Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue 3 - Evidence
OTTAWA, Monday, March 23, 2009
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day at 4 p.m. for its study of 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: Honourable senators, I see that we have a quorum and I would like to call this meeting to order.
Welcome to the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages. I am Senator Maria Chaput from Manitoba, Chair of the committee.
I would like to introduce the committee members who are with us today. I will begin on my far left: Senator Gérald Comeau from Nova Scotia, Senator Andrée Champagne from Quebec, who is vice-chair of our committee, and Senator Fortin-Duplessis, also from Quebec. On my right we have Senator Mobina Jaffer from British Columbia, Senator Claudette Tardif from Alberta and Senator Rose-Marie Losier-Cool from New Brunswick.
Today we are pleased to have with us the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, the Honourable James Moore, as well as officials accompanying him today. They are Ms. Judith LaRocque, Deputy Minister, Mr. Hubert Lussier, Director General, Official Languages Support Program, and Mr. David Robinson, Director General of the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games Federal Secretariat.
Welcome to you all.
The minister is appearing before the committee today to present his views, as Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, on a variety of issues related to official languages.
As you know, Mr. Minister, the development and vitality of these communities is the very focus of the committee's discussion and the work it carries out. The committee wishes to extend its sincere thanks to you for accepting our invitation to appear today. I now invite you to make your opening statement.
Hon. James Moore, P.C., M.P., Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages: Madam Chair, I am very pleased to be here today and I want to thank you for your kind invitation. I have a great deal of respect for this committee, which has an excellent reputation on the Hill, that of a committee that works hard in a non-partisan manner for the future of Canada's official languages.
I am here today to talk about what I would like to accomplish in the coming months in the matter of promoting our nation's official languages and to lay the groundwork for a productive working relationship.
To begin, I would like to say how honoured I was that the Prime Minister entrusted me with the responsibility for official languages, first as Secretary of State, and then as minister. For me, it is a tremendously important portfolio.
In fact, French played a central role in my life as I was growing up. You see, 30 years ago, my parents felt that it was important for French to be taught in British Columbia. They were ahead of their time in our province and believed that the key to uniting our country was communication. So, they enrolled my two sisters and me in French immersion school from kindergarden onward, and I am eternally grateful to them for their foresight. I am very proud to be among the growing number of Canadians — 9.6 million francophones and francophiles —who speak French.
[English]
Today my ability to speak French and English is a true asset for me. I am able to fully comprehend our society and its people; and I understand the hopes and concerns of Canadians and appreciate the cultural wealth of anglophone and francophone communities across our country.
As Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, I am responsible for the Official Languages Support Programs and the coordination of government action in official languages.
[Translation]
Since last July, I have met with a number of official-language community representatives, including members of the organizing committee of the next World Acadian Congress. We have invested over 4 millions dollars in this congress.
I also took part in roundtables bringing together community leaders in Vancouver, Moncton and Edmonton.
I attended the opening of the Canadian Francophone Games in Edmonton last August.
I also took part in Francoforce both in Quebec and in Dieppe. For his part, my colleague, Steven Blaney, represented me when Francoforce came to Ottawa. Francoforce enabled me to discover a talented and audacious new generation of Francophone artists who are very proud of their roots. I have also had the privilege of speaking with young Canadians who are learning their second official language, as well as other young Canadians who are pursuing their university studies in French in minority official-language communities.
In fact, less than a month ago, I announced that Simon Fraser University would receive an additional $1,215,000 to support its Office of Francophone and Francophile Affairs, bringing our Government's investment in this office to over $6.5 million. Thanks to the office, francophones and francophiles in this part of the country can do more than simply pursue a post-secondary education in French; they can stay in their province; they can express their attachment to the French language and to francophone culture; and, above all, they can continue to contribute to the vitality of their community in countless ways.
I consider the needs of official-language communities in all my decisions. For example, when I created the Canada Media Fund, I made sure that francophone communities would have their own budget.
On a smaller scale, in early March, I announced that we would support Maillardville's 20th Festival du Bois. This community, which I am well acquainted with, is celebrating its 100th anniversary and is the oldest Francophone community west of the Rockies.
Of course, this is not the only anniversary of major importance to Canada in 2009.
[English]
As you know, the Official Languages Act turns 40 this year. The anniversary is a real milestone, as the Official Languages Act was an excellent initiative for asserting Canadians' rights and opening up new opportunities to them. The recognition of our two official languages has always been part of my life and the country I have always known.
Our linguistic duality is a treasure and we want to take advantage of this anniversary to make Canadians more aware of the benefits of having two world-class official languages.
[Translation]
The year 2009 will be critical for those working in the official languages field. Our Government will continue to deliver on the commitments set forth in the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality, announced last June. I can assure you that a lot of work went into developing the roadmap. We considered the perspectives of a great many players.
We drew inspiration from the work of committees and reports of the Commissioner of Official Languages. We also took into account the recommendations issued in Bernard Lord's report and the results of the Sommet des communautés francophones et acadienne.
The roadmap is a far-reaching document that is very important to our country. It defines the Government of Canada's overall approach in matters of official languages, while presenting our objectives and our strategies. I have said this before, and I will say it again today: our government is determined to honour its commitment to all Canadians by making good on all the initiatives set forth in the roadmap. This is an unprecedented investment: $1.1 billion over five years. For 2008-2009, we expect to invest over $180 million, on top of the $15 million already set aside in the 2007 Budget for official-language community activities.
[English]
As a matter of fact, the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality funding announcements have started in sectors that we consider to be priorities — health, justice, immigration and economic development, as well as the arts and culture. I assure you that the implementation work is proceeding smoothly.
The Economic Action Plan presented in Budget 2009, passed by the House of Commons and the Senate, clearly demonstrates our government's commitment to the arts, culture and heritage. The plan sets aside an unprecedented $540 million to provide support and sound economic return on our investment.
[Translation]
Culture is also a major new component of the Roadmap. In fact, three days ago, as part of the Rendez-vous de la Francophonie in Vancouver, I announced the implementation of the Cultural Development Fund, an initiative that will enable us to respond to certain requests expressed by the Francophone community. This fund will have a $14 million budget over four years. It will support and strengthen the arts, culture, and heritage in English and French official-language minority communities, while promoting a sense of identity and belonging in these communities. It will also enable Canadians everywhere to better appreciate the diversity and vitality of our national arts and culture from Whitehorse to Moncton, by way of St. Boniface and Lennoxville.
I recently had the pleasure of announcing new details on the National Translation Program for Book Publishing. Starting April 1, our government will invest $5 million over four years to help Canadian publishers translate the literary works of Canadian authors into French and English. The aim of this program is to make the immense cultural and literary riches of our country accessible to as many Canadians as possible.
Regarding the health sector, I wanted to mention that Colin Carrie, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, announced today that the Consortium national de la formation en santé will receive an additional $4 million to help francophone students pursue post-secondary studies in this field.
I also wanted to discuss education, since it is a major component of the roadmap. The government has been working on education with its partners for a long time. In fact, for some 40 years, the Government of Canada has offered support to the provinces and the territories with a view to helping them meet their responsibilities in matters of minority language instruction. For the last full year, we spent $288 million on education, specifically on education in the minority language and on second-language instruction.
Agreements in matters of services and education between our government and the 13 provinces and territories must be renewed this year. This will enable us to pursue our partnership, while honouring our commitment to ensure that the roadmap is implemented in such a way as to consider regional specificities.
It is important that Canadians be given the opportunity to improve their mastery of French and English from primary school to secondary school. When we work with provincial governments on school or community-centre expansion projects, our intent is for these projects to benefit our youngest citizens. For example, we supported the expansion of the Centre communautaire Sainte-Anne in Fredericton through a total investment of over $6.6 million.
All these efforts show that our government remains strongly committed to promoting our communities and our linguistic duality. I fully intend to keep working with all the players, with the communities, and with the provincial and territorial governments, on behalf of Canadians everywhere.
[English]
We are committed to implementing the roadmap along with the renewing of the agreements and the establishment of the Program to Support Linguistic Rights. We are less than a year away from the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games in Vancouver, the discussion of which is the main reason Mr. Robinson is here today. Since the planning for the games began, respect and promotion of our two official languages have been priorities for our government.
[Translation]
The study presented by the Commissioner of Official Languages last December aptly expresses the fact that the 2010 Olympic Games are golden opportunity for Canada to promote its linguistic duality.
Our government expects nothing less than model games with respect to official language matters in 2010. I can assure you that our government and all our partners are working diligently to ensure that the 2010 Winter Games are games for all Canadians. In fact, we just unveiled the prototype of the Olympic Torch. In my opinion, the Torch Relay is one of the best symbols of the pan-Canadian spirit of the games. The relay will link 1,000 communities, both anglophone and francophone. And, during the games, Canadians will be able to witness the feats of our athletes in the official language of their choice.
