Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue 10 - Evidence - October 4, 2010
OTTAWA, Monday, October 4, 2010
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day at 5:08 p.m. to study the application of the Official Languages Act and the regulations and directives made under it. (Topic: The English-speaking communities in Quebec.)
Senator Maria Chaput (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Welcome to the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages. I am Maria Chaput, senator for Manitoba and chair of this committee. To begin, I would invite committee members to introduce themselves.
Senator Champagne: I am Andrée Champagne, senator from the province of Quebec. I would like to welcome our witnesses.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I am Suzanne Fortin-Duplessis, senator. I am very pleased to meet all three of you.
[English]
Senator Seidman: I am Judith Seidman, a senator from Montreal, Quebec.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: Good afternoon. I am Claudette Tardif, senator from Alberta.
[English]
Senator Fraser: I am Senator Joan Fraser, from Montreal.
[Translation]
The Chair: Today we welcome the Commissioner of Official Languages, Mr. Graham Fraser, who is appearing in the context of the committee's study on the English-speaking communities in Quebec. Mr. Fraser is our first witness following our committee's trip to Quebec City, Sherbrooke and Montreal as part of this study.
I would like to remind senators that the committee will be meeting in camera following the commissioner's appearance to discuss the committee's upcoming meetings and the next stages of the study.
Mr. Fraser, it is always a great pleasure for the committee to welcome you. You are here with two senior officials from your office, Ms. Eva Ludvig, your representative in the Quebec region, and Mr. Sylvain Giguère, Assistant Commissioner, Policy and Communications Branch. Please go ahead, Commissioner. Then the senators will have questions to put to you.
Graham Fraser, Commissioner of Official Languages, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages: Good evening, honourable senators and members of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages. It is a pleasure to meet with you today as you study the English-speaking community of Quebec. I appreciate the opportunity to share my thoughts with you on the challenges and opportunities that the English-speaking communities of Quebec face as you continue your hearings.
I can tell you that I share your interest in Quebec's English-speaking communities. I lived in Quebec for 10 years and learned first-hand about the vitality of its communities.
[English]
Since becoming commissioner almost exactly four years ago, I have visited Quebec 29 times and have met with representatives of the Committee for Anglophone Social Action in Gaspé, the Coasters in the Lower North Shore, the Voice of English-speaking Québec in Quebec City, the Townshippers' Association in the Eastern Townships, the Regional Association of West Quebecers, and the umbrella group, the Quebec Community Groups Network, the QCGN. I have also met with representatives of all three universities, McGill, Concordia and Bishop's.
[Translation]
I applaud the committee's initiative to carry out a specific study of Quebec's English-speaking community. I also applaud the fact that committee meetings were held in Quebec City, Sherbrooke and Montreal. On this first tour of Quebec, the committee got to hear first-hand some of the issues that are important to Quebec's English-speaking community.
It is one thing for me to speak about such issues based on my own visits throughout the province; it is quite another to hear directly from community representatives about their realities, as you have.
[English]
As I know you have heard, there are myths surrounding English-speaking communities in Quebec that still exist. In her presentation before you on September 13, 2010, Linda Leith spoke of "stubbornly persistent stereotypes that paint us as rich, White, pampered and coddled." However, as a recent report from Statistics Canada found, things have changed.
According to a recent article in the Montreal Gazette, Quebec anglophones earn less than francophones with the same credentials, have higher rates of poverty and hold far fewer public sector jobs, quoting the Statistics Canada report on the province's official language minority. The 122-page report paints a comprehensive portrait of the nearly one million Quebecers, 13.4 per cent of the population, for whom English is the first official language spoken.
As you learned in your hearings, the English language itself is not in danger. The challenge lies in ensuring the continuity and vitality of the English-speaking community in Quebec and its institutions. The English-speaking community and its leadership spoke to the committee about their continued desire to contribute to Quebec's society while maintaining its own culture and identity.
[Translation]
Like Canadian society at large, the English-speaking community of Quebec has evolved and changed over time. It has adapted to a changing political and linguistic landscape, and to an evolving legal framework.
And, like Canadian society as a whole, it is not homogeneous or one monolithic block. It is quite diverse both in its makeup and in its realities. There are, however, significant differences among Quebec's English-speaking communities.
[English]
As you know, the reality of English-speaking communities in Montreal is different from that of communities outside its metropolitan region. That was one factor we took into consideration when we conducted our studies on the vitality of three English-speaking communities in 2008: Quebec City, the Eastern Townships and the Lower North Shore.
Our intention with these studies was to shed light on the vitality of English-speaking communities outside the Montreal region, given their unique circumstances. As our studies indicated, and as the committee heard, there is often a sense of isolation, especially in remote communities.
Over time, there has been a dramatic transformation in the outlook within these communities and considerable emphasis placed on personal initiative and flexibility. A distinguishing feature of the English-speaking communities is that their members tend to look to their families, to individuals and networks, rather than to the government for services, even when the government provides them.
