THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON OFFICIAL LANGUAGES
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Monday, March 28, 2022
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met with videoconference this day at 5:01 p.m. [ET] to study matters relating to francophone immigration to minority communities.
Senator René Cormier (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Honourable senators, before we begin, I would like to remind senators and witnesses to please keep your microphones muted at all times unless recognized by name by the chair.
Should any technical challenges arise, particularly in relation to interpretation, please signal this to the chair or the clerk and we will work to fix the issue.
[Translation]
Participants should know to do so in a private area and to be mindful of their surroundings.
We will now officially begin our meeting. My name is René Cormier, senator from New Brunswick and chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages.
I would like to introduce the members of the committee who are participating in this meeting: Senator Rose-May Poirier from New Brunswick, deputy chair of the committee; Senator Raymonde Gagné from Manitoba, member of the steering committee; Senator Jean-Guy Dagenais from Quebec, member of the steering committee; Senator Bernadette Clement from Ontario; Senator Lucie Moncion from Ontario; Senator Mégie and Senator Pierre Dalphond from Quebec; and Senator Percy Mockler from New Brunswick.
I wish to welcome all of you and viewers across the country who may be watching. I would like to point out that I am taking part in this meeting from within the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabe Nation.
Today, pursuant to the order of reference received from the Senate on February 10, we are beginning our hearings for the purpose of undertaking a study on francophone immigration to minority communities.
To discuss this, we have some expert researchers on this issue. For the first witness panel, we have Jean-Pierre Corbeil, Adjunct Professor, Department of Sociology, Laval University. I would add that Mr. Corbeil is the former head of the languages statistics program at Statistics Canada. We also have Christophe Traisnel, Professor of Political Science, Arts and Social Sciences Faculty, Université de Moncton, as well as Leyla Sall, Professor of Sociology, Department of Sociology and Criminology, Université de Moncton.
Gentlemen, thank you for accepting our invitation and welcome to the committee. We are ready to hear your opening remarks, which will be followed by a period of questions from senators. Without further ado, the floor is yours. We will begin with Mr. Corbeil.
Jean-Pierre Corbeil, Adjunct Professor, Department of Sociology, Laval University, as an individual: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good evening, members of the committee. I want to thank you for inviting me to appear before you to provide some food for thought to assist you in your work on the issues and challenges associated with francophone immigration to minority communities in Canada.
I will be addressing three main points in my remarks. First, I will share some thoughts on the importance of considering, in any discussion on the establishment of immigration targets, the unequal capacity of official language minority communities to attract and retain immigrants and migrants in general. It seems to me that such consideration necessarily requires us to reframe the discussion on establishing targets in such a way as to move away from a national target and give more consideration to the varied local and regional realities of official language communities across the country.
Second, I would briefly like to discuss the criteria for defining francophone immigration to Canada.
Lastly, I will conclude by discussing a few potential challenges and issues as Parliament studies Bill C-13 on modernizing the Official Languages Act and the role that immigration is expected to play in preserving the vitality of the French language in Canada.
It is important to note from the outset that the demographic, socioeconomic and geolinguistic issues are not at all the same in communities striving to attract immigrants as in communities where the main challenge is to integrate them. Some communities take in very few, if any, interprovincial or international migrants, whereas the populations of others grow mainly as a result of the contribution of international or interprovincial migration.
Take Toronto, for example, where more than 45% of the French-language population consists of immigrants, and North Bay and Moncton, where francophones born outside Canada represent less than 1% and 4% respectively. To put it differently, at the time of the last census, approximately 40% of all francophones outside Quebec were living in communities where 80% or more of francophones were born in their province of residence, whereas those same communities admitted little more than 4% of all francophone immigrants outside Quebec. It seems to me these figures must be taken into consideration if the committee wishes to examine the factors at work for and against the settlement of French-speaking immigrants in minority communities and in maintaining their democratic weight.
Just as Quebec’s immigration policy tends to favour the selection of immigrants who have knowledge of French upon arrival, it seems to me that some thought should be given to other criteria for defining francophone immigrants who are likely to settle in francophone minority communities.
