Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue 3 - Evidence - Meeting of March 10, 2008
OTTAWA, Monday, March 10, 2008
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met today at 4:03 p.m. in order to study, and to report from time to time, on the application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it, within those institutions subject to the act.
Senator Maria Chaput (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: I will now call this meeting to order. We have a very special opportunity before us today because the Senate Standing Committee on Official Languages has begun a study of francophone culture in Canada and today it will be hearing from representatives from Western Canada, from the North, as well as from the Northwest Territories.
I would like to remind those who are listening to us today that arts and culture are the main development priorities of francophone and Acadian communities throughout the country. The committee undertook this study for the purpose of gaining a better understanding of the issues that minority francophone communities are dealing with and of their role in cultural diversity.
Protecting francophone culture in Canada also entails a better definition of the links that exist between Quebec and minority francophone communities.
Allow me to introduce the witnesses that we have invited to this afternoon's round-table. By video conference, we have Mr. Jean Johnson, Chair of the Board of the Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta, and Mr. Stéphane Rémillard, Director General of the Conseil culturel fransaskois. With us in person, here in Ottawa, we have Ms. Johanne Dumas, representative from the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique, Ms. Diane Bazin, Community Development Manager with the Société franco-manitobaine et Mr. Fernand Denault, President of the Fédération franco-ténoise.
The purpose of today's round-table is to discuss the state of francophone culture in Canada. We will be hearing from witnesses representing Western and Northern Canada, and we plan to meet at a later date with representatives from other communities, from government organizations, and from national arts and cultural associations. We are at the very beginning of our study.
To our witnesses, as I indicated, you have five to seven minutes for your presentations and then senators will ask you questions.
As chair of this committee and on behalf of our members, I would like to thank you for having accepted our invitation to appear before us today. I would ask you now to take the floor, beginning with Mr. Johnson and Mr. Rémillard, and then we will move on to the witnesses in Ottawa.
Jean Johnson, Chair of the Board, Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta: Madam Chair, the subject we will be discussing today is of the utmost importance for the Albertan francophone community in the context of our modern world and from an overall perspective.
Alberta's Francophonie has become over the past few years an international crossroads due to migration and immigration. By migration I am talking of course about our fellow Canadians from the eastern part of the country, but also about newcomers who have come to settle in Alberta for economic reasons that are obvious to everyone.
We are currently working on a societal plan in which the Francophonie is a linguistic community rather than a traditional cultural community. Describing ourselves as a community of French-Canadians in Alberta worked up until 20 years ago. However, the past five years have seen a rapid and significant change.
On the other hand, in Alberta, one of the factors that we understand very well and for which we are often called to account, is the traditional community that is very strong and proud of its heritage, and that serves as a foundation for the emerging community, and this is the traditional French-Canadian community of Franco-Albertans. This community is an important foundation for new francophones settling in Alberta. It is important to point out that the traditional community is a community that has had to fight and that recognizes how important it is to advocate for its rights; we have always done this, and this is a historical fact that newcomers are not very familiar with. By newcomers, I am referring to migration and immigration.
To give you an example, we held a contest in our community in 2005 to change the name of the Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta specifically to drop the word ``canadien-français,'' which reflected a certain era of history and a certain demographic reality, in order to send a more open and inclusive message. The project was not the success we had hoped for, but it did make us aware of the importance of paying more attention to francophone heritage in Alberta. During that process, we gave the impression that we were ignoring the existence and identify of those who identified with the expression ``French-Canadian.'' They mobilized in large numbers and influenced the result. So we are still called the Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta. We learned that when we speak to groups, we need to use inclusive language with both the traditional community and new communities.
One challenge we are facing today is how to create a common civic society. In Alberta, we are rebuilding a francophone community based on the foundation developed by the traditional community, so we are building on a solid cultural heritage. It is important to redefine our Francophonie, since francophones in Alberta are as culturally diverse as those in Toronto, for example.
Another important reality is that the majority of francophones in Alberta were not born here. When we communicate and make representations, whether to the Alberta government or to the English media, we work hard to make sure that people understand that the francophone community in Alberta is not a cultural community but rather a linguistic community just like the majority language society in Alberta, which is the anglophone community. We want to build our francophone community as part of Alberta's civil society. We want to have a francophone community that enables Quebecers, Acadians and Congolese to live their culture and identity fully in Alberta.
I will give you an overview of the francophone community in Alberta. It is important to understand its makeup because, from the point of view of the impact concerning arts and culture, we need to move away from traditional views and embrace a new reality that is diverse in its cultural values, cultural expression and artistic expression.
The challenge is to ask a community — which is already stretched in terms of both human and financial resources — to create more opportunities to promote this diverse cultural expression that reflects the richness and dynamism of Alberta's wonderful francophone community.
What do we see as the challenges for the federal government? We think that the federal government has a role to play as the standard bearer for this issue and the promoter of the whole notion of diversity and linguistic duality as Canadian values. When I say ``linguistic duality,'' I am not talking about Canadian bilingualism, but rather linguistic duality where there are two equal official languages. This must exist and be acknowledged in the cultural context, in the arts and in everyday life.
The federal government should include clauses to that effect when it signs agreements with the provinces. There needs to be space created for francophones. There should be a clause that says what the government is doing for minority language communities in that province or territory. The Canadian government has the opportunity to create and enhance this space for francophones through signage in a number of our major cities.
There is still a lot of work that could be done to create a francophone space by the federal government, and this can also be done through the active offer of services. There is a need to be proactive, and service should be offered in French. The government should assume that responsibility, which should be obvious to everyone, but it is not necessarily the case when you show up at a federal government office.
So that gives you an overview of the francophone community in Alberta as it has developed in a modern context.
Stéphane Rémillard, Director General, Conseil culturel fransaskois: Madam Chair, my presentation is divided into three parts: the first describes the characteristics of the francophone community in Saskatchewan; the second outlines the cultural challenges facing the community; and the third deals with support from the federal government for our communities.
I would like to begin by briefly presenting the ``fransaskois'' community with its main criteria and features. It is a long-standing community that accounts for approximately 2 per cent of the population. Of course, it is increasingly composed of people coming to Saskatchewan from other places, but it is based on communities that have been there since the province began. Francophones are widely scattered across the province but concentrated mainly in the northern and southern regions. That creates huge constraints in terms of travel distances and efforts required to bring people together.
Historically, the community developed quite a thick skin because it has encountered many difficulties throughout its history and faced some very difficult periods. For example, there was the Ku Klux Klan in the 1920s and the first educational reform in the 1950s where francophones were diluted in a sea of anglophones. For several decades, francophones had no opportunity to study in their language. Those are what we call the lost generations in Saskatchewan.
Despite all those problems and as a result of a great deal of effort, the community was able to develop a network of associations that managed to help French survive in some cases in Saskatchewan. There was the ACFC — which became the ACF — that brilliantly championed the cause of education in French. We also had the CCS that dealt with economic issues and, more recently, the Commission culturelle fransaskoise that did effective work in the 1970s to help disseminate cultural products and develop the arts and culture.
Those groups have played an important role. However, a key factor in Saskatchewan was obviously the decision by Pierre Elliott Trudeau's government to bring in the Official Languages Act. It was a bit like opening the windows of a room that had been closed up for too long. It gave a new impetus to the community's efforts, and the network of associations was enhanced and greatly strengthened.
The Official Languages Act resulted in sociological changes in Saskatchewan with respect to the relationship between the majority and the francophone community, among other things. Statistics Canada survey tend to show a decrease in the number of people who speak French at home. What the media do not mention, however, is that there are more and more francophiles and French speakers, who are often immigrants or part of the majority community.
One vital sociological change has been that what we call anti-French groups or tendencies seem to be on the decline, which signals the development of a more modern francophone community in Saskatchewan that is more open to immigration and outside groups enriching it.
So I think that we need to look at the latest statistics in a positive light. Our analysis needs to change. For example, we might not want to focus on people using French at home, but rather on those who are able to speak French and willing to build a francophone community in Saskatchewan.
Now I come to the second part, which is about cultural challenges.
The francophone community in Saskatchewan is faced with a certain number of challenges that have been identified and studied from all angles. This is one of the characteristics of our relationship with the federal government. For example, there is a lot of talk about exogamous families, which is a reality that strongly influences the rate of assimilation in Saskatchewan. The idea is to encourage those households to adopt French more often.
Access to services in French is another major challenge for our communities, along with access to French cultural material and the need for distribution networks for durable cultural products. The CCF has worked very hard on this for a number of years. A performance network has been developed to try to respond to that need. The network is operating and is very effective; it is one of the CCF's major achievements.
Good work is being done to help integrate francophone immigrants, and these efforts are beginning to show results.
The CCF is also looking into the problem of young people leaving the province and is currently working on the economic side to develop a strategy to entice our young people back to Saskatchewan and keep them here.
