One thing has been removed, and I never thought I would hear myself say that the matter should be reconsidered. However, I see that, under the system put in place in the public service in 2003, a good balance should be struck between unilingual and bilingual positions in order to give people the time to acquire the second language. To achieve that, the level of imperative bilingual positions staffed in the public service should be reviewed.
Mr. Chong, you mentioned that candidates should, in principle, be bilingual in order to enter the EX category, and that that made sense. I don't disagree with you, but the fact remains that bilingualism is required at much lower levels. From the moment there is direct interaction with the public in designated bilingual regions, candidates must meet the linguistic requirements in both languages. Couldn't we strike a better balance between bilingual and unilingual positions in order to enable people to acquire the second official language?
Coming from us, who represent the employees of the federal public service, this initiative would be interpreted as a good will gesture. That would open a door. However, it should be accompanied by a training program and funding. I repeat what I said earlier: responsibility is shared between employee and government, but it is there for both.