According to the 2016 census, 26,200 immigrants who had arrived in Canada over the previous five years had French as their first spoken official language, whereas nearly 53,000 recent immigrants, twice that number, could conduct a conversation in French. Similarly, for all immigration periods, there was a total of 130,000 immigrants to Canada, outside Quebec, whose first official language spoken was French, whereas nearly 388,000 immigrants, approximately three times as many, could conduct a conversation in French. I raise this point because it seems to me that, if the idea is to consider various ways to contribute to the vitality of francophone environments and spaces in official language minority communities, some consideration should be given to the role that may be played by those who are equally comfortable in English and French, even if French is not their mother tongue or first spoken official language.
In closing, and this is my third point, I think it’s important to take a brief look at some looming challenges and issues pertaining to francophone immigration. While the 4.4% target for francophone immigration outside Quebec has never been reached since 2003, it must be acknowledged that, with the recent announcement of annual national immigration levels of approximately 450,000 for 2023 and 2024, the idea of maintaining, and perhaps increasing, the demographic weight of francophone immigration across the country will need constant attention and genuine political will to be realized. Those immigration levels mean that approximately 17,000 francophone immigrants will have to be admitted outside Quebec in order to meet the 4.4% target, whereas fewer than 6,000 immigrants have been admitted there in the past five years.
Lastly, I must emphasize that part 1 of Bill C-13 provides that the government, and I quote:
—is committed to protecting and promoting the French language, recognizing that French is in a minority situation in Canada and North America due to the predominant use of English;
However, considering Quebec’s rights and responsibilities under the 1991 Canada-Quebec Accord respecting the number of immigrants destined to Quebec, the announced annual national level of 450,000 immigrants should absolutely take into consideration the needs of official language minority communities in and outside Quebec. I therefore believe that a genuine dialogue between Quebec and the federal government is inevitable if the federal government is serious about its commitment to protecting French across Canada. Failing that, and assuming Quebec’s immigration levels remain stable, Quebec’s share of immigration to Canada would decline, which would clearly contribute to an accelerating decrease in Quebec’s demographic weight within the federation and, consequently, Quebec’s francophonie.
Thank you. I will be pleased to answer your questions.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Corbeil. We will now go to Mr. Traisnel.
Christophe Traisnel, Professor of Political Science, Arts and Social Sciences Faculty, Université de Moncton, as an individual: Good evening, senators. First of all, I want to say that I am very honoured to appear today as a witness before the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages.
The aim of my remarks is to outline the research that my teams and I have conducted on francophone immigration to Canada. I will do that by highlighting the specific situation of francophone immigration outside the major centres, a special focus of my research, and particularly in the three territories and Atlantic Acadie.
Perhaps the first idea, which should be stated at the outset, is that there are major contrasts in the nature of the communities concerned and in the possibilities and constraints the local actors face in establishing admission mechanisms such as recruitment, promotion, settlement and integration of francophone newcomers.
Canada is a large country, and it is important to consider those strong contrasts for immigration to represent an opportunity for minority francophone communities to thrive. The experiences of migration and admission will not be the same for francophones in Toronto, Moncton, Caraquet and Whitehorse.
The second idea follows from the first: Immigrants themselves have profoundly contrasting profiles. All individuals have embarked on their own migratory journey based on a certain idea, also their own, of a plainly enchanted Canada that they will have to learn to modify when they encounter the reality on the ground.
Access to accurate and specific information before departure is thus essential. People do not immigrate to Vancouver, Quebec City, Iqaluit or Grande-Anse for the same reasons.
The third idea is that francophone immigration also entails coming into contact with public policies, institutional arrangements and community entitlements. It’s an issue on which three types of aspirations intersect with federal, provincial, regional, municipal, community and individual perspectives: the individual’s migratory plan with the challenge of individual or family success; the economic planning of governments with an economic development issue; and the concerns of francophone Acadian communities for their own vitality with the issues of demographic weight, population aging and community dynamics.
However, these three aspirations do not always converge. It’s not because you’re a francophone immigrant that you necessarily want to enrol your children in a francophone school, and we need to understand why.
The main challenge of francophone immigration is to cause the individual experiences of the immigrants themselves, the political will of decision makers and the community-building hopes of minority francophone groups to converge around a common cause: to achieve a successful confluence of francophone newcomers and host societies.
The entire challenge then is to design a set of mechanisms to make that confluence a success. Success does not depend solely on the immigrants; it also depends on the society that welcomes them and on the community that rightly views them as an opportunity.
Three more ideas, which I will only mention, should be considered.
Much has changed in these areas in Canada in the past 20 years. The immigration issue has given rise to what may now be called a “francophone immigration governance,” which should be reinforced by mobilizing immigrants, the community sector, decision makers and researchers, all of whom are involved in these considerations. The convergence is under way.