So the network of associations has been very effective in meeting the challenges and it works hard on what we call the macroproblems. However, there are also so-called microproblems, which depend to a greater extent on political trends and events that interfere with the normal development of the francophone community in Saskatchewan.
The elimination of the Court Challenges Program has had a major impact in Saskatchewan. After that happened, there was backsliding, if I can put it that way, by some groups with respect to the services that would normally be offered. Everyone is probably familiar with the case of Mr. Bell from Saskatchewan and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Without the Court Challenges Program, it was impossible to go to court over the issue. Another complaint has just been submitted to the Commissioner of Official Languages on the basis that this is not a unilingual English area, but rather a bilingual area where the RCMP was unable to provide service in French.
This is becoming somewhat of a worrisome trend. We have the strong impression that the elimination of the Court Challenges Program has led to federal institutions not bothering to offer services in French to the same extent as before. The dynamic behind that would be that francophones here are bilingual and so it does not really matter. On the contrary, it does matter a great deal, since if the notion that francophones are bilingual is used to avoid offering services, the result will be an acceleration of assimilation, which is already a huge problem in Saskatchewan.
This brings us, of course, to the matter of federal government support for the efforts of our associations to respond to both microproblems or macroproblems. There were many promises made at the time of the most recent Canada- community agreement, which will soon expire. We were urged to think about a comprehensive development plan, adopt results-based management and do a whole series of things that seemed positive; we had the impression we were in the major leagues. The problem that was indirectly caused by that approach was that community organizations were given too much responsibility and too little funding, with the result that many organizations, including the CCF and many others, had to deal with significant constraints. Over a five-year period in Saskatchewan, funding was frozen for four years. In fact, you could almost talk about permafrost when it comes to funding for organizations in Saskatchewan.
Without going into the details, I have found at least five observable consequences for organizations that are underfunded.
First, there is the general deterioration of working conditions and salaries. At the CCF, for example, the salary of an employee who has been with us since 1992 has not been adjusted for at least the past 10 years. When he joined our team, his salary was equivalent to that of a teacher with more than five years' experience, and today it is the same as that of a teacher who is just starting out.
Employee turnover is another consequence of underfunding. Within local community organizations, employees remain in their positions for barely 18 months. Within provincial organizations, an employee might last three years. This leads to a problem with turnover as well as with continuity. The CCF is very lucky to have an employee who has been with us since 1992, as well as a few others whom we are doing our best to hang on to.
Then, unfortunately, comes the deterioration in the quality of the services and a drop in the number of services that we are able to provide. In many cases, budget constraints have forced associations to eliminate services altogether. The CCF has had to cancel activities such as the Fransask'art, which is a loss for multidisciplinary artists. It was a wonderful opportunity for these artists to show their creativity. We are trying to get it going again, but it is not easy in the context of the funding status quo. We had also lost the funding program for artists, but I managed to reinstate it in 2006 with, unfortunately, a budget that was much lower than the previous one. Fantascripte, a magazine aimed at giving high school students a chance to be published, was also eliminated
We are also seeing a type of administrative cannibalism taking place as a result of underfunding and the limited number of programs; there is so much competition for funding among associations in Saskatchewan that we are almost doing one another harm in the process. I believe that one way to solve this problem would be to have separate envelopes for each sector. Arts and culture could have one separate envelope for the community sector, and even then, there should be a specific envelope for local organizations while provincial organizations should have access to another source, which would help to eliminate the competition among all of these organizations.
Then there is the administrative burden. Many organizations are having to spend more and more time preparing reports which leaves them less time to do their work on the ground.
One final concern for us, in Saskatchewan, is the fact that the employment market is becoming extremely competitive, and with the funding status quo, our associations are finding it more and more difficult to compete. The situation is made even worse because of the boom in the oil industry which is driving up salaries. If we do not see a reverse in this trend, then our best resources will soon be leaving our associations in order to earn higher salaries elsewhere. I believe it is essential that the next Canada-community agreement pay close attention to this fact.
The Chair: We will hear our next witness, Mr. Daniel Cuerrier, Director General of the Association des francophones du Nunavut, who will be making a short presentation.
Daniel Cuerrier, Director General, Association des francophones du Nunavut: Madam Chair, let me begin by explaining that Nunavut seems to be very remote and almost exotic, but we are much closer than our neighbours in the Northwest Territories or in Vancouver. Even though I arrived late, it is only a four-hour flight to Ottawa.
I will not begin by giving you an overview of the challenges that we face in Nunavut, but rather with the possibilities and hopes that sustain us. I have lived in Nunavut for 20 years. In fact, that is not quite true, since Nunavut was created in 1999, but I live in Iqualuit, which, before 1987, was known as Frobisher Bay. At that time, there were about 200 francophones living in Iqualuit, and today there are more than 700.
Statistics Canada's figures notwithstanding, we believe that there are between 1,000 and 1,200 francophones living in Nunavut. The reason for this great discrepancy is because francophones from exogamous marriages identify themselves as Inuit when they respond to Statistics Canada surveys, since the Inuit community is so welcoming.
An Inuit leader said: ``First Canadians, Canadians first.'' That means that one is Inuit first, then francophone or anglophone. Even though the francophone community in Nunavut is quite small, it still has a school board, a school, a community radio station, a day care, a tourism cooperative, an economic development committee and a health committee.
The Association des francophones du Nunavut represents the francophones in Nunavut. Year after year, the federal government spends $600,000 to ``meet its responsibilities.'' I hate this expression because it is not a matter of meeting any responsibility, but of ensuring that the francophone community will not die.
For its part, the Nunavut government also invests about $600,000 for the francophone community. This is quite an accomplishment in view of the huge challenges faced by the Nunavut government. It also represents an example of the respect that we have for official languages.
When it was born in 1999, Nunavut inherited the laws that applied in the Northwest Territories. Mr. Denault, who is here, can tell you about that. It is not easy to live in French in the Northwest Territories because the federal government does not respect the Official Languages Act.
The Moreau decision on the Official Languages Act has shown that the act is beneficial for the Northwest Territories as it is for Nunavut because we inherited it. It is an act that could protect francophone rights, but which does not do so, because of a lack of political will.
We must not forget that the territories are in a very special position. We are not like the provinces; in our case, the federal government tells the people and the territorial governments what they must do, how they must do it, and how the laws are to be applied.
For nine years now, the Nunavut government has been trying to establish a government, despite all of the challenges. It is a very young government, which is just now learning how to govern and which is managing to get organized in spite of a whole range of problems, be they environmental, educational, financial, social, et cetera.
However, we almost have an opportunity to work with a government that has shown a great deal of good will. To put things in perspective, 1,000 people seems to be a very small number when compared to the rest of Canada. What we must not forget is that the total population of Nunavut is about 30,000 people. They are spread over two million square kilometres, which represents almost 20 per cent of the total area of Canada. Needless to say, our challenges are enormous, they are as large as the Arctic itself.
In spite of these challenges, through trial and error, this unique government has shown a great deal of good will towards its francophone minority, which represents about 3 per cent of its population, something that would be the envy of almost all other official language communities in Canada.
Earlier I mentioned the funds that Nunavut invests in its small francophone community. I would also like to say that last fall, the Nunavut government introduced at first and second reading a bill on official languages that recasts the act that we inherited from the Northwest Territories.
This bill will lead to the best Official Languages Act in Canada. Much of it was drafted in consultation and in partnership with the francophone minority. It also takes into account the recommendations made by Justice Moreau in the Northwest Territories. Once it is passed, the languages will be truly equal, and it will provide for a comprehensive implementation plan, the appointment of a language minister, and even a trilingual municipal government.
We must not forget that this is the only jurisdiction in Canada that operates with three official languages: the language of the majority, which is the Inuit language; the dominant language, which is English; and French, which is the second minority language.
I can summarize my presentation today in a single thought, and that is why I am speaking to you, members of the committee. In order for it to come into effect, this act will have to have the consent of Canada's Parliament, and therefore, that of the Senate as well.
The francophone community in Nunavut needs your support. It needs your support so that the Government of Canada will pass this new Official Languages Act as quickly as possible. The Government of Canada must provide the budget that will be required for full and complete implementation. Finally, the government must change its mind and reinstate a new Court Challenges Program so as to provide us with the tools that we will need if the act is not respected.
That said, I would like to wish you unusakut, as we say, which means enjoy the rest of your day.
The Chair: We will now hear from Ms. Johanne Dumas, who represents the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique.
Johanne Dumas, Representative, Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique: Madam Chair, I represent the Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique, but I work for an historic community in British Columbia, namely, Maillardville, which will celebrate its 100th anniversary in 2009. I am the executive director of the Société francophone de Maillardville.