As you can see, 2009 will be a full year. I know that a lot of work has already gone into promoting our official languages. As the Minister responsible for Official Languages, I am fortunate to have the support of a dedicated parliamentary secretary. Shelly Glover, who is with me today, proudly represents me on a wide range of activities. I can always count on her knowledge of the realities of official-language communities and on her desire to promote Canada's linguistic duality.
Today I would like to call on your skills to help the government explore means and ways of encouraging more Canadians to master their two official languages and to use them regularly. I would like to work effectively with you and with all our partners within and outside of government to ensure that all Canadians benefit from our linguistic duality. Thank you. I am open for questions.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Minister. We will immediately open it up to questions from senators. However, I would like to remind colleagues that the minister must leave at 4:55 p.m. I therefore ask that you keep your questions specific and focused.
[English]
Senator Jaffer: I want to welcome you, Mr. Minister, and as a British Columbian, I am very proud of your heritage and the vision your parents had. I hope that in the future we will have more people like you from British Columbia who are fluent in French.
Regarding the very strong immigrant and new Canadian community we have whose first language is French, I would appreciate if you would tell us what you are doing to include them in the Olympic Games, especially in B.C. As you know, we have a large francophone immigrant community. Also, what kind of programs are you doing to help those who live outside Quebec integrate into our community?
Mr. Moore: With regard to the 2010 Olympic Games, you should know that official language minority community involvement is part of the conditions made for the money that Parliament approved for the torch relay, for example — which is 46,000 kilometres is the length of the torch relay, which is the longest in Olympic history; official language minority communities are to be along the route and that includes both francophone and anglophone communities to ensure these are Canada's games.
We in British Columbia have known about the games and have been getting excited about them for a long time. Unfortunately, there is a sense in British Columbia that the excitement about the games has not spread as far east as we want it to. The torch relay was announced early — this past fall — to try to get people excited about it and we want to involve, not just communities but also artists in every sense of the celebrations, along the route. The torch will stop at 100 different communities across the country and we want to ensure that official language minority communities are involved in the.
As I often remind many of our Bloc Québécois colleagues in the House of Commons, who like to take shots at the 2010 Olympics by indicating it is a sporting event and it is taking up too much money, this is an incredible opportunity for Canada, not only in official languages but also artistically. Three-point-two billion people be watching the Opening Ceremonies of the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games. We will have artists across this country; youth, Aboriginal artists and French and English artists will be telling the Canadian story in both official languages in BC Place Stadium. They will be involved across the country in the torch relay.
As I remind my colleagues from the Bloc Québécois, two-thirds of the athletes will be from the Province of Quebec. This is a real pan-Canadian effort that I think will be a unifying effort for the country at a time when we need not only economic stimulus but a good jolt of Canadian patriotism and pride. The 2010 Olympic Games will be a good moment for Canada. Official language minority communities will be involved in that way.
Your second question was with regard to general support for official language minority communities. We have a number of programs. One of the very large and engaged ones is a round table —
Senator Jaffer: May I interrupt? I know many other senators have questions, so may I ask you to give that answer in writing? That will be sufficient. I have one more question.
Mr. Moore: The short answer is we are doing a lot.
Senator Jaffer: Thank you and we will ask you to come back another day. I am pleased that you have emphasized your vision and our committee's vision that I often worry that we, as British Columbians, do not want to have the black mark that we did not respect the dual-linguistic heritage that we have in B.C.
We have to ensure it is well portrayed. I know the Official Languages Commissioner has spoken about the issue of translation and the Translation Bureau's expertise. I understand there is a gap of $1.5 million that Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games (VANOC) has asked the federal government assist with.
What are you doing to ensure that gap is covered?
Mr. Moore: Senator Jaffer, just look at the success and the analysis that has been done on VANOC efforts on the 2010 file. In the last Parliament, David Emerson was the minister responsible for the 2010 games. I was his parliamentary secretary. There actually were moments when VANOC had media scrums and did not have anyone present to speak French, which was a great disappointment to many Canadians. VANOC recognizes they made errors in that regard.
Over time, they have made incredible strides in the right direction, not only on the torch relay and the opening ceremony, but also in making investments and ensuring that staff and the execution of the 2010 games will be fluently bilingual. We will have the capacity to broadcast the Olympic Games in both official languages. Volunteers will be involved at the 2010 games.
I do not know if Mr. Robinson wants to add more of the progress of 2010 regarding official languages, but it has been substantial from where they began to where they are now.
David M. Robinson, Director General, 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games Federal Secretariat, Canadian Heritage: Recently, VANOC, the games organizing committee, completed their final version of the business plan. Now, we are in the process of reviewing the plan. VANOC's commitments on official languages are articulated in the contract they signed with us, called the multi-party agreement. That agreement stipulates in clear detail what VANOC is obligated to do. We are reviewing their obligations under the multi-party agreement and ensuring that they have provided sufficient resources. We will soon be reporting to the minister on our findings.
Senator Jaffer: I appreciate that very much. However, I understand there is a gap of $1.5 million for VANOC to provide the kind of services required over and above what it can do with committed funds. Will the minister provide that funding?
Mr. Moore: I am not aware of a funding gap.
John Furlong from VANOC was in Ottawa the week before last. We had a good meeting and he gave me a full briefing on how far VANOC has come.
We are aware of the concerns raised by official language minority communities outside Quebec. Broadcasters within Quebec, CTV, TQS, RDS, RIS, will deliver the games in both official languages. There have been concerns raised about the dynamic outside of Quebec. However, the number of people who have concerns is shrinking dramatically. These are Canada's games and they will be presented in both official language. It is also helpful that French and English are also both official languages of the IOC. Canadians will be very well served.
[Translation]
Senator Champagne: I have a supplementary question with respect to arrangements for broadcasting the games. I was told last week that there are still major discussions underway regarding broadcasting arrangements for the Paralympic Games and that no agreement has yet been reached between VANOC and Globe Media. Last week, I had an opportunity to meet with athletes in Valcartier. I think there may be a need for some gentle encouragement from the minister responsible and the Minister of State for Sports to ensure that our paralympic athletes also receive the benefit of television broadcasting, so that we can see them, not only on the podium during a 30-second clip on a newscast, but also actually watch them perform. That is my suggestion.
Mr. Moore: I am aware of the needs. People tend to forget, because on the news, they talk about the "2010 Olympic Games.'' However, it is the "Olympic and Paralympic Games.'' The infrastructure for the Paralympic Games is very important, as is television broadcasting of those games. The infrastructure in place to broadcast the Olympic Games will be used for the Paralympic Games as well. I know that many people have concerns about this.
Judith A. LaRocque, Deputy Minister, Canadian Heritage: Madam Chair, last week, we had an opportunity to meet with CTV, which is the broadcaster for the games, and we asked that very question. We were told that the Olympic Games broadcasting agreement is an agreement with the Olympic Committee. However, it is the Organizing Committee of the Vancouver Olympic Games that holds the broadcast rights for the Paralympic Games. It is a separate agreement. Committee members anticipate the same quality of media coverage, but they are not there yet. They have appointed Rick Hansen as special advisor, and he will help them ensure that there is appropriate coverage of the Paralympic Games. So, we are all on the same wavelength.
Senator Champagne: Let us get our ministers involved, to give them a little push!
Mr. Moore: The media centre in Vancouver is unprecedented in the history of the Olympic Games.
Senator Tardif: Mr. Minister, I want to congratulate you on your appointment as minister and also for your commitment to French, one of our two official languages here in Canada. In your presentation, you referred to projects that had recently received funding. It seems to me that we are seeing piecemeal announcements. The communities have been waiting for details on implementation of the roadmap since June of 2008. When will we be able to get more information on this?
Mr. Moore: The roadmap represents a $1.1 billion investment over five years. In the package, you have all the details with respect to how the money will be distributed. We are strengthening our commitment in this area. There is $17 million set aside for the Canada Public Service Agency. . . .
Senator Tardif: Can I just interrupt you for a moment? Have we all received that information?
Mr. Moore: The roadmap is on our website.
Senator Tardif: Do we have information regarding the Canada-Community Agreements?
Mr. Moore: The agreements?
Senator Tardif: The Canada-Community Agreements that expire in March of 2009?
Hubert Lussier, Director General, Official Languages Support Programs, Canadian Heritage: The Canada- Community Agreements can be concluded in the context of discussions with both the francophone network outside Quebec and the anglophone network inside Quebec. The agreements set out a mechanism for cooperation with the communities. Unless that cooperation is renewed, if both parties continue to want to agree on how they should be implemented, then the cooperation continues.