Here is another idea. For the moment, it must be said that the linguistic profile of immigrants who choose the Atlantic region does not reflect that region’s current linguistic balance. Its modest targets have not been met, and the overall situation is the same elsewhere in Canada.
With respect to the second last idea, immigration isn’t always a “long quiet river” for newcomers, and its course is strewn with obstacles, particularly administrative ones. Many solutions are proposed by the research and community actors who are now familiar with the landscape and who should therefore be closely involved in decision making.
Lastly, the third idea: One of the main challenges is to retain francophone newcomers, particularly in regions far removed from major centres. Retention must be viewed in a manner consistent with the mobility culture specific to the immigrants concerned. It is better to plan for mobility and to assist immigrants in pursuing their migratory experience elsewhere rather than to retain them at all costs.
Their welfare must also be considered locally, and that may be how retention is achieved. It may ultimately be done by providing high-quality public services and a community that is genuinely open to a range of diversities. Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Traisnel. Mr. Sall, the floor is yours.
Leyla Sall, Professor of Sociology, Department of Sociology and Criminology, Université de Moncton, as an individual: Good evening, senators. I am just as honoured as my colleagues to appear before you. I find the term “appearance” somewhat amusing because I come from Senegal, and, for us, the words “to appear” mean to appear before a court. So my wife was frightened when I told her I was to appear before the Senate.
The Chair: I can reassure you, sir.
Mr. Sall: Thank you very much.
That being said, francophone immigration to francophone minority communities is an ambition. It represents the ambition to expand those minority communities that face demographic and linguistic challenges and are living in or alongside a dominant anglophone community in Canada.
Challenges are of course involved in admitting and integrating immigrants within francophone minority communities. Those challenges are attributable in part to the social characteristics and societal trajectories of those communities.
Allow me to explain. Francophone minority communities, which are offshoots of the greater French Canadian family, are used to evolving along distinct lines, by which I mean we aim to distinguish ourselves from the dominant anglophone community and to preserve our specific characteristics to avoid being swallowed up by that dominant community.
They are also communities that have managed to forge a social cohesion model based on ethno-racial homogeneity. Suddenly, in the 2000s, they were asked to open up to diversity and to become minority host communities, communities that admitted immigrants.
Imagine communities that were used to a certain specificity, a certain homogeneity and a social cohesion model based on homogeneity that have suddenly been transformed into communities that welcome immigrants. That creates challenges, particularly in welcoming diversity.
These are communities characterized by multidimensional institutional incompleteness. They have become communities that admit immigrants, but they do not have all the necessary immigration powers. That is why some communities, particularly the Acadian community, increasingly refer to duality in immigration. They would like to have more powers with which to admit immigrants.
When I say institutional incompleteness, I am referring to the fact that, if you view French as an institution, there is obviously an institutional incompleteness because the labour market operates to a large extent in English, and that therefore raises a challenge when it comes to admitting and retaining immigrants.
As my colleague said earlier, the retention challenge is related in large part to the fact that the labour market often operates in English. Retaining these immigrants means retaining them physically, of course, but also retaining them symbolically. Imagine immigrants who arrive in Canada and are recruited by anglophone employers. They will ultimately be more or less anglicized and fail to develop a sense of belonging, but their children will ultimately be anglicized too because the symbolic value of English is quite strong among immigrants.
There are challenges, of course, but the francophone minority communities also have assets. That is not the case for all communities, but some have assets.
Certain factors promote retention and integration. They include economic vitality. Employment is obviously crucial. Employment is what enables 90% of people to stay in these communities. Then there are francophone post-secondary educational institutions, which should encourage the federal government to increase funding for the institutions in those communities. Lastly, these are communities that immigrants consider safe.
In the frequent interviews I have had with immigrants arriving from Europe, one of the things they told me was that they were staying because they felt safe enough to raise their children here.
Affordable housing is also a retention factor. We are increasingly losing that factor because housing is increasingly scarce. It is also difficult for immigrants to have their educational qualifications recognized. They also cite the anti-racist struggle because minority francophone communities have become pluralist francophone communities, but no serious anti-racist policies have been put in place.
The example I cite is Acadie, with which I’m quite familiar. The Société de l’Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick, which is very interested in immigration and more or less coordinates it all, has 10 commandments for combatting racism. However, many of those 10 commandments are limited to advice on interactions among Acadians, Canadians and immigrants. Consequently, there is no policy on combatting racism in the workplace.