I would like to tell you about our situation, which is not all that different from that of other minority francophone communities in Western Canada. I will explain our reality, as a group located in British Columbia. The francophones in British Columbia do not all live in a single region; they are literally scattered throughout the province. That is interesting, but it is also a challenge. The fact that we are located throughout the province means that there are no large francophone communities similar to the ones that one might find in Manitoba, for example, where many francophone communities are located close together. That is one of the main challenges for our province and for our Francophonie.
That is also the reality that we face in Greater Vancouver, where French is definitely not the language of the majority, since the language that is spoken most often in Vancouver is Mandarin. You will therefore understand that the reality and the needs of the Canadian Francophonie in this province are not a priority and, considering the daily challenges faced by cultural groups in that province, they are not likely to be a priority any time soon.
Cultural development in our province is successful, once again, despite the lack of support from the provincial government. We receive little help from the province and from the federal government, and there was no real budget increase when the last Canada-community agreement was signed, which means that growing communities have less money to work with. Francophones are moving to British Columbia in great numbers, because of the climate, the mountains, and, for young people, the need to become immersed in an anglophone community. Nevertheless, their survival instinct and the need to experience life in French does undoubtedly exist. Since there are growing numbers of francophone communities and associations, the budget must be divided into ever smaller slices. This is a daily challenge for us.
Our new Francophonie is made up of migrants, many of them coming from Ontario and Quebec, who are moving to an anglophone environment. But there is also a new international Francophonie. More and more visible minorities are moving to our province. That is fine, but even if these minorities are visible, the francophone community remains invisible to the ever-growing Asian community in British Columbia. There is nothing to show that we are francophones; whether we are from Senegal or Montreal, nobody knows that we are francophones: we are seen as either a White person or someone from Africa.
We are lucky to have a growing student population as well. Luckily, more and more English-language schools in British Columbia are closing. In our region, from Coquitlam to Maillardville, about five schools closed last June — and that is only in our region, which is 20 km from Vancouver. You are probably aware that in all of the other regions, other schools are closing because the Department of Education has enormous challenges to face. The Francophone School Board in British Columbia is experiencing a growth in its population; it is the only school board in British Columbia that is growing while all of the others are having to close their schools.
We must not forget that the Olympic Games are fast approaching. As you know, the world will visit Vancouver- Whistler in 2010. That is something to be proud of, even though we are quite concerned about the participation of the Francophonie.
The Société francophone de Maillardville organizes an annual event called the Festival du bois. One of the activities is a visual arts project to which we invited a lady from Joliette who is an expert in making the ceintures fléchées or arrowhead sash. I had met her when I visited an exhibit at the Joliette museum. She brought along artefacts and sashes to demonstrate the importance of the arrowhead sash to French-Canadian culture. The Festival du bois was invited to be part of the VANOC cultural Olympiad in 2008. I could provide you with samples of the program to show you how poor the translation was that informed the entire world about this event. The same problem can be found on the website for VANOC, the Vancouver Organizing Committee. The English term for ``ceinture fléchée'' is ``arrow sash,'' and it was translated as ``carquois'' which, of course, is a quiver. They certainly did not put very much effort into it! That is the type of thing that the British Columbia Francophonie has to deal with. It is insulting. They have seven translators working for them. That is an issue for us, as is their programming. We know that the Canadian Foundation for Cross-Cultural Dialogue is looking into the reality of the francophone context for the 2010 Olympics. We hope that our Fédération des francophones de la Colombie-Britannique as well as the provincial cultural and artistic council will work along with them to ensure that the French language is well represented. I think that it is not only an opportunity for British Columbia, but for all of French Canada, including Quebec, to showcase the linguistic duality of this country. This is a wonderful opportunity for us, since it is happening in our own province, and not somewhere else. I urge the Senate to highlight the importance of having all francophone communities represented at the 2010 Games.
The Chair: Thank you, Ms. Dumas. Our next witness is Mr. Fernand Denault, President of the Fédération franco- ténoise.
Fernand Denault, President, Fédération franco-ténoise: Madam Chair, we would love to bring you good news in appearing before you today. That will happen if we continue to work as hard as we have been working; it is team work, and you are certainly an important part of our team. Through you, the Senate has shown great leadership. It is unfortunate that we have not seen the same thing in Parliament. However, perhaps one day we will be able to convince the others of the right thing to do. Congratulations and thank you for the invitation.
In the Northwest Territories, the francophone community organizations are similar to what can be found in the provinces; we have active communities from the Beaufort sea, the Mackenzie delta and Inuvik, all the way to Fort Smith, which is on the Alberta border, the capital, Yellowknife, on the northern side of the lake, and Hay River, which was previously known as ``Rivière au foin,'' on the southern side.
We are quite active, and despite some huge challenges, our reality is exactly the same in Western Canada, with the added bonus of greater distances and higher transportation costs.
We have had no increase in our cultural funding in the past 12 years. Try to imagine having to manage a family budget that has not changed in 12 years and you will understand how difficult it is not only to maintain but to continue doing the same type of things. That is our reality.
It can be said that cultural diversity is not a new phenomenon for us. To my knowledge, the North has always been cosmopolitan. We can see that through our written history: during the Franklin expedition, there were multicultural elements among his crew. I believe there was even one Italian member. With the history of mining in Canada's North, we have seen the workforce in the Northwest Territories originate from around the world.
However, we do have something that is quite unique in this country, something of which we are proud, which is our duality. This fact is now supported by 72 per cent of Canadians. Senator Murray, you might remember that, 20 years ago, the opposite was true: only 25 per cent of Canadians supported the concept of duality.
A great deal of progress has been made, but we cannot say that our politicians reflect popular opinion. It might even be said that some of them are lagging behind. We hope that some day public opinion will be reflected in the votes that are cast.
As has already been said, we have additional challenges to face. That is true. Unfortunately, the Government of the Northwest Territories is not living up to its obligations. What is even sadder is that a Northwest Territories Supreme Court justice noted that there was discrimination against us. It ordered the government to provide restitution, something that was challenged and continues to make its way through Canada's legal system. We are currently awaiting a decision by a Court of Appeal. The Court Challenges Program is extremely important for anything that relates to the Constitution. It is a sad day when a citizen is not afforded any respect from his own government!
Moreover, the court noted that the federal government was rather lax in monitoring its institution, namely, the Government of the Northwest Territories. As you know, the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development is directly responsible for the creation of the Northwest Territories government. The same thing applies to the recent creation of Nunavut. There were no extensive national consultations; all that was required was the signature of a federal minister. That is our reality.
We are always trying to improve our lot and things are not all that bad, even though that may be hard to imagine when you are from elsewhere — you cannot imagine the nightmare situations. The number of allies is steadily increasing and we have gained some ground. For example, parents have succeeded in obtaining francophone schools and school boards, once again, thanks to the courts. If we could one day obtain something without the help of the courts, that would be fantastic.
Perhaps we, the francophones of this country, could raise the question of national unity. Perhaps francophone citizens could feel equal no matter where they live in Canada. Perhaps that would remove certain insecurities that fuel internal divisions that never seem to disappear. Often, when we find a solution, it slips through our fingers. Bang! It is gone and we cannot find it any more. And then we wonder what we did wrong because we did not go to the heart of the matter.
The heart of the matter is that Canadian francophones, citizens of this country, have trouble feeling at home from coast to coast. It is almost impossible in the current context. We have created tools to solve this problem, but we do not seem to have the federal leadership required to attain our goals. Our sense of identity as francophone Canadian citizens, on this American continent, is strongly threatened if our language and culture are not part of our lives. Culture is an essential element in shaping children's sense of identity and maintaining it through adulthood. It is easy to lose. Sometimes, we take it for granted and that is a mistake.
The linguistic and cultural duality of our beautiful country is supported by 72 per cent of the population, as confirmed by recent statistics. Happily, this majority is increasing, but unfortunately, we, as francophone citizens, do not always have the support we need from our federal government in order to provide our artists with proper development tools. As a result, our country is deprived of our testimony and our celebration. The fact that we exist across Canada is given little value. And yet, our federal government has taken on the responsibility for achieving results in this regard by respecting our country's charter and equality between francophone and anglophone citizens.
In both Northern and Western Canada, as you heard from Mr. Johnson and Ms. Dumas, the francophone population is in a state of flux. It is migrating from one end of the country to the other to take advantage of the prosperity in these regions, just as anglophone citizens are doing. People leave disadvantaged regions in the hope of improving their lot, getting back on their feet and making things better for their families, but often many of them return to those disadvantaged regions.
If francophone citizens can only take advantage of the opportunities afforded by regional economic development in certain parts of the country if they are willing to give up their sense of identity and dignity, does that mean that we are second-class citizens? Should we settle for being second-class citizens? Do anglophone citizens risk losing their identity if they go to regions where there are a majority of francophone citizens, such as Acadia or Quebec? No. And yet the government, even though it aims to improve the lot of francophones and ensure that they are on an equal footing, is not taking the appropriate steps. On the contrary, since it has established new objectives, budgets are declining while noble rhetoric is on the rise. We have nothing concrete. The government gives us beautiful bouquets with one hand and cuts programs with the other. In fact, that is what happened just before the Court Challenges Program was abolished. Remember the glowing speech given in Prescott Russell just before that.
