THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON OFFICIAL LANGUAGES
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Monday, February 26, 2018
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day at 4:30 p.m., in public, to continue its examination of Canadians’ views about modernizing the Official Languages Act, and, in camera, to consider a draft agenda (future business).
Senator René Cormier (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Good afternoon. My name is René Cormier, and I am a senator from New Brunswick. I am pleased to chair today’s meeting.
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages is continuing with the second stage of its study on official language minority communities’ views on modernizing the Official Languages Act. Today, the committee will hear from an organization working in the adult education sector. We have the pleasure of having with us Mr. Michel Robillard and Ms. Gabrielle Lopez from the Réseau pour le développement de l’alphabétisme et des compétences. The Réseau pour le développement de l’alphabétisme et des compétences brings together partners from the education and training, economic, employment, public service and community sectors in order to implement strategies to improve the literacy and skill levels of adult francophones in Canada.
Before giving the floor to our witnesses, I would ask the members of the committee to please introduce themselves.
Senator Poirier: Good afternoon. Senator Rose-May Poirier from New Brunswick. Welcome.
Senator Mégie: Senator Marie-Françoise Mégie from Quebec.
Senator Maltais: Senator Ghislain Maltais from Quebec.
Senator Gagné: Raymonde Gagné from Manitoba.
Senator Moncion: Lucie Moncion from Ontario.
Senator McIntyre: Paul McIntyre from New Brunswick.
Senator Smith: Larry Smith from Quebec.
The Chair: Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Mr. Robillard, you have the floor.
Michel Robillard, Board Member, Réseau pour le développement de l’alphabétisme et des compétences: Mr. Chair, committee members, good afternoon and thank you for your work, your commitment and your reports, which attest to your understanding of the situation of the members of our community.
My name is Michel Robillard. I am the Executive Director of the Coalition ontarienne de formation des adultes, or COFA, and a board member of the Réseau pour le développement de l’alphabétisme et des compétences, better known as RESDAC. I am accompanied this afternoon by Ms. Gabrielle Lopez, RESDAC’s former executive director.
Our presentation will focus on four points: the current situation, the Official Languages Act, RESDAC and, in conclusion, suggestions for modernizing the Official Languages Act.
Today, the prosperity of nations, the success of businesses, the vitality of communities, social progress and personal development all require high levels of knowledge and skills. Adults are facing new challenges at work, as citizens with a concern for sustainable development, as parents, as people who are taking care of their own health or that of a loved one, and as people engaged in their community.
Until recently, the consensus was that adult education was important. In recent years, however, we have seen the federal government’s disengagement from adult literacy. We fear that the government is turning its back on thousands of Canadians with low literacy skills. We are talking about 53 per cent of francophones living in minority communities who perform below level 3 on the literacy scale, the minimum threshold to function in a knowledge-based society. This data is drawn from the 2013 Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies. The government’s disengagement places these people at risk of living with social, cultural and economic exclusion for the rest of their lives.
With globalization and the development of the knowledge-based economy, having a high skill level equates to economic benefits. However, intensified globalization in the economic sector produces low employment as well as unemployment among young people and contributes to an increase in the number of people with precarious jobs.
We have also found that skills development must increasingly exceed economic development objectives and foster greater civic engagement. Canada is faced with a new economic and demographic reality as a result of globalization and the emergence of the knowledge-based society.
Ongoing learning is a vector for community, social and economic growth in francophone minority communities. It is a tool that helps reduce linguistic insecurity and, as a result, helps broaden the francophone space and ensure the sustainability of our communities. It is at the heart of the development of every francophone Canadian’s identity.
Since the Official Languages Act was passed in 1969, English and French have been the official languages of the Canadian federal government. A number of government initiatives have strengthened the implementation of the obligations under the act and led to the creation of consecutive five-year action plans aimed at achieving three main objectives: to foster the vitality of official language minority communities, to improve bilingualism in the federal public service and to strengthen the country’s linguistic duality. Ten federal institutions received funds for sector-based activities and programs focusing on official languages. The Department of Canadian Heritage ensures the horizontal coordination of the official languages program, including the implementation of the action plan.
As a result of the provinces’ efforts to take on more responsibilities since the 1970s, the government has gradually ceded these responsibilities to the provincial and territorial authorities, in particular, in the case of employment, through Canada Job Fund agreements. Some of these funds are reserved for people with jobs but no recognized secondary school diploma or diploma or vocational training, or with low literacy and skill levels.
A number of studies on the official languages have shown that the provisions of the Official Languages Act are applied differently from one province to the next. As a result, there is no standard level of support for official language communities in the different provinces and territories.