Senator Tardif: Has the funding been enhanced?
Mr. Lussier: The funding is applied at current levels for the fiscal year that is ending.
Senator Tardif: In terms of "positive measures,'' Mr. Minister, when we asked the question the last time — you were not minister then — we were told that an answer could not be provided because this was being handled by the Commissioner of Official Languages. Now that the case has been settled out of court, do you have a more precise definition of the term "positive measures'' under Part VII of the act?
Ms. LaRocque: Our definition is that anything that supports the communities is a "positive measure''. If you are referring specifically to Part VII and what is being done at the federal level, I can give you additional information. There has been an extensive awareness campaign, an information tour and we have also produced a guide for all federal government civil servants. We could make those available to you.
Senator Tardif: I believe we have already received them. I wanted to know if the guide had been updated since then. Have other departments made you aware of what they have accomplished in that respect? You do receive reports from each of the departments.
Ms. LaRocque: Yes, we receive reports, we organize seminars and the champions meet regularly.
Mr. Lussier: As the deputy minister just mentioned, there are several networks within which the concepts underlying application of Part VII are communicated. The champions network, which previously concerned itself very little with Part VII, is now doing so on a very regular basis. My colleagues and myself are also called on to make presentations on this.
What is Part VII? Well, the departments that have traditionally been concerned with official languages in relation to the language of work or the language of services to the public, have an ever better understanding of what it is about. So, the message that Part VII concerns the communities and all federal institutions has clearly been heard.
Senator Tardif: In this definition of "positive measures'' which you accept, do you believe that consultation with the communities is an important criterion?
Mr. Lussier: Yes, of course.
Senator Tardif: You do consider consultation to be an important criterion. As regards the criteria for accessing funding under the former Court Challenges Program, do you consult the communities when there is a lack of funding or when the funding is no longer available?
Mr. Moore: Funding remains available for existing commitments, but not for new commitments. As you know, last July, our government announced the creation of a new program to support linguistic rights. This program will be implemented before the end of 2009.
Senator Tardif: Have you made a commitment to existing interveners under the former Court Challenges Program?
Mr. Moore: Yes, I know there is a case in Edmonton, but this will not apply to new interveners. Cases that were already underway prior to the cancellation of the Court Challenges Program will continue to receive funding.
Senator Tardif: This is a case that affects them very directly, and I do not believe they consider themselves to be new interveners.
Mr. Moore: That is the policy our government announced in 2006. Our commitment was clear and we have not changed that policy. We will not be providing funding to new interveners.
Senator Tardif: The fact is, however, that a neighbouring province did receive funding subsequently and the minister may want to take a closer look at that.
Senator Comeau: I would like to thank the minister for his comments regarding this committee. We do try not to be partisan and it is rare for that to occur. As a general rule, the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages works very well. After all these years, I can tell you that the well-being of our communities is something we still feel very strongly about and that we continue to keep our eye on the ball.
As I understand it, the government has undertaken to consult minority official-language communities with respect to the development or implementation of its policies and programs. For community groups, that means that they will be consulted by the department and its officials with respect to issues of concern to them.
However, for the government, that means that community groups will generally be consulted, but not on specific issues. Is my interpretation correct?
Mr. Moore: No, it really will be both, because issues relating specifically to our commitments are important. When I meet with groups and officials, it is also very important to know how we can improve things. So, we also work on the details. Because I am from the West Coast of Canada, being able to participate in a roundtable with representatives of the Acadian community in New Brunswick, in order to get a feel for what is happening on the ground, is particularly important. They talk to us about their own cultural and historical background and tell us what they want us to know about their communities.
Senator Comeau: You say you go to New Brunswick, but do you also go a little further afield? Do not forget Newfoundland.
Mr. Moore: Yes, as far as Newfoundland.
Senator Comeau: I recently read a press review that deplored the fact that the Interdepartmental Partnership with the Official-Language Communities, or IPOLC, had been cancelled without consultation. That was the expression used by the groups that prepared the press review. Can you explain why IPOLC was cancelled without consulting the communities?
Mr. Moore: There were consultations that my deputy minister can give you more information about. However, the major objectives of that initiative had largely been met, as was demonstrated by the federal institutions' commitment to the communities. Since this was a decision made by my predecessor, I really cannot comment on it.
Ms. LaRocque: While it is preferable to hold consultations at every opportunity and when appropriate, the decision to terminate the IPOLC was made as part of the strategic review. It was done within the budget process and, as we all know, there are all kinds of confidentiality rules associated with the budget; as a result, decisions are only announced once the budget has been approved by cabinet.
As with all other decisions made as part of the strategic review that deal with the Department of Canadian Heritage, it was unfortunately impossible to hold prior consultations.
Senator Comeau: What that means, then, is that programs like the IPOLC can be cancelled without any consideration for their value if they were created as part of a ministerial review; these programs can then be cut without consultation with the stakeholders.
Mr. Moore: Many federal institutions have incorporated the IPOLC objectives and have met those objectives. The program was a success, but it was also a project to be implemented over a set period of time; it was not an ongoing project. There will always be consultations, not only with the people receiving the money immediately, but very broad consultations. We know that the 2009-2010 Budget is a budget aimed at tackling the current crisis. And, as you know, this budget was not our first such budget, because last year's budget also tackled economic issues and the looming global crisis.
That is what the Government did not only with the people who received money through the IPOLC, but also as part of the government's responsibility to more manage the economy effectively.
Senator Comeau: I understand. I would like to come back to the whole concept of consultation, particularly in relation to section 41, which was amended through legislation passed in 2005 to provide that the government would take "positive measures'' with the minority communities in Canada, both anglophones in Quebec and francophones outside Quebec.
I understand that this required taking decisions. And, sometimes, it is a budget issue and cuts have to be made somewhere. When you see that there are problems in the economy and with the budget, you decide that this program or that is going to be cut.
However, I am trying to find some balance between "positive measures'', on the one hand, and the concept of consultation or the lack of consultation, on the other. Considering the press reviews in these communities, I think we can ask ourselves: why not?
Mr. Moore: All I can tell you is that, as Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, we do our homework. In terms of holding consultations in the field, I can tell you that is why I am practically never home; I have forgotten what colour my house is. Every time there is a break week in Ottawa, I visit other cities. I have already visited quite a large portion of the country. Last week, I was in Alberta, in Banff, Calgary and elsewhere. Consultation does not just mean sending someone an e-mail to say "give me your opinion'' or "what do you think of this''; it means having real consultations. I actually go and meet with them in the field, in the offices of the groups concerned, where they have their programs and responsibilities. That kind of consultations is really important, not only to have a sense of the immediate decisions to be made, but also to get a real understanding of what the overall situation is in Canada as regards our two official languages.
Senator Comeau: Well, it might be a good idea, when a decision is to be made, particularly regarding the budget, to have someone at the table. For example, when the decision is being made to cancel the IPOLC, without consulting the stakeholder groups, it might be advisable to have someone there who could at least make you aware of what the consequences are. I would like to be re-assured that someone is at the table.
Mr. Moore: I would like to give Ms. LaRocque an opportunity to tell you what was being done under the minister who preceded me in this portfolio and the way consultations would work. As a government or as a minister, we are constantly looking for ways to make improvements; for a government, it will be through programs that cost money, several million or several billion dollars. Also, as an individual, we always have the responsibility to look for ways to work more effectively. Ms. Larocque may want to talk about the IPOLC and the process implemented by Ms. Verner.
Ms. LaRocque: Very briefly, because I know there are other questions, the strategic review was an exercise during which we carried out an in-depth review of all departmental programs. In every case, we did an analysis, asking ourselves certain questions: has the program met all its objectives? Is this still the best way to proceed? This program was really meant to act as an incentive to other departments to seek out and involve the communities, by making them part of their everyday clientele.
After five years of the Action Plan, now we are looking forward, at five years of our Roadmap; there is no doubt that progress has been made and that departments which were perhaps less involved — like Health Canada or Industry Canada — are now much more involved with the communities, because they have the resources to do that. This is the kind of question that we asked ourselves.
As the minister was saying, it was always intended to be a program with a beginning, a middle and an end; it was one way of getting things done. Now the situation has evolved and I am very pleased to be able to say that the departments are increasingly involving the communities. The communities always come to see us because we are considered to be the government champions. They tell us about their relationship with other departments. When things are going well, that is great; if we need to take action to move them along more quickly, we do so. I think there is now a realization that there are other ways of doing things besides an incentive program.
The Chair: We have approximately 12 minutes left with the minister before he has to leave. Our next questioner will be Senator Fortin-Duplessis, followed by Senator Champagne and Senator Losier-Cool.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Mr. Minister, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the committee. I want to thank you, Mr. Minister, for your interest in the Standing Committee on Official Languages, as well as for the overview you provided of the services you are managing through your department.
