Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue No. 3 - Evidence - Meeting of April 11, 2016
OTTAWA, Monday, April 11, 2016
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day at 5:35 p.m., to continue its study on the application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it, within those institutions subject to the act.
Senator Claudette Tardif (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Good evening. I am Claudette Tardif, a senator for Alberta. I am pleased to chair the meeting this evening. Before we turn to witnesses, I would ask all members of the committee to introduce themselves, starting on my left.
Senator Poirier: Rose-May Poirier, New Brunswick.
Senator Mockler: Percy Mockler, New Brunswick.
Senator Fraser: Joan Fraser, Quebec.
Senator Jaffer: Mobina Jaffer, British Colombia.
Senator Rivard: Michel Rivard, Quebec.
Senator McIntyre: Paul McIntyre, New Brunswick.
The Chair: The committee is continuing its study on the application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it, within those institutions subject to the act.
This evening, we are pleased to welcome the commissioners from New Brunswick and Ontario. We have Katherine d'Entremont and François Boileau. The meeting this evening was organized so that the Senate committee could examine collaboration mechanisms that exist between language commissioners in Canada and learn more about the role of provincial commissioners.
I will now invite you to give your presentation, after which, senators will ask you questions. Once again, welcome. Ms. d'Entremont, the floor is yours.
Katherine d'Entremont, Commissioner of Official Languages for New Brunswick, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages for New Brunswick: Thank you Madam Chair and members of the committee. I would like to thank you for inviting me to appear before you today. It is always a pleasure to meet with those who take an interest in official languages and the vitality of minority language communities.
Over the next few minutes, I will talk about the role of the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages for New Brunswick, some of the issues we work on, as well as our relationships with the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages of Canada and the Office of the French Language Services Commissioner of Ontario.
As officers who promote the advancement of both official languages, we work and carry out studies in a number of fields affecting the vitality of the language. Over the past few years, we have addressed a wide variety of issues such as education, immigration, signage and bilingualism in the private sector.
[English]
Last year, our office published a study on the advantages and economic potential of bilingualism. It was a first for the province of New Brunswick. The study was conducted by an economist and an economic development specialist. The study was called Two languages: It's good for business, and it discussed the economic advantages of a bilingual workforce.
For example, because of its two official languages, New Brunswick has a customer contact centre and back office industry that generates $1.4 billion worth of export revenue each year for the province. It is estimated that this sector employs more than 15,000 people in the province; moreover, this economic activity benefits unilingual as well as bilingual people. In fact, the study revealed that companies that came to the province for its bilingual workforce have created two unilingual English jobs for each bilingual position.
[Translation]
I would now like to talk about our relationships with the offices of the other language commissioners. Since its creation in April 2003, our office has maintained close ties with the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages of Canada and the Office of the French Language Services Commissioner of Ontario.
I should note that these ties were formalized in 2013 with the signing of two memoranda of understanding, which have since been renewed. Two specific issues illustrate the close cooperation between the three offices. First, in 2013, the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages of Canada published a major study on access to justice in both official languages, in collaboration with our office and that of Ontario's language commissioner. As part of the study, the three offices examined the appointment process for superior court judges as well as the language training available to them. The study showed that the appointment process did not guarantee that a sufficient number of judges would have the necessary language skills to hear Canadians in the minority official language. The study recommended ten tangible and practical measures to improve the bilingual capacity of the superior court judiciary. All three of our offices are urging Justice Canada to act swiftly and cooperatively in implementing the recommendations.
The second issue on which the offices worked closely was immigration; in 2014, the three commissioners took a joint position on francophone immigration, calling on federal and provincial governments to adopt four guiding principles. First, immigration must help maintain, and even increase, the demographic weight of francophone minority communities in Canada. Second, federal and provincial immigration policies and programs must be designed and tailored to address francophone immigrant recruitment, integration and retention needs specific to the different contexts of francophone minority communities across Canada. Third, strong federal-provincial-community partnerships, long-term strategies for the selection, recruitment, welcoming, education, integration and retention of immigrants, and sufficient resources are needed to ensure that immigration supports the development and vitality of francophone minority communities.
Lastly, governments must develop an evaluation and accountability framework to measure progress achieved and ensure attainment of immigration objectives in francophone minority communities.
[English]
In addition, the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages for New Brunswick also has ties with the Languages Commissioner for Nunavut. As well, it should be noted that the commissioners of Canada, Ontario, New Brunswick and Nunavut are founding members of the International Association of Language Commissioners, established in 2013, whose mandate is to help language commissioners fulfill their role worldwide by exchanging knowledge of best practices and high professional standards and in promoting language equality and diversity.
That concludes the brief overview of the work of our office, and I will be pleased to answer any questions if time permits.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you very much, Ms. d'Entremont. Commissioner Boileau, if you please.
François Boileau, French Language Services Commissioner of Ontario, Office of the French Language Services Commissioner of Ontario: Good evening. I would like to thank you for inviting me to appear before the committee, Madam Chair.
[English]
It's a great honour to be here tonight. I would like to thank you for allowing me to appear before the committee.