As concerns culture, it seems to me that it would be a good opportunity for our government to contribute, slowly but surely, to national unity. If the message is that francophone citizens can have the same opportunities as anglophone citizens to benefit from their country, that they can speak out and celebrate through their artists, thereby ensuring that their presence is valued, would this not be a way of achieving the objective of a united Canada using a non- confrontational method?
Diane Bazin, Manager, Community Development, Société franco-manitobaine: Thank you, Madam Chair. Where do I begin? I would first like to say that all the witnesses to date have moved me. It is clear that we all have a great deal in common. We experience the same realities and the same challenges, but I would still like to tell you about our situation.
I work with some 30 rural francophone communities in Manitoba. The importance of cultural identity is becoming increasingly clear. The economy can no longer be divided from culture: the two go hand in hand. The same is true for health and culture. All of this is part of who we are and is essential to the development and even the survival of some of my little communities. I say ``my communities,'' because they are all very dear to me, whether their population is 50, 200 or 1,000.
Our francophone communities genuinely need your support. The government has trouble meeting the needs of francophone communities, even though it is easy to criticize and there are positive initiatives that are being taken.
I learned that the government has recently reinstated the summer placement program for students. For small communities, this program is very important, because without it, we risk losing part of our heritage.
Who are we and what is in store for us? We need to know our history and our background. All of these programs are important and I am happy to see that they exist this year. I strongly encourage your committee to continue its work, because it has always helped us showcase the importance of programs intended for francophone communities.
These programs are not necessarily costly, but they are important for our little communities. When we talk about cultural identity, we mean the arts, culture and the entertaining aspect of life in French.
Everything stems from there, from our festivals and our community celebrations. That is where our identity comes from. It is thanks to these events that our young people discover that they are part of this family. That is what shapes our identity.
My colleagues mentioned that we are facing numerous challenges. The migration of young people to urban centres is undoubtedly our communities' number one challenge. A program called ``Place aux Jeunes'' was developed a few years ago. Thanks to this program, we found that our young people tended to leave to pursue their education in larger communities, and we wanted to determine how we could bring them back home. This program was very successful during the first two years.
There are also many provincial organizations which are essential for the survival of the francophone community and which are funded by Canadian Heritage. It is important to encourage the survival of all our community programs and organizations.
In Manitoba, there are between 30 and 40 community groups that are seeking to establish partnerships to maintain their programs. The francophone community in Manitoba has developed strategies for the next 5 to 10 years, and it will certainly need your help to implement them.
We are trying to expand our space. The Société franco-manitobaine has been working to meet this challenge for a few years and it believes that immigration is the key to doing so. More and more, we are realizing that expanding our space depends on accepting the fact that this may change the landscape.
I do not think that this is negative; on the contrary, this can only bring positive things. We must embrace the idea of expanding our space in the context of an overall plan.
Working with the community as a whole is definitely another key element. Last year, we created a new program called Changement 2008. It is really something. Over the past six months, we have had the opportunity to meet with leaders of different groups from throughout the francophone community. We have begun taking stock and really analyzing what everyone is doing. We are seeking to get to know each other better and to determine how we can work together.
Many partners work in the area of education and others in the area of culture. We need to find a way to optimize our resources, because they are extremely inadequate.
We are all in the same boat. We are all coping with the challenges that I mentioned earlier. We all lack time and financial resources. We lack volunteers, who are key to the survival of the community. Given the lack of time and resources, we are concerned about where the next wave of volunteers will come from.
What is important for us is to know that you are there to help. Senator Chaput is well aware of our reality and we realize the importance of what she is doing. We have seen what she has accomplished in the past and we believe that it is vital to encourage the government to assume its responsibilities toward francophone communities in this country.
It is sometimes said that the Francophonie is an added value. Although that is true in part, we believe that the Francophonie should be simply a value.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Ms. Bazin. We will now go to questions, and as chair of the committee, I am going to ask the first one.
I have listened to you closely and I have tried to understand what the state of francophone culture is in your community. Our study deals with the state of francophone culture, and while I was listening to you, I noticed that there were links between the different challenges.
Arts and culture are thrusts of community development. By presenting your respective situations, you are truly in the process of redefining francophone culture. You refer to new communities and new arrivals. You refer to exogamous marriages and the inclusive formulas used to integrate this new clientele coming to Northern Canada, Western Canada and the Northwest Territories.
My question will seem broad to you, but I would like you to answer. In your opinion, what is the place of francophone cultural life in your community? Who should partner with you to help you promote and develop francophone culture? Who should support your initiatives? Of course there are the governments, but I would like you to address this question from within your community. Do partners work together to develop this francophone culture?
Ms. Dumas: Last week, I met with Stéphane Audet, Executive Director of the federation, in order to report on what is happening within the French-speaking community.
The situation is fairly dire. I can only speak for our province, but we know full well that there are some four executive directors who are suffering from professional burnout. One of them was away from work for one year.
Speaking of volunteering, I do a great deal of volunteer work. When you are working 70 to 80 hours per week, and you do not have time to take the vacation days allotted to you or take advantage of your overtime, there is a problem. And I am not alone, this happens with all the offices in the province. The average salary of an executive director of a community cultural organization in British Columbia is approximately $35,000. And that is British Columbia.
Do you know how much a house costs in British Columbia? Or even the cost of living in British Columbia? The grocery bill alone is 15 to 20 per cent higher than elsewhere. And I am sure that there are other communities in the country that are facing the same reality. The situation is abominable.
When I look at our situation in Maillardville I do not want to give up because I sincerely believe in my community, I love it. I am from Montreal and my family knows very well that I will never go back there. I have embraced my community of Maillardville with all my love and all my heart. I feel at home and I want to continue living and working here, but one day I will reach the end of my tether, just like so many other people who are in the process of burning out.
What is the reality and why are things the way they are? It is because there is a lack of funding to hire people. I am not the only one who does volunteer work for my organization; my employees do too. When we hire someone, I tell them that I expect them to work overtime, but that I cannot pay them. They will have to work overtime on a volunteer basis. However, they can take time off for personal reasons if they wish. That is the reality. We must negotiate with the employees that we hire.
Yes, the communities exist and they want to continue expanding. We have been given funding to expand and we have momentum. However, there is not enough money for us to maintain our momentum. I spoke with my colleagues in the province before coming here and they are all experiencing the same reality. So that is the situation in British Columbia.
Ms. Bazin: I agree fully with everything that has been said today. In Manitoba, the situation is good. It is not perfect, but we have realized the importance of working together. We have to come to that realization.
We have assets that work well, such as bilingual centres. These are places where people can operate in French, 24 hours a day. We have centres where the working language is French. There are communities where 60 to 75 per cent, and sometimes more, of the French-speaking population can live and function in French. People can attend church in their language, do their grocery shopping in their language, and send their children to school in their language.
This does not mean that we have met all the challenges. One of them is to work more closely with our school board, something that we are not always used to doing. There are also examples in the health system. In our community, we set up a health care centre called the Centre Albert-Gaillot. Within this centre, there is a library, medical services, physical fitness facilities and other services related to health care. We managed to raise $1.6 million for a small community of 620 people. It was the community that took the first step because it was important for its health and development. And I mean health in the broad sense of the term. We are talking about prevention, for both physical and mental health. So we raised these funds with the help of the province, which contributed just under one million dollars. It is truly marvellous to have these opportunities to work together.
Those are ideas. It proves that we are alive.
Senator Poulin: Today we have the privilege of welcoming six people who are very involved. I have to tell you how touched I am by your involvement. Some of you are volunteers, others are paid employees who work up to 80 hours per week, but if it were not for your involvement and for your generosity, our challenges in francophone Canada would be even greater, and I really wanted to say that. It is people like you who find solutions to many challenges.
Your presentations have shown just how immense our country is, geographically. This reality causes serious budgetary difficulties for obvious reasons. It causes communication problems between our francophone communities. The particular challenges that you are experiencing are similar. There are common bonds but also major differences.
There is a challenge that is common to all our francophone communities that I am attuned to. I am referring to the importance of public communication for everything that deals with francophone culture in this country. When I talk about public communication, I am thinking radio, television, Internet, written press, books and magazines.
These communications are essential to reflect, enhance and develop our culture. I will always remember hearing Daniel Lavoie sing for the first time at a concert organized by Radio-Canada in Winnipeg. He was very young. He was accompanied by a group of musicians from Winnipeg. It was Radio-Canada that organized this little concert. This is a striking example of the importance of a public broadcaster for the development of talent, whether we are talking about singers, musicians or writers. It is so important.