The 2006 Census and the Survey on the Vitality of Official-Language Minorities referred to the aging of the francophone population and a population explosion in Canada which is attributable to a higher rate of immigration in recent years.
At the same time, according to the Société Santé en français, the aging population phenomenon is affecting francophone communities outside Quebec much more than it is the rest of the Canadian population. The survey reflects a deep commitment on the part of these francophones outside Quebec to their own language and the importance they attach to receiving services in their language.
Mr. Minister, in your opinion, do the provinces and territories fully recognize the importance of ensuring access to resources and specialized care in French for our seniors?
The reason I ask the question is that, through our work and in newspapers in Toronto, where approximately 100,000 francophones live and where these 100,000 francophones are able to receive long-term care, there is a centre providing bilingual care on one floor only; there are 37 beds and 15 per cent provide care in both languages.
How can the federal government help the provinces and territories to provide francophone seniors with adequate specialized health care in French?
Mr. Moore: That is a big question. There is always an opportunity to work together. As you know, at Citizenship and Immigration, there is a special dynamic in Quebec; it is important to be alive to that. In our roadmap on recruitment and integration of immigrants, we have set aside $20 million. This is an increase over our first roadmap and it is very important. We also have to work with the provinces. The first part of your question had to do with my assessment of the service levels in the provinces and territories. There are differences between the provinces. As you know, in different provinces, there are different levels of service and responsibility. For example, in Vancouver, most new Canadians are from China, Korea and South East Asia; there is not a significant Francophone migration. A government that wants to respect the francophone fact makes investments. Thus there is a department with responsibility for the francophonie which does its own work, and we have made investments to meet those commitments.
At the Edmonton roundtable, there were representatives of the African, Rwandan and other communities of francophone heritage. And, when we talk about services, we are not talking only about government services; there are services provided by parties outside government that make connections between the African heritage and new opportunities in Canada.
With respect to health care, that is one of the major investments in the roadmap. The roadmap will provide for an investment of $1.1 billion over five years; for the health care sector, it is $174.3 billion. We have a number of examples, as you well know, such as Montfort and others, where services must be provided in both official languages.
At the hospital where I was born, the Royal Colombian Hospital in New Westminster, there are services for the francophone community, because there are more than 10,000 francophones living in my community.
So, it is important to be able to access services in French and to help hospitals provide services to their patients in the official language of their choice.
Ms. LaRocque: We have a number of interesting projects that deal specifically with health care, whether it is the one with the University of Ottawa to train nurses, the one with La Cité collégiale, or others still. The situation varies from one region of the country to the next. In Moncton, people may have less trouble receiving services in French than elsewhere. We are aware of the fact that this is a very real future need. Like you, I, too, will want to receive health care services in French. We are trying to respond to the provincial reality. We have monies available to do that, and Health Canada, through the roadmap, also has significant dollars to invest.
Mr. Moore: We have an annual envelope of $36 million for minority official-language communities, in order to ensure their development and enable them to help new Canadians with their problems on the ground. I have an office in Vancouver and another one in Ottawa. I cannot be aware of all the needs and concerns that are out there in every single one of the provinces and territories. It is important for the government to provide funding to grassroots organizations that have a very clear understanding of the concerns of new Canadians and the both governmental and non-governmental services they require. That is why we have included this unprecedented amount of funding in the roadmap, in order to help organizations on the ground.
The Chair: Mr. Minister, I know that you have to leave in less than five minutes. Could some of your officials stay for a few more minutes for those senators who have not yet had an opportunity to ask their questions?
Ms. LaRocque: With pleasure.
Senator Champagne: Well, Mr. Minister, at least we did not put you through an awful quiz and ask you to name every cultural icon from Quebec!
Mr. Moore: But I did answer almost half of the questions.
Senator Champagne: There is one thing that makes my life difficult and it is possible that you, Ms. LaRocque, can provide me with this information. I became aware of the existence of this document outlining the roadmap about three weeks, or perhaps a month ago.
Mr. Moore: This one?
Senator Champagne: Yes. I did not realize that it had been printed. I was the one who called your office, had it sent here and then distributed it to some of my colleagues. No one had received it. I am a member of this committee, yet I never received it. It seems to me we are having trouble being kept informed.
[English]
I read that your parliamentary secretary recently made an announcement regarding the Historica Foundation of Canada and an increase in their youth program.
I have no idea what this is all about. I never received a piece of paper telling me about this.
[Translation]
You referred earlier to the translation, which will arrive on April 1. However, in terms of all the details and the actual criteria, we do not currently have that information. It was in here, for example, that I discovered that Termium was to be provided to the public free of charge. All Canadians interested in knowing what is going on in terms of our official languages deserved to be given a little more information. It simply is not possible that it took eight months to make it public. Perhaps it was on the Internet.
Ms. LaRocque: Yes, indeed. I am very sorry that you did not see it, because it has been on the department's website since June 20. We should perhaps make more effort to pass the information on to you. Once things are up on the website, we simply assume that they are available to both committee researchers and your offices. But we can always do better.
Mr. Moore: All the information relating to the roadmap or other initiatives is available on our website. I recall that when Ms. Verner was the minister responsible for official languages, she convened a briefing in the East Block — I attended that briefing — and there were only two senators and about three or four MPs in attendance.
Senator Champagne: We are perfectly willing to spread the good news, but first we have to be told!
Mr. Moore: If there are communication problems, that can cause political problems. So, it is up to us to take corrective measures. What is important for taxpayers is that the government is making unprecedented and effective investments. That is very important in terms of meeting the needs of our Francophone and anglophone communities across the country.
On that note, Madam Chair, I would like to thank you for inviting me to appear today. This is my first visit, but certainly not the last. Enjoy your day and the best of luck in the future.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Minister. We are going to take a few more minutes for the questions that senators were unable to put to the minister. You three will hear the questions and, if need be, you can forward written answers to us.
Ms. LaRocque: We have someone with us today who is able to answer all your questions with respect to the roadmap. We are ready and available to hear your questions.
Senator Losier-Cool: Please pass on our thanks and our congratulations to the minister for coming to meet with members of the committee.
I have a very brief and specific question that relates to the minority francophone culture. Last week, many media outlets quoted the minister as saying the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation was probably going to have to eliminate between 600 and 1,200 positions because of a revenue shortfall. We are wondering whether it would not be possible to provide some additional funding to the Corporation to help it fill the gaps in its budget. You heard the comments made by the Chair of the Board of Directors of the Société nationale de l'Acadie, Ms. Françoise Enguehard, and the President of the SANB in New Brunswick, Mr. Jean-Marie Nadeau, both of whom immediately reacted to the announcement, expressing their tremendous concerns with respect to Radio-Canada's regional programming. This is not the first time we have talked about Radio-Canada's regional programming, and there is no doubt that if positions are eliminated, we will have concerns. I do not need to repeat again just how important Radio-Canada is to the minority official-language communities.
As I was reading the roadmap, I was delighted to see what the document says on page 13. I do appreciate what is being done for arts and culture.
Here is my question: Can the minister intercede with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, either directly as the minister responsible, indirectly through a budget vote in the House of Commons, or in his capacity as minister responsible for implementing section 41 of the Official Languages Act, to ensure that the cuts at Radio-Canada/CBC are not detrimental to francophone minorities?
Ms. LaRocque: I can answer part of that question. The other part should be addressed to the minister.
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is a Crown corporation.
It is an independent corporation with its own board of directors, and I believe it would not only be unusual but deemed inappropriate for the minister for interfere with decisions made by the board of directors — a board which, as I say, is independent. It is up to them to take whatever measures or actions that they believe to be important or necessary.
That has always been the tradition in terms of the relationship between the Minister of Heritage and the board of directors of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. The latter is a completely separate and independent body, in order to ensure that there is no political interference, of course. The minister therefore has no direct role to play in the decisions made by the corporation.
As regards an indirect role or financial support, the minister has made public statements on the subject and has been quite clear in stating that there would be no action taken to provide additional subsidies to Radio-Canada/CBC, which receives more than $1 billion from Canadian taxpayers; the Minister has said that he has confidence in the management of Radio-Canada and its board of directors, and that he is confident they can live within their means.
Senator Goldstein: My question is a follow-up to the one put by Senator Fortin-Duplessis a little earlier. You alluded to health services in the language of the person requiring care. Some seniors do not need health services per se, but they need moral and other kinds of services, which are not necessarily connected to the state of their health — at least, not their physical health.