[Translation]
These changes over the years have had an impact on the way communities organize and perceive themselves. There is a reluctance in many communities to claim services that are available to them and to identify themselves as anglophones. Among other things, communities feel like they are invisible. They believe that their needs are not well understood by government and decision-makers. The fact that the English-speaking community of Quebec does not feel that it is included nor that its contribution to Quebec and Canadian society recognized contributes to this sense of invisibility.
The English-speaking community of Quebec has always been inclusive and open to integrating newcomers. Its diversity and changing face have been shaped by immigration and also by out-migration to other parts of Canada.
You heard about the phenomenon of the "missing middle," the generation that left Quebec in the 1970 and 1980s and its impact on English-speaking communities. You also heard about the impact of the arrival many newcomers had. In fact, 20 per cent of English-speaking Quebeckers are now visible minorities. This diversity helps English-speaking communities share their rich history while looking to the future and building bridges within Quebec and across Canada. While the community's diversity is seen as an asset, especially by youth, these demographic and social changes have an impact on the community's renewal. They also have an impact on the renewal of its institutions, especially in the context of an aging population.
As our vitality studies showed, many factors lead youths to leave these regions in pursuit of better opportunities: lack of employment or development opportunities, and limited access to services, resources and activities are only a few. English-speaking youth want to stay in Quebec and contribute to their communities. They want to move away from past conflicts and the two solitudes. They are also increasingly bilingual and highly educated, which is an advantage, but also a factor that can lead them to leave Quebec for better opportunities elsewhere. This may seem like a contradiction. However, this is a paradox that members of these communities are faced with. But, as our studies pointed out, communities are mobilizing to stem the tide, but encouraging youth to get involved in their community and stay in the region.
That said, there also has to be an economic incentive for youth and the wider population to stay in Quebec. Limited job opportunities, under-employment and unemployment, whether related to one's level of education or to the economic reality of a particular region, are all factors that pose a challenge in retaining community members of all ages. This is but one example that speaks to the larger issue I mentioned in opening about the challenge of ensuring the continuation and vitality of English-speaking communities and their institutions.
You also heard about challenges the English-speaking community of Quebec has in accessing health and social services in their language, particularly in remote communities. Some of these issues came up in our vitality studies too. The Community Health and Social Services Network, the CHSSN, in collaboration with McGill University and with funding from the Roadmap for Linguistic Duality, has been doing much work in that regard. But challenges still remain in ensuring that communities' needs are better understood by governments. As our studies found, the availability of services improves community members' quality of life as well as the community's vitality, and has an impact on whether people stay in or return to the region.
[English]
Another key challenge in ensuring communities' vitality and renewal is the lack of cultural institutions and activities. Visibility and access to cultural institutions and networks are key factors that contribute to communities' vitality. New and revitalized cultural organizations, such as the Morrin Centre in Quebec City, play a central role in fostering a sense of identity, belonging and attachment within the English-speaking community. They also play an essential role in reaching out to the broader population. They can also be another incentive for community members to stay and get involved in community organizations. Again, these examples are but a few that speak to the broader issue of the federal government's role and how it supports and assists the English-speaking community of Quebec in its development.
It is my hope that the committee's work will help the federal government gain a better understanding of the English- speaking communities' needs and priorities. Your committee's study is of vital importance to the English-speaking community of Quebec. My hope is that the federal government will see it as such and that it will take the committee's findings seriously.
While some of the English-speaking community's challenges are sometimes similar to those faced by francophone minority communities, the responses to them should not be the same. A one-size-fits-all approach or an approach that says what works for francophone minority communities works for the English-speaking community of Quebec is not what we need. Government policies and programs should have the ability and the flexibility to respond to the English- speaking community's speaking needs and realities.
Key federal government initiatives, such as the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality, should keep in mind the specific challenges and needs of Quebec's English-speaking community because in many regards they are different from those faced by francophone minority communities. The English-speaking community has its own set of political, social, economic and cultural circumstances. It is my sense that there needs to be a greater interdepartmental collaboration to respond to them effectively.
One must not forget that the English-speaking community of Quebec is an official language minority community with the same constitutionally recognized linguistic rights as francophone minority communities. As such, the Quebec Community Groups Network represents at the national level one of Canada's official language minorities. In keeping with Part VII of the Official Languages Act, the federal government and its institutions have a responsibility to support and to assist the development of official language minority communities to enable these communities, including the English-speaking community of Quebec, to thrive. To do so, it must ensure it has an adequate understanding and knowledge of communities' realities on the ground. As this committee highlighted in its report on Part VII of the Official Languages Act, the implementation of concrete actions that have a positive impact on official language minority communities still poses a challenge for many federal institutions.
My hope is that studies such as the one this committee has undertaken will help shed some light on the needs of English-speaking communities in Quebec. Your study helps open the door to such an understanding. I hope the federal that government looks at it closely and that it will help it rethink and reimagine its role toward the English-speaking community of Quebec.
I would now like to take the remaining time to answer any questions you may have.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: My question concerns services. Quebec's anglophone minority enjoys language rights with respect to health and social services. In 1986, amendments to the Act respecting health and social services, Bill 142, expanded services to the anglophone community. That Quebec act requires some 254 social services and health institutions to provide services in English. However, the threat for English-speaking communities, the cause of a certain fear revealed in investigations, does not appear to be related to the figures or to access to services.