Although progress has been made, literacy and skills development in French in some provinces and territories is underfunded, or not funded at all. Moreover, the support once provided for research, resource development and cooperation in francophone minority communities by the Office of Literacy and Essential Skills, OLES, has been all but eliminated.
As a result of both of these situations, the development of tools and resources and the availability of literacy and skills development services are unequal from one province or territory to the next.
Established in 1991, RESDAC is currently the only nationwide organization aimed at improving literacy and essential skills levels among francophone adults living in minority communities in Canada. It represents the community and college groups that provide literacy and skills training and development in the provinces and territories.
Since October 31, 2017, we are no longer sustainable, the federal government having cut our funding in 2014. Nevertheless, we are still the only organization in the education continuum that receives no funding from either the Department of Canadian Heritage or the Department of Employment and Social Development. As a result of the loss of its basic funding, a lack of consultation and a number of changes in policy and decision-making processes on the part of our main funding partner, OLES, RESDAC decided to file a complaint with the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages.
I am pleased to announce that, as a result of the investigation, the Interim Commissioner of Official Languages found that the Department of Employment and Social Development was in breach of Part VII of the Official Languages Act. The Interim Commissioner of Official Languages made two recommendations to the department. First, it recommended that it re-evaluate its policy and eligibility criteria with respect to the funds available for literacy and essential skills development in order to ensure more consideration for the special needs and priorities of official language minority communities. Second, she recommended that the department evaluate the repercussions of eliminating RESDAC’s basic funding and that of its provincial and territorial network and that it take the appropriate measures to address the negative impacts.
The future of RESDAC and the clients who benefit from the services of its members is still uncertain. A new official languages action plan is imminent, but we have no indication as to funding in this area and, more particularly, whether RESDAC will receive basic funding to pursue its mission.
It is important to mention that, after receiving the investigation report, we indicated to Ms. Hajdu, the Minister of Employment and Social Development, our interest in working in partnership with key stakeholders so that the department can fulfill its obligations under the Official Languages Act.
Two weeks ago, we received a letter in which the minister undertook to help francophone minority communities find solutions. We are currently in discussions with the department concerning a proactive search for solutions in conjunction with francophone minority communities. The discussions are going well, but the department still does not want to consider basic funding for RESDAC.
RESDAC agrees with the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne, and believes that the Department of Canadian Heritage should ensure basic minimum funding, as it does for other national sectoral organizations that are part of the education continuum.
With respect to the future and the importance of literacy development, when francophones living in minority communities become proficient in essential skills, they and their communities enjoy several positive effects. Proficiency in essential skills is a vector for economic, social and community development. The effects are obvious. They include better wages, better health, a better chance of educational success for our children, more active involvement in the community and a decrease in linguistic insecurity. In other words, our sector helps ensure the sustainability of our communities.
In conclusion, by 2030, automation and changes to existing occupations could put more than 10 per cent of Canadian workers at risk of losing their jobs unless they acquire new skills. They will need a high skill level to function in the new global economy.
For these reasons alone, the Official Languages Acts must be revised. We believe that the following points must be taken into account in the modernization of the act. The first point involves access to services. In other words, all Canadians should have access to literacy and adult education services. This means that francophone organizations in the sector must receive the funding they need to deliver quality services.
The second point involves statistics. Government bodies are thinking increasingly in terms of impact. We are required to define and measure the impact of our initiatives. Often, our funding partners expect us to provide population-based impacts. Francophones in some provinces and territories do not have access to these types of statistics. New measures should be implemented to give francophone minority communities access to more complete statistical data.
The third point recommends greater accountability on the part of the provinces and territories to federal institutions concerning the funding allotted to them under the Official Languages Act, as well as on the part of the federal institutions responsible for the implementation of the Official Languages Act to the Department of Canadian Heritage.
The following point involves access to documents that are easy to understand. We must recognize the need to adopt a clear and simple writing style for all government forms and publications.
The following are other issues more specific to our sector that are of concern to us and that should be taken into consideration in the modernization of the act: low numeracy skills among francophone adults with low literacy skills; the lack of essential skills, which is becoming increasingly problematic among young adults in college, university and vocational training; the importance of generic skills, which are just as important as technical skills; the importance of having a continuum of service providers in order to foster a coordinated effort that can respond to the multiple needs of various clienteles throughout their lifetime; basic funding for a national organization such as RESDAC so that it can pursue its mission, continue playing a role in the education continuum and ensure that all of the learning needs of francophone adults with low literacy skills living in minority communities are taken into account.
Thank you for inviting us to appear and for your continued work in this area. This concludes our presentation.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Robillard. We will now begin the question period.
Senator Poirier: Thank you for your presentation.