[Translation]
Perhaps we should have talked more beforehand, because I see that both my presentation and that of my colleague have many similarities. I will therefore skip the passages that have already been mentioned by my colleague.
[English]
I know that the subject of collaboration among the commissioners is of particular interest to you, so I will begin with that subject.
[Translation]
It has now been nearly nine years since I was appointed French Language Services Commissioner. I have established good relations with the other officers of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. I have forged ties with ombudsmen and commissioners in other countries and territories, but the accomplishment of which I am most proud is the fruitful relationship I have developed with my colleagues Graham Fraser, at the federal level, and Katherine d'Entremont, of New Brunswick.
I believe it is not just useful, but essential, for the functioning of my office and in advocacy for the language rights of Ontario's francophone minority, that I be familiar with the practices of the other language commissioners' offices in Canada. I include the Office of the Languages Commissioner of Nunavut and Commissioner Sandra Inutiq, from whom I have learned a lot.
I am certain that services to the public have been improved as a result. That is why Commissioners Fraser, d'Entremont and I have signed memoranda of agreement for exchanging information, transferring complaints, where necessary, and sharing the processes that our respective offices adopt. Most importantly, we have an appendix with the names and contact information of the people in charge of cases so that they can communicate freely, without going through the usual chain of command.
[English]
In 2013, we also published a joint study on access to justice in both official languages or, more specifically, the bilingual capacity of the superior courts. Obviously, we pay close attention to the justice system, particularly since it often affects vulnerable populations.
[Translation]
In November 2014, Commissioner Fraser and I released a joint report on immigration, a large part of which was devoted to francophone immigration in Ontario. As well, in the lead-up to the Pan Am Games held in Toronto last summer, we signed an agreement with Saad Rafi, the CEO of the organizing committee, to ensure that Canada's and Ontario's linguistic duality was properly represented and supported before, during, and after the games.
Mr. Fraser, Ms. d'Entremont and I try to meet when we are in the same city, whenever possible, in addition to taking part regularly in the same activities. Last month, all three of us were speakers or panellists at the annual conference of the International Association of Language Commissioners, the IALC, in Galway, Ireland. At that meeting, the IALC members decided to create working committees with members of our staff to facilitate discussion. We agreed to talk more about common topics, particularly when reports on investigations or studies are released. It is my intention to continue and even improve this collaboration with my colleagues in Canada.
[English]
Earlier, I mentioned access to justice and immigration. As you know, these are areas that involve both levels of government, but there is another area we talk about less often that is no less important — services to the communities.
[Translation]
Canada is an enormous country, and Ontario itself is vast. The quality of the services provided by governments to populations, whether they are metropolitan, urban, or rural, has a direct impact on the development of communities, especially when they are minority communities. One of my recent focuses, in this era of technology when services are increasingly offered online, is getting government institutions to understand how important it is that the services they offer be tailored to the communities they serve. While the needs are sometimes similar, they are also often different. For many people, and in particular those who are most vulnerable, that means being able to receive services in person in their own language.
Communities can, of course, take their own development in hand, for example, by establishing multi-service centres, or having one centre that may house services offered by municipal, provincial and federal governments, along with community services, under the same roof. This creates places where services are offered in both languages but where the language of work is French, somewhat like Manitoba's bilingual service centres. To do that, however, the different levels of government have to agree to work together for the benefit of the communities.
I would like to briefly come back to the topic of immigration. In October 2014, we three commissioners released a joint statement in which we set out four guiding principles with regard to immigration. In our report, Graham Fraser and I recommended that newcomers have access to language training in both official languages to facilitate integration, and that it be offered by francophone institutions. We have to make sure that newcomers understand, from the time they arrive at Pearson or Macdonald-Cartier Airport, that they can rely on a truly francophone organization from which they can gather a host of useful information about services that are available in French, about schools, and about community and neighbourhood life. This is also one of the challenges facing Ontario, in fact: to make sure not only that when immigrants go to get their health cards or driver's licences, they feel comfortable asking for and receiving services in French, but also, and most importantly, that they feel the government is helping them to get acquainted with their new community, including their francophone community.
[English]
Let us not forget that francophone immigration is a very real fact in Ontario, and it is not merely hypothetical. In the greater Toronto region, nearly one out of two francophones was not born in Canada. That represents a lot of people.
[Translation]
I would like to take the opportunity to highlight the graph that has been distributed to you; it represents the statistics on francophones in Ontario. The graph is fully bilingual, of course. Should you wish to have more copies, we have several hundreds of them at your disposal. Make the most of them because these statistics are valid for only two years and will change with the next census. It gives you an idea of the number of francophones who live in each region, including those who were born outside Canada.
With that in mind, I am very proud that the Government of Ontario adopted an inclusive definition of "francophone'' in 2009, following on my very first recommendation as commissioner. That new definition has certainly contributed to developing a feeling of belonging among francophone immigrants. People whose mother tongue is neither French nor English but who know French and speak it at home are now considered to be francophones. This is very important. This definition has led to 50,000 more francophones being counted. These are not 50,000 francophones who randomly appeared. They were already there. They have now simply been counted as francophones. These people are already in Ontario and are taking part in francophone community activities and sending their children to French- language schools. In short, they live in French as soon as they step foot out of their homes, so we may as well recognize them as francophones. This is why I am very interested in your examination of Bill S-209, which seeks to find a new definition of "francophone.''