I would like to hear your opinion on this point. Could you give us your comments on the English-speaking communities' feeling of inclusion or belonging?
Mr. Fraser: First, allow me to answer your question on services. Like you, I was pleased to see the impact of the Roadmap program concerning English training for the employees of Quebec's health system, at CHSSN and McGill University. It amounts to a total of nearly $40 million, $19 million for CHSSN and $19 million for McGill University. As a result, at least 4,000, now 5,000 or 6,000 employees have taken courses.
When I was in the Eastern Townships, I met an individual who was very active in the health network in Granby. I asked her whether the training system had been useful and she answered that it had, but particularly with regard to primary services. A teenager who breaks an arm falling off a bicycle can access care at a CLSC in English. However, in the case of a 58-year-old farmer who has early Alzheimer's symptoms, that requires a type of training that goes far beyond basic training for providing primary services. So the aging population is one of the challenges that must be met in terms of training needs.
On the inclusion question, there is a subjective aspect to the question as to whether they feel included or excluded. For example, for 10 years, I never felt excluded, although others really did feel that way and still do. You heard evidence from people who appeared before your committee to the effect that the debate over Bill 103 takes it for granted that every gain for the English-language system is a loss for the French-language system. So there is a feeling that the anglophone system in itself presents a threat to the French language in Quebec. For those involved in those institutions, this is an exclusive issue. There is often this attitude. I previously cited Linda Leith, who talks about stereotypes when that has absolutely nothing to do with the actual situation. When people tell groups seeking funding that they do not need it, why not go and get money from your friends in Westmount, that can also trigger a feeling of exclusion.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: In your opinion, what major research needs must be met in order to gain a clearer understanding of the actual situation and challenges of the English-speaking communities in Quebec?
Mr. Fraser: First, the question of community. We are at the very start of the issue of research in the English- speaking community. That seems paradoxical because this is a community with a rich history, but a few years ago, Rodrigue Landry, the head of a research institution in New Brunswick, was looking for a partner in Quebec and could not find one. Today, there is an institute attached to Concordia University, and they are now starting up. I think research has to be done on mobility, on the communities' vitality needs, on youth needs and on the factors that can keep young people in the community. I would now ask Eva Ludvig whether there are any other factors that should be mentioned.
Eva Ludvig, Commissioner's Representative, Quebec Region, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages: I believe it is useful to have figures in order to provide the communities with arguments when they go looking for support from various government bodies. We talked about myths. It is important to have figures on bilingualism levels among young people, on the quality of that linguistic knowledge, on the health of the institutions; a full range of data simply does not exist. As we said, there are a lot of myths. And even when Statistics Canada issues statistics on income, there is still a debate. So we need these reliable figures and that has to be done very well.
Mr. Fraser: I would like to go back to a question raised by your committee about which I was unaware. The difficulty in finding specific school drop-out figures is an obvious one. If a student leaves a school and the province, that is not really dropping out. It is often difficult to obtain specific figures in this field. The school drop-out issue is not just a problem for Quebec's English-speaking community, but a crucial issue for the country as a whole. We must gain a better understanding of the reasons why students drop out and of the actual figures surrounding that issue.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: With regard to drop-outs, I believe the secondary schools are able to provide us with information. From the work done during this week of meetings, we were made aware of the difficulties encountered in the Gaspé region, where there is a high observed drop-out rate as a result of drug problems.
In that region, those who drop out do not necessarily move away. They stay in the region and live on welfare, whereas those who succeed go and work elsewhere.
Mr. Fraser: That is a major dilemma for the community.
Senator Tardif: You mentioned the importance of research and studies. With regard to research and studies, we have to be able to rely on a reliable data base. I was wondering to what extent the government's recent decision to eliminate the mandatory long census form would make it harder to collect data or analyze that data for the group of English- speaking communities. To what extent do you rely on the information provided by Statistics Canada on the minority language communities?
Mr. Fraser: I am going to disappoint you. We received about 20 complaints on this matter. We are in the preliminary stages of an investigation. I cannot comment and I will avoid making any comment on the census issue. In a way, to ask the question is to answer it.
Senator Champagne: Thank you, Madam Chair. I can only tag onto the question asked by Senator Tardif.
When we see exactly what questions have been added to the short form, which is still mandatory, we will really be able to get an accurate idea of the consequences those changes to the census form will have. At that point, we will be able to make a decision as to whether we are for or against abandoning the long form.
In your address, you said that the English-speaking community of Quebec has always been inclusive and open to integrating newcomers. You said that 20 per cent of English-speaking Quebeckers, newcomers, belong to visible minorities.
Anglophones in Quebec City told us how much they rely on immigration to expand their community. Some problems have obviously been caused by this specific Canada-Quebec agreement.
Do you think we can suggest anything to the federal or provincial government in order to separate the two problems? We realize that Quebec wants to take in the majority of francophone immigrants at the outset, but at the same time would it be possible for it not to close the door to anglophones who would be welcome in the existing English-speaking communities?