I would like to ask you a few questions. The first concerns Part V, which concerns the language of work of federal employees. Have you had occasion to work with federal employees or to address this part of the act within your organization?
Mr. Robillard: Yes, we work with federal employees. Use of the official languages has never been a problem with the Coalition ontarienne de formation des adultes and the people with whom I work.
Senator Poirier: In your opinion, should we re-examine Part V in order to make changes or improvements?
Mr. Robillard: About five years after a new federal government program is implemented, it is completely reviewed in order to determine what works well and what works less well, what lessons have been learned and what can be improved.
The same type of approach should be applied to laws, especially the Official Languages Act. Our world is constantly evolving. Many things have changed in the past 30 years, including the use of social media. In my opinion, there are probably elements in parts V, VI and VII of the act that should be re-examined in depth.
Senator Poirier: When it revised its Official Languages Act in 2002, New Brunswick, the only officially bilingual province in Canada, found that the act should be re-examined every 10 years. Do you think this should be the case at the federal level as well?
Mr. Robillard: Governments are increasingly talking about continuous improvement. In my opinion, such a review mechanism is only logical; revising our laws regularly is an excellent approach.
Senator Poirier: My final question involves Part VII of the act. The committee heard several witnesses mention the importance of Part VII of the Official Languages Act. However, this is also a part of the act that is not always clear or that seems to give rise to several interpretations when it comes to its application.
In your opinion, as it stands, is Part VII adequate, or should it be changed as well?
Mr. Robillard: Here is the problem. As we said earlier, 10 government departments receive funding for the roadmap, which applies to the Official Languages Act. Since the Department of Canadian Heritage ensures the horizontal coordination of 10 departments, there are probably 10 different interpretations of Part VII of the Official Languages Act, especially when it comes to positive measures.
It probably would be a good idea to explain what is meant by positive measures by giving concrete examples. It is almost certain that, with 10 departments involved and one department ensuring horizontal coordination, interpretations will differ from one department to the next. The application of positive measures will also differ from one department to the next.
Senator Poirier: My final question is as follows. The current roadmap expires on March 31, 2018. Has Minister Joly consulted you about the new roadmap?
Mr. Robillard: I know that several of our members attended consultations on the new roadmap. Several of us were consulted and raised important points to consider. I will now turn it over to my colleague, who participated in the consultations.
Gabrielle Lopez, Representative, Réseau pour le développement de l’alphabétisme et des compétences: I participated in the Canada-wide consultations on the roadmap. Several of our members were present during the consultations, so we were able to share our points of view on the issues at stake, and our comments were reflected in the report produced by the committee.
Senator Poirier: Thank you. Excellent.
Senator Gagné: Welcome to the committee. I sincerely believe that RESDAC plays an important role in literacy and essential skills development; you also play a role in ensuring community development.
We are talking about Part VII of the Official Languages Act, and we know that, in Part VII, the federal government undertakes to support the development of English and French linguistic minority communities in Canada. I am always thinking about what changes we could make to improve Part VII or which regulations we could adopt to clarify its application.
What types of changes could we make so that organizations such as RESDAC don’t face uncertainty?
Mr. Robillard: That is an emotional issue, as you know. RESDAC, as a nationwide organization — and when we speak of nationwide organizations, we are often talking about francophone communities — has had extensive discussions with its anglophone colleagues in Quebec, who are experiencing essentially the same challenges and issues as we are.
I will give you a concrete example, which, in my opinion, is a good example to help understand and strengthen Part VII. The concept of education continuum, which is recognized in most provinces as well as by Heritage Canada as ranging from early childhood education to university, is starting to have operational implications for the provinces. New Brunswick has an education continuum; Ontario is implementing one now. In these provinces, the continuum includes both education and training, since literacy and essential skills development are an integral part of it. Not all Canadians had the opportunity to go to elementary or secondary school, and many of them who did dropped out. Where do these people turn? Often, to literacy and essential skills organizations. Many of the provinces therefore incorporate essential skills into the continuum. This is not the case at the federal level. This is the only component that is not funded.
In my opinion, when we are trying to understand Part VII and positive measures, this is a good example of a positive measure that adopts a holistic approach. Let us be clear: our small communities often have few resources. With respect to all the resources we can access to develop the level of education, the continuum and so forth, when people develop and implement Treasury Board or departmental policies, there needs to be a far more comprehensive approach that is not limited to certain components. In my opinion, there is a way of improving Part VII, and it is with this type of example.
Senator Gagné: Some witnesses proposed adding another part to the act dealing specifically with education, the education continuum and accountability with respect to transfers to the provinces. I would like to hear what you have to say about this and whether you think developing a part dealing specifically with the education continuum would be a good idea.