I would like to come back to the reflection, the enhancement and the development of culture. Several of you mentioned repeatedly that culture is more than the arts and culture, more than what is written, spoken or sung or what is acted on stage or on television. It reminds me of that famous quote: ``Culture is what we remember when we have forgotten everything else.'' I see culture in very broad terms, and I entirely agree with your analysis as to the interdependency of the issues you have talked about.
I would like to know how you connect in your various communities, for example, with Radio-Canada/CBC or the written press. Do you use the Internet? I feel, with the analysis that we have undertaken here, that they are major players, that they are essential partners in terms of our sense of belonging to francophone life across this country.
In fact, I was thinking of Nunavut. When I went to Iqaluit, I visited the small Radio-Canada/CBC station and I thought to myself: Did you approach them for ``This Hour Has Seven French Days,'' as a small special program in French even at the local level? We know that there are in fact a significant number of local and regional programming hours for each regional Radio-Canada station. I believe it is 16 hours.
I no longer recall the specific numbers, Madam Chair, but it was 14 hours when I was there 15 years ago, but I believe that has gone up.
I would really like to know how you make the connection. What are your objectives? How do you do this work?
I do not know who would like to answer. I know there is a good Radio-Canada station in Regina. Perhaps the director from Saskatchewan would like to say something?
Mr. Rémillard: The connections between the CCF and Radio-Canada, among other organizations, are very close. Many of our activities and programs would probably be very hard to carry out without the assistance of Radio- Canada. Every year, there is the Gala fransaskois de la chanson, which is the stage that comes before Chant'Ouest. Radio-Canada is a wonderful partner for this kind of activity. Radio-Canada plays a central role also for Chant'Ouest every year.
We have developed an almost organic relationship between Radio-Canada and our network for broadcasting artists' performances. Often, artists use a promotional strategy in order to get themselves known, and Radio-Canada broadcasts material for those who are touring Saskatchewan through its various programs. This is an essential springboard. I know that Radio-Canada also plays an important role with several other associations that are part of our Saskatchewan network. There is a very interesting dynamic that has developed.
Other partnerships have developed as well; I am thinking particularly about local newspapers like L'eau vive.
Partnerships have also developed with most of the networks, even with the CBC and networks like CTV and Global. In that way, we manage to serve most of our clientele.
The CCF also tries to offer services to what we call francophiles — because there is the whole aspect of artistic development — and the artists, particularly youth who come from the immersion sector, are interested in our programs. We try to reach out to these various clienteles as broadly as possible through these networks. But it must be recognized that Radio-Canada is critical for us.
Mr. Cuerrier: I want to come back to the question asked earlier by the Chair. If I am talking about Nunavut, the state of francophone culture, I would say we are fighting with our last breath. That is more or less our reality.
To come back to your question, Senator Poulin, I believe that yes, in fact, you are quite right: a strong public network is important and essential. I can attest to that. It should in fact be stronger than that because in Iqaluit, it does not exist. Radio-Canada's signal comes to Iqaluit through services like Bell ExpressVu, or there is no service at all.
Iqaluit does indeed have the CBC North station, but there is no French programming. When the people at CBC North were approached, their response was that they did not have a francophone mandate. It is a separate entity, it does not necessarily come under the rest of the Canadian network. Do not ask me why; I do not know.
That said, the director of the CBC North station is not automatically opposed to the French language. A few years ago, he offered us one hour of air time per week. When we discussed the Radio-Canada radio signal, he offered to receive the signal and pay for a telephone line to transmit it to the community centre so that we could rebroadcast it using our own transmitter. There is no objection to our rebroadcasting the signal. Furthermore, my radio coordinator will not be pleased with me for having said so publicly. We did indeed buy a dish antenna, and we are receiving the signal and rebroadcasting certain Radio-Canada programs in French for the francophone public of Iqaluit, with no support or contribution from the public broadcaster.
I have absolutely nothing against the public broadcaster; on the contrary, I believe it has an important role to play and should even have increased budgets so that it can invest more in communities. On the other hand, a national network cannot and does not take into account asymmetry in our country. We were talking about the great distances and the differences, despite the many similarities as well, but I believe we must come back to the idea of a network of community radio stations; at the very beginning of the decade, everyone was saying it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. But it did not pan out. The federal government invested millions in that project. We created l'ARC du Canada to help these communities communicate with one another, to form ties, but it all fell apart over the issue of $50,000 per year for a satellite feed. I find that — pardon me, disgusting.
We have to give small communities — and of course I am pleading the case for mine —, means to equip themselves, to work, to co-operate. This is fundamental; otherwise we will miss out on our great Canadian dream of linguistic duality and the survival of these communities.
If we were to invest in the existing budget for the Francophonie of Canada, even to the tune of the cost of the construction and annual maintenance of one ship for the Coast Guard, we would change the face of the Francophonie in this country. Small initiatives like that, in the context of the huge federal budget, would make a considerable difference in each and every one of our communities.
Ms. Dumas: I think that Radio-Canada's relationship with francophone communities in British Columbia is adequate. It is better for some than for others, probably because we are closer to the centre of Vancouver.
We just wrapped up our festival, the Festival du bois, which is the biggest francophone event in British Columbia. As Mr. Rémillard was saying, we had the support of other media. We put together a campaign a few years ago called ``Flaunt your Frenchness,'' which attracted the attention of both Global and CTV, among others.
On the other hand, I see the situation that exists between Radio-Canada and the CBC, and I feel a lack of fairness in many respects. Radio-Canada in Vancouver strongly promotes the visibility of anglophone events that are held in Vancouver, such as the PuSh Festival and the Jazz Festival. That is fine, because there are certainly not enough francophone events to support the ads that have to run between each program. But the reverse does not happen at the CBC. We tried to approach the CBC — and I am not alone, since other organizations have done the same thing — in order to have a higher profile on that side as well.
[English]
We were told, ``No, you have to go to Radio-Canada if you want support. We do not support the francophone community.''
[Translation]
It is disturbing, because we see that Radio-Canada supports the anglophone groups whereas the contrary is not true. I can tell you that in British Columbia we are very angry. We find this situation rather worrisome. And as Mr. Denault was saying earlier on, if we really want to be recognized as a bilingual country from coast to coast, these realities must be corrected. CBC must recognize the francophone community as a partner, an asset, as an added value perhaps, to its programming and its reality.
You saw what happened a few weeks ago. We do not need to repeat it, since it was disgraceful and in very bad taste. But that reality exists. It is no joke. I must tell you that the time allocated to the Festival du bois by the CBC this year was ridiculous. The Festival du bois is an event that attracts between 15,000 and 17,000 people, of which 62 per cent are anglophones. They offered us two minutes at 5:45 a.m. and told us to come to the studio, if you can believe it! That is the reality, and that is the support we were given this year. They proposed a quarter to six on a Friday morning and did not want to do it over the telephone; we would have to go to the studio. We said to forget about it.
Senator Poulin: I think you have raised a problem and it is an issue that will be part of our research. CBC has responsibilities in terms of both cultures and languages. You alluded to what happened last week. We should remind people: all the francophone components were excluded from the broadcast of a closing concert. This happened a few days ago. We also had complaints from francophone artists. I am still awaiting an apology from the president of the CBC. I have not seen it, perhaps I missed it, but I think you will agree that it is an extremely important point.
The Chair: Mr. Johnson, I have not forgotten you. I will give the floor to Mr. Denault and afterwards I will come back to you so that you can answer the first question as well as Senator Poulin's.
Mr. Denault: First of all, I will answer Senator Poulin's question. You have raised some very interesting issues. When you talk about Radio-Canada, it is flagrant. I do not want to upset you, but the members of our small community pay approximately $6,400 per year, and have over the last 18 years, in order to maintain Radio-Canada's equipment and be able to receive the signal in the capital of the Northwest Territories. The signal comes from Montreal, and the monies come from the only cultural program that exists, the one I was talking about earlier on when I said that we had received no increase in 12 years. This portion of the budget has been eaten away by the increases we have been subjected to.
On the other hand, the CBC has no problem if we are talking about assimilation and the goal is English assimilation. There is no problem, and the cost is not important. There is no small community in the North — and I challenge you to check on this — regardless of its population, that does not receive the CBC. The aim was to assimilate the Aboriginal population. In those cases, price is no object. However, it is another story when it comes to supporting francophone citizens. I will stop sharing my frustrations with you, since I am feeling very emotional.
The Association franco-culturelle de Yellowknife has set up a small community radio station that is part of the RFA network. It is working very well, although it has extremely limited resources and a dwindling budget. How long can a community radio station last? It is at risk of disappearing like so many others if we cannot find solutions. Our reality in all of this is to keep chasing after money. We get exhausted chasing down projects, because the support does not exist. Our people burn out, we lose them, and we hope that they can be replaced. This is how we work. It is not the most responsible way to run things, but it is the only way we have.