I’d like to invite senators to review the Employment Equity Policy because it will guarantee retention. Immigrants often complain that they are qualified but that they are not recruited as a result of the employment equity policy in Canada, which has no teeth. These are factors that more or less improve or undermine the situation.
The closure of francophone labour market sectors also plays a major role in preventing immigrants from staying in those communities even when they have been recruited. We know, for example, that, in Acadie and among minority francophones, the two francophone labour market sectors that have high-quality jobs available for immigrants are education and health.
Unfortunately, what we see is that, when those immigrants arrive, they aren’t recruited in education or health, even if they are qualified in their fields. Or else, if they are recruited in the health sector, it’s to fill auxiliary nurse positions or to work in senior care facilities, even though they are qualified physicians, nurses and so on.
The Chair: Mr. Sall, I must ask you to wrap up. I’m sure the senators’ questions will give you an opportunity to provide further clarification.
Mr. Sall: The conclusion is that we should help these communities build a new social cohesion model based on inclusion and diversity. I’ll be able to come back to that during the period of questions. Thank you very much.
The Chair: Thank you very much to the three of you, gentlemen. We will now go to questions. Colleagues, I would ask those participating virtually that you use the “raise hand” feature in Zoom to ask for the floor. Those who are present in person can let the clerk know they want to speak. And please don’t hesitate to get our attention should we fail to confirm that you have not been added to the list.
Being aware of the time ahead and of the members’ interest in our witnesses’ remarks, I suggest that, for the first round, each senator be allowed five minutes, including the question and the answer.
I would ask my colleagues to mention which of the witnesses your question is for. If the witnesses can also agree to the idea of concluding their remarks within five minutes, we’ll be able to have a second round should the opportunity arise.
I therefore give the floor to the deputy chair of the committee, Senator Poirier.
Senator Poirier: Thanks to the three of you for your presentations. As my question concerns a topic that I’ve already addressed with Mr. Corbeil, I’ll ask him my first question, which is quite broad. As he knows, the 4.4% target clearly hasn’t been reached. Regardless of the figure established as a target, mechanisms must be in place for us to be able to reach those targets. There is a shortage of mechanisms and programs.
What mechanisms or programs should be put in place to improve francophone immigration? What should the federal government do to improve francophone immigration?
I’m asking you the question, Mr. Corbeil, but if the other two witnesses have anything to add, they may do so, time permitting.
Mr. Corbeil: Thank you, senator. Very briefly, I would say that, from the outset, we should stick to the fact that there are no francophone pool issues outside Canada. Over the years, several studies conducted, for example, by the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie and the Observatoire démographique et statistique de l’espace francophone have shown that the growth rate of the francophonie in Africa is really impressive. According to data made available in the past few weeks, there are more than 320 million francophones in the world, and the greatest growth is in Africa.
However, what we’re seeing is that very few African migrants come to Canada, even though recent immigrants to areas outside Quebec, by which I mean those who have landed in the past five years, come largely from African countries. Consequently, the main challenge, in my mind, is to try to understand why those immigrants seem to prefer Europe, for example, or the United States over Canada.
There is a credential recognition issue. Ultimately, it seems that we can’t reach or admit an adequate number of immigrants. I think we have to understand why the government hasn’t met these targets in the past 15 years and what right and wrong actions it took. We don’t have that information. We have very little information on the subject.
Consequently, we should try to understand how the relationship between Canada and African immigrants can be established, for example. Why can’t we attract more immigrants who are nonetheless highly educated?
Senator Poirier: Do the other witnesses have anything to add?
Mr. Sall: African immigrants don’t go to Europe because they prefer it. Canada has a very good image among the African countries. The problem is related more to immigration procedures. International students, for example, often go to Europe. Why? Because it’s cheaper. For example, tuition fees are lower. They have relatives there, but, at the same time, tuition is cheaper.
Moreover, one of the recommendations I would make would be to lower the tuition fees of Canadian universities for international francophone students. The University of Ottawa has taken a step in that direction, which is attracting a lot of international francophone students. Other universities should follow that example, and, for that to happen, a system of scholarships and bursaries should be put in place to lower costs in that area.
Credentialed immigrants also want to come to Canada. The problem is that there are only two embassies in Africa that can review their files, our embassies in Dakar and Nairobi. As you can understand, the procedures are complicated on a continent where only two Canadian embassies can process files.