Mr. Robillard: When they submit their budgets, most of our governments mention the knowledge-based economy, the importance for the economy of always being on the cutting edge of technology, of having a skilled workforce, and so forth. In my opinion, education gives us this cutting edge. Whether you are talking about university or trade programs, it is extremely important.
I think it would be a good idea to have a part that deals more specifically with education, since the data is demoralizing. Thanks to Statistics Canada and the data from the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies, we know that 48 per cent of Canadian francophones perform at literacy levels 1 and 2, that 56 per cent perform at levels 1 and 2 in mathematics, and that 76 per cent perform at levels 1 and 2 in numeracy.
We are facing increasing challenges as technologies develop. Therefore, it is very important to invest heavily in adult education and training because we have a lot of catching up to do, including when it comes to the development of essential competencies.
I recently attended a conference where they were talking about the Northern Ontario Ring of Fire. They were saying that, to meet workforce needs, they would probably have to bring in foreign workers. I asked myself why. We have workers in Ontario, anglophone, francophone and Indigenous workers who, with the proper training in essential skills, could take on these jobs. That way, the salaries paid would be reinvested in Northern Ontario’s economy. That applies everywhere, from Nunavut to the Northwest Territories. We need to train our people and develop a skilled workforce. That will allow us to create jobs and wealth by investing in our economy.
Yes, I think that having a part of the act that deals specifically with education is a good idea. In fact, it is extremely important.
Ms. Lopez: I have one concern. It is sometimes difficult for adult education to carve out a space for itself in the broader context of education because education usually means formal education, while adult education is often informal, with courses that do not necessarily lead to a diploma or certificate. It is a delicate issue, because adult education has difficulty gaining recognition because it is informal.
Senator Gagné: I would like to clarify something. Literacy in minority language communities could be included in the education continuum, right?
Ms. Lopez: Yes. In fact, we are working with the Fédération nationale des conseils scolaires francophones, which developed the new framework in which we began working only two years ago.
Senator Gagné: I wanted to hear it from you. Thank you.
Senator McIntyre: Thank you for your participation and for your excellent presentation.
If I understand correctly, the question of funding is key. This being said, in the past, your organization received funding from Heritage Canada. Since 2014, the federal government has cut your basic funding. I am mentioning this because the committee was also supposed to hear from the Réseau des cégeps et des collèges francophones du Canada; however, the Réseau bowed out because of its extremely precarious financial situation.
If I understand correctly, in your opinion, measures should be incorporated into the Official Languages Act to ensure sustained funding for your organization and others like the Réseau des cégeps et des collèges francophones du Canada. That is what I understand.
My question is in the same vein as that of Senator Gagné and involves the education continuum. As you mentioned, according to your organization, support for literacy and numeracy is an integral part of the education continuum, like early childhood education and the education offered in elementary schools, secondary schools, colleges and universities. Just recently, in winter 2018, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages launched a study to examine literacy and numeracy support programs in Canada. Has your organization been involved?
Mr. Robillard: We appeared before a parliamentary committee on official languages two weeks ago to share our opinion.
Senator McIntyre: How did it go?
Mr. Robillard: It went very well. Most of the members of the committee seemed to agree with us. I cannot speak for them, but our comments were well received. There were many very good questions about the impact of the disappearance of the only nationwide organization for literacy and basic education. I think they were happy to learn that we had begun working with OLES to find solutions to our budget problem. I noticed that the members’ attitude and the committee’s reaction to our presentation were extremely positive. I would like to ask Gabrielle, who was assisting me at the time, to weigh in.
Ms. Lopez: In fact, their attitude was very receptive. The committee itself issued a report after our appearance the previous year. Many of their recommendations supported us in our approach. Yes, it was very positive.
Senator McIntyre: I also see that, last fall, your financial situation was such that you thought you would have to cease operations because of a shortage of employees, but that you were able to soldier on thanks to the volunteers on the board of directors. Could you tell us a bit about the work done by these volunteers?
Ms. Lopez: Mr. Robillard is one of them.
Mr. Robillard: I am one of them. I want to mention something rather remarkable about the group. For many years, OLES funded a database initially called the National Adult Literacy Database, now the Canadian Adult Literacy Database Base, or COPIAN. It contains the largest collection of literacy and basic education resources in Canada. After losing their funding, they decided to cease operations, and we used funds from our RESDAC reserve to ensure the database’s sustainability. The database contains documents in both English and French. Now we have a partner organization in Quebec, CEDAF, which manages and maintains the database to preserve the information and publications it contains. Part of our funding was used for that purpose.