We also set up a territorial newspaper, which is also useful from time to time in Nunavut. It has been a clear success, and we can now communicate among ourselves, stay abreast of the latest news and learn in French about what is happening elsewhere in the country. We also created a publishing company that puts out books from time to time. However, the problem remains that we still have to run after projects. If there are existing projects, we try, if we have time and if we do not have to be running around for ten other projects, to give them a few hours between 10 p.m. and midnight.
This was not the case. It is easy to give a brief response to your question because there is so little to say. There is no francophone space in the Northwest Territories. We look for places to gather for cultural purposes. We are looking for gyms because our schools do not have any.
We talk about an equal quality of education, but that is far from being the case in the Northwest Territories. That is indeed why the francophone community is losing its potential to develop. People will choose immersion schools for their children because they are equipped with brand new gymnasiums. This means that the children speak French, but the culture is anglophone.
Efforts to help artists develop are non existent. We have never had the tools required to do that work. We planted a few seeds here and there, and a few artists have sprung up and when there is one, we are very proud. Artists look for help indirectly through the anglophone organizations that have some promotional budgets. Other artists fend for themselves. It is practically a miracle, but it does happen. This means that the challenge for francophone artists is greater. It also means that generous anglophone citizens are helping francophone artists. For the francophone artists, it is a way of surviving in the sector.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Denault. We will now hear from Mr. Johnson, who is back on line via our videoconference facilities.
Mr. Johnson: In answer to your first question, you spoke of the state and relative position of francophone culture. Much is said about what has been accomplished and all of the wonderful things that are happening in Alberta, but there remain a number of significant challenges.
We are concerned about a huge increase in the francophone population. Last year, 8,000 Quebec health insurance cards were exchanged for Alberta health cards, in spite of the fact that the 2006 census only identified an additional 2,500 francophones.
According to estimates, there are more than 100,000 people whose first language is French living in Alberta, and the demand for services is increasing. For that reason, the whole area of arts and culture must be re-evaluated. Culture is at risk because there is no increase in the community's ability to respond to the growing need for services. Now, who can we turn to for help?
The Chair: We have just lost our video and audio signals. That is unfortunate. Perhaps we will be able to reconnect with Mr. Denault a little later. I will now call on Senator Champagne, the vice-chair of our committee.
Senator Champagne: There is a recurring theme in what each and every one of you has said, and it involves the freezing of the funds that are granted to organizations. Mr. Rémillard and Mr. Cuerrier spoke of respecting official languages and of problems with funding. Ms. Dumas spoke in the same terms. Mr. Denault, in Iqualuit, made mention of these factors as well.
Of course, we all know that it would be possible to do more if we had more money. You all mentioned the Court Challenges Program that was set aside and about which we cannot say very much at the moment because the issue is before the courts. We will see what happens.
People have a hard time understanding why the government has stopped funding the groups that were involved in lawsuits against it. It is a rather strange vicious circle.
If you had a number of associations and organizations, how likely would it be that, without additional funds, they could be brought together to work on projects that are of mutual interest?
Ms. Bazin: With ``Changement 2008,'' we are trying to see how we might work more closely with one another. Of course, we would like to have more funding, but if we wait for that to happen, we may not last very long. That is why we must find a means to maximize our human resources. We could have a single executive director position instead of the current three. The most important thing that we learned from our first look at the 33 organizations is that communication is key, be it internal, local, regional, provincial, or even national. We have to find a way to get to know one another and work together rather than simply wait for more money from the government. We have been waiting for more funding for 10 years now, and, all the while, the cost of living has increased, which means that we have much less money to work with today.
Senator Champagne: I would imagine that if your three organizations come together, they will share ideas and the new organization will be able to help a greater number of people.
Ms. Dumas, you spoke of translation problems; what you had to say was quite disturbing. We met with some VANOC representatives because we wanted to ensure that Canada's Francophonie was not being ignored by the organization. The issues you raised were quite straightforward, and involve something as simple as accurate translation; I hope that your complaint did not fall on deaf ears. In any case, the VANOC representatives will be seeing us again. After Easter, we will be meeting in Victoria and Vancouver with the Association of Francophone Parliamentarians. I promise that I will raise the issue with them when we meet.
Ms. Dumas: The problem is not only with VANOC. I can tell you about a mistake that appeared last year on the Services Canada website. It was an offer of employment in Maple Ridge, British Columbia.
It said: ``Maple Ridge, B.C.,'' and was translated by ``L'arête d'érable avant Jésus-Christ'' [maple ridge before Jesus Christ]!
Senator Champagne: That is obviously an example of machine translation.
Ms. Dumas: Absolutely.
Senator Champagne: It is hard to believe.
Ms. Dumas: It is hard to believe. I raised the issue in a meeting with the Fédération des francophones, and the Public Works representatives who were in attendance spoke to us about it. I would simply like to point out that francophones in Canada are also tax payers. It was a sad thing to see.
It might sound funny to say ``l'arête d'érable avant Jésus Christ,'' but it is no laughing matter. It is truly very sad.
Senator Champagne: What can be done to help the Francophonie in your regions? I know, for example, when it comes to music, it is a long way from Iqaluit to Grise Fjord, which is just centimetres from the North Pole, and musicians traveled to all of the schools along James Bay to share their culture with the students who live in that part of the country. Could something similar be done for the French language?
I know that it has been done with music. My husband took part in a number of these tours. Could we use actors to read poetry, or teach the children some French songs? How would you go about organizing this type of tour? The musicians were paid by the musicians' guild and various provincial departments as well as the federal government, which helped to cover their travel costs. What could be done that would promote the French language in these schools, go over well, and require a little more work than you are doing now?
Ms. Dumas: I have a lot to say. Senator Champagne, I think there is a crying need among the minority French language communities in Canada. Every year, my organization, the Société francophone de Maillardville, applies for Canada Council funding. We have been fortunate, we have often received support, as long as we had a viable proposal, of course; we know that there are other projects and that we are not the only ones doing this type of work. We also receive support for our artists' travel expenses.
The problem that I see is that there are no current programs that reflect francophone communities outside Quebec. When we apply to the Canada Council for a grant to help with a festival, then we must absolutely include some type of aboriginal content. But it does not work that way for aboriginal programs, which are not required to have any francophone or anglophone content. To me, that seems rather unfair, and not because we do not want to include an aboriginal dimension, because we have always done that. We have been running this festival for 19 years, and we are always happy to do so; we will be doing it again this year and we will continue to do it, because we are intent on showcasing our diversity to the public.
There is one thing that I would like the Fédération culturelle canadienne française to understand,— and I do not know if the organization is represented here today. I would like the Senate of Canada to impress upon the Canada Council as well that there is a francophone reality outside Quebec, and it is different.
Managers have often told me that if a project was not approved it was because we had not taken any risk. If I invite la Bottine Souriante to play, then of course, we will have a great turnout, but we are not a Bottine Souriante type of festival, even if we showcase traditional and international music. If, for example, I invite an Acadian group or La Bardasse from Quebec, then I am taking a risk because no one in British Columbia has ever heard of these groups. We do not invite Ginette Reno to perform at the Festival du bois, not because we would not like to hear her, but because that is not what our festival is all about; there is another festival for popular music.
I think it is high time that Canada Council took a good look at the francophone reality outside Quebec and understood that it involves something other than Quebec type festivals.
Senator Champagne: That is perhaps something that we could be sure to include in our report, Madam Chair.
The Chair: I will now recognize Mr. Johnson.
M. Johnson: I hope that I can stay with you for a little bit longer this time. I will begin by responding to the last question about what we can do, and I will carry on where I left off my previous comment.
There is the whole issue of programs that are already developed without providing for any consultation with the communities. I call that parachuting. You take a program, you force it on the community and you tell them to find some way to adapt to the program. What that does is to increase the administrative burden without providing the resources that are essential to the communities who deliver the services. I know that there is an administrative responsibility, but you should help us to help you develop the programs that will best meet the needs of the communities, rather than do the opposite.
With respect to promoting and training artists, I can summarize my position in one word: ``exposure,'' meaning an opportunity to promote the wealth of francophone artists; one way to do that is through community radio stations. Radio Canada has very strict guidelines and for those of us who live in Western Canada or in Alberta, I think that promoting community radio would provide some permanent, additional outlet for our artists, while respecting the cultural dimension of our communities.
Whenever we want to advertise a social or cultural activity that will take place in our communities, the radio station becomes an indispensable tool, since people are looking for certain products and do not always know where to find them.
In response to the first question, Madam Chair, I would say that the situation in Alberta is precarious, in view of the growth of the francophone community. For example, 8,000 Quebec health cards were exchanged for Alberta health cards. It is estimated that the community has grown from 67,000 in 2001 to more than 100,000 in 2006 or 2007. We cannot get a handle on the exact number but we know that there are more than 100,000 francophones. The Alberta government is of the same opinion and has begun to negotiate agreements for a service policy.