[English]
In closing, I would note that my team and I are working on several investigations limited to Ontario that involve issues coming to francophone communities throughout Canada. In fact, at least two investigative reports should be released this spring in addition to my annual report that is due to be tabled in the next few months.
[Translation]
Thank you again for inviting me and for listening. I look forward to your questions and I will try to answer them to the best of my knowledge.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Boileau. Your presentation was very interesting. Senator Poirier, the committee's deputy chair, will ask the first question.
Senator Poirier: I would like to thank our two witnesses. We are pleased to welcome you once again. It has been quite some time since last we met, Ms. d'Entremont. I would like to ask both of our witnesses some questions, after which, I will have another question regarding New Brunswick, specifically.
As you know, the 150th anniversary of Confederation will soon be upon us. I wonder if you have been consulted with regard to event planning or celebration. What do you expect from the celebrations, especially as they relate to Acadians and Franco-Ontarians?
Ms. d'Entremont: I have not been consulted.
Senator Poirier: Have you reached any agreements? What will happen in the Acadie region?
Ms. d'Entremont: I simply do not know. I have not been consulted. I do not know who is responsible for the consultations. Have they been to New Brunswick? I do not know if it has been discussed with the government. I have not been involved in the initiative.
Mr. Boileau: No one has been consulted in Ontario. In my opinion, the Office of Francophone Affairs should be consulted on the matter. As far as I am concerned, I expect the 150th celebrations to reflect Canadian values, especially with regard to linguistic duality. The festivities need to demonstrate respect for francophone minorities and official languages. I sincerely hope that the festivities will be celebrated at the local level, so that every community can play an active role in celebrating their country. The festivities should not be limited to Ottawa. All of the festivities, be they in Ottawa, other large cities or elsewhere, should, without question, reflect our linguistic duality. We need to ensure proper planning of the celebrations from the get-go in order to do justice to the history of francophone communities. This is a golden opportunity for Canadians to remember who they are, to recognize their distinct identity and their linguistic duality, and to understand what it truly means to be Canadian.
Senator Poirier: In your opinion, what are the most pressing official languages issues?
Ms. d'Entremont: I think that it is important to promote our recommendations and follow up on them. In 2013-14, we conducted a study on bilingual positions and language training. I continue to promote these recommendations. The study focused on several factors. In New Brunswick, we do not apply the same strict requirements as at the federal level. There are no designated positions. We must take stricter measures for bilingual positions. I continue to raise awareness about the importance of these recommendations among political leaders and public servants. When a bilingual position is posted, we do not specify the language skills required. In my opinion, this recommendation should be implemented, because the lack of clarification can be confusing. Some candidates mistakenly think that they are not qualified for a bilingual position because they are not aware of the requirements. In short, these candidates disqualify themselves because of the lack of clarity regarding the required skill levels. I seize every single opportunity to highlight how important it is to follow through with these recommendations.
Last year, I made recommendations concerning senior officials. These senior managers are the ones who must provide leadership. This is not yet the case in New Brunswick. According to our study, only 49 per cent of managers in the public service are bilingual. In an officially bilingual province like New Brunswick, one would expect a greater proportion of bilingual staff at senior levels. In my opinion, it is important to continue pushing for these recommendations, promoting linguistic duality, and trying to influence political decision makers and those in the public service. Substantial recommendations have been made. The entire system has been reviewed. I think we could improve things by following through on these recommendations.
This year, over the next two or three months, we will be releasing our next annual report. We will be making other recommendations that I cannot discuss today. Every time we propose major recommendations, further to studies of the entire system, it is important to continue discussing them so that they are not forgotten from one year to the next.
Senator Poirier: Have all your recommendations been favorably received since 2014?
Ms. d'Entremont: The recommendations from the 2013-14 annual report date back to the former government and the transition period. We published the annual report in June. After that, the election campaign was launched and the new government came to power in the fall. We intend to restart discussions and to request an account of the progress that has been made. To my knowledge, no measures have been adopted. The recommendations proposed last year have not been implemented, which is disappointing. However, we will continue to bring them up.
The Chair: Mr. Boileau, do you have a question for Senator Poirier?
Mr. Boileau: The priority issues are the same in terms of health, education, immigration, access to justice and public services. These are areas that are all interconnected. Over the past eight years, we have written several annual reports and investigation reports, which were all well-received overall. We have gotten remarkable results from the provincial government on some of our recommendations. The dialogue with the provincial government is advancing. My own office gained independence from the government on January 1, 2014. I now report directly to the Legislative Assembly. I have become an officer of the Assembly. Of course, these are positive changes. We published a special report on French-language health services planning. It was well-received, and there were positive changes made that reflected our recommendations.