Yes, we evaluated different options. One of them was simply to close up shop, but the board of directors decided to soldier on. Each of RESDAC’s member organizations uses its own funds for travel, meetings and so on. Since we believe that RESDAC’s mission is important, members unanimously decided to keep the organization alive, hoping one day to get the artificial lung we need to keep us alive for a few more years. We are keeping the organization alive, participating in various meetings, because we believe in RESDAC’s mission. When I talk about volunteers, I am talking about Collège Éducacentre and Pluri-elles in Manitoba, Éducacentre in British Columbia, the Coalition ontarienne de formation des adultes, CODAC in New Brunswick, Collège de l’Île in Prince Edward Island, Collège Mathieu in Saskatchewan and the Association franco-yukonnaise. All of these member organizations decided to continue to support RESDAC, and our doors are still open. We do not intend to close up shop right away.
Ms. Lopez: I would like to add something. The organization was well managed before it closed, because it had amassed a $200,000 reserve. We used this reserve to carry out our projects until October 2017. Board members continue to participate in meetings like this one today, as well as in an effort to develop a consortium of service providers. We are trying to develop a new structure that better reflects today’s reality, one that would help us renew our ways of doing things and meet needs on the ground. This is not necessarily a decline, but a way of rethinking our role and how we do things.
Senator Mégie: There is something that is not clear to me. I need clarification. You said that the francophone population does not have access to statistics, and that you needed statistics to evaluate the impact of your initiatives.
Mr. Robillard: Let me give you a concrete example. In 2013, we received the results of the international survey conducted by the Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies, overseen by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the OECD. Canada provided the largest cohort of all OECD countries, with 27,000 Canadians from all walks of life participating in the survey, compared with 5,000 individuals from the United States. New Brunswick was overrepresented, because they recruited more francophones in New Brunswick, Ontario and Manitoba, and Quebec recruited more anglophones.
Thanks to this sample, we were able to get a better reading of the situation with respect to the essential skills of anglophones in Quebec and francophones in the other three provinces. The size of the sample enabled us to work with Statistics Canada. Statistics Canada produced a much more detailed report for New Brunswick, Quebec and Ontario. The statistics we use today are exceptionally sound thanks to these larger samples. However, the same is not true for the other provinces. There are few statistics for Saskatchewan, and they are incomplete and not detailed enough to help us make decisions. Often, our funding partners ask us for detailed impact assessments on health, education and so on. However, we do not always have the statistics we need to get the data.
We think that there might be a way. We can’t say how, but Statistics Canada could use its international reputation to help. That is what I wanted to say. It is more difficult to obtain reliable and comprehensive statistics for minority communities.
Senator Mégie: So the problem is the disparity between the provinces.
Ms. Lopez: Concerning the study Mr. Robillard is talking about, in the case of Ontario, RESDAC was obliged to fund a portion of the sampling in Ontario, along with Statistics Canada and COFA. It does not just happen. We made an effort to obtain a more detailed reading. A presentation to this effect was made to the Departmental Advisory Committee on Official Languages. I will send you the extract.
Senator Mégie: Could measures be implemented when the act is revised?
Mr. Robillard: Apparently, 10 departments are involved in the implementation of the act and the Roadmap for Canada’s Official Languages. I don’t know whether Statistics Canada is on the list, but it would be a good idea for it to study how to improve a specific component relating to francophone minorities in Canada and the anglophone minority in Quebec.
Senator Moncion: Thank you for coming and discussing the challenges you are facing. My question is in the same vein as that of Senator McIntyre. Similar questions often come up at our meetings.
Who apart from your organization is responsible for basic education?
Mr. Robillard: British Columbia has its Collège Éducacentre, Manitoba has Pluri-elles, a solid organization working in the field of francophone literacy, and Ontario has COFA, which has 40 points of service offering distance education. Ontario invests considerably in the four cultural sectors: Aboriginal Peoples, francophones, the hearing impaired and anglophones. A large number of investments go to literacy across all four sectors.
In Quebec, some schools and an entire community sector teach literacy. In New Brunswick, CODAC works with the department of education, and Nova Scotia has literacy development organizations that partner with other organizations. Prince Edward Island has the Collège de l’Île, which promotes literacy and offers a literacy program. The Association franco-yukonnaise offers some services. There are also services available in the Northwest Territories.
Before we arrived here today, we were a little rushed because we attended a webinar commissioned by OLES on the situation with respect to literacy and essential skills services in every province and territory in Canada. A 400-page report written by Marc Johnson of the University of Ottawa gives a detailed description of all literacy and essential skills activities in Canada, all provinces and territories combined. It contains a wealth of data. As soon as we receive the document, we will ask OLES to send you a copy. It is very enlightening, and there is a wide gap in services and structures. The report is full of information.
Senator Moncion: That leads me to a question on funding. How many of these organizations were directly affected by the budget cuts?
