as explained in the “Consultation” section. By the end of the pre-consultation period, that questionnaire had been completed by over 1 300 respondents, of whom roughly 800 (58.3%) completed the UFPBA section. Some questions focused on preferred language for interacting with FRPBs, as well as the quality of the services provided by these businesses in the preferred language and satisfaction with those interactions. Although there are significant self-selection biases, and the results of a small sample are not representative of the country as a whole, the results are useful in creating a baseline scenario for monetizing benefits.

Stakeholder profile

The federally regulated private sector encompasses strategic industries such as transportation (interprovincial road transportation, air, rail, water and pipeline), telecommunications, broadcasting, banking, postal services, and certain specialized industries related to feed, flour, seed and grain.^{footnote 14} It also includes atomic energy, uranium mining, and oil and gas.

Federally regulated private businesses

The UFPBA and its regulations would thus apply to a subset of the federally regulated private sector. Approximately 386 businesses — or 7.4% of FRPBs operating in Canada — would be subject. In total, the regime would cover some 1 580 workplaces in Quebec and in RSFPs, and 73 329 employees across Canada.^{footnote 15}

Nearly 40% of worksites of subject FRPBs—representing more than 48% of employees covered—are located in Quebec. Of businesses with at least one site in Quebec, approximately 49% held a francization certificate issued by the OQLF as of January 5, 2026. It is assumed that these businesses will choose to remain subject to the Quebec regime. As a result, the UFPBA and its regulations would affect approximately 261 FRPBs, 628 worksites and 35 307 employees in Quebec. These businesses are mainly concentrated in the banking industry (47% of worksites), followed by road transportation (26%), communications (11%) and air transportation (6%). In RSFPs, approximately 163 subject FRPBs operate 952 workplaces, employing 38 022 people. The breakdown by industry is similar, with a high concentration in banking (51% of worksites), followed by road transportation (20%), communications (10%) and air transportation (10%).

Concerning language obligations in passenger transportation, the UFPBA would apply to 10 airlines (excluding Air Canada, which is already subject to the Official Languages Act, and certain routes operated by Indigenous airlines, which will benefit from an exemption with regard to language of work) servicing approximately 97 routes linking two airports and offering 1 331 flights per week with in-flight service. Businesses operating other modes of transportation (ferries and interprovincial transportation by bus, coach or train) in Quebec or in RSFPs and linking Quebec or RSFPs to points elsewhere in Canada account for approximately 214, mainly short-haul routes.

Employees

Employees in FRPBs would benefit from new rights involving the use of French as a language of work (supervision, tools, internal communications). Implementation would be easier in Quebec, where 95% of workers aged 15 or older report having a knowledge of French. In RSFPs, nearly 41% of employees on average have a knowledge of French, and their potential demand for communications and services in French^{footnote 16} averages 27%. The regime could also expand employment opportunities for French-speaking job seekers while fostering a more inclusive work environment within FRPBs. In RSFPs, an estimated 1.3 million people are active in the labour market, 41% of whom have a knowledge of French.

Consumers

The proposed regulations define the “services” to which consumers are entitled as including the transport of passengers by airplane, train, coach, bus, ship or ferry within Quebec, between a location in Quebec and a location elsewhere in Canada, within an RSFP, or between a location in such a region and a location elsewhere in Canada. “Communications” is defined as including all documents that are intended for consumers, whatever their form (paper, electronic, etc.), including brochures, leaflets, purchase orders, catalogues, contracts, invoices and receipts. According to the proposed regulations, FRPBs in Quebec would be required to ensure that such communications are mainly in French, whereas FRPBs in RSFPs would have the option of doing so. In addition, FRPBs would need to clearly indicate to consumers in Quebec and in RSFPs that they can obtain service in French via any method of service or communication. The regulations would require that French be used in all of the business’s customer-facing documents in a manner at least equivalent to the use of any other language.

In RSFPs, potential demand for French represents 28% of the total population (aged 15 or over) on average, while in Quebec, 94% of the province’s total population (aged 15 or over) reported having a knowledge of French in the last census.

Government of Canada

Lastly, the Government of Canada would be a key stakeholder in the implementation of the regulations. The implementation costs will be borne primarily by three entities: the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages (OCOL), PCH and the Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB). Consumers and employees alike will have access to the mechanisms in the UFPBA for asserting their language rights. They will be able to file complaints with OCOL, which will oversee the handling of those complaints. Under certain conditions, OCOL may refer complex language-of-work complaints to the CIRB.

Benefits

The regulations establish a clear framework to assist the new regime as a whole in achieving the objectives set out in the UFPBA. The Act and its regulations are expected to bring about meaningful long-term change by instituting a stable, predictable legal framework for Francophone language rights. Such stability would allow consumers and workers to better plan their interactions and professional activities with confidence. The regulations provide the necessary details to ensure that the regime fits into the broader effort to preserve and promote French in Canada, complementing provincial and municipal policies and existing school initiatives. In fact, every province and territory has a statute or policy governing French-language services for its residents. Some provinces have even introduced initiatives demonstrating their commitment to the economic development of the Francophone community.^{footnote 17} The Act and its Regulations therefore reinforce the alignment and complementarity of Canada’s language regimes by supporting French in FRPBs.

The implementation of the regulations would generate tangible economic and social benefits for several stakeholder groups by establishing a transformative regulatory framework, thereby fostering a more inclusive and equitable working and consumer environment.

The benefits to consumers ($54.6 million, present value) would include improved access to French-language services, particularly in the banking, communications and transportation sectors, which account for around 20% of household spending. For example, expanded access to banking services in French would make it easier to understand products and contracts, reduce the risk of errors, and boost confidence in businesses.

The benefits for workers ($125.3 million, present value) would include better access to supervision, tools and internal communications in French within FRPBs. This would help reduce misunderstandings, boost productivity and foster a more inclusive work environment. The regulations could also expand employment prospects for French-speaking job seekers, particularly in regions outside Quebec.

The benefits for employers ($94.6 million, present value) would include clearer language obligations, facilitating compliance with the Act. Improving internal communication and reducing language-related errors could boost operational efficiency. In addition, being able to offer a bilingual work environment would make FRPBs more attractive to a wider pool of talent.

The collective benefits ($29.4 million, present value) would be based on the regulations’ contribution to preserving and promoting French in Canada. As a complement to provincial, municipal and school policies, the regime would strengthen the presence of French in the federally regulated private sector, supporting the vitality of Francophone communities across Canada.

All in all, these spin-offs would translate into tangible economic benefits for all stakeholders. The monetized benefits are estimated at an annualized average of $43.3 million, or $303.9 million in constant 2024 dollars, discounted to the base year 2027 at a rate of 7%. This estimate takes into account the fact that the regulations would apply first in Quebec only, beginning in 2027, then in RSFPs as well, beginning in 2029.

Costs

Implementing the regulations would entail costs for FRPBs and the Government of Canada given the efforts to achieve compliance with the language obligations set out in the regulations (language training, translation, signage, internal governance, complaints management, etc.).

For businesses, language training — estimated at $125.2 million (present value) — represents the main expenditure item. The purpose of language training is to guarantee that employees can exercise their right to supervision in French ($113.8 million, present value) and to improve service to consumers ($11.4 million, present value). Some 1 938 managers would need to take initial or refresher training, resulting in a temporary loss of productivity. However, businesses would be able to resort to alternative strategies, such as targeted recruitment of bilingual staff or the use of translation technologies.

Passenger-transportation-related costs are estimated at $4.8 million (present value). This amount does not represent direct operational costs but rather an estimate of the resources required to ensure adequate on-board language service: recruiting or assigning bilingual personnel, adapting on-board service procedures, incorporating language practices into operations, etc.

Translation costs are estimated at $55.7 million (present value) and would be incurred mainly in the first half of the analysis period. These expenditures cover the translation of internal and external communications, as well as the adaptation of work tools and documents. They could decline in the medium term with the adoption of artificial intelligence and post-editing tools.