We made recommendations, for example, about the lack of post-secondary programs offered in French in Central- Southwestern Ontario. In this region, we found that the rate of access to French-language post-secondary education ranged from 0 per cent to 3 per cent, in comparison with the proportion of programs offered in English. That ignited a bit of a fire. An important discussion is now taking shape; it is a discussion that was dormant for the last 40 years but is now re-emerging, with talk of creating a French-language university in Ontario. This is the type of debate that I have been very happy to see between the community and the government, and we played a small role in that.
There is a lack of French-language schools in the Greater Toronto Area. We had recommended that the government provide funding for ten new schools, and we received funding for nine. This is a step in the right direction, but there are still shortcomings.
Certain regulations were not amended as I would have hoped, and so it is possible that I will revisit this issue over the coming weeks. I would like to be able to answer you, but I do not want to say too much. The coming months are going to be quite busy, with many reports being published, including our annual report.
It is important to understand that there is a law in force in Ontario governing services provided in French. Its name is rather telling, the French Language Services Act. It has been 30 years since the law was passed. If we compare it with the federal Official Languages Act, which has around 100 sections, our law has only 14. We stretched things almost to the breaking point, and I think that was a successful approach for Ontario. We do not have the same proportion of francophones as New Brunswick and we do not have the same status. So we try to do what we can with the means at our disposal. I do, however, think that we have accomplished a lot for a population that represents 4.8 per cent of the population as a whole, in other words, 611,000 people, many more than in all the other provinces combined.
As far as the percentage of the population is concerned, this is not a population that is as large as that of New Brunswick; the power dynamics are thus not the same. However, we need to think of the progress that has been made. Allow me to give you an example. Thirty years ago, having a licence plate in French in Ontario would have been unthinkable; it would have led to a riotous debate. Today, it seems perfectly ordinary, and that is what I would hope for: that there not be a debate, that the issue of French be depoliticized, and that it be normal to provide services in French to the population. I think that we are getting there, little by little.
Senator McIntyre: Thank you to both of you for your presentations, and thank you for joining us.
I see that excellent collaboration exists between the language commissioners, both at the national and international levels. For example, at the national level, memoranda of understanding were concluded between your two offices and that of Commissioner Fraser. Furthermore, as you mentioned, two joint studies were conducted: one on access to justice in both official languages and the other on francophone immigration.
I would like to ask each of you a question. The first question is for Mr. Boileau. During his appearance before the Senate committee on March 21, Commissioner Fraser mentioned his meeting with the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship. According to him, the federal government has committed to restoring the Francophone Significant Benefit Program. Mr. Boileau, I understand that you reacted positively to this announcement; can you tell us more about it?
Mr. Boileau: The fact that they are having the conversation is already progress. I am happy about it. The government is open-minded; we noticed it immediately after the meeting between Commissioner Fraser and the minister. The minister reacted positively.
We do not really know why the Francophone Significant Benefit Program was scrapped, since the program yielded real results for francophone communities. It facilitated access to the selection of new newcomers; companies had the opportunity to choose a qualified person directly and to bring that individual to Ontario. Eliminating the Francophone Significant Benefit Program and replacing it with the Express Entry Program, which did not really yield any results, called into question the government's desire to truly give francophones an advantage.
The fact that the minister announced that he would reinstate the program — under another name — sends the message that he is open to discussion. Here, in Ontario, what is important to understand is that we have also made progress with our own government on this issue. In 2012, Ontario adopted its first immigration strategy. There had never been one previously, which is surprising.
In addition, the strategy set out a provision that at least 5 per cent of newcomers should be francophones. We have not yet reached that number, and that is why my colleague and I recommended that the Government of Ontario strike a working group that would focus on the welcome component, as well as on the way to seek out newcomers, namely the selection, integration, welcome, training and retention of newcomers. Retention of newcomers is also very important. How do we do that? By ensuring that they feel they are part of a welcoming community.
Francophone Manitoba has achieved its goal, and I believe that Ontario could do so as well, provided that it had the resources and a real strategy. We are almost there in Ontario, and I am waiting very eagerly for the report of a working group that we had actually recommended. The government accepted the recommendation and should publish a report very shortly, one that will provide practical measures — at least, I hope it will — and allow us not only to dream, but also to make real progress on the ground with the help of specific solutions.
Senator McIntyre: Ms. d'Entremont, as you know, since 2011, a language training program for judges has been offered in New Brunswick. In your opinion, could the program serve as a model to improve the situation at the national level?
Ms. d'Entremont: You made me smile when you started asking your question. I would invite you to learn more about the program; it is a fantastic program that I have seen in action. Justice Yvette Finn is the one who implemented it, and she did so successfully without much fanfare. It is a program that is catching on; we have managed to attract people from all across Canada. They come to Caraquet, New Brunswick, a week at a time, four times a year, I believe. There are various modules. Last year, an equivalent program in English was designed. Judges, mainly — but perhaps not only — from Quebec, come to St. Andrews, where the program is offered in English. It is a gem. I wrote about it in my annual report, and we recognized the initiative with an award. A number of the program components are excellent, such as the development of an assessment tool, which is really good. The tool allows learners to conduct self- assessments. They are put in real work situations. I would encourage you to learn more about it. I believe that it would be very appropriate to apply it to the workplace within the federal government. It is a very good program.