Their credentials aren’t recognized in many instances, which is another reason why they find it hard to immigrate to Canada.
Lastly, don’t forget that, to date, western Europe has enjoyed very positive advertising and is very attractive to francophone immigrants. That’s starting for Africa, but the pace is still too slow for my taste.
The Chair: Briefly, Mr. Traisnel, did you want to speak?
Mr. Traisnel: Very briefly. I entirely agree with what my colleagues have said.
As regards immigration pools, perhaps an effort should be made to refine relations with those pools, simply by reasoning about networks and thus introducing a fairly qualitative aspect. When you ask people what brought them here, you realize that certain profiles are more particularly interested in Canada. Perhaps an effort can be made to promote francophone communities to certain categories of people most likely to be interested in Destination Canada, to use the name of a forum that’s held in Paris every year.
International students are another promising pool that can be characterized as such, simply because we realize that they tick many important boxes. Earlier I discussed the convergence of wills and political intentions with immigrants’ interests. Here we’re discussing exactly that type of objective since we’re dealing with people who meet the needs of the Canadian labour market and who, in many instances, want to settle in Canada since they’re international students who are also francophone.
Senator Poirier: Thank you. My speaking time is up, but I’d like to be on the list for the second round.
Senator Dagenais: Thanks to our guests. My question is for Mr. Corbeil.
Minister Petitpas Taylor told our committee last week that the official languages bill offers all Canadians a chance to learn French. I admit I have some serious doubts about that statement given the size of the country and the virtually total absence of French in many of its regions. Can you tell us whether any analyses have been conducted on the impact social media has had on the interest or lack thereof of Canadians and immigrants in learning and using French?
Mr. Corbeil: Thank you for your question, Senator Dagenais.
It’s a fairly complex question. We have little information for the moment on the impact of social media. Perhaps my colleagues know more about the subject.
What we see, at the very least, is that, generally speaking, the majority of immigrants who arrive in Canada… By that, I mean in Canada, outside Quebec, since Quebec tends to favour immigrants who have knowledge of French or an ability to learn French. Consequently, I’m not talking about all immigrants right now, but rather approximately 60% to 65% of immigrants when they arrive.
This is a major challenge because you have to understand that most immigrants arrive in Canada as adults, usually over 25 to 30 years of age. It’s harder to learn one of the official languages at that age since most of those immigrants at least know English, and French is potentially a bigger challenge.
There’s a real challenge, perhaps with regard to priorities. In the mid-1980s, barely 30% of immigrants entering Quebec had any knowledge of French. In the 2010s, it was more than two out of three immigrants. Why can’t we admit or select, outside Quebec, more immigrants who have some knowledge of both official languages? That’s a challenge. Perhaps additional points should be awarded for knowledge of both official languages, not at least one. That would definitely help promote the phenomenon. As for social media, I unfortunately don’t have an answer to your question.
Senator Dagenais: Mr. Corbeil, my next question is this: Do you think the official languages bill does more than protect the fundamental and constitutional rights of francophone minorities outside Quebec? Does the bill contain elements to promote the use of French outside recognized francophone communities? More specifically, is there any interest in speaking French outside known francophone circles?
Mr. Corbeil: Once again, that’s a very broad question. You really have to understand — and this is an interesting phenomenon — that, according to our data published last fall, half a million young francophones are enrolled in French immersion programs in Canada. It’s genuinely popular. The federal government is helping to raise interest in learning both official languages.
Retention is the issue and will always be the main issue. When these students leave high school, they believe they won’t have any more opportunities to use their second language. Consequently, I think a major effort is necessary, not just to make young people aware of the importance of using both official languages, but also to take all possible measures to promote their retention and to create francophone spaces where immigrants and non-immigrants can use those languages.
Senator Gagné: Welcome to our guests and witnesses.
When the Commissioner of Official Languages, Raymond Théberge, appeared, in February, I believe, I asked him why successive governments had been unable to reach their targets for francophone immigration outside Quebec. He said that immigration involves many actors and stakeholders not only at the federal level, but at the provincial and community levels as well. You also alluded to that in your presentations.
Who should be the conductor here? The provinces have also set many targets, especially based on economic development. The provinces nevertheless have a considerable say in the decision to bring in economic actors. How should that be organized? Who should be the conductor? In addition, if you’re able to comment on Bill C-13, how can we establish the organizational basis of a francophone immigration policy?