Signage costs are estimated at $2.6 million (present value) and would apply mainly in RSFPs. These expenditures would support the addition of French-language elements to existing permanent signage to avoid having to replace that signage.

Language governance costs include the establishment of committees for the fostering of French ($3.9 million, present value); in Quebec, the preparation of language-situation overviews by committees; the drafting of reports by committees (for businesses with workplaces in Quebec, annually by default, triennially where the committee holds a certificate of generalization of the use of French; for businesses with workplaces in RSFPs only, triennially only); standardized internal communications ($0.4 million, present value); and disclosure to employees ($0.1 million, present value). Administrative costs associated with the annual transmission of information to the government and the issuance of certificates are estimated at $1.9 million (present value).

Concerning costs to the Government of Canada, PCH would play a key role in implementing the regulations, including promotion, interpretation and guidance in relation to the new language obligations. Over the 2027 to 2036 period, the costs to the Department are estimated at $9.3 million (present value), which includes developing educational tools, handling requests to interpret the regulations, managing exemptions, publishing a list of subject businesses and managing the certification process in Quebec.

OCOL would manage complaints related to the new language rights. The total costs for OCOL over 10 years are estimated at $27.5 million (present value), including fixed implementation costs; variable costs related to complaints handling; and operating and structural costs, including the development of a digital tool, training, promotion and litigation management.

The CIRB, supported by the Administrative Tribunals Support Service of Canada, would receive language-of-work complaints from OCOL but only where such referral is warranted by the nature, complexity or seriousness of the alleged contravention (and only with the consent of the complainant). The CIRB forecasts a volume of 29 to 36 complaints per year beginning in Year 3. The estimated costs are $1.08 million per year for the first two years and $2.19 million per year ongoing as of 2029. The total costs for the CIRB over 10 years are estimated at $11.7 million (present value).

The total costs for the three government entities are estimated to be $48.5 million (present value) for the 10-year period. These conservative estimates will be revised as the regime comes into force. They take into account the anticipated budget adjustments at Canadian Heritage, OCOL and the CIRB.

The total costs to business and government over 10 years (2027–2036) are estimated at $243 million (present value), which represents an annualized average of $34.6 million per year (in constant 2024 dollars, discounted to the base year of 2027 at a rate of 7%). These estimates take into account the fact that the regulations would apply first in Quebec only, beginning in 2027, then in RSFPs as well, beginning in 2029 (see Appendix A for a detailed breakdown of monetized costs over the 10-year period).

Cost-benefit statement

• Number of years: 2027 to 2036 (10 years)
• Price year: 2024
• Present value base year: 2027
• Discount rate: 7%

Table 1: Monetized benefits (in millions of dollars)

Stakeholders affected	Description of benefits	2027	2029	2036	Total (present value)	Annualized value
Consumers	Service in French	2.3	11.2	11.2	54.6	7.8
Workers	Work in French	0.0	27.5	27.5	125.3	17.8
Employers	Branding	8.9	17.7	17.7	94.6	13.5
Collective	Social cohesion, cultural value	2.8	5.5	5.5	29.4	4.2
All stakeholders	Total benefits	13.9	61.9	61.9	303.9	43.3

Table 2: Monetized costs (in millions of dollars)

Stakeholders affected	Description of costs	2027	2029	2036	Total (present value)	Annualized value
FRPBs	Language training	50.3	50.3	2.6	125.2	17.8
	Passenger transportation	0.5	0.9	0.9	4.8	0.7
	Translation	11.8	9.5	7.2	55.7	7.9
	Signage	0.0	3.6	0.0	2.6	0.4
	Fostering of French	0.6	0.8	0.8	4.4	0.6
	Administration	0.2	0.5	0.4	1.9	0.3
Government	PCH, OCOL and CIRB	4.7	8.3	9.1	48.5	6.9
All stakeholders	Total costs	68.1	73.8	20.9	243.0	34.6

Table 3: Summary of monetized benefits and costs (in millions of dollars)

Impact	2027	2029	2036	Total (present value)	Annualized value
Total benefits	13.9	61.9	61.9	303.9	43.3
Total costs	68.1	73.8	20.9	243.0	34.6
Net impact	−54.2	−11.9	41.0	60.9	8.7

Positive impacts

• Clarification and stabilization of language rights in FRPBs, ensuring that French-speaking consumers and workers enjoy predictable access to French-language services and communications.
• Increased opportunities for workers to participate in recruitment processes, and to work and be supervised in French in FRPBs.
• Reinforcement of provincial framework for promoting French in Quebec.
• Complementarity with provincial, municipal and school language policies in RSFPs, helping to strengthen the use of French.
• Reduced uncertainty for employers thanks to clearly defined language obligations.

Negative impacts

• The new linguistic obligations could complicate the onboarding and adaptation of unilingual-English or non-French-speaking employees within FRPBs, potentially limiting their opportunities for career advancement.
• The net impact would be negative for the first two years of the regime, during which time the costs would be higher and the benefits for consumers, workers, employers and the community as a whole would not yet have materialized.

Distributional analysis

In keeping with the purpose of the UFPBA, which is to foster and protect the use of French in federally regulated private businesses in Quebec and RSFPs, the distributional analysis of the costs of the regulations reflects a differentiated approach based on regional linguistic realities.

In Quebec, where the vast majority of consumers (94%) and workers (95%) are already proficient in French, the measures set out in the regulations are intended mainly to consolidate existing gains. Here, existing practice is already largely consistent with the requirements on language of work and language of service to consumers, keeping the costs of reaching compliance to a marginal amount.

In RSFPs, the situation is different. Pursuant to the regulations, approximately 28% of the 2.1 million residents could exercise the right to service in French (potential demand in French) under section 7 of the UFPBA. These include some 65 000 unilingual Francophones for whom access to service in French is critical. However, only 39% of customer-facing employees in the subject businesses are currently able to meet that demand.

To bridge the gap, the majority of the investments — close to 60% of the estimated $125.2 million over 10 years in compliance costs — will go to language training, in keeping with employers’ duty to ensure that employees are able to exercise their language rights (section 9 of the UFPBA). These efforts will be concentrated mainly in New Brunswick and Ontario, where the need is greatest and which account for 95% of the potential demand for services in French across RSFPs. The distributional analysis therefore reflects an approach that is differentiated, tailored to regional linguistic realities, while ensuring gradual, targeted implementation of the obligations set out in the regulations.

Uncertainty/sensitivity analysis

The cost analysis is based on data from Statistics Canada’s 2021 Census of Population and the Employer’s Annual Hazardous Occurrence Report of the Labour Program (extracted in early 2024) and on various calculations and assumptions developed by PCH. While these data do allow for the identification of the various populations targeted by this exercise, they do not necessarily reflect the exact reality of each region or business at the present time.

Uncertainty/sensitivity analysis aims to assess the robustness of the cost-benefit analysis results in the face of uncertainties surrounding certain key assumptions. It is based on three complementary approaches: examination of combined scenarios (optimistic and pessimistic), univariate sensitivity analysis, and probabilistic (Monte Carlo) simulation. These methods allow us to measure the impact of parameter variations on results and to identify the most decisive variables.

The variables tested cover several dimensions: financial parameters, such as the discount rate (3%, 7%, and 10%) and the growth of FRPBs; behavioural assumptions, such as consumer willingness to pay and frequency of interactions; worker preferences, including willingness to accept; and operational parameters specific to passenger transportation, including unit costs per flight and levels of bilingualism.

The results show that the discount rate and consumers’ willingness to pay are the variables that have the greatest influence on the results. However, even in the pessimistic scenario, the benefits remain significant, confirming the overall robustness of the analysis. Lastly, mitigations are proposed, such as flexible implementation and the use of technology, in order to reduce the risks associated with uncertain assumptions.

Furthermore, the linguistic variables, while aligned with the parameters of the regulations, remain approximations in terms of assessing proficiency in French and the language training needs of employees and managers. As a result, even though the estimates for training costs are reasonable, those costs could vary depending on learning mode, available resources and organizational constraints.