[English]
Senator Jaffer: Thank you very much for your presentations. I found them energizing. I can't think of another word. I really liked the cooperation that the commissioners have.
I wish Commissioner Fraser was here, too, so that I could ask the three of you the following question: In the time that you've been commissioners, do you see the French language growing? My preoccupation is that there is no point talking about the French language as a bilingual language if it is not growing. Is it growing? Are you seeing a difference? I know you talked about the licence plates, but it is more than that.
Mr. Boileau: We tend to forget that French is a language in full expansion throughout the world. By 2050 there will be 700 million people speaking French, namely in Africa, where 85 per cent of the French-speaking population will come forward. So it a language in expansion around the world; it is a language in expansion on the Internet; and it's a language in expansion in business. It's also a language that is spoken on five continents, so we're making strides throughout the world.
Here in Ontario — I'll speak, obviously, for my province — we see that French immersion is extremely popular. We actually have huge issues with regard to immersion. We're not capable of delivering the programs that parents want because there are so many requests for new schools, for new programs of immersion.
Also, French is taking its place on the public side. It is not only a language spoken in the family setting; it also spoken publicly now. So there is this recognition. As I said earlier on, it is normal to speak French. Obviously, if you go to Toronto, if you sit around in an Ikea store, you'll literally hear all the languages of the world, French included. I have done it before. So it's a very multicultural society.
French is a multicultural language, meaning that we have so much diversity coming into Ontario. It is very reassuring and refreshing to see such diversity in the schools. When I go to schools in the Greater Toronto Area, Hamilton, London or even here in Ottawa and see so much diversity, I ask the kids if they speak two languages. They don't speak only two languages; they almost unequivocally speak three languages, sometimes four.
I see hope for expansion because French is being seen as an inclusive language. This is why we have an inclusive definition in Ontario, and I am very proud of that.
Yes, French is actually taking its place. For the last 25 or 30 years — actually, it could be said that it's much more than that — we have built our own institutions. We are beginning to bear the fruit of those institutions. Now, we're not just talking about institutions in primary and secondary schools, which have always been the force for francophones to make sure that they recognize their own communities. It's more than that; we are talking about post-secondary schools. We are talking about institutions in health and in business.
So we see those institutions coming along within francophone communities, and we are beginning to show confidence to build partnerships with the rest of society as well. This is encouraging. We're leaving behind the politics of it and moving forward.
I won't put on pink glasses and think that there is no assimilation. There is an assimilation issue. There are problems in Ontario. Not everything is rosy. We have assimilation. There's no doubt about that, but we're making sure that the state, as much as it can, is there to help francophone communities think of services that will be modelled on the needs of the community and not just making sure that documents are written in French and English. Programs have to be pertinent and relevant to the needs of the development of communities.
Ms. d'Entremont: I want to mention that our office commissioned a study, the summary of which we published in our annual report last year, on the evolution of bilingualism in New Brunswick. One of the interesting statistics that came out of the study was that over the past 40 years the proportion of people whose mother tongue is English in New Brunswick and who are bilingual went up from 15 per cent to 30 per cent. So of all the bilingual people in New Brunswick, 30 per cent have English as their mother tongue, and that is probably most attributable to French immersion programs that started at the beginning of that 40-year period.
I think there is still a lot of work to do in New Brunswick. There is still a belief that only francophones are bilingual, which is absolutely not true. We try to debunk that myth on a daily basis. That's just one of the statistics that was quite revealing, to show the evolution of bilingualism by mother tongue in New Brunswick. It's quite an interesting story.
We also have to be mindful of the threat of assimilation. Even though our minority language, the French language, is a healthy minority at about a third — and that proportion has been maintained over many decades — we always have to be vigilant that the French language and the rights that people have worked so hard to achieve are protected.
Senator Jaffer: We just heard that 9 per cent of students in B.C. are in immersion. I would like to hear about the percentage in Ontario and New Brunswick.
As I said, I was so energized when I saw your definition of "francophone.'' For those of us who were colonized, we resent being put into an anglophone box. We want to choose which box we want to go into. Truthfully, we don't want to go into either box. I think we want to just learn the language, which is an official language of our country.
I am very encouraged by your definition, but I'm hoping for, one day, a definition, where you don't have to be a francophone or an anglophone because some of us don't like those definitions. We just want to be able to learn both languages as a right.
Anyway, this is a good first step on your definition of "francophone.'' I'm wondering if any other provinces have adopted this definition.
Mr. Boileau: A bill was tabled in Manitoba. Of course, they are in an election right now, so the bill was not passed. Their definition of "francophone'' was much broader than ours in Ontario, so I was looking into that definition with keen interest.
In Nova Scotia, the definition is also broader than in Ontario, and that is also very interesting. But there is new legislation. It was passed only a few years ago.
To answer your question about immersion schools, I believe around 5 or 6 per cent of children are going to full immersion schools, but there are different degrees of immersion in Ontario. Seventy-five per cent of the program is done in French. I could send you the complete data. I don't have it in front of me right now.
A lot of people are taking core French, but there is space to grow in Ontario with regard to immersion. Still, it is the capacity to develop those schools or new programs that is difficult because of the lack of teachers.