Since there were a number of questions asked at our last meeting with respect to services provided to seniors, I am wondering to what extent the government could "help'' — and I put the term in quotation marks for obvious reason — the provinces deliver services to seniors, other than health services, in provinces where seniors are part of the minority population?
Ms. LaRocque: I will probably ask Mr. Lussier to complete my answer. What seems to work well in some areas of the country is a system where the community centre, the senior centre, children's daycares and the community radio station are all grouped together. It creates a kind of critical mass, such that seniors, for example, have a little more support by the very fact of these services being grouped together.
This system has yielded very good results in Prince Edward Island, where there are not a large number of seniors who are part of the minority community, but where a critical mass has been created almost by force; this has worked very well and we have seen the same thing elsewhere. It is one option, although I will ask Hubert Lussier to give you more detailed information with respect to what Health Canada and others are doing.
Mr. Lussier: You should really put this question to Health Canada, because we are not experts in that area. However, what Judith LaRocque just said is perfectly true in a number of areas. Through Health Canada, we focus on training people who are not necessarily physicians; rather, they are medical or paramedical health care workers and provide the services that seniors require. This is done through training in provincially regulated institutions, but with the help of institutions that are incorporated into a network with the support of Health Canada to provide that training, which can be quite specialized, even though they are not physicians.
In the minister's province, Éducacentre, for example, plays that very role. And, in almost all the provinces, we have similar examples. We are working with the University of Ottawa and with francophone Quebec institutions. The University of Sherbrooke plays a very important role in that area. These are examples that our colleagues from Health Canada could illustrate with additional details — far better than I can, in fact.
[English]
Senator Jaffer: Mr. Robinson, when you have clarification of the $1.5 million gap, please provide the chair with an explanation.
Mr. Fraser, the Commissioner of Official Languages, has made some recommendations and we have not received a response to recommendations 1, 3.2, 4, 10, 15, 16 and 17. This committee would like to know the government's position on those recommendations. He asked Canadian Heritage to respond to those specific recommendations.
Mr. Robinson: Would it be acceptable to respond in writing?
Senator Jaffer: Yes, please respond to the chair. I have them, and I am sure you have them as well.
Would you like me to table them, or does everyone have them? I have them in both languages.
The Chair: Yes, please, Senator Jaffer.
[Translation]
The Chair: Could you forward your answers to the clerk?
Mr. Lussier: Yes.
Senator Mockler: The roadmap talks about different departments and the fact that each has a role to play. This morning, I was here when the Parliamentary Secretary, representing the Minister of Health, made an announcement on the Santé en français Roadmap with Health Canada. This does not affect only one province; it affects all the provinces and territories, as well as minority official-language communities in terms of improving access to health care in their own environment. What are the benefits of this initiative?
Ms. LaRocque: I would like to ask Jérôme Moisan, who is our expert on the roadmap, to answer that last question.
Jérôme Moisan, Senior Director, Official Languages Secretariat, Canadian Heritage: You have raised a question with respect to two or three areas for which Health Canada has received funding. This morning's announcement had to do with training health care professionals; this is money that will go to the provinces and territories to help them train professionals to provide care, medical or otherwise, in the language of the minority.
That is already happening in Quebec, where language training is given to health care professionals who have already been trained; in the other provinces, training is being provided to health care professionals — in other words, nursing, medical and paramedical staff — completely in French so that they are ultimately able to provide health care services in that language.
The other initiative for which Health Canada has received funding relates to networks of health care professionals who can then, region by region, mobilize resources that are available for the minority communities and individuals who are in the minority where they live. These networks will mean that people can access more information about the medical services available in each region and then avail themselves of these services through the different networks. There are network hubs in Northern Ontario, Easter Ontario and in every region of Canada. In Ontario, there are four major networks; in New Brunswick, the system is organized somewhat differently and, depending on the region, the structure can be somewhat different.
Those are the two main areas under the responsibility of Health Canada — first, the networks that bring people together and, second, training of professionals. This is being done in all the provinces and territories in cooperation with the provincial governments.
Senator Mockler: One final question: Do you have your own system of monitoring the linguistic communities, to ensure that the obligations laid out in the roadmap are being met and that services are being provided by Health Canada in the different jurisdictions?
Ms. LaRocque: Every department that receives funding through the roadmap has specific obligations to fulfill. Departments are required to prepare their own Treasury Board submissions. That involves carrying out evaluations and submitting a report. Formerly, under the Action Plan, it was the mid-term report, followed by the final report. The process now will be somewhat similar. We are collecting the results. We are always determined to innovate and make improvements. And it is by performing ongoing evaluations that we can achieve that.
The Chair: Well, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to thank you on behalf of the committee for appearing before us this afternoon. We will anxiously await your answers to the written questions given you by Senator Jaffer, as well as an answer from the minister to the question put by Senator Losier-Cool with respect to his power to intercede with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.
Senator Losier-Cool: I know that he cannot interfere with programming, but he can provide money. It is on page 13 of the Roadmap.
Ms. LaRocque: Thank you for having us, Madam Chair.
[English]
The Chair: Honourable senators, we now welcome representatives from Quebec Community Groups Network. We have with us this afternoon Robert Donnelly, President; Sylvia Martin-Laforge, Executive Director; and Rita Legault, Director of Communications and Public Relations.
The Quebec Community Groups Network appears before the committee this afternoon to provide its point of view on various official languages matters.
Mr. Donnelly, the committee thanks you for accepting the invitation to appear before us today. I now invite to you take the floor.
Robert Donnelly, President, Quebec Community Groups Network: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, senators.
[Translation]
The Quebec Community Groups Network is pleased to have this opportunity to address the Standing Committee on Official Languages. While we are here, we would also like to thank Senator Maria Chaput for her interest in the English-speaking community of Quebec and her participation in the QCGN-sponsored conference at the University of Montreal in February of 2008. The theme of the conference was "The Vitality of the English-Speaking Communities of Quebec — From Community Decline to Revival.''
For those who are interested, we have brought along copies of the research document published for the symposium.
[English]
The Quebec Community Groups Network is a not-for-profit association that brings together more than 30 organizations from all parts of Quebec. Its purpose is to support and assist in the development and enhance the vitality of English-speaking minority communities. This is undertaken principally through promoting linguistic duality in Canada and more specifically, advocating for the vitality of our community in Quebec.
We do this by leading policy development on issues of importance to our community and by strengthening the links between English-speaking communities, the francophone majority in Quebec, the francophone minority outside Quebec and Canada's majority.
The QCGN was recognized by the department of Canadian Heritage as the official representative and interlocutor of Quebec's English-speaking community sector in the last collaboration accord, about which I will speak later in my presentation.
The QCGN encourages and promotes participation by government departments and agencies in the development of English language minority communities. It also promotes cooperation with provincial, regional and municipal government authorities in order to support and assist the development and enhance the vitality of the community in priority areas such as human resources, education, the arts, culture and heritage, health and social services — of which we heard a lot in the last hour — justice, youth and seniors, as well as employment and economic development.
[Translation]
One of the major initiatives over the last five years has been the Greater Montreal Community Development Initiative, or GMCDI, which looked at particular obstacles and successes in the metropolitan region. The focus of the initiative was to create intersectoral linkages in the areas of employability and education; arts, culture and heritage; and health and social services. Some of the issues identified in our research are unique to Greater Montreal, but others are transversal to the English-speaking community of Quebec — giving way to possibilities for mutual support between Greater Montreal and the regions, and contributing to a more vital community as a whole.
You will also find materials relating to the latest GMCDI report.
[English]
The Quebec Community Groups Network is working hard to help develop and implement policies that support and nurture the community's place in Quebec and Canadian society. Among our greatest challenges has been recognition of Quebec's English-speaking community as a minority both in Quebec and in Canada. That is why we are pleased that the Commissioner of Official Languages, Graham Fraser, underlined our "national'' standing, because we consider the standing of the English-speaking community of Quebec has been ignored by many federal departments.
In its last annual report, the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages noted that Quebec's anglophone community is one of the two official language minorities, and stressed that federal institutions and key stakeholders interested in official languages should acknowledge our community's contributions to national policy-making in Canada.
For the Official Languages Act to be effective in Quebec, our community's national standing must be recognized and acted upon. That means federal institutions must find innovative ways of supporting our community. While priorities apply nationally, policies can be adapted in such a way as to implement them differently in Quebec. The Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality begins from the right place in making it clear that it intends to strengthen duality by promoting support to the English and French minority language communities, which are an integral part of Canada's national identity.
When the earlier 2003-2008 action plan was developed, I think we can all agree that the bulk of the funding was allocated to francophone minorities outside Quebec. On the plus side, the development of the health sector is a success story in Quebec. However, for varied and potentially valid reasons at the time, there was little or no funding for other sectors. When evaluation frameworks were developed and applied, they were done in the context of the original initiatives, which had no Quebec component, for example, in immigration and literacy.