Mr. Fraser: One of the challenges, and this is in fact an inevitable challenge in Quebec's political context, is access to English-language schools. This is currently quite a hot topic. If you compare that with the minority francophone communities outside Quebec, one of the key factors in their francization process is enrolment in French-language schools. This option is not available to the English-speaking community in Quebec.
Other options have to be found so that the English-speaking community can maintain its vitality and encourage immigrants to join it even though school is generally not a gateway to the community.
This is quite difficult, but, for example, Part VII of the act requires every federal institution to take positive measures to promote the vitality of the official languages in minority communities. There are ways to help a community in its efforts. You saw training centres in the communities that are doing an outstanding job for their minority members. There are other ways of ensuring that the communities can obtain community resources, economic and sociality vitality. This is, in part, a paradox for immigrants who are attracted by minority communities, whether it be in Quebec or in other provinces, because they first have to learn the majority language in order to live in a minority language community. Consequently, in the small communities that want to attract immigrants, there has to be training that is expressly open to people from the minority community.
There is one thing that I have seen in other provinces, and this was confirmed by the evidence you heard, and it is also a paradox, with regard to training: free training is offered to immigrants, but it is not provided for the community itself. Action must be taken to ensure the Canada-Quebec agreement can include funding for language training not only for immigrants or people who come from other provinces, but also for members of the community.
Senator Champagne: I heard Minister Kenney say in a recent address how big an effort had been made in his department to ensure francophone immigrants go elsewhere than to Quebec. I know that in Winnipeg, for example, where we met with francophone parliamentarians, there is an extraordinary program to encourage people to settle in their region.
If the same kind of advertising were done and the same services offered to anglophones in Quebec, how would the public react? Would it call the players traitors if such a targeted effort were made to attract anglophones to Quebec? When we think of all the problems we have with bridge schools and Bill 103, even when we want to help and make good recommendations to our government in this matter, and that is the duty you have accepted as well, we sometimes wind up in a situation that is not easy to say the least and, in any case, a little embarrassing.
Mr. Fraser: Yes, absolutely. It is delicate. I am going to make an observation, but I do not know whether that will help you in your deliberations. I have observed that, when the francophone majority in Quebec feels confident and stable, there is a general feeling of openness, generosity and welcome to others, to immigrants, to anglophones. On the other hand, if it feels attacked, undermined or vulnerable, there is a reaction of defence, and they want to close the doors. There is an attitude of withdrawal.
The result is that they often have a very contradictory attitude toward a minority that is not viewed as a minority. Part of the task is to make the majority understand that the English-speaking minority is genuinely a minority dealing with the same problems as any minority community. And that is no easy task.
We see that in the immediate and visceral reaction outlined in the last Statistics Canada report on the economic situation of the English-speaking community, where there has suddenly been a debate. Figures show that 98 per cent of francophones believe that the English-speaking community is richer than the francophone community.
However, the figures show that the average income of anglophones is less than that of francophones.
This perception has been around for centuries and persists, which does not help the situation.
[English]
Senator Seidman: Commissioner, we are truly grateful to you for making your second appearance here. The first was before we went on our study, and you helped set the scene for us. We are especially happy to have you back now that we have returned, so that we can try to put it into a context.
In your presentation you said the government responses to the English minority community should not be the same necessarily as they are to the French minority communities. They are both official language minority communities, but their needs are different. You suggested there could be greater interdepartmental cooperation. I would like you, if you could, to elaborate on this.
Mr. Fraser: I also said a challenge for the English community is that the rules and regulations of the federal government deal with some organizations as national organizations if they have members in more than one province, and the government has other rules that deal with organizations that are in a single province.
Although the Quebec English-language communities have a total population that is about the equivalent of the French-language minorities outside Quebec, the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne is dealt with at a higher level in the bureaucracy as a national organization than the QCGN is as a provincial organization. One serious improvement would be, in that level, paradoxically, even though I said they should not be treated the same, if they were treated the same, being given the status of a national minority; that would simplify matters quite dramatically.
The other area where there is a need for greater inter-ministerial cooperation is that of economic development, where different departments are involved in the file, and sometimes those different departments will deal with the English minority in a quite different fashion than the French-speaking minority. We have had the DesRochers decision, which says clearly that federal departments have an obligation to design their programs in a way that fits the needs of the minority communities. To the extent that federal departments are aware of this obligation as described by the Supreme Court, they are more aware of it in terms of dealing with the francophone minority communities than they are in terms of dealing with the English minority communities.
Senator Seidman: That is particularly interesting and helps clarify what you meant.
When we travelled, I often asked our witnesses, "What can we do to help you?"
Mr. Fraser: That was one thing I was going to tell you when I suspected you would ask that question.
Senator Seidman: One thing that became evident from many responses to this question is that it seemed on the surface there was a certain degree of confusion, but probably there was not confusion so much as frustration, because many of the issues that were put forward were issues that were very clearly not in federal jurisdiction — education, health care, culture, immigration, small business, economic development, all these things. What can we do about all this? It leaves you feeling helpless when people are asking you to help them with things that you feel you have no control over.