Mr. Robillard: Twenty-two. The entire literacy and essential skills infrastructure in Canada was destroyed. The only organization left….
Senator Moncion: We’re talking about services in both English and French?
Mr. Robillard: We’re talking about services in both English and French, including The Centre for Literacy in Quebec, which lost its funding. COFA lost its funding, but the province decided to support us. RESDAC lost its funding, and its anglophone counterpart lost its database. In all, 22 organizations lost their funding.
Senator Moncion: One of the questions proposed asks where in the bill to modernize the act we could incorporate provisions aimed at ensuring funding for your organizations. Could the bill contain such provisions and, if so, where?
Mr. Robillard: In Part VII, yes. There is a section on education. We are hearing more and more about the education and training continuum. Part VII would be a good example of positive measures.
When we teach literacy, we teach people to be proud of their language, be it English or French. We tell people that, if they improve their level of French, if they speak better French, they are speaking their language and becoming more involved in the community. It ensures sustainability. These are positive measures that, logically, should be in Part VII, but if we want to be more structured and add a part that deals exclusively with education — because, in my opinion, that is the crux of the matter — it could affect both components of the revised act.
Ms. Lopez: RESDAC is a nationwide organization that oversees organizations that offer services on the ground. Part VII is interesting because of the positive measures it provides for. An organization like RESDAC, which can do research, which supports practitioners, gives them training to improve their skill level, provides evaluation and work tools, is an example of a positive measure. It makes up for the provinces which, unlike Ontario, may have less infrastructure or far fewer resources.
Senator Moncion: I have seen all that you have done.
Mr. Robillard: I believe that education and the community sector are the key foundations for life in our francophone communities. In small communities, when the community sector is strong, organizational capacity develops and citizens thrive. It generates activities, synergy and so on. In Ontario — I’m talking about my province but I lived in several small communities in Nunavut and pretty much everywhere — when the community sector is dynamic, the community is as well. When we have the means to invest in our community, culture and language develop, and people are far more engaged.
Senator Moncion: Ontario has examples of communities like Hearst, GreeneStone and Val Rita-Harty. All of the small communities in the North survive thanks to the participation of their citizens.
Mr. Robillard: In Saskatchewan, with its Collège Mathieu, the francophone community is very dynamic thanks to investment.
The Chair: Before giving the floor to Senator Maltais, I would like to ask a follow-up question. What explanation was given at the time funding was cut for the entire literacy network in 2014?
Mr. Robillard: I attended the meeting where they announced the budget cuts. The context was very different at the time. They were talking a lot about social finance, a concept that had been used in England and certain parts of the United States. There was also a change in priorities at the Office of Literacy and Essential Skills. They were focusing more and more on essential skills development in employment, giving literacy a role aimed more at economic development. It wasn’t a bad idea, except that there are different kinds of literacy. There is community literacy, social literacy, civic literacy, employment literacy and so forth. If OLES changes priorities and focuses on a single component of literacy, who will take care of the others?
Heritage Canada told us that the funding had been awarded to OLES, so the problem may be with OLES, but OLES changed its priorities. Where do we go now for the different types of literacy that need developing? Theoretically, we thought we could approach Heritage Canada and ask it to reinvest in the other types of literacy, but that is not what happened. They changed their priorities.
We also had the whole project-based management and basic funding-based management aspect. It was also a significant change in how organizations are funded. They fund projects instead of providing basic funding. This works for some organizations, but funding by project does not ensure the sustainability of an organization that has a far broader mandate than simple project management. Projects are an ad hoc thing. They have a lifespan. Once they are completed, if they do not become a program, they disappear. If you fund by project and do not provide basic funding, the organization will always be looking for new projects. The question is what the true impact will be for communities. You can’t manage the development issues of francophone communities, which face several issues, by managing projects. You need sound organizations to be able to implement real and sustainable measures in francophone communities. So project management is good for some organizations, but it is perhaps not the best idea for nationwide organizations that have an impact on communities. That is when the 22 organizations lost their funding.
Senator Maltais: Welcome, Mr. Robillard and Ms. Lopez. I listened carefully to the presentation of your brief, which I found excellent, and I also listened to your answers. I am trying to understand the exact framework in which you work. Tell me if I am mistaken. According to the Constitution, education is under provincial jurisdiction. Each province has a department of education, and there are French and English-language school boards that are mandated to teach young people. Adult education must teach adults and operate trade schools.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms stipulates that individuals are entitled to receive such education in the language of their choice, that is to say, their first language. In theory, all of this is funded by the department of education. Where do you come in?