In the case of translation costs, despite PCH’s efforts, it proved impossible to establish a precise baseline scenario. The analysis is therefore based on a hypothetical approach, which introduces significant uncertainty. Despite this, the assumptions are intended to reflect a realistic scenario, even though some fluctuations are expected in the actual application of the requirements.

Lastly, this analysis is intentionally conservative, overestimating the number of businesses subject to the regulations, particularly in Quebec, where more businesses may already be in compliance with the CFL regime by the time the new regime comes into force. This approach aims to ensure that estimates reflect a maximum-compliance scenario, thereby minimizing the risk of underestimation.

Small business lens

During the regulatory development process, PCH considered excluding small businesses, as defined by the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (fewer than 100 employees or annual gross revenues under $5 million), so as to spare them an excessive burden of compliance costs. That choice was validated during the regulatory consultations (see “Consultation” and “Rationale” sections). As a result, FRPBs with fewer than 100 employees in Canada will not be subject to the UFPBA regime in RSFPs.

In Quebec, of the 305 FRPBs with between 25 and 100 employees, 110 of them (36%) are already subject to the Quebec provincial regime (compared to 68% of medium and large FRPBs in Quebec). For the latter, the only cost associated with the regulations would be the written notice to the Minister that the FRPB in Quebec is withdrawing from the federal regime. For the 195 FRPBs in Quebec who do not have a certificat de francisation for the CFL, presumed subject to the federal regime for the purposes of this analysis, the regulatory analysis demonstrates that, given the specific demographic and linguistic composition of Quebec, very few of the businesses in that province are expected to incur significant language-training or translation costs (the two largest cost categories for industry). However, there is a recognition that some businesses may still be affected by these requirements.

In total, the discounted benefits for small businesses in Quebec over 10 years are estimated at $12.3 million, or an annualized value of $1.78 million. These benefits will help offset compliance costs and strengthen the organizational performance of small businesses. Discounted costs for small businesses in Quebec are estimated at $5.4 million over 10 years. Of this total, $4.8 million would be for language training and translation, and $0.6 million for administration and activities to foster French. These costs would be concentrated in a limited subset of businesses and are lower than what would have been incurred if small FRPBs in RSFPs had been included in the regime. Thus, small businesses would not be disproportionately affected by the proposed regulations. Factoring in the estimated costs of $4.8 million and the estimated benefits of $12.3 million, the net impact for small businesses is positive, with a net gain of $7.5 million over 10 years. This would represent an annualized value of $0.68 million, or about $17,959 per business over the period, or $2,776 per year.

Small business lens summary

• Number of small businesses potentially impacted: 305
• Number of years: 10 (2027 to 2036)
• Price year: 2024
• Present value base year: 2027
• Discount rate: 7%

Table 4: Benefits (in millions of dollars)

Administrative or compliance	Description of benefit	Present value	Annualized value
Administrative	Clarification of obligations, reduced uncertainty	0.2	0.03
Compliance	Improved image, HR attractiveness, linguistic inclusivity	4.5	0.7
	Reduced stress, improved comprehension, inclusivity	7.6	1.1
Total	Total benefits	12.3	1.8

Table 5: Costs (in millions of dollars)

Administrative or compliance	Description of cost	Present value	Annualized value
Administrative	Administrative costs	0.4	0.1
Compliance	Language training	1.1	0.2
	Translation	3.7	0.5
	Other compliance costs	0.2	0.03
Total	Total costs	5.4	0.8

Table 6: Net impacts

Amount	Present value	Annualized value
Net impact on all impacted small businesses	$6.9M	$0.98M
Average net impact on each impacted small business	$22,623	$3,279

One-for-one rule

According to the Policy on Limiting Regulatory Burden on Business, the one-for-one rule applies, as the new regulations would result in an increased administrative burden on FRPBs. The Red Tape Reduction Regulations stipulate that the calculation of administrative burden must include costs incurred during the first 10 years after a set of regulations comes into force. Therefore, the administrative burden associated with the new regulations includes projected costs for the 2027 to 2036 period.

This means that in calculating the administrative burden, only the costs associated with initial adaptation to the regulatory requirements and preparation of the annual disclosures and triennial reports between 2027 and 2036 are to be considered. The administrative requirements include the submission of consolidated disclosure forms and, for some businesses, the production of a triennial report on the activities of the committees for the fostering of French.

Under Element A of the one-for-one rule, it is estimated that the proposed regulations would result in an annualized increase in administrative burden of $86,567, or $128.06 per business, in constant 2012 dollars discounted to the base year 2012 using a 7% discount rate.

Table 7 below provides a summary of the regulatory burden on businesses.

Table 7: Regulatory burden on businesses

Administrative Requirement	Number of businesses	Time required (hrs./yr.)	Average salary (with charges)	Total annualized cost
Notice to Minister: withdrawal from federal regime (Quebec)	252	1	$31.04	$407
Familiarization with regime – small FRPBs (Quebec)	195	1	$52.64	$700
Familiarization with regime – medium-sized and large FRPBs (Quebec)	66	4	$52.64	$779
Familiarization with regime – Subject FRPBs (RSFPs)	168	5	$52.64	$1,880
Triennial report by committees for the fostering of French in Quebec (with certificate)	36	6	$52.64	$3,954
Generalization program (first year)	168	16	$52.64	$4,325
Providing information – Small FRPBs (Quebec)	214	1	$52.64	$5,102
Providing information – Medium-sized and large FRPBs (Quebec)	72	4	$52.64	$5,681
Provide information – Subject FRPBs in Quebec (head office)	72	4	$61.80	$6,189
Generalization program (ongoing)	179	4	$52.64	$7,185
Providing information – Subject FRPBs in RSFPs (head office)	179	4	$61.80	$11,474
Annual report of committees for the fostering of French in Quebec (without certificate)	36	18	$52.64	$11,863
Providing information – Subject FRPBs in RSFPs (per workplace)	179	5	$52.64	$12,365
Triennial report by committees for the fostering of French (RSFPs)	179	6	$52.64	$14,662

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

Quebec has a long history of regulating language of service to consumers and language of work in the private sector. The federal regime was inspired by the Quebec regime and is similar in many respects, though not identical. In terms of similarities, both statutes afford consumers the right to be served in French and workers the right to carry out their work and have access to work tools in French. In terms of the proposed regulations themselves, they would exempt certain businesses with an international or scientific-research focus, as the CFL does in Quebec. The proposed UFPBA regulations would provide a framework for, and lay out the terms of, these exemptions.

A major difference lies in the fact that the OCOL, the body that will be receiving complaints, is a body of the Parliament of Canada, independent of the Government of Canada, whereas in Quebec the OQLF reports to a government minister. However, the Minister of Canadian Heritage is responsible for the administration of the federal statute, just as Quebec’s Minister of the French Language plays an important role in the administration of the CFL regime.

The UFPBA allows the Minister of Canadian Heritage to enter into an agreement with the Government of Quebec to ensure better administrative harmonization in the exercise of the choice of regime by FRPBs in Quebec. Such an agreement would help flesh out the technical parameters facilitating administrative harmonization and cooperation between the two governments. However, the UFPBA and its regulations would still operate in the absence of such an agreement.

International obligations

In terms of international harmonization, with the coming into force of the UFPBA, Canada would join a small list of countries that have a language regime covering private sector services. In countries such as Belgium, Finland, Switzerland and Spain, some governments (at different levels of governance) encourage their private sectors to offer service in more than one language.

What is different about Canada’s UFPBA regime is that it would require subject businesses to provide service in French and respect important language-of-work rights (supervision, employment contracts, work tools).

International passenger transportation being outside of the scope of the proposed regulations, no international obligations will be affected.

Effects on the environment

Further to the Cabinet Directive on Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment, a preliminary review has concluded that no strategic environmental and economic assessment is required.

Gender-based analysis plus

Identification of issues

The following table shows the percentage of employees who know “at least French,” by federally regulated industry and by gender.