When it comes to the Francophonie, the rich kids in Alberta are also poor cousins because we have a government that does not pay much attention to us but is demonstrating some openness. The partners that should come to the table include the Alberta government which can use the federal government as leverage to force the hand of our provincial and territorial governments. The government could then boast about its accomplishment by saying that it wants to create spaces for francophones, it has a responsibility and it wants to include certain clauses in agreements that are signed with the provinces. We want proactive services. There are many opportunities available to us. What my colleagues and other witnesses have said reflects what is happening in Alberta. In other words, we must act quickly to begin to increase the capacity provided to communities so that we can be true partners for the development and promotion of our great Canadian values.
The Chair: I will take two brief answers to Senator Champagne's question, because Messrs. Denault and Rémillard would like to speak. And then we will move on to Senator Murray.
Mr. Denault: I will not repeat what has already been said. We all share the same opinion. Yes, we do work together from time to time to organize tours. Because of our location, we are closer to the Yukon and Whitehorse. In the past, we have invited musical groups to our communities in Fort Smith, Hay River, Yellowknife and Inuvik; they have then gone on to Whitehorse. We have a number of reasons to consider working together. We would not do it as a stopgap measure, but with the intention of taking real action and building something new. That is our current situation.
Mr. Rémillard: First, I would like to respond to the question relating to developing partnerships in order to maximize the available funding.
Interesting things are being done in Saskatchewan. The CCF is currently working on a fast developing project, in cooperation with the province; it involves cultural industries. The CCF has approached the Conseil de cooperation de la Saskatchewan, which is the organization that is involved in economic development, and the SEFFA, which is involved with adult education, to develop a partnership that would promote the cultural industry dimension and help with artistic development in Saskatchewan.
Moreover, the province is working with the Saskatchewan Arts Board in order to eventually bring all of this together. On the anglophone side, there is a move to create an organization that would bring all of the partners together. For the time being, this would involve mainly music, but eventually, other parts of the cultural industry would be brought on board.
The Association jeunesse fransaskoise is also developing partnerships with us, with the Association des aînés and other similar projects. This happens quite often. We have no choice, we have to find some alternative even though there is competition for available funding. These partnerships usually lead to the best outcome.
With respect to having musicians tour the schools, the Conseil culturel runs a program in Saskatchewan for that purpose. We regularly invite artists to perform in the schools. Of course, transportation is an issue. Canada Council does not meet our transportation needs at all. As Ms. Dumas has said, the programs are often ill adapted to the needs of Western Canada. It is a misperception to say that we do not take any risks.
It is true that many artists are well known in Eastern Canada but are not familiar to Western audiences, and in some cases, it would be a risk to have them perform. There are some — musical styles or artistic disciplines — that the Canada Council seems to favour over others, even if, in our opinion, they are not always the right choices. The programs should be adapted or adjusted. I can only add my support to the position expressed by Ms. Dumas.
I would have liked to discuss a number of other issues. There are a number of partnerships with the province, and we feel that this is a positive step because the official languages policy seems to be having an effect in Saskatchewan. The province is beginning to understand that a cultural product is a positive thing. It can lead to large-scale economic spin offs for Saskatchewan because there is a market for this type of product, and the fact that a province is mostly English-speaking does not mean that one cannot develop a francophone cultural product that could be exported. These dividends are available to Saskatchewan. That is the spin that we are putting on it and, interestingly enough, the province seems to want to move in that direction. That is the type of thing that we have been doing.
The Chair: Before we hear from Senator Murray, I would like our witnesses to know that we will also be hearing from national organizations, including the Canada Council for the Arts and others, but the committee first wanted to hear from the community and that is why you are with us here today.
Senator Murray: Mr. Johnson, first, in a very distant past, there was a Franco-Albertan culture. These people shared a common language and a history that went back to the 19th century. It was a rather homogeneous community that was centred around the church. The reality that you are describing today is a demographic one in which most Franco- Albertans or francophones living in Alberta are not native to that province or perhaps not even native to Canada. They identify themselves as belonging to a linguistic rather than a cultural community.
You mentioned the challenges facing the federal government. Your challenge is to find a way to create this cultural dimension without which you would not have a real community, but rather just a collection of individuals who share the same language.
You are the president or a representative of the Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta. Do the francophones in Alberta have any organizations that are purely cultural or are they working toward creating any such organizations?
Mr. Johnson: There are many groups such as the Société des arts visuels de l'Alberta, le Regroupement artistique francophone de l'Alberta, l'Uni Théâtre, la Girandole dance company. There are a number of initiatives and organizational infrastructures already in place.
I would like to take a step back. The foundation for this Francophonie or what is known as the Franco-Albertan community continues to exist and it is what we are building upon to create this new francophone identity. There has been phenomenal growth with the arrival of Quebeckers, Acadians and people from northern Ontario. That alone serves to change the dynamics of the traditional francophone community. Those who identify as Franco-Albertan or French Canadian are on the same footing as Quebeckers who move to Alberta and identify as Quebeckers. However, added to the mix are the North African Muslim communities and people from Central Africa, including Rwanda, Gabon and Congo. That adds a multicultural dimension and a visual aspect that makes for a diverse francophone community.
Community groups that provide arts and culture services are examining the issue of resources and the communities' capacity to increase the number of services that are provided to meet the needs of those who require them. The groups are seeing their traditional role evolve into one that is much more international and more modern.
I am not sure if I answered your question, but we are in the midst of developing our society in Alberta.
Senator Murray: Are the francophone immigrants scattered throughout the province or do most of them settle in the more dynamic regions that we call the oil patch?
Mr. Johnson: Obviously, places like Grande Prairie and Fort McMurray will experience a large influx of new arrivals. However, immigration has had a greater impact in Calgary and Edmonton. You are right in saying that immigration is oil-patch driven.
Senator Murray: I understand. In my opinion, we should dedicate most of our efforts and resources to areas where there is a critical mass. That is obviously the case where you live.
Ms. Bazin, you represent some 30 rural francophone communities in Manitoba. What would be the proportion of Franco-Manitobans living in rural areas compared to the number of francophones living in the Greater Winnipeg area?
Ms. Bazin: That is a good question. I do not have the exact figures. I do know that most francophones live in Saint- Boniface. We have some 30 communities, some of which only have a population of 60, while others, like Sainte-Anne, have almost 10,000 inhabitants.
Senator Murray: Everyone is familiar with the wording in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as it applies to education: ``where numbers warrant.'' Would you not agree that the federal government should concentrate its efforts and its resources where there is a large cultural critical mass?
Ms. Bazin: Absolutely. Except that we do not know if it means 10 people or 50 people. It is never clear; we do not know exactly what it means. As they say, build it and they will come. However, there is always a risk that we will lose our identity as a francophone community.
Senator Murray: In urban areas?
Ms. Bazin: In both urban and rural areas. There are small communities that are growing very quickly, but they run the risk of losing their identity.
Senator Murray: That is why the government feels so strongly about having facilities combining a school and a community centre in cities like Fredericton and Saint John, New Brunswick.
Ms. Bazin: Those are key areas.
Senator Murray: These combined facilities serve as a gathering point for the francophone population.
Ms. Bazin: Exactly. They are very important. If we want different cultures to become involved in the community, then we must find some way for them to participate. In some of our small communities, we have seen people from other cultures arrive and have no place to go. Then we wonder why they are not more involved in the community. Perhaps no one went to see them to invite them to share their culture so that we might better understand them and so that they might, in turn, understand us. We want to achieve something better. We were not prepared for these challenges.
Senator Murray: Mr. Cuerrier, did you say that you have some education and cultural infrastructures in Nunavut? I would assume that most of them are located in Iqaluit?
Mr. Cuerrier: Yes, indeed.
Senator Murray: Are the 1,000 or 1,200 francophones scattered throughout the territory or are most of them living in Iqaluit?
Mr. Cuerrier: More than half of them live in Iqaluit. We believe that there are between 600 and 700 francophones living there. That said, we often receive requests from francophones living in remote communities. Iqaluit seems quite remote when you are in Ottawa. We regularly receive requests for French services from other parts of Nunavut. That is something that we cannot provide at this time because of the level of funding that we receive, as well as our limited infrastructures and human resources.
I reacted a little when you mentioned the idea of critical mass because I think we should be careful. Does that mean that even if a community has a great deal of energy and wants to develop, if there are not enough people there, then it will be ignored or the people will be told to move to an area where there is a larger population? That is a rather strange approach. I think that Canada is a generous country, something that it can afford to be. I am not sure that the same thing would be said in other places.
Another thing is often on my mind. Everywhere — especially on the English channels — you hear that a new Canada is dawning because of immigration, which has a positive influence and is opening people's minds and horizons. But people keep on saying that this new Canada is necessarily anglophone. I believe that we must give the francophone community — I will repeat what I said earlier — the necessary tools and means to welcome these people and to open themselves up to the world.