Mr. Robillard: You are perfectly correct. Education is under provincial jurisdiction. However, the federal government often invests in various areas under provincial jurisdiction. Health is an excellent example, as is education. When you look at the Official Languages Act and you have dozens and dozens of small communities spread out over the country, as I mentioned in my presentation, funds are not always used in the same way. For example, we worked with an organization in a province that will remain nameless that had a very limited budget. Representatives of this organization asked us to give them a hand for almost 10 months. At the end, the organization, which offered training in French, lost its budget completely.
Senator Maltais: You provide services to the department of Education in each province by teaching literacy and dispensing adult education to people who never had the chance to complete their studies. Therefore, you provide services to the school boards.
Mr. Robillard: Let’s look at this from a different angle. We do not provide services to school boards, but to learners. We offer complementary services.
Senator Maltais: Bear with me. You provide services to the province by offering services in small communities, right?
Mr. Robillard: True. That is COFA’s mandate.
Senator Maltais: If you provide services to the province, the province should foot the bill.
Mr. Robillard: Your question is very pertinent. We are privileged in Ontario. Quebecers are privileged. They have large structures and big budgets. They invest heavily. But that is not the case for all provinces. Our members share best practices. For example, some things were done in Nova Scotia that generated a lot of reflection in Ontario, and, thanks to experiments in Nova Scotia and the Yukon, we recently developed a project focusing on an integrated approach. At that time, there were all sorts of discussions about best practices and financing that served as a lever for implementing new ways of doing things in communities with fewer resources or with less support. That allowed us to have an impact on all our small francophone communities. I can tell you that, in our province, there are places where there are no educational services for francophones.
We collaborate with other partners to offer these services. We partner with federal and provincial government agencies and other organizations. The same thing occurs at the national level. We share. We use RESDAC funding as a lever to enable communities to take advantage of programs and services to which they would otherwise not have access.
Mrs. Lopez: I would like to clarify another point. Yes, education is under provincial and territorial jurisdiction. Funds are transferred from the federal government to the provinces and territories. In literacy and adult education, but especially in literacy, these funds do not always get to their destination after they are transferred. They are used by the school boards or other organizations based on decisions made by the province. That is the problem with the transfers.
Senator Maltais: I understand. It’s the case for both francophones and anglophones. francophones do not have the monopoly on illiteracy. It’s 50-50.
Ms. Lopez: We’re also talking about functional illiteracy.
Senator Maltais: As the late René Lévesque used to say, there are no more dead ducks. Where I’m going with this, and it is very important, is that I am originally from Quebec and I fought hard for literacy. At the time — I was sitting in another house of parliament — my cause was economic development. People had to acquire basic French and math skills to gain access to trades such as welding, to be able to measure lengths of iron. That’s normal. At the time, there were what we called “tables populaires”. I called people to parliamentary committees and asked them what they were doing. I also invited the Minister of Education to explain his role to me. His role was to offer the people sitting at the tables the education and instruction they needed. The department of education can provide funds, and I’m not talking about funding by project. It worked in 1915, but the method is outdated. Today, in 2018, it is ridiculous to talk about funding by project.
Ms. Lopez: But we’re still talking about it.
Senator Maltais: I don’t believe in it. Funding by project will get you nowhere. You need permanent funding to know where you will be going in two or three years because, otherwise, you are working hand to mouth and you don’t know whether you will be able to pay for groceries next month.
In Quebec, everything concerning education is under the jurisdiction of the English and French-language school boards. I understand that you represent very small communities, as you say. But the situation in Ontario is not so bad. How many francophones are there in Ontario?
Mr. Robillard: There are 622,000 francophones in Ontario.
Senator Maltais: That is exactly the number of anglophones in Quebec. It is a large portion of the population, and I think that funding should come from the province’s department of education. You represent small communities and, as you say, the funds transferred by Heritage Canada don’t always get to their intended destination: literacy training for francophones and anglophones.
How should we revise the Act? We only do it once every 50 years. What would you like to see included in the Official Languages Act that would guarantee long-term financing and put an end to funding by project? Tell us in a word exactly what you would like to see in the Act.
Mr. Robillard: In a word?
Senator Maltais: Yes.
The Chair: Maybe a few words.
Senator Maltais: It’s a slight anachronism.
Mr. Robillard: What can I say? I alluded to the fact that, if federal transfers are intended to support programs such as literacy, the provinces and the departments that allocate the funds must be accountable and there must be sound accountability mechanisms. It thinks that that is the first thing we need to ensure so that the envelopes make it to the communities.
For example, if you are talking about funding nation-wide literacy organizations, what always astonishes me is that, despite the investments made by the different levels of government in Canada to develop essential skills, 53 per cent of francophones and almost 50 per cent of anglophones still don’t have access to what they need. You need to ask whether the right measures are being taken. Personally, I think it’s a national disaster because we are living in a knowledge-based society in which digital literacy is becoming necessary at every level.