Table 8: Percentage of FRPB employees who know “at least French,” ^{footnote 18} by federally regulated industry and gender

Industry	Quebec				RSFPs
	Men		Women		Men		Women
	% tot. FRPB pop.	% know at least French	% tot. FRPB pop.	% know at least French	% tot. FRPB pop.	% know at least French	% tot. FRPB pop.	% know at least French
Feed, seed and grain	3.9%	85.8%	3.6%	85.5%	2.5%	35.5%	1.8%	30.9%
Banking	10.2%	96.4%	28.7%	98.0%	9.9%	44.9%	32.0%	45.7%
Atomic energy and ore / fossil fuels extraction	27.8%	94.7%	30.1%	95.0%	32.4%	41.5%	18.4%	42.1%
Postal services and pipelines	6.6%	90.1%	6.4%	93.5%	8.9%	36.1%	16.4%	40.6%
Telecommunications	9.3%	96.5%	9.4%	96.0%	6.0%	41.2%	9.0%	39.5%
Air transportation	5.8%	91.8%	6.5%	93.4%	5.5%	44.9%	8.3%	45.4%
Rail transportation	2.2%	92.5%	1.0%	89.7%	2.3%	39.3%	0.9%	44.1%
Water transportation	2.1%	96.5%	0.9%	88.9%	1.4%	38.5%	0.6%	28.6%
Road transportation	32.2%	93.5%	13.4%	95.1%	31.1%	34.9%	12.5%	34.7%
Total FRPB-relevant industries as a share of all industries	13.4%	(average) 92.6%	7.8%	(average) 92.8%	18.6%	(average) 39.6%	4.7%	(average) 39.1%

Gender

The proposed regulations reinforce the legislative measures in the UFPBA aimed at protecting the use of French within FRPBs in Quebec and in RSFPs. Gender (identity or expression) is not considered an identity factor influencing the beneficiaries of the proposed regulations (employees and consumers). However, an analysis of the gender composition of business sectors does yield some interesting findings. Depending on the perspective taken, particular attention could be paid to whether the target groups are men or women. For example, men make up a higher proportion of the FRPB workforce, both in Quebec and in RSFPs, and are concentrated in the transportation industries, particularly road, rail and water transportation. However, although women are less numerous in FRPBs, they have a slightly higher knowledge of French than men in certain industries where customer service figures prominently, particularly the banking sector, where they dominate. However, in RSFPs, this level of knowledge in other industries, such as telecommunications, is lower.

Indigenous identity

In RSFPs, the proportion of Canadians who identify as Indigenous is approximately double that in Quebec, approaching the national average. These populations could be disproportionately affected by the UFPBA regulations. However, knowledge of French among the overall populations of RSFPs is the same in percentage terms. But when we look at the statistics by Indigenous group, both in Quebec and in RSFPs, we see that Inuit have by far the least knowledge of French, compared with First Nations, Métis, and Indigenous peoples of other origins. Any effort in this area must therefore take this situation into account, though most FRPBs in Indigenous territories are expected to be excluded or exempted from the regulations.

Benefits for Francophone and Francophile populations

Unilingual Francophones

Both in Quebec and in RSFPs, the proposed regulations would benefit unilingual Francophone populations, who are, on average, older than the general population. They would operationalize the rights set out in the UFPBA to receive service in French in regions outside Quebec, where the decision to provide service in French is typically at the discretion of the business concerned. In addition, they would establish the right to work in French and would require businesses to supervise and provide work tools to Francophone employees in their language. This would also apply to immigrant populations who are proficient in French and a language other than French

Bilingual/multilingual Canadians

It goes without saying that the proposed regulations would have a positive impact on the employability of employees who are already bilingual (English–French), as their professional language proficiency would become an important asset for business leaders. Outside Quebec, proficiency in French is rarely a mandatory skill; at best, it is deemed an asset. Under the proposed regulations, French would become a full-fledged professional skill for the relevant positions.

Learning opportunities

The UFPBA and the proposed regulations would require employers to establish committees tasked with generalizing the use of French within the business. These initiatives represent opportunities for businesses and their employees to participate in French learning and development activities.

Impacts on populations speaking a language other than French and mitigation measures

The UFPBA and its regulations allow for the use of English or another language other than French if consumers wish to use that language and the FRPB is able to do so.

With respect to the language of work, the rights provided for Francophone employees do not preclude communications and documents (including individual employment contracts, arbitral awards and communications with trade unions) from also being provided in English or another language other than French, provided the use of French in any widely distributed communications is at least equivalent to the use of the language other than French.

Any adverse treatment of an employee solely on the basis of insufficient knowledge of French is also prohibited if the employee occupies their position at the time this provision comes into force.

FRPBs must consider the needs of employees who are close to retirement, have many years of service or have conditions that could impede the learning of French.

Lastly, the proposed regulations require FRPBs to ensure that, in the case of documents intended for consumers in Quebec that are available in English or another language other than French, the use of French is at least equivalent to the use of the other language.

From this point of view, therefore, the proposed regulations will have a neutral effect on the use of other languages.

During the consultations, PCH heard that small businesses might have difficulty ensuring that employees can exercise their right to work in French without making human resources adjustments. The proposed regulations would therefore fix the size of subject businesses at 25 or more employees in Quebec and 100 or more employees across Canada for RSFPs. These thresholds would ensure that the language-of-service and language-of-work obligations would apply only to businesses that are large enough to be able to organize and implement the obligations without prohibitive incremental costs. Our data show that the relevant FRPBs in Quebec and in RSFPs already have a certain number of bilingual employees. The list of RSFPs is based on the presence of Francophone populations, and the overall rates of knowledge of French in the relevant FRPBs are significant in the regions in which the regime would apply.

In both Quebec and RSFPs, a requirement for proficiency in a language other than French will not constitute adverse treatment if the employer can objectively justify that requirement after having examined the situation. In Quebec, an employer will also need to set out the reasons that justify such a requirement in any advertisement to fill the position in question. The use of English is expected to remain common, as needed, as is currently the case in businesses subject to the CFL. However, the UFPBA could have a negative impact in certain individual cases. For example, employees who speak a language other than French at the time the UFPBA comes into force could be expected to supervise Francophone employees. In some individual situations, learning French may not be feasible due to various factors (disability, learning difficulties, age, etc.).

The UFPBA already takes these possibilities into account, stipulating that existing employees may not be treated adversely for the sole reason that they do not have sufficient knowledge of French. That is, they may not be dismissed, laid off, demoted, transferred, suspended, harassed or subjected to reprisals, disciplinary action or any other penalty. In addition, the UFPBA provides that when a business takes measures to generalize French, it must consider the needs of employees who are close to retirement, have many years of service or have conditions that could impede the learning of French. The term “conditions that could impede the learning of French” is defined in the draft regulatory text.

Our analysis reveals that, except in a few isolated cases, the proposed regulations should not have a disproportionate negative impact on employees who are not proficient in French for the obvious reason that Francophone populations outside Quebec are only a minority. By and large, outside Quebec, it is expected that the language of businesses’ commercial operations will remain largely unchanged and that demand for services will also remain largely unchanged. Thus, the vast majority of unilingual English positions should not be affected. In addition, the proposed regulations would provide for certain exemptions (see the sections on exemptions and modern treaties) that would further mitigate potential adverse effects.

Rationale

Criteria for inclusion in the list of RSFPs

The UFPBA applies to the entire province of Quebec, subject to the applicable exclusions and exemptions. However, the RSFPs elsewhere in Canada where the Act will apply need to be defined by regulation. In line with what some stakeholders suggested during the various consultation activities, our proposed list of RSFPs is based on demographic criteria that seek to ensure a viable regime by capturing regions that are home to a critical mass of Francophones. The success of the regime will depend on strong potential demand for service in French and the capacity of the private sector workforce to meet that demand. For potential demand to be strong, it must be geographically concentrated. Therefore, the list was based on the 2021 Census data.