[Translation]
Senator Fraser: Thank you to both of you, and welcome to the Senate. It is really very interesting to listen to you.
I would like to come back to access to justice. I have a general question that is for both of you, and, then, I have a more specific question for you, Ms. d'Entremont.
Following the joint study that you conducted, did you receive responses from the government to your recommendations, either at the federal or provincial level?
Mr. Boileau: The Government of Ontario responded positively. It is ready to work with the federal government to create a memorandum of understanding on the bilingual capacity of judges, as well as on language training and the makeup of bilingualism committees.
This will, this reinsurance, exists in Ontario. After tabling our joint report, we did not feel the federal government was very receptive at the time. With the new government, we hope that the answers we have received in previous years will not be final answers, and that we will be able to obtain more favorable responses to our recommendations. In Ontario, the door is open; I was reassured as much recently.
Ms. d'Entremont: With respect to New Brunswick, a meeting is scheduled with our minister of justice in roughly three weeks. It will be my first opportunity to discuss our study with him. I discussed it with the former minister, at the time of the study's publication, but I am raising the issue again. I will have more information after the meeting. Essentially, we need to promote our recommendations and encourage the provincial government to move forward on them. Thanks to the strong language training program that is offered to provincial judges in New Brunswick, it is a golden opportunity.
Senator Fraser: That was my second question.
Ms. d'Entremont: We therefore need to talk about this and the application of the program at the federal level.
Senator Fraser: Has the federal judiciary expressed any interest in the program or contacted you about it? The initiative seems so obvious, and it should have been implemented a century ago.
Ms. d'Entremont: I do not know whether it was discussed with the federal minister, but I will be sure to promote it to the provincial minister. It is possibly something that we could discuss among the commissioners. I could certainly lend a hand on this and try to put people in contact, if there was an interest. However, I think we are going to start discussing it with the provincial minister.
Senator Fraser: The federal government has already announced its intention to finally appoint bilingual judges to the Supreme Court. But, if there is no supply from the lower ranks, we will be facing a significant problem.
If I may make a small suggestion in private, you could suggest to your minister contacting the federal government to expedite the matter.
Mr. Boileau: Here in Ontario, the Minister Responsible for Francophone Affairs — who works on the file full time — also has a part-time job: being the Attorney General of Ontario. The stars are therefore aligned for this discussion.
Senator Mockler: First of all, I would like to acknowledge the commissioner of our great country, Canada, who is here as an observer. Mr. Fraser, I would like to congratulate you on the work that you do.
I would like to raise three subjects that concern certain responsibilities that I took on when I sat in other legislatures. I am speaking of the Société Santé en français, of what more we can do for francophone immigration and, finally, of how we can try to control the assimilation of our provincial jurisdictions by the federal government.
Given the presence of Ms. d'Entremont, I would also like to discuss the turbulence that we experienced in New Brunswick recently. I would like to say that the critical comments that were made about you do not represent the view of most New Brunswickers who I know. You certainly do not deserve that type of treatment. Furthermore, I expressed my discontent and my opinions regarding various groups, and I would like to encourage you to continue your work. Your report on the advantages of being bilingual should be used to conduct an overview of official languages in Canada and in New Brunswick. With respect to Ontario, I must say that I have had the opportunity in the past to speak with Minister Meilleur about many of the files that affect the francophonie.
Canadians should be made aware of the fact that, according to the program Découverte, which is hosted by Michel Rochon, the benefits of a bilingual brain have been confirmed. Without reading you the entire report, I would like to quote the following excerpt:
Increasing scientific research shows that bilingualism gives children cognitive advantages, that it can be learned with a high level of skill throughout a lifetime and that it offers a neuroprotective effect to the end of life.
I think that these are things that should be focused on in this report, given the turbulence that we experienced in New Brunswick. A number of people have said that they weren't aware of this. However, if we want to advance the Official Languages Act and further modernize services, we must communicate this information to Canadians.
There are therefore three files that interest me. The first is the Société santé en français. We know a bit about its background. It is a fairly new organization, but one that conducts exceptional work. I would like to hear your opinion on the organization.
I would also like to hear about francophone immigration. After the federal government set up its refugee program, I had the opportunity to meet with people from the provincial legislature, from both the government and the opposition sides, as well as various provincial stakeholders, to discuss francophone immigration. I concluded from those conversations that we must be very diligent if we want to safeguard our francophonie, within our respective provinces.
We must think about what we can do to further promote the francophonie, what recommendations we can make to the government, and how we can raise awareness around the Société Santé en français, a group that provides an important bridge between our two official languages.
Finally, could you briefly explain how we could oversee or adopt a process to better promote the two official languages without falling into the assimilation gap?
The Chair: That was a lovely speech, Senator Mockler, and quite a question. I would ask the witnesses to be as concise as possible in answering those three questions and, if necessary, to provide the committee with any supporting documents. That would be greatly appreciated.
Mr. Boileau: I would like to speak briefly about the group Société Santé en français.
Here, in Ontario, people may recall the Montfort Hospital controversy, which was a trigger event that revealed how fragile we were in terms of health care institutions. That is why the federal government's involvement was so important.