How can we make sure we obtain basic funding? As I mentioned earlier, if we can include in the act clear provisions about education, adult education and the need to invest in education as well as in training, I think that might be a useful lever. In terms of how to word it, I couldn’t tell you. But one thing is certain: accountability and positive measures are key elements, as is the need to include very clear parts in the act that deal with education, training and basic funding.
Senator Maltais: I’ll give you an example. I come from the Côte-Nord region in Quebec. There were several small anglophone municipalities in my old riding. In terms of vocational training, there are 253 inhabitants in Old Fort and 284 in Saint-Augustin, not enough to build a vocational training centre. This is what we did. The Côte-Nord school board, which had special status because of its remote location, reached agreements with the English-language school boards in Sherbrooke and Montreal to offer training to young people. It even paid for their accommodations.
So, the young people went to English school. We could not transfer them in Secondary V to a French-language vocational training centre, because they wouldn’t have understood a word. Is this the type of agreement your group can enter into? For example, if 10 young people in a small community in Saskatchewan want to learn welding in French, can you reach an agreement with a school board somewhere that would allow them to do just that?
Mr. Robillard: If there is a school board, yes, but often there isn’t.
Senator Maltais: Are you saying that some provinces don’t have a French-language school board?
Mr. Robillard: The territories are so vast that that could be the case, yes. A lot of young people in francophone communities move away for a few years to get an education. Even in our communities here in Ontario, a lot of young people go to La Cité collégiale or Collège Boréal. Collège Boréal has a few campuses, and young people must leave home for two to four years to learn a trade before returning home, if they decide to return home. There are places where training and education offerings are very limited. It’s a fact. I’m not making it up. That’s the way it is today.
OLES’s report explains the situation. That is why we are focusing more and more on distance education. Can we offer distance education courses? Yes, but not for everyone. People with low literacy skills have difficulty reading and writing. If you give them a mouse, they’re going to ask you what they’re supposed to do with it. There are places where there is a gap in services, and it isn’t always possible. But where it can be done, yes, there are mechanisms in place, a bit like your school boards, but it isn’t that easy in every community.
I lived in Nunavut for three and a half years. Yes, they are lucky in Nunavut, because the government decided to open a French-language school and daycare centre, and I believe that there is even a secondary school for a small population of about 700 to 800. They have it good. The same is not true in other provinces. There was a political will in Nunavut to invest heavily to support the francophone community, but the same is not true everywhere.
The Chair: Thank you. Senator McIntyre, you are last on the list for the second round.
Senator McIntyre: Mr. Robillard, in your presentation, you referred to the decision of the Interim Commissioner. This being said, in fall 2017, the Commissioner found in favour of your organization and, in a word, she said that the department had not taken Part VII into account. This is very important, because the department’s decisions have had an impact not only on your organizations but on others as well. Following her decision, the Commissioner recommended that the Department re-evaluate its orientation and eligibility criteria.
My question is as follows. Was there any follow-up, either by your organization or by other organizations, in response to the Interim Commissioner’s recommendation?
Mr. Robillard: Yes, for the past few weeks or months, we have been working with Employment and Social Development Canada and in particular with the Office of Literacy and Essential Skills. Thanks to Gabrielle, almost a year ago, we began a joint impact assessment. We began thinking about how RESDAC could morph into something different while maintaining its primary mission.
We are currently in discussions with the department to hold consultations with several stakeholders in francophone communities across Canada. We will hold a two-day design jam on March 19 and 20 to start thinking about how best to meet the needs of francophone communities using a mechanism we are currently developing. It would be a type of consortium, like the one they have for colleges. We have already met several times with the Office of Literacy and Essential Skills, and we are setting things up.
One of our repeated requests is that we would like to work with other key stakeholders participating in the Act’s application. Among other things, we would like Heritage Canada to be at the table, because it, too, has a role to play in the sustainability of communities, financing, the Roadmap and so on. It is working diligently to ensure that the key stakeholders are united around the table for the two-day consultation. Yes, there have been positive developments in recent weeks.
Senator McIntyre: I’m happy to hear that. You filed a complaint in 2015, and the Interim Commissioner rendered her decision in 2017. Congratulations, and keep up the good work!
Mr. Robillard: Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Robillard and Ms. Lopez, for the quality of your presentation, for your commitment and for your ability, despite the financial challenges you are facing, to move forward and put your shoulder to the wheel with all your members from the various provinces to ensure that literacy and skills development remain at the forefront and a priority. Thank you very much.
[Proceedings continue in camera]
(The committee continued in camera.)