Most of the stakeholders consulted stressed the importance of adopting a quantitative approach that reflected community vitality while incorporating certain qualitative criteria, without one being at the expense of the other. With this in mind, the proposed regulations would designate, as an RSFP,

• the entire province of New Brunswick, given that potential demand for service in French across that province (33.5%) is much higher than in other provinces and represents 18% of national demand in French outside Quebec according to Statistics Canada’s 2021 estimates of potential demand for French-language services in Canada outside Quebec; the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms recognizes English and French as the official languages of New Brunswick and both linguistic communities as having equality of status; and the UFPBA has been, as its purpose, fostering the use of French and recognizes the remedial nature of language rights and the diversity of the provincial and territorial language regimes;
• any census division outside Quebec and New Brunswick with potential demand of 20% or more, according to Statistics Canada’s 2021 estimates of potential demand for French-language services; and
• any census tract (CT) with a minimum population of 1 000 inhabitants and potential demand for French-language services of 10% or more, located in a census metropolitan area (CMA) with more than 30 000 people who may request communications or services in French.

This method of estimating potential demand is also used in applying the regulations under Part IV (Communications with and Services to the Public) of the OLA, with different thresholds. The combination of these three criteria covers approximately 48% of potential demand outside Quebec, while ensuring a critical mass of demand for French in the areas covered by the regime.

Our in-depth demographic analysis demonstrates that with these proposed criteria, the identified CTs would boast a sufficient labour pool to support French-language workplaces. The criteria used would exclude other metropolitan areas, such as Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary, where the Francophone population is too dispersed within the CMA.

Employee thresholds in the definition of “FRPB”

The proposed regulations would provide that in RSFPs, the federal regime would apply only to businesses with at least 100 employees across Canada. The threshold is necessary to avoid placing an undue burden on small businesses. This need was clearly highlighted during consultations with representatives of these businesses. This approach mitigates the concerns — expressed during the consultations — about UFPBA compliance costs in a context of labour shortages and rising costs.

In Quebec, the threshold would be set at 25 employees to reflect the fact that Quebec’s CFL requires businesses with 25 or more employees to initiate a francization process and register with the OQLF. This takes into account the comments of some spokespersons for language promotion organizations, who stressed the importance of proper coordination between the federal and provincial governments to avoid confusion for businesses when implementing the UFPBA. Businesses with 0 to 24 employees are excluded from the federal regime.

Exemptions

The exemptions for businesses belonging to Indigenous governments are justified in that they preclude any conflict between the regime and modern treaties as well as the rights of Indigenous Peoples.

This exemption aligns the federal regime with Quebec’s CFL regime, as recommended by a majority of stakeholders consulted. The same is true of the exemption for businesses operating on “Indian reserves” and Category I and I-N lands under the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement and the Northeastern Quebec Agreement, or any other territory with equivalent legal status further to the adoption of a modern treaty or other equivalent legal instrument.

The proposed regulations would also contain a series of exemptions for businesses whose activities are exclusively related to the conduct of international business, are governed by protocols or international standards that require the use of a language other than French, or are related to the production or distribution of cultural content in a language other than French. These exemptions are justified by the nature of the business activities in question and are designed to avoid imposing an undue burden on such businesses. Similar exemptions are found in Quebec’s CFL regime. In the area of interprovincial and international transportation, the proposed regulations would clarify that means of transportation are not considered workplaces. With regard to consumer services, international passenger transportation would be excluded. This is to avoid an overly complex interpretation of language obligations in respect of employees working on board or operating interprovincial or international conveyances, given that the regime would not apply uniformly across Canada. This addresses the expectations expressed by most of the businesses consulted, including those operating in the transportation sector.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

Key to the successful implementation of the UFPBA and its regulations are the complementary roles played by the Minister of Canadian Heritage and the Commissioner of Official Languages for Canada. While Canadian Heritage assists businesses in understanding and adapting to the regulatory framework, the Commissioner enforces the language rights guaranteed by the UFPBA and its regulations through the Commissioner’s powers of intervention. Each player will have to put in place the necessary mechanisms to effectively carry out their respective responsibilities.

Role of the Minister of Canadian Heritage

The Minister of Canadian Heritage plays a central role in implementing, interpreting, promoting and raising awareness about the UFPBA and its regulations. The Minister is also responsible for administrative management of the mandatory declarations/statements from FRPBs operating in Quebec, which includes receiving and confirming receipt of such declarations/statements, and updating information. PCH will introduce targeted measures to support FRPBs in adapting to the new framework, including

• disseminating resources, communication tools and information materials;
• providing interpretation and advice concerning the operation of the regulatory provisions;
• organizing outreach activities tailored to the needs of businesses;
• receiving and processing FRPB declarations/statements, including issuing certificates of registration, as well as certificates of generalization of the use of French within the business and any revocation thereof; and
• compiling and updating, on an annual basis, the list of FRPBs that have submitted their initial declaration or annual statement and exercising the Minister’s authority to provide that list to the Commissioner and Quebec’s Minister of the French Language.

As the main point of contact for FRPBs in matters of regulatory interpretation, PCH will play a supporting and guidance role. This role also includes an administrative component, consisting of managing information on subject businesses and sharing the information contemplated in the regulations with the Commissioner and Quebec’s Minister of the French Language.

The Minister would receive, from the FRPB committees for the fostering of French, a copy of the language-situation overview, which includes a description of their programs intended to generalize the use of French, which must be sent to the Minister within three months of being prepared and every three years thereafter. The Minister would issue a certificate if the Minister believes that the programs generalize the use of French through the means referred to in subsection 10(1.1) of the UFPBA. If the Minister believes that they do not, they would provide the committee with feedback, which would need to be included in the committee’s first annual report that follows, as well as the reasons for refusing to issue the certificate.

In such a scenario, the committee would update its programs and submit a new document within one year.

The Minister would also be permitted to publish, on a Government of Canada website, a list of businesses whose committee for the fostering of French holds a certificate of generalization of the use of French.

The Minister will also report annually to Parliament on the measures implemented and the progress made, in keeping with the legislative requirement to submit an annual report to Parliament on the matters relating to official languages for which the Minister is responsible. These annual reports may include aggregated data from the declarations/statements received in order to document the presence and evolution of federally regulated businesses operating in Quebec.

Over the longer term, PCH will analyze issues of interpretation and operation that arise over time in order to tailor its support and assistance to the needs of businesses and provide input into the regulatory review slated for 10 years after the regulations come into force, recommending adjustments where necessary. This analysis will also be based on data collected through mandatory FRPB declarations/statements and the sharing of information with the Commissioner and the Government of Quebec.

Role of the Commissioner of Official Languages for Canada

The Commissioner will be responsible for enforcing the UFPBA in Quebec as soon as the statute comes into force in that province, and then in RSFPs two years later. The handling of complaints will be a key component of the Commissioner’s mandate under the UFPBA. The Minister of Canadian Heritage would have the regulatory authority to provide the Commissioner with a list of businesses that are duly registered under the federal regime. Thanks to that list, the Commissioner will have complete and up-to-date information on subject businesses, allowing the Commissioner to better target interventions, as well as enforcement and oversight activities. The Commissioner will be able to

• receive and process language-of-work complaints from employees;
• receive and process language-of-communication and language-of-service complaints from the public; and
• investigate, on the Commissioner’s own initiative, any matter relating to communications with and services to consumers that raises the possibility of non-compliance with the UFPBA (this is not the case for language-of-work matters, where an employee complaint is required).

Thus, depending on the context, admissible complaints or matters in which the Commissioner elects to intervene may give rise to an investigation, and that investigation may or may not yield recommendations. The handling of a complaint will involve several steps on the part of OCOL’s employees, including

• determining whether the complaint is admissible (confirmation of jurisdiction, nature of alleged events and alleged breach of UFPBA);
• conducting an investigation to gather the relevant information from the business and the complainant;
• assessing the merits of the complaint on the basis of the requirements in the UFPBA and its regulations;
• recommending corrective action to the business in question, where appropriate;
• following up with the business to confirm that the recommended corrective action has been taken; and
• examining, in certain cases, specific breaches of the UFPBA, including in relation to the committees for the fostering of French or an exemption invoked by a business.