Allow me to tell you a short story. At the time, I was the one who drafted Société Santé en français's bylaws and regulations. So, I know the group well. Here, in Ontario, I am pleased to see that the provincial government also funds health care networks. Although a parallel effort, sometimes it's the same network.
Certain federal networks are funded by the federal government, but in Ontario, there are also planning units for providing health care in French. For example, in the National Capital Region, the network funded by the federal government is also provincially funded. So that collaboration does exist. I believe there could be more, since the networks are not identical, although there is some overlap.
We have planning units that more or less follow the same model of encouraging collaboration with health care providers to identify solutions addressing the lack of health care professionals and the need for French health care services, as well as collaboration with the Consortium national de formation en santé, or CNFS. This is a very important dynamic. In my opinion, the federal government's participation is absolutely essential. However, I am pleased to see that the Province of Ontario has taken the initiative rather than waiting for funding from the federal government.
Ms. d'Entremont: I will now speak about immigration. I wrote to the federal immigration minister three days ago. First of all, I congratulated him on the implementation of a new program. In fact, we also wrote letters to the former federal minister, with whom we had discussions.
The situation in New Brunswick is unique, because I spoke out publically on the immigration file. I asked that immigration practices reflect the proportion of francophones in New Brunswick, that is to say, 33 per cent. We have noted that, for a number of years now, about 12 per cent of our immigrants are francophones. This is across all federal and provincial government programs.
Three weeks ago, I met with the provincial immigration minister. I encourage both levels of government to create a federal-provincial framework agreement so that they can work together to achieve francophone immigration levels that are consistent with our population's demographic weight, in other words, 33 per cent.
In July 2014, the provincial government adopted an action plan to promote francophone immigration to New Brunswick. It committed to respecting francophone levels in our province. This is good news. However, to reach that target, the federal government must absolutely acknowledge the importance of working with provincial authorities in New Brunswick in order to maintain the demographic weight of our community.
The population in New Brunswick is not on the rise, and the only way to achieve an increase in population is by immigration. And so, if we continue to attract francophone immigrants at a rate of 12 per cent, the demographic weight of the francophone community will go down every single year. It is not only a matter of reaching 33 per cent today, but also a matter of catching up. The refugee situation is a golden opportunity as we can attract more immigrants than usual.
I have just written to Minister McCallum encouraging him to adopt a federal-provincial framework agreement.
Mr. Boileau: With regard to your third question, about assimilation, I would say that our objective is to fight against assimilation.
The federal government can only do so much, but provincial governments and other authorities can do a lot more because we have jurisdiction over areas that directly affect our citizens. Therefore, we have to examine not only the relevance of the services that we offer to the francophone population here, in Ontario, but also the way the services are offered. These are two incredibly important aspects: that the services be relevant and that the delivery of such services reflect the needs of the population. That is the focus of our work. For example, Ontario has implemented a language planning policy that does not exist anywhere else. This language planning policy, which applies to education, is a unique Government of Ontario program that seeks to fund and offer tools to French-language educators and to highlight the double workload of educators in French-language schools, that is to say, teaching not just the French language but also French culture.
Therefore, this program does not have an English equivalent because it is not needed. For a few years now, and it's very new, we have also had language planning policies for post-secondary education. These initiatives allow us to move in a direction where we are equipping ourselves with tools.
When I talk about services tailored to the population, this is a good example: francophone shelters for female victims of domestic abuse. These are also services that we offer to the population, telling them that, in the event of a crisis, should they need to leave their home at three o'clock in the morning, with two young children in tow, to go to a shelter, they can be served in French. The person can calm down, taking the time they need, and then a worker will help them write their CV, find a job, a new place to live and so forth.
This care is absolutely crucial. These are measures that the provincial government can take to help francophones remain francophone every day. When we get up in the morning, we have this choice: will I stay francophone today, yes or no? The government is there to help facilitate this choice through its actions.
If, invariably, the answer is "Sorry, I don't speak French,'' in a tone that could be perceive as unkind, that does not send the message that our language is recognized publically, that it is spoken and accepted by the general public. That is our challenge, ensuring that, in delivering programs, people properly understand the importance of the active offer and the need for francophones to feel comfortable asking for services in French. That is why it is so important to have institutions.
The Montfort Hospital was mentioned earlier, and I will stop there. Francophones who go to Montfort Hospital do not ask themselves this question: Is today the day that I will ask for health services in French? Francophones don't need to ask themselves this question. It's the same thing if they seek treatment at Dr. Georges L. Dumont Hospital, in Moncton. They will not ask themselves that question there either. Obviously, we cannot have these kinds of hospitals all over Ontario, but we can create shared spaces, where francophones will feel at ease and where they will not ask themselves that question, because it is normal that they be served in French. That is what we are working on.
Senator Poirier: I just have one question, and it also concerns Commissioner Fraser's appearance a couple of week ago. In late February, the government introduced Bill C-6, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act. As it stands right now, adults aged 18 to 64 must demonstrate knowledge of Canada and of one of the two official languages. Bill C-6, however, would reduce the maximum age by 10 years. In other words, those aged 55 and over would no longer need to know one of the two official languages. If the bill is not amended, the proposed measure will become the law of the land.