We discussed with some witnesses the inadequate transparency in the way the Government of Quebec uses the funds that are transferred by the federal government for minority language education and second-language instruction and even in other areas — and I believe Senator Champagne already touched upon this — in the federal-provincial transfer agreements and equalization payments and things of that nature.
How do you deal with all this? Can we do anything to help make things more transparent or to ensure that monies that are meant for the minority language community in Quebec actually go to the minority language community? I am struggling.
Mr. Fraser: Let me stress that the problem you have described is not at all limited to the Government of Quebec. In the area of education, a former provincial minister of education actually confessed to me that once the cheque arrived from the federal government there are all kinds of needs and that they are under a lot of pressure to simply move that money into the envelope and then spend it as they see fit.
One of the real challenges is how to ensure that the money Ottawa spends on second-language education actually is devoted to second-language education. In a number of other areas Quebec is actually better than most because it does make more of an effort to track, but it is a serious problem. I know that Canadian Heritage has made a serious effort to track the money as best it can, but I have been told by federal officials that, to a certain extent, once they moved to no-strings funding, it became very difficult to hold the provincial governments to spending it where they said they were going to spend it.
However, I noted that when the Eastern Townships School Board appeared before you and told you that federal money had been spent on laptops for kids, the Quebec government was only too pleased to have someone else providing the money for this. I think the challenge is to find the seams, find the areas where there is not an issue of federal-provincial squabble and areas where the federal assistance on something of that kind is actually appreciated rather than resented. There are a number of such areas, including, for example, the health network funding that was provided, which has actually had the concrete result of thousands of primary health care workers now being able to give primary health care after having taken this program carefully developed at McGill University so that they would be learning very clearly the vocabulary they would need to give primary health care.
At times I worry that the degree to which federal government funding has become rooted in provincial assumptions that the money goes to second-language training, the provinces are losing their sense of responsibility for second- language training. It is a two-edged sword sometimes. This is much less the case in Quebec than it is in the other provinces. The provinces assume that the learning of the second language is dealt with by the federal government, so they do not pay much attention to it; but that is not the case in Quebec.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: Thank you, Madam Chair. I was going to ask the same questions as Senator Seidman. And they are excellent questions. So I will move on to something else.
In one of your studies on anglophones in Quebec, you stated that, from an institutional point of view, the schools and health and social service institutions that offer services to the English-speaking community must deal with pluralistic clienteles that reflect the dichotomy between Montreal and the rest of Quebec. Is that still the case? And from what standpoint could we examine that issue?
Mr. Fraser: I believe the challenges remain. You observed the difficulties those institutions encounter when you heard the evidence of the people from Gaspé and the Lower North Shore. These are genuine problems in the delivery of services by education and health institutions. I noted the emphatic nature of Senator De Bané's reaction on the issue of the number of employees in the department of education dealing with the English-speaking community compared to those dedicated to the francophone community. Yes, there are still service delivery problems. However, I have always been struck by the dedication of the people who work in the department.
[English]
Ms. Ludwig: One thing that differentiates services in Montreal from those in the regions, especially health and education, is the historical institutions in Montreal that are accessible to the English-speaking community. That is not the case outside Montreal. Of the various stories told to the committee, one in particular struck a chord with everyone: In the Lower North Shore area, couples were separated in long-term care facilities, and they never saw each other again. That is the kind of reality that exists for a significant number of English-speaking people in Quebec.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: Is the difference between the urban and rural areas part of the equation?
Mr. Fraser: Absolutely. When we conducted our vitality study, we examined one community that is really at the extreme end on all aspects of the problem, that is to say the Lower North Shore. There are 5,000 anglophones there, 80 per cent of whom are unilingual English speakers who, for centuries, have depended on the fishery; a fishery that no longer supports them in the same way. They live surrounded by a population and institutions that are more or less unilingual francophone.
One citizen told me he abandoned his business because he could not understand the Quebec government's regulations governing his business sales. Relations between the people in that region and the Government of Quebec are difficult over linguistic issues, even with the federal member of Parliament. They are at the mercy of an airline that has a monopoly in the region. I also spoke to a woman whose two sons were attending high school in the Sherbrooke region. Both spent the summer in Alberta to pay for their education because, if they went back to Blanc-Sablon to work through a summer program of Public Works and Government Services Canada, all the money they would earn in Blanc-Sablon would go to pay for airline tickets. They could go to work in Alberta and earn enough money to pay for airline tickets, their education and everything they needed for the academic year. This is a community that is dealing with enormous problems of geographic isolation — of transportation and services — and problems of linguistic isolation as well.
Senator De Bané: Commissioner, first I would like to tell you that I have known all the commissioners since 1969. Many have been of very high quality. However, let me say, without undermining your modesty, that I think you are the best of all those I have seen in the past 40 years. It is rare to see someone who has such a thorough knowledge of both communities.
That being said, I would like to have your comments on a few points. As you said, I was struck by the fact that, in Quebec City, barely 30 out of 1,400 government employees are under the authority of Mr. La France, assistant deputy minister for anglophone affairs. Obviously, 30 out of 1,400 is approximately 2.2 per cent. From the figures alone, we see that they act more as a transmission belt for the rest of the department. They represent only 2.2 per cent, whereas there are a lot more of them in the population of Quebec.