In the area of justice, where both communities were targeted, the evaluation noted the English-speaking communities of Quebec were almost absent from the five-year process. That should have been a wake-up call to proceed differently, but despite that lesson, roadmap funding is once again massively targeted to the francophone minorities.
The only way to correct this situation is to ensure the evaluation framework explores what is missing for the English-speaking communities of Quebec. If that is not done, the priorities of our community will continue to be ignored.
Already, a number of initiatives in the roadmap do not have a component for the English-speaking communities of Quebec — for example, in the areas of literacy and child care. The answer is not to divide the existing pie differently, because the francophone minority is also in need of fair funding. We need a bigger pie.
We have come to recognize that when a systemic flaw fails to recognize the needs of our community, only an evidence-based approach can resolve the issue. In that context, we propose that Canadian Heritage develop and implement overarching evaluation methodology that would ensure all departments take the priorities of the English- speaking community into account.
Our community faces some significant challenges. Over the past few decades, the English-speaking community of Quebec has lost numbers, power and influence, and provincial language laws have had a major impact on its vitality. In 1969, when the Official Languages Act was passed, English-speaking Quebecers made up more than 13 per cent of the population of Quebec. The population dwindled to a little more than 8 per cent in the latest census.
Over the past 40 years, English institutions have weakened and access to services in our own language has diminished. Education provisions of the Charter of the French language have had a significant impact on the province's English language public education system, causing a decline in enrolment that threatens the future of many schools, especially in rural and isolated regions. In spite of legislative guarantees, access to English language health and social services depends largely on the type of service and, indeed access varies widely from one region to the other.
[Translation]
English-speaking Quebecers, especially our unilingual elderly and our less fortunate, require access to services in their own language.
Our community also needs access to job skills that will allow English Quebecers to integrate into the job market and allow the community to retain its youth and young families, and keep its communities alive and vital.
[English]
A study on those who left and those who stayed was presented at our conference last fall and included in the symposium book. That study shows that the brain drain from Quebec continues. Between 1996 and 2001, Quebec lost more than 8,000 anglophones a year. Of that group, 58 per cent had a post-secondary education. In the meantime, high school dropouts made up the largest group of anglophones who stayed in Quebec.
While anglophones in Quebec tend to be at the higher end of the education spectrum, they also show the highest level of unemployment among Canada's linguistic groups. According to 2001 census data, Quebec's anglophones sat 2 percentage points ahead of the national unemployment average of 9.4 per cent, a figure rising to over 20 per cent in some regions of the province.
The departure of highly educated, bilingual anglophones is a loss of human capital for both the English-speaking community of Quebec and for Quebec society as a whole. It also points to a glaring need for a policy for French language training that recognizes the French language as an essential job skill. A successful human resources development strategy in cooperation with support from key provincial and federal partners is of paramount importance to the survival of our community. That includes not only access to jobs in the federal and provincial public services, where the diversity of Canada and Quebec must be reflected, but in all sectors.
"We are not the enemy and it is time we stopped being perceived as such,'' stated former Commissioner of Official Languages, Victor C. Goldbloom, when he spoke to our conference at the Université de Montréal last year. Such an astute observation from an individual of Dr. Goldbloom's stature had a profound impact on conference participants, providing insight on how English-speaking Quebecers should see themselves and how they should be reflected in the greater community.
An analysis of self-portrayal and perception of our communities was the inspiration for the QCGN's presentation to the official language champions in Quebec City in June at a presentation entitled "From Mythic Monolith to Creative Diversity.'' Myths busted include the notion that the English-speaking community is not a monolith but rather an extremely diverse and multilingual community. He also pointed out that our institutions are increasingly becoming a fragile legacy of our community and that the current anglophone population sees Quebec as home and wants to continue making valuable contributions. The QCGN presented an evidence-base to demonstrate quite the contrary to these myths that have been upheld for far too long.
By the same token, the English-speaking community requires the support of our brothers and sisters in the francophone majority if we are to influence successfully the policies required to develop vital and viable English- speaking minority communities that will continue to contribute to Quebec.
[Translation]
English-speaking Quebec faces the particular challenge of being a minority within a minority which, let us face it, is not always recognized as such by key decision-makers and opinion-leaders. After years of working through our challenges and issues in Quebec, we believe there are signs that the English-speaking community of Quebec is finally accepting its minority status.
By contrast, French-speaking Quebec is both a minority and a majority. As a minority linguistic community, it faces serious challenges within Canada and North America. But French Quebec has had a hard time coming to terms with the fact that it is also a majority. While defending its place as a minority within the rest of Canada, the French- speaking community needs to learn to be a majority in the context of its relationship with its English-speaking minority in Quebec.
[English]
With the coming years, the QCGN will better understand the English-speaking community's place in Quebec and Canadian society and to get a better handle on the willingness of French-speaking Quebec to support actively our place within Quebec.
In the long run, minority rights depend largely on the majority's willingness to recognize and defend them. Those are among many issues the Quebec Community Groups Network and its partners hope to address in the coming years. For the roadmap to be truly effective for our community, investments in Quebec will require a high level of commit by the politicians and the policy and program architects — champions, really — because decision-makers will need to be innovative and convincing.
There is a saying that "legal ways change folk ways''; we know that legislation without effective implementation results in little change. For us in the English-speaking community in Quebec there is a real appetite for change.
[Translation]
Senator Goldstein: I want to thank our witnesses for coming today. I have a lot of questions. I will ask them one after the other until you stop me.
[English]
In terms of education, I have been looking at the statistics that you have cited. I noted in The Gazette this morning, that the Montreal English-speaking school board will likely be closing three schools.
Have you taken into account the following two facts when you speak of the diminution of education facilities for anglophones in Quebec? A goodly number of anglophones, including me, would have sent and have sent their children to French schools. Have you taken into account all allophones, those people who are neither anglophone nor francophone, who tend to go to the French-speaking schools because they are obliged to under Bill 101? These people often live in an English-speaking "milieu'' with their families and within the community but are compelled to educate their children at French-speaking schools.
Considering those two factors, are the education concerns you have implied in your excellent statement of as much concern as they would appear?
You point out in your paper that in 1969, when the Official Languages Act was passed, the anglophones were 13 per cent of the population and today they are 9 per cent, though you say 8 per cent in your paper. It also depends in large measure how you count. Have you taken into the significantly increased bilingualism among anglophones since 1969, which would tend to make these figures not as drastic as they first appear?
Finally, you point to a differential in employment or unemployment amongst anglophones. The reality is that an anglophone in Quebec, in order to be able to work in Quebec, must have a command of French. That is not a startling proposition by any means. Should we not be making more effort to have anglophones be able to seize and function in French while preserving their culture, identity and perhaps unique anglophone Québécois characteristics?
I am not scandalized by that.
Sylvia Martin-Laforge, Executive Director, Quebec Community Groups Network: We will have to come here more often if there are lots of questions. This is great.
Regarding the closing of schools, you are very right to say that there are two concerns. One concern is that anglophones, les ayants droit, are sending their kids to French schools because they want them to be bilingual; they want them to be more bilingual. That is a concern and let me start with that one.
The test here is the English system. We had a forum last year with hundreds of young people that culminated in a document that is on our website. It is called Creating Spaces for Young Quebecers: Strategic Orientations for English- speaking Youth in Quebec. The young people there from across Quebec did say they felt they had gone through school and their French was not good enough. In Quebec, we go through the English system and we learn French as a second language.
That is an interesting concept in Quebec because French is not a second language in Quebec. Therefore, while many go into immersion, the cry for help from the youth was that their French was just not good enough. They not only said that but they said they had a taste for bi-literacy. They had a taste for understanding and working with francophone youth. They felt that gone were the days of the "two solitudes.'' They wanted to play, live and learn with young francophones and they did not have a great opportunity to do that.
What does that say about the system? It says we have to rethink how things are done in Quebec. That is very different from official languages policy throughout the rest of Canada. Quebec is very different and we know that. At one point in this document, we said that one size does not fit all. To ensure anglophones use their "droit de ayant- droit'' means parents will have to be reassured that their children are coming out of the sausage mill being able to live and work in Quebec in French.
Children are saying their French is not sufficient. We have to work on that within the education system. We have to figure out different ways. That means when children finish school, they need to have sufficient tools within the province of Quebec to use French as the language of work. There are several ways to do that, although they are probably all expensive.
With regard to allophones, yes, they go to French school.
[Translation]
We know, having learned this from Francophones outside Quebec, that culture is passed on through school. Young people have told us that they are lacking a sense of attachment. Not to the language, no — we speak French and we speak English; we speak English in Quebec, of course — but to the culture, to different cultures. We have learned French. We were Italian, we were Greek or we came from the Caribbean.