Since I live in Nunavut, I am truly at the crossroads of all these cultures. Most of the francophones who come here are from Quebec. Others come from across the globe, such as from Africa. A little earlier, you talked about a kind of commingling of people speaking the same language. I think we have moved beyond that. It is not just a group of individuals who share the same language. It is a group of individuals who have come together, who acknowledge one another, who share the same language and who share a strong bond. In Iqaluit, whether we are Arab or Black, from Quebec or Manitoba, we all speak French and love French music, when we actually to get to hear it.
You just asked what you could do for us. My answer is this: anything! But first and foremost, give communities the tools they need to make their dreams come true. Send artists our way, anything. We live in a cultural desert. Do not abandon francophone communities and only speak of linguistic duality, when in fact our language is our country, whether we are anglophone or francophone. It does not matter where we come from, the language is within us. It is our country and we are lucky enough to live in a country called Canada which is a very generous one, and we should not forget it.
Senator Murray: In my view, it is clear that francophones, like other Canadians, are increasingly moving our large urban areas. Francophones living in Toronto or Halifax represent only a small part of the population, but they form a critical mass. If the Francophonie outside Quebec is to survive, we must absolutely concentrate our efforts in these large urban areas.
You talked about legislation; you have asked us to get Parliament to pass an official languages act, but I take it you mean a territorial act. Is that right?
Mr. Cuerrier: Absolutely.
Senator Murray: Are you referring to an act which has already been passed by your legislature?
Mr. Cuerrier: I will try to be brief. You should not raise these issues with me because I am very passionate about them and once I start I cannot stop talking about them.
When Nunavut was created in 1999, it inherited all of the legislation of the Northwest Territories, whether it was good or bad. That is what happened. So we basically photocopied everything, and in our minds this legislation belonged to the Northwest Territories before and beginning April 1st, 1999, it belonged to Nunavut. It was the same. In fact, the Official Languages Act of the Northwest Territories recognizes 11 official languages, unless I am mistaken: nine native languages, and English and French.
But this is an aberration given the reality of Nunavut, because three languages are actually spoken in Nunavut: Inuktitut — or Inuinnaqtun, the Inuit tongue —, English and French.
The Government of Nunavut decided pass an official languages act to increase the status of Inuktitut and to make it equal to French and English, because under the inherited Northwest Territories legislation, native languages were not granted the same status as English and French. The Government of Nunavut did an excellent job, because it took into account the demands of the francophone community; there were discussions and consultations. It also took into account the decision of Judge Moreau in Yellowknife. It put everything together and tried to create legislation on official languages which truly respected the three communities which live side by side in Nunavut. But if this bill is to become law, it must be passed by the Canadian Parliament. That is part of the process: when you are a territory, father must approve before a bill can become law. That is the point I was making, because after Parliament has passed the bill, you in the Senate will have to deal with it, to ensure that it is adopted as quickly as possible. . .
Senator Murray: Parliament is in fact made up of two Chambers, the House of Commons and the Senate.
Mr. Cuerrier: I am sorry. I am in full flight, but I am not familiar with the details. So after the bill passes the House of Commons, you will receive it in the Senate. I ask that you speak to the members of Parliament so that the bill is passed quickly because it is in the best interest of the people living in Nunavut. So I would ask that as soon as the legislation lands on your desk, you pass it as quickly as possible.
Senator Murray: But you, Mr. Denault, have said that the government of Northwest Territories has not respected its obligations. What obligations? The territories are creatures of the Canadian Parliament. They certainly do not have a lot of say in the area of official languages.
Mr. Denault: I am not the only one to say this; the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories has also said so in a very clear and detailed decision.
Senator Murray: Are we talking about obligations which the government of Northwest Territories has given itself or obligations imposed by the federal act?
Mr. Denault: Both. The judge ruled in favour of the responsibility of the government of the Northwest Territories under its act, but the Northwest Territories legislation is based on federal legislation, which in turn is based on our Charter. So the judge did not think it was necessary to make a ruling based on the Constitution.
However, given what our governments are doing, there is no doubt that one day the issue will be settled.
I would like to add something in response to your question —
Senator Murray: I did not mean to provoke you.
Mr. Denault: No, I do not feel I have been provoked. I am enjoying this. The issue of critical mass cannot be applied the same way everywhere; it depends on the circumstances, the place and the demographic reality. A total of 42,000 people live in the Northwest Territories. Of that number, a bit less than 3 per cent see themselves as francophone Canadians, and nearly 10 per cent say they speak French. That 10 per cent are people who love French and who want to be involved in any type of event we organize. They are the critical mass. Because of the 10 per cent, French is the second most spoken language in the Northwest Territories.
I do not quite understand the argument of the example. If I recall the facts of history — I am no expert in the matter — after the Riel Rebellion was put down, a critical mass of anglophones was created in Western Canada, which grew through immigration. The question today, though I do not know if statisticians want to ask it, would be: who are the true anglophones in Canada?
Because the critical mass of anglophones was created through immigration. Over time, generations of people began to speak English. However, they retained some elements of their ancestral culture, which is a big thing. I believe that some of the information we receive is a little biased in that regard. What would prevent us, given the same type of justice applied over time, from creating our own critical mass of francophones? This issue should not even have to put us on the defensive; we should not even have to be discussing this. When people immigrate to Canada and choose to speak French, it is just as valid as someone who chooses to speak English. It is a matter of identity.
Ms. Dumas: To follow up on what Mr. Denault was saying, I believe, Senator Murray, that our concerns in British Columbia, as francophones, is that people are increasingly trying to wedge us into a multicultural reality, which is causing us to lose our sense of identity. Everyone is put into this great big melting pot, its contents are stirred and you come up with multiculturalism.
I am often invited as a guest speaker on multiculturalism in British Columbia. But I keep on repeating that I am not part of multiculturalism, that I am a member of one of Canada's official language groups.
For all the reasons which have been mentioned, I believe that when you talk about supporting communities, if one community has three people, they might be told to join a bigger community for financial reasons. If you want to open a French school in British Columbia, the French school board requires that there be at least ten children. If ten kids are enough to open a school, I believe that ten people are enough to create a community.
Senator Murray: Is the situation of francophone immigrants in Alberta the same as in British Columbia?
Ms. Dumas: Today, there are indeed many francophone immigrants as well as many francophone migrants. It is the same reality as in Alberta.
That is why there is also a lot of competition for jobs.
Senator Murray: Does Maillardville have the greatest francophone population in British Columbia?
Ms. Dumas: I believe that the reality of Maillardville today is a historical one. The people who live there are descendants of seven generations of francophones who continue to speak French. It is not the same thing in Vancouver where many more people come and go; they might stay for a year or two and then move on. Maillardville is a real community where people choose to live and where they stay for generations. If that is the reality of our community, it does not mean that our community is less important just because it is smaller than other communities in the province; I feel it is still important.
Mr. Rémillard: I simply want to add something to what Ms. Dumas said with regard to multiculturalism and the perception people often have of francophone communities, especially in Saskatchewan.
In the 1980s, when the Conseil culturel was receiving regular funding from the province, it was often within the multiculturalism program. People often perceive us as being quaint and folkloric. Over time, by making many representations, we managed to change the perception people had of us, which was an obstacle to the development of the Conseil culturel. Today, there are still remnants of that attitude when we deal with the province, if only because we have a permanent seat on the Multicultural Committee of interest, which is an advisory committee.
Of course, there are still lots of activities which are based on French-Canadian folk culture.
We would like to present the francophone community of Saskatchewan as one which is connected to the international reality of francophones. That is, we would like to make people aware that there is an international Francophonie and that Western francophones, as well as all other francophones in Canada, are part of that reality.
What Canada's francophones can contribute is the richness of their culture. We are part of that culture, we must accept it, and not only accept it but make the federal government realize that if we are to make our voice heard within the international Francophonie, people will have to stop perceiving Western francophones as being quaint and folkloric. We are full-fledged members of modern society. That is my opinion.
The Chair: Thank you. We are running out of time and we will have to end this passionate, if I can put it that way, but extremely interesting discussion.
I have a bit of homework for our witnesses because we did not have time to go through all the questions.
The committee would like you to e-mail your answers to the following three questions:
First, is the government of Quebec's policy on the Canadian Francophonie helpful to you? If so, how? We would like to know what you think about the Quebec government's policy with regard to the cultural sector and support for this sector.
Second, regarding Part VII of the Official Languages Act, could you provide us with examples of positive measures which could support francophone culture?
Lastly — and this issue triggered an extremely interesting discussion —, regarding critical mass, numbers, rural versus urban, could you provide us with examples of networking?
I know that this is already happening between various provinces and regions. With examples of what already exists, the committee will be in a better position to make recommendations.
You are before the Senate Committee on Official Languages, which is here to protect minorities, and we are just beginning our study. So if you could, we would appreciate your sending your responses to the committee clerk. Thank you very much to our witnesses and to honourable senators.
The committee adjourned.