In your opinion, would such a change have an impact on francophone and Acadian communities in New Brunswick and Ontario? Most 55-year-old Canadians are still in the workforce. Under this bill, these people would no longer need to know one of the two official languages. I would like to hear your opinion on the subject.
Ms. d'Entremont: I have very few statistics to support an opinion on this subject. In New Brunswick, the situation is probably different from that of Ontario. Very few people speak neither of the province's two official languages. When immigrants arrive, of course, they choose to integrate into one community or the other. As such, I cannot say that this is an issue that our office has studied. Very few people in New Brunswick do not speak either of the province's official languages. I will stop there.
Mr. Boileau: I read the transcripts of your meeting with my colleague Commissioner Fraser with great interest and I was hoping that you would not ask that question. I will tell you, quite frankly, that a commissioner's first responsibility is to be rigorous. We cannot simply say what we think about anything and everything. Our statements must be well- founded. In this case, we have not analyzed or studied the bill. It would thus be difficult to render an opinion on the matter — which appears to be important — without having studied it.
Senator Poirier: I appreciate your answer. Personally, I find the measure troubling. I think that we should take a closer look at it in an effort to understand its impact. The fact that people will come to Canada, wanting to become Canadian citizens, and not need to know one of our two official languages is something that will be very interesting to keep an eye on.
Senator McIntyre: As you know, the Commissioner of Official Languages of Canada has the power to bring a case before the courts. In New Brunswick, the commissioner does not have this power. Mr. Boileau, do you have this power in Ontario?
Mr. Boileau: Unfortunately, the power to initiate legal proceedings is not part of the 14 sections contained in Ontario's French Language Services Act.
Senator McIntyre: I know that you report to your respective legislative assemblies.
Mr. Boileau: Yes, I report to the Legislative Assembly.
Senator McIntyre: Ms. d'Entremont, you have been the Commissioner of Official Languages since 2013. Is that correct?
Ms. d'Entremont: Yes.
Senator McIntyre: Your mandate ends in 2020. It is a seven-year mandate.
I note, as well, that the New Brunswick Official Languages Act will have to be reviewed by December 31, 2021. I am referring here to section 42.1 of the Official Languages Act. I know that it is a bit early yet, but how do you plan to undertake this review?
Ms. d'Entremont: The last review took place in 2013, when I was appointed commissioner. The former commissioner had prepared recommendations.
I have a paper file in my office, where I keep notes that I make from time to time. When the time comes to make recommendations, further to the review process, we will be ready. Should the scope of the act be broadened? I do not know if you are aware of the fact that the 2013 review, and another more recent review from last fall, have resulted in more than 40 professional associations in New Brunswick being subject to the Official Languages Act, as of July 1, 2016. That means that my mandate will include investigating complaints from citizens who are unsuccessful in obtaining services from a professional association. This is a major change that will come into effect as of July 1.
I always have a little list of potential issues we could examine. As the date of the next review draws closer, we will begin making a concerted effort to formulate recommendations for the next round. So that is more or less our process. All of the files we are dealing with in the meantime are helping us to prepare for the process.
Senator McIntyre: There is another important date on our horizon for official languages in New Brunswick: July 1, 2016. As you know, as of that date, new language obligations will be imposed on professional associations in New Brunswick. Do you expect to receive a high number of complaints following the coming into force of those new provisions?
Ms. d'Entremont: That is a very good question. I'm eager to see how things will unfold. It is very difficult to predict whether we will receive many or few complaints. I will be able to tell you more in a year.
When I appeared before the legislative assembly committee in support of my budget proposal, I requested slightly more funding than in last year's budget, so that we could acquire the tools we needed to fulfill our new responsibilities. The committee did not grant me the funding I requested.
It is difficult to quantify the resources we will need, because we have no idea how many complaints we will receive. I think that number will depend on the efforts made by the government, or our office, to make citizens aware that, as of July 1, they will be able to turn to us if they have complaints involving professional associations. Our services are free. People do not need to go to court. They can submit their complaints to us, and we can take appropriate action. It is difficult to know what to expect, because we have no idea how many complaints we will receive.
Senator McIntyre: Ms. d'Entremont, as a senator from New Brunswick, I follow the wonderful work you do very closely. Congratulations! Keep up the good work.
Ms. d'Entremont: Thank you.
The Chair: On behalf of committee members, I would like to thank our two official language commissioners, Katherine d'Entremont and François Boileau, for being with us this evening.
I would also like to thank Commissioner Graham Fraser, who is here this evening as an observer, as well as to support his colleagues. I think that attests to the excellent spirit of cooperation that reigns among official language commissioners.
On behalf of the committee, I thank you for having been so generous with your time and for sharing your expertise with us. I would also like to thank you for the work you do to represent us so well, and to raise the profile of our francophonie, which is so important to us and so valuable to our country. Thank you for always watching over our rights, and promoting this beautiful language and this wonderful culture.
On behalf of the committee, thank you.
(The committee adjourned.)