[English]
We all learned English. However, the attachment to and visibility of culture are different pieces of heritage in Quebec. It is a complex issue.
Once again, I invite you to check our website. Youth, with our help, have put together a very compelling report with suggestions for changes in Quebec that would respond to their needs.
Mr. Donnelly: That answers the first and third questions. The second question was what is the English speaking community of Quebec?
A conference was held last Friday in Ottawa with the Association for Canadian Studies where this was one of the debates. At one point, they were looking at statistics and talking about francophones, allophones, first language spoken in the home and first language spoken. The QCGN has been working hard in the last month. When looking at community vitality, we are using the phrase that I used a couple of times — "English-speaking Quebec.'' It is the most inclusive in that sense.
Senator Comeau: Thank you for coming today to explain the situation in Quebec for anglophones.
One area that the QCGN has noted in its priority development sectors is to strengthen visibility and participation in Quebec society. What does this mean?
Mr. Donnelly: Senator, it takes up the theme that I talked about in my presentation — living with the reality of the French majority and being part of that. One paragraph I had to skip in my presentation because of time was the concept that it is not a zero-sum thing. It is not a gain or loss in whether the English population stays relatively the same or even grows a little.
As Senator Goldstein was saying, we are talking about an increasingly bilingual population more a part of mainstream Quebec society.
Senator Comeau: You noted the challenges faced by the anglophone minority community. I noted that you said it is being recognized both in Quebec and nationally. I found that to be an interesting comment, but I am not sure what it means to be recognized. Do you mean out of sight, out of mind?
Mr. Donnelly: I will also ask Ms. Martin-Laforge to respond to that question. Sitting for the past hour in the back benches, I was pleased to hear four senators talk about the two official minority languages. I do not think that was on people's radar three or four years ago. We are getting more recognition.
Ms. Martin-Laforge: The myth that anglophones all live in Westmount and go to Knowlton on the weekend is a concern to us.
Senator Goldstein: Some senators do not know where Knowlton is.
[Translation]
Knowlton is a lovely place in the Eastern Townships.
[English]
You often ask quite down-to-earth questions, but I will give you a technical answer.
When the federal government establishes policies and programs, they often consult. However, we have to undo what they are thinking to make them consider a different way because their frame of reference is the francophone community.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis asked a question about seniors. We have a larger number of seniors in Quebec than in the rest of Canada. Many of my friends' parents cannot get into seniors' homes in Quebec — in Montreal even — because there is no available seniors' home. The care is not available.
One of our biggest difficulties is with the federal departments because of their frame of reference. All these wonderful people who write the policies for official languages come from Franco-Ontarian or Franco-Manitoban backgrounds. They have this idea of what it is to be francophone outside of Quebec, which is truly important. However, few have worked with us in Quebec.
In addition, "national'' does not mean the same thing in Quebec as in Canada. We have that conundrum to work with all the time.
Senator Comeau: In your presentation, you noted that provincial language laws have had a major impact on the communities of Quebec. That is understandable. Bill 101 and the repercussions of it obviously come to mind. Are there any laws other than Bill 101 that have had an impact on communities?
This is a separate question. Are you in contact with representative groups from other minority language communities in Canada — New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, et cetera? New Brunswick has larger numbers and they are not as impacted as Nova Scotia or Manitoba for example.
Mr. Donnelly: I am happy to say we have made good inroads in that area over last two years. I have been able to sit down with my counterpart Lise Routhier-Boudreau, President of the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada numerous times in last few years. We keep in contact and work on dossiers together. We have been very active. Therefore, the answer to the second part of the question is yes and the relationship is getting better all the time.
In terms of other language legislation, the only thing I can think of is potential amendments to Bill 101. However, I do not know of other laws.
Ms. Martin-Laforge: We always look at what they want to do with CEGEPs in Quebec. We must also look at possibilities in terms of federal legislation. About a year and a half ago, there was an amendment that went through the Senate regarding bilingual trials. That was a bit of a worry to us. The bill to make federal departments accountable under Bill 101 was of great concern to us.
Senator Comeau: May I suggest that it might be a concern to the minority language communities of Canada as well. When this kind of federal legislation is proposed, it has an impact on our communities in Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick and across Canada. It is frightening from our perspective as well. I do not want to be partisan but what happens in Quebec affects our communities. I have found that over time, some negativity has developed from what has happened in Quebec. When this kind of proposed legislation occurs at the federal level, it can have an even greater negative impact on our communities.
Senator Goldstein: If I may say, for clarification, it is important to understand that the bill proposing to make various institutions subject to Bill 101 is a private member's bill and has little chance of succeeding. Therefore, I do not see it as cause for great worry. Even I bring forward private member's bills.
Ms. Martin-Laforge: It raises angst.
Senator Goldstein: «Angst» is a harsh word, Ms. Martin-Laforge. Perhaps we could say that it raises concerns.
Senator Comeau: On a point of order, we are completely off the subject. However, I would be more than pleased at a future meeting to discuss the impact that such private member's bills can have on people across Canada. They might seem frivolous to us but to people across the country, they are not frivolous. We might want to raise the point at a future meeting.
Senator Tardif: Thank you for your informative presentation. I am surprised by some of the statistics that you presented, in particular, the fact that anglophones in Quebec show the highest level of unemployment among Canada's linguistic groups. I find that surprising. As well, you mentioned that the community needs access to job skills that will allow English Quebecers to integrate into the job market and will allow the community to retain its youth and young families.
I always thought that the English post-secondary system in Quebec was one of the best. Could you clarify to which job skills you refer when you state that English Quebecers need certain job skills to integrate into the job market and to retain its youth?
Mr. Donnelly: Having taught 31 years in an English CEGEP in Quebec, I must agree with your positive assessment of post-secondary education. However, in respect of job skills, the first thing that comes to mind is language, which is so important, as we have talked about.
Senator Tardif: Do you mean French language skills?
Mr. Donnelly: Yes, I am referring to representatives of English minority communities. It is so important in terms of job opportunities. As well, the more research that we do, the more we find that English speakers in Quebec are much more bilingual than they think they are. Certainly, the experience in Quebec City and other areas is that they think they do not have a working knowledge of French that would allow them to access some of the jobs available to them, apart from the federal and provincial civil services, in terms of the private sector. Yet, private sector employers are happy to hire people employees with a base that they are willing to work on to become bilingual employees.
Ms. Martin-Laforge: Although we have no evidence, fewer programs are offered in the colleges to anglophones whose French language skills are not good enough for some of the courses offered in French only. We do not have much hard evidence to support that but young people tell us that they are having trouble finding the courses they need, yet they would like to stay in Quebec. It is the same problem for francophones outside Quebec; they go to another province, and we might not see them again.
Senator Tardif: Are you receiving funding from the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality?
Mr. Donnelly: One challenge that remains is trying to track exactly how it is applied. Once the funding reaches the Quebec education sector, where it goes in jobs and job training it becomes a bit of a boondoggle because once Quebec takes control, they prioritize the spending as they see fit.
For years, we have been working on trying to trace the money through the Minister of Education, Recreation and Sports in Quebec so we can have a clear picture of how much funding goes to the English-speaking community of Quebec. Once we determine that amount, then we can know how it has been applied.
Senator Tardif: Increasing the social transfer generally to the provinces is not necessarily a positive move to address post-secondary needs.
Mr. Donnelly: One of our main messages to our Ottawa partners and friends in the last few years is that when the devolution takes place of services and/or funding to Quebec, it has to come with ways whereby we can follow it and have it apply, or at least our share of it, to us.
Senator Tardif: That is a challenge for both official language minority communities.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Thank you, Madam Chair. Welcome to the committee. As regards health and social services provided in English, is there a difference between Montreal and the other regions of Quebec? Are there anglophone minorities outside of Montreal that are not receiving care in their language?
Mr. Donnelly: There has been some progress.
Ms. Martin-Laforge: In our presentation, we were saying that the health care sector has been exemplary in using the monies provided through the roadmap — prior to that, it was the action plan. There was $30 million under the action plan, and some $18 million was added through the roadmap. For the English-speaking community, these priorities have been acted on very appropriately.
One of our members, the Community Health and Social Services Network, has been providing exceptional management of that allocation in cooperation with the Quebec government and is ensuring that services are available where the need exists. In Quebec, we have 22 networks, including Townshippers and the Anglophone Social Action Centre in Gaspé—which are making use of this money to ensure that care is available in the regions.
Under the action plan, Montreal was not really covered. However, this time around — there is to be an announcement today with a start date of April 1 — there will be networks in Montreal — for example, in Montreal East, where there are quite a few anglophones who are unable to receive care in their language. So, the network has been expanded. And there is no doubt that there are now more hospitals providing services in English in Montreal.