I would like to ask you whether you can provide a comparison of the organization chart of Quebec's department of education, anglophone services sector, with those of Manitoba, Ontario and New Brunswick. In each of those three provinces, there is a group in the departments of education that handles the francophone or Acadian minority community.
I would have a better idea of the comparative situation if your office could help me get that. In addition, I know that you have an in-depth knowledge of Quebec's English-speaking community and I would like to tell you how impressed I was by the quality of the people we met in Quebec City, Lennoxville and Montreal.
In Montreal, we were told two things that I had never thought, that the English language is not in danger in Quebec, but that the English community is. I never noticed that there had been such considerable decline in the past five or six years. It is not an issue of language, but rather of the community.
In addition, with regard to a field that Ms. Champagne knows infinitely better than all of us, one representative of the artistic community told us in Montreal that there are approximately 7,000 anglophone artists and talked about the following problem. Anglophone artists are competing with Hollywood and the media are not interested in them. They told us they were considered to be small fry relative to Hollywood and that they were also unknown in the francophone community, so by both sides. They told us they could not live as artists if no one talked about them. This is something that had escaped me and this opened my eyes.
Last, I am going to tell you what shocked me most, and I hope you will be able to do something about this. As you know, in 1991, following the proceedings of a task force bearing the names of its two co-chairs, the Broadcasting Act was modernized along with the CBC's mission. The words "national unity" were struck out and it was said that the public broadcaster had to reflect Canada as a whole, as well as the various official language minority groups and so on. The act was very well revised in 1991.
Our committee spent a week conducting hearings in Quebec, and I have no memory of the CBC's French-language service, Radio-Canada, broadcasting a single news item about any of those hearings. I did not see them anywhere.
There was something fleeting on the anglophone side, particularly in Sherbrooke, but it was virtually nothing at all. This is a fundamental topic that falls completely within CBC/Radio-Canada's mission under the 1991 legislation, and it is completely disregarded. It is beyond me how the public broadcaster's two networks, English and French, could to all intents and purposes completely disregard this in such an important matter.
On the other hand, the Bastarache Commission got at least one hour of coverage in the evenings and five or six hours during the day. How then do you build bridges between the two communities?
Hon. Senators: There is no scandal —
Senator De Bané: That is correct. And as no one is talking about it, we have the situation you described earlier: as long as there are feelings of insecurity, there will always be overdeveloped self-defence mechanisms and situations that date back many years because the networks are separated from each other by a thick wall and, in Quebec, you can forget about the English-speaking community.
I found that truly unacceptable, and I understand why we have so many problems. It appears the public broadcaster does not want to talk to us about them and every day prefers to provide coverage of what is going on in Paris or elsewhere.
Just look at the French-language print media in Quebec, such as Le Soleil, La Presse, Le Devoir and Le Journal de Montréal — Le Droit being a separate case. None of those papers has correspondents in the other Canadian provinces, except on Parliament Hill in Ottawa. None. Le Droit fortunately has correspondents in Toronto, and so on.
If the public broadcaster, which has journalists across Canada and throughout Quebec, now does not want to cover a full week's work by a special Senate committee on a fundamental topic, I understand why you say there are these kinds of suspicions and overdeveloped defence mechanisms.
These are the things I wanted to say and the saddest things I saw during that week, contrary to the 1991 Broadcasting Act. That is all.
Mr. Fraser: I would like to respond to you briefly. First, we will try to find the data you need. With regard to the question of the English language, which, as you say is not threatened, although the community instead is, I would make the following comment. The first time I heard that distinction made between the English language and the English-speaking community, that is to say what that represented, it was presented from a completely different standpoint by the late Gérald Godin. That was before he was a minister in Quebec City. He was chairing a committee that made recommendations on amendments to be made to Bill 101. That was in 1983, I believe.
In his report, he emphasized that the English-speaking community did not present a threat to French in Quebec. He stressed that there was a threat to the French language in Quebec, but that it was English as an international language, as well as the international media and the omnipresent nature of English.
No one was yet talking about globalization, but he drew a clear distinction in order to explain to the National Assembly that the anglophone community did not present a threat to French or to the majority. That was the first time I had heard that distinction.
We can debate other findings made in that committee, but that was an important distinction to draw at that time. With respect to the issue of artists in Quebec, I would add another point. Montreal is the most cosmopolitan city in Canada. It attracts artists from across Canada and around the world. A number of years ago in Montreal, we witnessed a flowering of independent music.
These artists go to Montreal rather than to Berlin and do not necessarily identify with the anglophone community. Nor do they identify with the francophone majority; they identify with Montreal's artistic community. One of the challenges for the English-speaking community would be to establish ties with these young people who come from everywhere and who are attracted by the artistic energy that Montreal exudes and who do not necessarily establish ties with the anglophone or francophone communities.
There is one exception to that, and that is that the National Film Board has recognized Pop Montreal as an anglophone minority cultural event. There is a film component to that festival, which recognizes artistic vitality, but which has no traditional connection with what is thought to be Montreal's or Quebec's traditional anglophone community.