Note that some of the Commissioner’s new powers under the Official Languages Act, including those relating to compliance agreements and orders, will not apply under the UFPBA in Quebec until the relevant order-in-council is issued by the Governor in Council.

The Commissioner may also conduct, at the Commissioner’s discretion, promotional and awareness activities to improve compliance with the UFPBA. However, with regard to language of work, such activities will be limited to situations where a complaint has been made.

Lastly, in order to be able to carry out these new responsibilities, the Commissioner will also have to make changes to the Commissioner’s Office. These will include

• creating or adapting a digital system to register subject businesses and effectively manage complaints;
• training investigators to deal with UFPBA complaints;
• redesigning the Office’s website to reflect the Commissioner’s new responsibilities;
• producing information materials for businesses and the public; and
• preparing to respond to any court challenges to the Commissioner’s decisions.

Canada Industrial Relations Board (CIRB)

The UFPBA regulations will not include provisions dealing with the role of the CIRB, which is subject to a separate enabling authority that is not being exercised in this regulatory framework. However, the UFPBA does recognize the mutually complementary roles of the two entities, providing that the Commissioner may, under certain conditions, refer to the CIRB, language-of-work complaints that call for specific expertise or in-depth intervention. The role played by the CIRB, which has targeted expertise, is therefore complementary to that of the Commissioner.

Contact

Richard Léger
Director
Official Languages Regulations Directorate
Official Languages Branch
Department of Canadian Heritage
200 Sacré-Cœur Boulevard
Gatineau, Quebec
J8X 4C6
Email: ReglementsLO-OLRegulations@pch.gc.ca
Telephone: 873‑455‑2685

PROPOSED REGULATORY TEXT

Notice is given, under subsection 36(1) of the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act ^{footnote a}, that the Governor in Council proposes to make the annexed Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Regulations under subsection 33(1) of that Act.

Interested persons may make representations concerning the proposed Regulations within the first 30 days on which both Houses of Parliament are sitting after the date of publication of this notice. They are strongly encouraged to use the online commenting feature that is available on the Canada Gazette website. However, if they use email, mail or any other means, the representations should cite the Canada Gazette, Part I, and the date of publication of this notice, and be sent to Richard Léger, Director, Official Languages Regulations Directorate, Official Languages Branch, Department of Canadian Heritage, 200 Sacré-CÅ“ur Boulevard, Gatineau, Quebec J8X 4C6 (email: ReglementsLO-OLRegulations@pch.gc.ca).

Please note that as part of the publication process, all representations, including attachments, will be published on the Canada Gazette website, subject to its terms of use relating to the provision of comments.

Ottawa, June 17, 2026

Janna Rinaldi
Assistant Clerk of the Privy Council

Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Regulations

Interpretation

Definitions

1 (1) The following definitions apply in these Regulations.

Act

means the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act. (Loi)

committee for the fostering of French

means a committee established under paragraph 10(1)(c) of the Act. (comité de promotion du français)

Indigenous peoples

has the meaning assigned by the definition aboriginal peoples of Canada in subsection 35(2) of the Constitution Act, 1982. (peuples autochtones)

modern treaty

means a treaty, as referred to in section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, that is entered into by His Majesty in right of Canada and an Indigenous people and that comes into force after 1974, as amended from time to time in accordance with its provisions. (traité moderne)

Definitions — Act and Regulations

(2) The following definitions apply in sections 5 to 13 of the Act and in these Regulations.

communications

in relation to consumers, includes

• (a) communications related to services;
• (b) all documents that are intended for consumers, in paper, electronic or any other form, including
  • (i) brochures,
  • (ii) leaflets,
  • (iii) purchase orders,
  • (iv) catalogues,
  • (v) contracts,
  • (vi) invoices,
  • (vii) receipts, and
  • (viii) acquittances. (communications)

employee

has the same meaning as in section 33.1 of the Official Languages Act. (employé)

region with a strong francophone presence

means any of the regions set out in the schedule. (région à forte présence francophone)

services,

in respect of consumers, includes the transport of passengers by aircraft, as defined in subsection 3(1) of the Aeronautics Act, train, coach, bus or ship, including by ferry,

• (a) within Quebec;
• (b) between a location in Quebec and a location elsewhere in Canada;
• (c) within a region with a strong francophone presence; and
• (d) between a location in a region with a strong francophone presence and a location elsewhere in Canada. (services)

workplace

does not include a means of transportation. (lieu de travail)

Definitions — subsection 10(2) of Act

(3) The following definitions apply in subsection 10(2) of the Act.

conditions that could impede the learning of French

means any long-term or recurring physical, mental or learning impairments that could, despite accommodation, impede the learning of French. (condition qui pourrait nuire à l’apprentissage du français)

many years of service

means at least 20 years of employment with the same employer. (grand nombre d’années de service)

Mergers and acquisitions

2 For the purposes of these Regulations, a person that is not an individual is deemed to have employed

• (a) if the person acquired or merged with other entities after January 1 of the previous year, the employees who were employed by those entities on that date; and
• (b) if the person resulted from a merger of entities that took place after January 1 of the previous year, the employees who were employed by those entities on that date.

Exclusion — federally regulated private business

3 For the purposes of paragraph (a) of the definition federally regulated private business in subsection 2(1) of the Act, the number of employees is 25 employees who occupied or were assigned to positions in workplaces in Quebec on January 1 of the previous year.

PART 1

Quebec

Notice — subsection 6(2) of Act

4 (1) A notice given under subsection 6(2) of the Act must be given to the Minister in writing.

Deemed notice

(2) If the Minister enters into an agreement under subsection 6(3) of the Act, any federally regulated private business registered under section 139 of the Charter of the French language, CQLR, c. C-11, is deemed to have given notice that they became subject to that Charter on the day of their registration.

Predominance of French

5 A federally regulated private business that carries on business in Quebec must ensure that French is markedly predominant on any signs, posters and advertising that it uses to communicate with consumers in Quebec that are in French and another language.

Clear indication

6 A federally regulated private business that carries on business in Quebec must clearly indicate to consumers in Quebec, in all methods that it uses to provide services or communicate, that they may communicate with and obtain services from the business in French.

Document availability

7 A federally regulated private business that carries on business in Quebec must ensure that the use of French in any documents that are intended for consumers in Quebec, if they are available in English or another language other than French, be at least equivalent to the use of the language other than French.

Exemption — fewer than 100 employees in Quebec

8 A federally regulated private business that has workplaces in Quebec is exempt from the application of paragraph 10(1)(c) of the Act, in relation to those workplaces, if, on January 1 of the previous year, it employed fewer than 100 employees who occupied or were assigned to positions in workplaces in Quebec.

Requirement to provide information

9 (1) A federally regulated private business that carries on business or has workplaces in Quebec must, within six months after the day on which it becomes subject to this subsection, provide the Minister with a declaration that sets out the following information:

• (a) the number of its employees who occupied or were assigned to positions in workplaces in Quebec on January 1 of the previous year; and
• (b) the number of workplaces that it had in Quebec on January 1 of the previous year.

Annual statement

(2) The federally regulated private business must, starting in the year after the year in which it is required to provide the declaration referred to in subsection (1), provide the Minister with an annual statement confirming that it carries on such business or has such workplaces, as the case may be.

Certificate of registration

(3) On receipt of a declaration provided under subsection (1) or an annual statement provided under subsection (2), the Minister must provide a certificate of registration to the federally regulated private business.

List

(4) The Minister may provide the Commissioner and the Minister of the French Language of Quebec with a list of the federally regulated private businesses that, during the preceding one-year period, have provided a declaration under subsection (1) or an annual statement under subsection (2) but have not since chosen to be subject to the Charter of the French language, CQLR, c. C-11.