We also know that at the University of Sherbrooke Hospital Centre, services are bilingual. So, in that respect, things are going fairly well.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Would you say that anglophones in Quebec are receiving much better service than francophone minorities in the other provinces?
Mr. Donnelly: There has been progress and things are much better now than they were four or five years ago; however, there is still work to be done in Quebec.
What we find encouraging is that, with the networks now in place in the regions, from Gatineau to the Gaspé and the North Shore, a lot of progress is being made, and it is often with unilingual anglophones. There was a real need there.
Earlier this afternoon, we heard about money for programs that will train and prepare people to work in the regions, and it is very important that this continue.
Senator Champagne: Francophones, anglophones, hispanophones — yesterday, they were all Irish. They were all different colours.
I am increasingly bothered by the way some Quebecers seem to be reacting.
[English]
Forty or forty-five years ago, as a young performer, the fact that I could speak some English made me someone. I had a good chance of having a career somewhere, somehow. Forty or forty-five years later, in Quebec, as a politician, you want to put half a paragraph of your speech in English.
[Translation]
But why do you want to do that? There are only francophones here. Why do you want to speak English? My view is that, if there is a unilingual anglophone in the room and I want to talk to that person, I am going to do it in his or her language, if I know that language.
I would like every young person coming out of university to be not only bilingual, but multilingual. I would like them to learn at least a third language, and possibly even a fourth. A sage once said that, the more languages you know, the more life you have in you.
Do you believe that, in my own wonderful province, which is part of my country, a country I am proud to belong to, that we will finally succeed in achieving some balance, so that we are not afraid of speaking one language or the other?
Mr. Donnelly: I would like to tell you about two very positive developments. I taught for 30 years in an anglophone CEGEP. However, I know that, on the francophone side, arts and humanities programs are flourishing. They are attracting more and more students, and these programs involve three or four languages. We see a lot of them.
We conducted a study with a hundred or more students whom we asked to indicate their priorities. They told us that they need better quality in French.
At the conference last Friday, we obtained statistics from Quebec showing that the level of bilingualism among Quebec anglophones is higher than among anglophones in the Ottawa area — 33 per cent, compared to 27 per cent. That means that things are getting better and better.
Senator Champagne: Anglophones who have been able to learn French through this type of program are starting to be more stubborn. What I mean by that is that, if you detect a slight English accent and you switch to English, they will want to continue the conversation in French, because that is how they learn. On television, I saw people living in the Sherbrooke area who said they were having trouble and did not know whether they wanted to stay in Quebec or leave. What can we do to avoid losing these brilliant minds? What can we do to keep them?
Mr. Donnelly: We have a lot of projects underway, in the 32 organizations that make up the Quebec Community Groups Network, that involve working with young people. We received money from Canadian Heritage for a major project in recent years. Our youth are the future, particularly in the small communities outside the Montreal region. When they leave to go to university or to get a better job — or even just a job — they do not return. We are working very hard in this area and it has become a priority, not only for the organization in Montreal, but for organizations across the province.
Ms. Martin-Laforge: The area where anglophones in Quebec are having the most success is arts, culture and heritage. Artists work in French and in English. Friday, the minister announced $14.5 million in funding over four years through the roadmap. In Quebec, we have major projects to propose in order to access one third of the money, and the key is arts, culture and heritage.
Mr. Donnelly: With youth.
Senator Champagne: Let us keep on working with young people in arts, culture and heritage!
Senator Mockler: I want to commend you for the initiative with Lise Routhier-Boudreau. This is a useful complement that will help to make people more aware of the work you are doing across the country.
[English]
On page 4, Mr. Donnelly, you say:
The Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality begins from the right place in making it clear that it intends to strengthen duality by providing support to the English and French minority language communities, which are an integral part of Canada's national identity.
[Translation]
As you know, there will always be debate about our respective responsibilities; the provinces versus the federal government. Can you tell us what mechanisms you would like to see or can you give us examples of what you would like the federal, provincial or territorial governments to be aware of so that the anglophone minority community is better able to take its rightful place?
Mr. Donnelly: Earlier this afternoon, we talked about the new legislation which encourages all departments to be proactive in their work with minority communities. We would like this to be put into effect, so that we can stop talking about it and find out exactly what it means.
[English]
Put that into practice might be a step in the right direction.
Ms. Martin-Laforge: Part VII is the answer. I gave you an example earlier of a health model that went very well, where the federal officials thought outside the box and were able to work with people in our community and with the province, forming partnerships.
We have to test different models. It will not be the same in each sector. I would say to you, as my president said earlier, that devolution kills us.
With respect to immigration, we did not get a cent in immigration in the roadmap. We cannot get a cent in immigration in the roadmap because it is provincial jurisdiction.
[Translation]
We have immigration projects.
[English]
We do not talk about a "welcoming society'' because we are not a welcoming society.
However, when we talk to our federal counterparts about immigration, we talk about how we can help Quebec retain the immigrants it receives. Twenty per cent of the immigrants that come in every year leave Quebec. Forty-five thousand are coming in; 20 per cent every year are leaving. Some of those are English-speaking. Some of them want to learn English but do not have the English skills to find a job because for many jobs in Quebec, you have to speak English. Therefore, when we talk about immigration and the $20 million that was given in this roadmap, we obtained, through a great deal of cajoling, a small amount of money for research.
In each of those priorities, we have to figure out how it could work in Quebec. That takes serious thinking. Part VII is part of it; commitment and understanding and willingness to think outside the box is another.
Legal ways change folk ways, as we said. We have the legal ways, but we need to get people working on partnerships. We are ready to help with those partnerships between the federal and the provincial counterparts.
We do not have a recipe for all, but we figure there is a lot of work to be done.
Senator Mockler: Is the roadmap a step in the right direction?
Ms. Martin-Laforge: It is a step in the right direction in that the priorities in the last five years were given and a lot of money was given, $800 million and some. This time it is $1.1 million, but the English-speaking community has not had its fair share of that money.
Mr. Donnelly: Regarding the new arts and culture things that were announced, we were ready. We prepared documentation and a framework agreement so that soon as the money was announced we could say what we would do with our 10, 20 or 30 per cent, or whatever it turns out to be, but we need that in all the six or seven other sectors.
[Translation]
Senator Losier-Cool: I understand that the arts, culture and heritage in Quebec have played a major role, and that is very positive. I want to commend you because I believe that Quebec produces artists of the highest quality, at the provincial, national or international levels, in every area of endeavour. But that is not my question.
From time to time, our committee meets with people in the regions to ask them about their expectations and challenges. Do you have suggestions or advice for us as to where we should go in Quebec? We really like to go to Montreal, but perhaps we should go where there are concentrations of minority anglophone communities not really receiving services, again in relation to the Official Languages Act, which is the mandate of our committee.
Mr. Donnelly: One anglophone speaker in four in the province of Quebec does not live in the Montreal region. There are communities here and there, of all sizes, which have considerable needs.
All we need is to know your availability and how many people would be coming. We would be very pleased to invite you and have you visit some of these communities. This would help you gain an appreciation for their needs.
The Chair: As I understand it, if the committee decides to travel and to visit your area, the clerk of the committee could get in touch with you and you would be prepared to help us, by suggesting where we might want to go and whom we should meet with?
Mr. Donnelly: Of course. And that would not be in the Montreal region, based on my recommendation.
The Chair: On behalf of all the members of the committee, we would like to extend our very sincere thanks for your agreeing to appear today. It was very interesting and I learned a great deal, even though I thought, being from a minority official-language community in Manitoba, that you were better treated in Quebec than I am in my own province. At this point, perhaps we should be saying that the needs are similar or the same. Thank you very much.
[English]
Mr. Donnelly: It is we who wish to thank you very much for taking the time to listen to us and to ask your very interesting questions. After hearing all the questions from the minister, I got a bit nervous coming to sit down here, but it has been a pleasant experience, and we are glad to see your interest. We hope you will give us your support.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you. Honourable senators, we will take a short two-minute break, after which I will need two minutes more of your time.
(The committee suspended.)
(The committee resumes.)
The Chair: Honourable senators, you have just been given a document which is a request for authorization of a budget for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2009. All committees have to table a budget by the end of the fiscal year.
You have in front of you the budget that was prepared by the clerk, and I would like you to look at the general expenses in that budget and tell me whether you have any comments to make, or whether you are prepared to approve it now.
Senator Comeau: I so move.
The Chair: Senator Comeau has moved adoption of a $5,000 budget. Are there any questions or comments? Thank you very much for your cooperation and for your time.
(The committee adjourned.)