As regards the Sauvageau study in 1991, I have another story to tell, perhaps a more positive one. One of the things I have observed in the French-language media in Quebec is that they increasingly cover, without sarcasm or irony, certain cultural and tourist events that take place in English Canada. They treat them as something valid.
For example, articles have appeared about the Toronto International Film Festival and there have been columns in the travel section of Le Devoir on kayak excursions in Georgian Bay and Prince Edward County in Ontario. In fact, they do not treat these regions with contempt, but rather as regions that are entirely valid places to visit for anyone who wants to visit an interesting place.
When I was in Quebec 30 years ago, no one would have thought of writing an article about a tourist visit to Ontario without making somewhat sarcastic comments about the lack of services. In addition, 15 years ago, there was a murderous incident when a certain professor of engineering, Valery Fabrikant, committed a massacre at Concordia University. When the topic was addressed in the newspapers, people felt an obligation to explain what Concordia University was, as though it were located in another province or another state or as if it were a foreign body in Quebec. It was done without contempt, but it was assumed that no one reading the newspaper would know that there was a Concordia University in Montreal.
Almost exactly four years ago, at the time of the killings at Dawson College, Montreal unanimously reacted in a way that showed this was the loss of a young Montreal woman at a Montreal institution. The entire city stopped for the funeral and no one referred to Dawson College as an anglophone university.
And I perceived progress in those two tragedies. I saw an entirely laudable reflex of inclusion. So, yes, what you said is entirely true, and I believe we are seeing signs of progress.
The Chair: I see the time is passing. Commissioner, can you stay with the committee until 6:30 p.m.?
Mr. Fraser: Yes, of course.
The Chair: Thank you. I will accept a brief supplementary question from Senator Fortin-Duplessis and Senator Fraser. Then we will move on to the second round of questions.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: My supplementary question is further to what Senator De Bané said. I very much enjoyed taking part in our committee's hearings and proceedings, but I was enormously moved by the fact that the communities did not seem to have easy access to broadcasting services, print media, community media in their language and that in no way helps those communities in the regions.
In your opinion, what can public broadcasters such as the CBC do? To give you an example, the communities wanted to advertise a theatre play that people had prepared, but it was not shown on the television or elsewhere. That affected them. I too was moved in seeing that an entire community was unable to advertise its activities to the rest of the world.
Mr. Fraser: It is very hard to identify effective support measures by the media, which generally operate in the private sector. There are some support programs at Canadian Heritage for publications, weeklies and community radio stations. I do not have any figures to hand to list the programs for you, but I know that those programs exist.
The Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages decided to go after Radio-Canada over the closing of CBEF Windsor, at which time 878 complaints were received. First it must be determined whether the office has jurisdiction in this matter. Radio-Canada claims that is not the case, but if it is the case, the obligations of CBC and Radio-Canada toward the communities under Part VII of the Official Languages Act will have to be determined.
There is a role that the government could perhaps play and that does not fall into the areas of programming or journalism. That is support for high-speed Internet access. As you all know, some communities do not yet have high- speed Internet access.
It is increasingly through Internet use that we will be able to see the future of communications for the small communities.
Senator Fraser: Thank you, Madam Chair.
[English]
I have two things for the record. First, I am related to Mr. Fraser, but we have not been in cahoots about this. In fact, over the past 40 years, this is one of the subjects we have discussed the least, probably.
Second, for the record, I should note that CBC Radio did cover us in Quebec City and, indeed, interviewed me. I do not know whether they interviewed anyone else. They may well have, but I owe them that. They did make that effort, which is more than they make for many other Senate committees that go travelling. We are unsung talents a great deal of the time, not just this committee.
I have a request, commissioner. When you are looking up numbers for Senator De Bané, could you add an item to your list, if possible? I am not asking for the impossible. Do we know how the arts and cultural granting agencies divide up their money according to linguistic criteria? I mean, a dance troupe is a dance troupe, but writers write in English or in French, and there are theatres and filmmakers. Do we have any concept of how the various granting or financing agencies treat English-speaking artists in Quebec and French-speaking artists everywhere else?
You said that English-speaking Quebecers believe their needs are not well understood by governments or decision makers. You delivered that portion of your text in French and talked about le gouvernement. It is no secret that many English-speaking Quebecers believe that the provincial government does not have a strong grasp of or interest in their needs. Do you think that is equally or partially true for the federal government?
Mr. Fraser: I do. Let me give a couple of examples. For one thing, the English community is significantly under- represented in the federal government departments in Quebec. Not as dramatically under-represented as it is in the provincial government, but nevertheless there is significant under-representation.
In some regional offices in Quebec there is no greater understanding of the English-speaking minority in a federal department than there is in a provincial department.
I have in the past had some minority language organizations' representatives tell me that, in some specific areas, they found it easier to deal with the provincial government than the federal government because the provincial model of table de concertation did not have an equivalent for the federal government.
Basically, the challenge was ensuring that they got on to the table de concertation or that their issue was raised at the table de concertation at the provincial level, a familiar form of public consultation. It is one of the tools used by many government departments in Quebec and is not used in the same way.