Committee for the fostering of French

10 (1) A federally regulated private business that has workplaces in Quebec and is required to establish a committee for the fostering of French must do so within six months after the day on which that requirement becomes applicable to it.

Equal representation

(2) The committee must be composed of an equal number of members representing the employer and employees — chosen by the employer and the employees, respectively — with at least two members representing the employer and two members representing the employees.

Meeting twice every year

(3) The committee must meet at least twice every calendar year.

Overview of language situation

11 (1) A committee for the fostering of French established by a federally regulated private business that has workplaces in Quebec must, within six months after the day on which it is established and every three years after that, prepare an overview of the language situation at all levels of the business in those workplaces that includes a description of the programs intended to generalize the use of French developed under subsection 10(1.1) of the Act.

Copy to Minister

(2) The committee must provide the Minister with a copy of the overview of the language situation within three months after the day on which it is prepared.

Certificate of generalization of use of French

(3) If the programs referred to in subsection (1) generalize the use of French through the means referred to in subsection 10(1.1) of the Act, the Minister must issue a certificate of generalization of the use of French to the federally regulated private business that established the committee. If the Minister refuses to issue a certificate, they must provide the business with a notice setting out the reasons for the refusal and feedback on the programs.

Update

(4) If the Minister refuses to issue a certificate of generalization of the use of French, the committee must, within a year after the date of the notice referred to under subsection (3) and every year after that, update its programs referred to in subsection (1) and provide the Minister with a document describing those programs.

Suspension of certificate

12 (1) The Minister may suspend a certificate of generalization of the use of French of a federally regulated private business if the programs developed under subsection 10(1.1) of the Act by the committee for the fostering of French established by the business no longer generalize the use of French through the means referred to in that subsection.

Reasons and opportunity to make representations

(2) The Minister must provide the federally regulated private business with a written notice that sets out the reasons for the suspension and give the committee an opportunity to make written representations in respect of the suspension.

Reinstatement of certificate

(3) The Minister must reinstate the suspended certificate if the situation that gave rise to the suspension has been corrected or if the reasons for the suspension were unfounded.

Revocation of certificate

13 (1) The Minister may revoke a certificate of generalization of the use of French if the certificate has been suspended for a period of three months or more.

Action plan

(2) Within three months after the day on which the certificate is revoked, the committee for the fostering of French must provide to the Minister an action plan aiming to ensure that the programs developed under subsection 10(1.1) of the Act generalize the use of French through the means referred to in that subsection.

Update of the programs

(3) Within the year after the date of the revocation and every year after that, the committee must update its programs developed under subsection 10(1.1) of the Act and provide the Minister with a document describing those programs.

Triennial report

14 (1) A committee for the fostering of French established by a federally regulated private business that has workplaces in Quebec and that holds a certificate of generalization of the use of French must prepare, at least once every three years, a report on the measures it has taken in respect of those workplaces to carry out its mandate.

Annual report

(2) If the federally regulated private business that has workplaces in Quebec does not hold a certificate of generalization of the use of French, the committee must prepare a report at least once a year.

Inclusion of overview and feedback

(3) The first report prepared after the preparation of an overview of the language situation under subsection 11(1) must include a copy of the overview and, if any, the Minister’s feedback.

Duty to retain reports and provide copies

(4) The federally regulated private business must retain each report for at least 12 years and provide a copy to any of its employees who request it.

PART 2

Regions with a Strong Francophone Presence

Clear indication

15 A federally regulated private business that carries on business in a region with a strong francophone presence must clearly indicate to consumers in that region, in all methods used by the business to provide services or communicate, that they may communicate with and obtain services from the business in French.

Document availability

16 A federally regulated private business that carries on business in a region with a strong francophone presence must ensure that the use of French in any documents that are intended for consumers in that region, if they are available in English or another language other than French, be at least equivalent to the use of the language other than French.

Exemption — fewer than 100 or 500 employees

17 A federally regulated private business that has workplaces in one or more regions with a strong francophone presence is exempt from the application of paragraph 10(1)(c) of the Act, in relation to those workplaces, if, on January 1 of the previous year, either of the following conditions was met:

• (a) it employed, throughout all regions with a strong francophone presence, fewer than 100 employees who occupied or were assigned to positions in workplaces in regions with a strong francophone presence; or
• (b) it employed fewer than 500 employees who occupied or were assigned to positions in workplaces in Canada.

Requirement to provide information

18 (1) A federally regulated private business that carries on business or has workplaces in one or more regions with a strong francophone presence must, within six months after the day on which it becomes subject to this subsection, provide the Minister with a declaration that sets out the following information:

• (a) the number of its employees who occupied or were assigned to positions in workplaces in regions with a strong francophone presence on January 1 of the previous year; and
• (b) the number of workplaces that it had in regions with a strong francophone presence on January 1 of the previous year and, except in the case of New Brunswick, the addresses of those workplaces.

Annual statement

(2) The federally regulated private business that carries on business or has workplaces in one or more regions with a strong francophone presence must, starting in the year after the year in which it is required to provide the declaration referred to in subsection (1), provide the Minister with an annual statement confirming that it carries on such business or has such workplaces, as the case may be.

Certificate of registration

(3) On receipt of a declaration provided under subsection (1) or an annual statement provided under subsection (2), the Minister must provide a certificate of registration to the federally regulated private business.

List

(4) The Minister may provide the Commissioner with a list of the federally regulated private businesses that, during the preceding one-year period, have provided a declaration under subsection (1) or an annual statement under subsection (2).

Points of service

19 (1) A federally regulated private business that carries on business in one or more regions with a strong francophone presence, other than New Brunswick, must, within six months after the day on which it becomes subject to this subsection, provide the Minister with a declaration that sets out the following information:

• (a) the addresses of its locations in those regions to which consumers have access and at which it provides services to consumers;
• (b) the addresses of its websites and the names that it uses on social media platforms to the extent that those websites and social media platforms are accessible to consumers in those regions; and
• (c) the telephone numbers that can be used by consumers in those regions to contact the business in French.

Annual statement

(2) A federally regulated private business that carries on business in one or more regions with a strong francophone presence must, starting in the year after the year in which it is required to provide the declaration referred to in subsection (1), provide the Minister with an annual statement confirming or updating the information referred to in that subsection.

Passenger transportation

(3) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(a), a federally regulated private business that transports passengers is not required to provide the addresses of the locations at which boarding and disembarking are the only services provided to consumers.

Committee for the fostering of French

20 (1) A federally regulated private business that has workplaces in a region with a strong francophone presence and is required to establish a committee for the fostering of French must do so within six months after the day on which that requirement becomes applicable to it.

Equal representation

(2) The committee must be composed of an equal number of members representing the employer and employees — chosen by the employer and the employees, respectively — with at least two members representing the employer and two members representing the employees.

Meeting twice every year

(3) The committee must meet at least twice every calendar year.

Triennial report

21 (1) A committee for the fostering of French established by a federally regulated private business that has workplaces in a region with a strong francophone presence must prepare, at least once every three years, a report on the measures it has taken in respect of those workplaces to carry out its mandate.

Duty to retain reports and provide copies

(2) The federally regulated private business must retain each report for at least 12 years and provide a copy to any of its employees who request it.

Committee established under the provincial Act

22 A francization committee established under the Charter of the French language, CQLR, c. C-11, by a federally regulated private business with workplaces in Quebec may serve as the committee for the fostering of French with respect to that business’s workplaces in regions with a strong francophone presence.

PART 3

Other Exemptions

Indigenous territory

23 (1) A federally regulated private business is exempt from the application of the Act and these Regulations in relation to activities it carries out in an Indigenous territory and in relation to its workplaces in an Indigenous territory.

Definition of Indigenous territory

(2) In this section, Indigenous territory means

• (a) a reserve, as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Indian Act, or any lands that are to become a reserve under a treaty land entitlement settlement agreement; and
• (b) any settlement areas or settlement lands — including Category I or Category I-N lands within the meaning of the Act respecting the land regime in the James Bay and New Québec territories, CQLR, c. R-13.1 — that are referred to in a modern treaty.