I think federal government departments do not have as sophisticated consultation mechanisms as has been the case and developed by some provincial governments.
The third area is the one I mentioned in my text. The Quebec Community Groups Network is treated as a regional organization rather than as a national organization, and it sometimes finds it is very difficult to get access at the more senior levels of departments because of that.
Senator Fraser: You mentioned the missing middle. In English Quebec that is the missing middle generation, among whom would normally be found the community leaders who are vital in ensuring a community's continued health and vitality. Many of the people who would be in those leadership positions now left, for one reason or another, and made their lives elsewhere, which has put quite a significant burden on some people who are now getting on in years who are still there. Some of them were leaders already in 1970, and 40 years later they are still the leaders because the community has not been able to find succession.
Are you aware of any programs, or do you think it would be worth exploring programs of leadership development among the young in English Quebec or, for that matter, in francophone communities elsewhere?
Mr. Fraser: This was one of the issues raised in our vitality study, particularly in the Eastern Townships. My understanding is that, as part of their youth retention strategy, they began to work specifically on leadership programs, job-training programs. Not just job-training programs, but job-seeking training, if you like — giving young people the skills to go and get the jobs that they had the qualifications for but often felt they did not have the language skills for when in fact they did. That is the one program I am aware of that was part of the strategy.
One paradox regarding the retention issue for young people in Quebec is that, on the one hand, everyone recognizes that people need to be bilingual to be able to work in Quebec now. What many young people feel, if they have graduated from university and they are entering into a competitive job market, is that their French skills are actually not as strong as the francophone graduates with whom they will be competing for a job, but those skills are more than strong enough to be considered a major asset in Ottawa or Toronto or other parts of the country.
Their own perception of their language skills is such that the degree of bilingualism they achieve is actually an incentive to leave rather than an incentive to stay. It is one of those double-edged swords of the community, seeing their best leave.
Ms. Ludwig: This might be useful in your reflection. You are talking about leadership development and young people, and sometimes there are good things to copy elsewhere. The francophone communities have youth networks that do not exist in Quebec, and that is something the federal government can help with. These networks not only support each other in terms of finding opportunities to stay, but they also develop leadership. That is certainly something the federal government can help in.
Senator Fraser: I know that I am wearing out my welcome here, but you may wish to think about this and write to us if you have thoughts on it.
Along the general lines of what the federal government can do, can you give us any guidance on areas where the existing system of bilateral agreements could perhaps be improved, areas where the agreements, when they come up for renegotiation, might be made more flexible or more precise or whatever? Similarly, with respect to English-speaking Quebec, is the Roadmap where we want to go? Is it good enough? Did it give enough attention to us?
Mr. Fraser: You save easy questions for the end.
Senator Fraser: I said you might wish to reflect and write to us.
[Translation]
The Chair: Would you prefer to answer that question in writing, commissioner?
Mr. Fraser: With pleasure.
[English]
One element I would add that you might want to consider — I do not know whether it came up in your hearings, but I do not think I saw any reference to it in the hearing in Quebec — I know that in Valcartier, the family resources centre is very involved in finding jobs for basically anglophone spouses. I think it was sought out by Emploi-Québec, which did not have the same resources or ability to find jobs for English speakers in Quebec City.
One area you could make recommendations in is ways in which the military bases in Quebec reach out to the community and use and expand their family resource centre networks so that those can be resources that, in collaboration with Emploi-Québec, can establish programs for job placement and job training.
Senator Fraser: That would be interesting. Thank you.
[Translation]
The Chair: Time is passing. Three more senators would like to ask questions in a second round. Would the senators agree to ask their questions so that the commissioner can respond in writing?
Senator Champagne: The commissioner will no doubt appreciate my question because it is not easy.
First of all, this past weekend, I was delighted to see that Montreal's Théâtre Centaure has finally placed some television ads this year. I find that extraordinary.
I would like to go back to the role of our immigrants and emigrants and that of all newcomers who increase the numbers of our various linguistic communities, particularly minority communities. It is often said that it is important and marvellous for them to integrate into the community. And turning the page, prayers are offered to avoid assimilation. Where do you draw the line between their integration and their assimilation?
[English]
Senator Seidman: I guess Senator Fraser sort of put the question again. I would like to quote from your second-to- last paragraph, last line, where you say, "I hope the federal government looks at it closely" — referring to our work — "and that it will help it rethink and reimagine its role toward the English-speaking community of Quebec."
I would like to ask you, since you have so much expertise in this area and you have clearly also listened and watched as we did our work, if you could think a bit and perhaps in your wisdom suggest to us anything that comes to mind in rethinking and reimagining that role toward the English-speaking community of Quebec. We would be most appreciative of that.
[Translation]
The Chair: Commissioner, on behalf of the committee members, I want like to thank you sincerely, you and your team, for coming to answer our questions.
For us, you are a source not only of information, but also of inspiration. So thank you very much and we hope to see you again soon.
Mr. Fraser: Thank you very much. It is always a pleasure to be here.
The Chair: We will suspend the sitting and resume in camera.
(The committee continued in camera.)