Indigenous control

24 A federally regulated private business that is not an individual is exempt from the application of sections 9 to 11 of the Act if it is controlled by a council, government, corporation or other entity referred to in paragraph (d) of the definition federally regulated private business in subsection 2(1) of the Act.

Indigenous business

25 A federally regulated private business is exempt from the application of sections 9 to 11 of the Act if it is registered as a First Nations, Inuit or Métis business by an Indigenous organization that is recognized under a modern treaty.

Cultural property

26 A federally regulated private business is exempt from the application of sections 7 to 11 of the Act and section 5 of these Regulations in relation to activities that are directly related to the production or distribution of cultural property with linguistic content that is exclusively in a language other than French.

International business

27 A federally regulated private business is exempt from the application of sections 9 to 11 of the Act if its activities are exclusively related to the conduct of international business and the use of a language other than French is predominant in the conduct of that international business.

Research protocols and international standards

28 A federally regulated private business is exempt from the application of sections 9 to 11 of the Act, in relation to a workplace, if

• (a) the activities carried out at the workplace are governed exclusively or primarily by research protocols or international standards; and
• (b) compliance with those protocols or standards requires that the activities be carried out, in some circumstances, in a language other than French.

Condition — duty to inform Minister

29 An exemption under any of sections 26 to 28 applies only if the federally regulated private business informs the Minister in writing of its intention to rely on the exemption and confirms that intention with the Minister in writing every five years after that.

PART 4

General Provisions

Publication

30 (1) The Minister may publish on a Government of Canada website

• (a) a list of the federally regulated private businesses that hold a certificate of registration; and
• (b) a list of the federally regulated private businesses that have the committee for the fostering of French that hold a certificate of generalization of the use of French.

Personal information

(2) Subsection (1) does not authorize the Minister to publish personal information as defined in section 3 of the Privacy Act.

Review of Regulations

31 (1) The Minister must ensure that a review of the provisions and operation of these Regulations is undertaken in conjunction with each review that is undertaken under subsection 42(1) of the Act.

Report

(2) The Minister must include a report of the review of these Regulations in the report referred to in subsection 42(2) of the Act.

PART 5

Amendments to These Regulations and Coming into Force

Amendments to These Regulations

32 Subparagraph (b)(viii) of the definition communications in subsection 1(2) of the English version of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

• (viii) discharges and acquittances.

33 Section 3 of these Regulations is replaced by the following:

Exclusion — federally regulated private business

3 For the purposes of paragraph (a) of the definition federally regulated private business in subsection 2(1) of the Act,

• (a) as it applies in respect of Quebec, the number of employees is 25 employees who occupied or were assigned to positions in workplaces in Quebec on January 1 of the previous year; and
• (b) as it applies in respect of a region with a strong francophone presence, the number of employees is 100 employees who occupied or were assigned to positions in workplaces in Canada on January 1 of the previous year.

Coming into Force

S.C. 2023, c. 15, s. 54

34 (1) Subject to subsection (2), these Regulations come into force on the day on which section 33 of the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act comes into force, but if they are registered after that day, they come into force on the day on which they are registered.

S.C. 2023, c. 15

(2) The definition region with a strong francophone presence and paragraphs (c) and (d) of the definition services in subsection 1(2) and sections 15 to 22, 32 and 33 come into force on the day on which subsection 62(1) of An Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada’s Official Languages comes into force.

SCHEDULE

(Subsection 1(2))

Regions with a Strong Francophone Presence

Ontario

• 1 Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry (census division 3501)
• 2 Prescott and Russell (census division 3502)
• 3 Ottawa (census division 3506)
• 4 Nipissing (census division 3548)
• 5 Sudbury (census division 3552)
• 6 Greater Sudbury (census division 3553)
• 7 Timiskaming (census division 3554)
• 8 Cochrane (census division 3556)

Nova Scotia

• 9 Yarmouth (census division 1202)
• 10 Digby (census division 1203)
• 11 Richmond (census division 1216)

New Brunswick

• 12 New Brunswick

Manitoba

• 13 The region consisting of the following census tracts in the Winnipeg Census Metropolitan Area, as they existed for the 2021 Census of Population:
  • (a) 6020100.01
  • (b) 6020100.02
  • (c) 6020100.09
  • (d) 6020100.10
  • (e) 6020102.02
  • (f) 6020104.00
  • (g) 6020105.00
  • (h) 6020110.02
  • (i) 6020110.04
  • (j) 6020111.00
  • (k) 6020112.01
  • (l) 6020112.02
  • (m) 6020113.00
  • (n) 6020114.00
  • (o) 6020115.00
  • (p) 6020116.00
  • (q) 6020117.00
  • (r) 6020500.02
  • (s) 6020595.01
  • (t) 6020595.02
  • (u) 6020600.00

Alberta

• 14 Census tract 8350020.00 in the Edmonton Census Metropolitan Area, as that tract existed for the 2021 Census of Population

Terms of use and Privacy notice

Terms of use

It is your responsibility to ensure that the comments you provide do not:

• contain personal information
• contain protected or classified information of the Government of Canada
• express or incite discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, sexual orientation or against any other group protected under the Canadian Human Rights Act or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
• contain hateful, defamatory, or obscene language
• contain threatening, violent, intimidating or harassing language
• contain language contrary to any federal, provincial or territorial laws of Canada
• constitute impersonation, advertising or spam
• encourage or incite any criminal activity
• contain external links
• contain a language other than English or French
• otherwise violate this notice

The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to review and remove personal information, hate speech, or other information deemed inappropriate for public posting as listed above.

Confidential Business Information should only be posted in the specific Confidential Business Information text box. In general, Confidential Business Information includes information that (i) is not publicly available, (ii) is treated in a confidential manner by the person to whose business the information relates, and (iii) has actual or potential economic value to the person or their competitors because it is not publicly available and whose disclosure would result in financial loss to the person or a material gain to their competitors. Comments that you provide in the Confidential Business Information section that satisfy this description will not be made publicly available. The federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change retains the right to post the comment publicly if it is not deemed to be Confidential Business Information.

Your comments will be posted on the Canada Gazette website for public review. However, you have the right to submit your comments anonymously. If you choose to remain anonymous, your comments will be made public and attributed to an anonymous individual. No other information about you will be made publicly available.

Comments will remain posted on the Canada Gazette website for at least 10 years.

Please note that communication by email is not secure, if the attachment you wish to send contains sensitive information, please contact the departmental email to discuss ways in which you can transmit sensitive information.

Privacy notice

The information you provide is collected under the authority of the Financial Administration Act, the Department of Public Works and Government Services Act, the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement Implementation Act,and applicable regulators’ enabling statutes for the purpose of collecting comments related to the proposed regulatory changes. Your comments and documents are collected for the purpose of increasing transparency in the regulatory process and making Government more accessible to Canadians.

Personal information submitted is collected, used, disclosed, retained, and protected from unauthorized persons and/or agencies pursuant to the provisions of the Privacy Act and the Privacy Regulations. Individual names that are submitted will not be posted online but will be kept for contact if needed. The names of organizations that submit comments will be posted online.

Submitted information, including personal information, will be accessible to Public Services and Procurement Canada, who is responsible for the Canada Gazette webpage, and the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right of access to and correction of your personal information. To seek access or correction of your personal information, contact the Access to Information and Privacy (ATIP) Office of the federal institution managing the proposed regulatory change.

You have the right to file a complaint to the Privacy Commission of Canada regarding any federal institution’s handling of your personal information.

The personal information provided is included in Personal Information Bank PSU 938 Outreach Activities. Individuals requesting access to their personal information under the Privacy Act should submit their request to the appropriate regulator with sufficient information for that federal institution to retrieve their personal information. For individuals who choose to submit comments anonymously, requests for their information may not be reasonably retrievable by the government institution.