That question is for whoever would like to comment.
The Chair: Mr. Sall?
Mr. Sall: Thank you very much. That’s a very broad and relevant question.
It would be pretentious of me to say that such and such an institution or actor should be the conductor. What I know is that this is a shared responsibility between the federal government and francophone organizations focusing on francophone immigration outside Quebec. Allow me to explain: These are the same organizations that always come back and tell us we haven’t reached the francophone immigration target. However, they’re also the ones that don’t do much to promote the inclusion of immigrants in the francophone labour market.
For instance, in Acadie, which I know well, the desired target, if I’m not mistaken, is 33% of francophone immigrants to maintain demographic balance between the two official language communities. At the same time, we know there’s a francophone labour market that offers high-quality jobs. We’re told every time, for example, that there are teacher shortages in primary and secondary education. And yet immigrants often tell me in interviews, “No, I had a job, but in the anglophone district teaching French as a second language.” In the meantime, people in the francophone systems tell me all the time that they’re short of francophone teachers. It would be good to have a shared responsibility under which we could tell the Société de l’Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick, “If you want to have your 33% francophone immigration, prove to us you can recruit at least 33% of immigrant teachers because there are always francophone personnel shortages in both health and education.” I’m in favour of that shared responsibility. We have to stop telling the federal government that it has failed to meet the targets when, at the same time, the organizations aren’t doing much to promote the recruitment and retention of immigrants in the francophone labour market.
Mr. Traisnel: It’s a very interesting question, all the more so because it means looking at Canada as it is.
When we talk about conductors, the sole conductor in meeting targets — with even more capacity for action than the community organizations and francophone minority communities — is the head of governance, the federal government. Leyla Sall mentioned the institutional incompleteness of the minority communities, and I entirely agree with him. They also don’t have the ability to make immigration decisions.
However, some things are headed in the right direction, simply because we’re witnessing a gradual convergence of goodwill in recruiting francophone immigrants from the outside, but community organizations have relatively little ability to act on a certain number of factors or to make public decisions. Once again, it’s the head of governance that decides in Canada.
Senator Mégie: Good evening to the witnesses and thank you for your testimony. I hear a lot of talk about 33% of immigrant francophone teachers. So I see that we’re more inclined to choose those who teach French because teaching is the basis of everything, but why don’t we choose in other fields, in sectors where people will work in that language so they can perhaps gradually establish French as a language of work? I don’t know whether you’ve previously thought about that in connection with the francophone presence where you live.
Mr. Sall: Thirty-three per cent is just an example that I cited in education, but it can obviously be extended to other fields. In my remarks earlier, I suggested reviewing the employment equity policy because, as I said, employment is crucial. High-quality jobs are what makes it possible to retain francophone immigrants in our communities. However, when you look at the employment equity policy, it doesn’t apply to small businesses, even though they’re the backbone of the Canadian economy.
Senator Mégie: That’s it.
Mr. Sall: Consequently, that policy must be applied; we have to find a way to apply it in small businesses. The other suggestion I wanted to make concerns the introduction of state-assisted contracts. Why wouldn’t the federal government introduce types of state-assisted contracts to promote the retention of these immigrants in francophone minority communities? This means that, if an employer recruits a francophone immigrant, half of that individual’s salary would be paid by the government for at least a year or two, while the individual develops experience and establishes basic Canadian professional experience. Surely that would promote retention in those communities. The criticism that’s often levelled at those immigrants is that they don’t have any Canadian work experience.
Senator Mégie: Thank you. I wanted to add a supplementary question. Is there a provision in the Official Languages Act that would help us move forward in integrating francophone immigrants in the workplace?
Mr. Sall: Not at the present time. There certainly should be one because, when we discuss the responsibility of the federal government, which must take positive measures to promote the vitality of the francophone minority communities, we can definitely include a lot of things under vitality, including retention through work.
Mr. Corbeil: Yes, we were talking about governance earlier. I think what seems to be fundamental is the employer awareness issue. The federal government, which is theoretically responsible and should assume governance, can’t manage the file alone, which is why it’s important to establish an excellent partnership with the communities themselves and make employers aware of the importance of recruiting immigrants. As we know, there are labour shortages across the country. New Brunswick is a fairly unique case because we know that the francophone population of that province represents approximately 23% of the francophone population outside Quebec. New Brunswick receives barely 4% of all immigration that takes place outside Quebec.
This enormous discrepancy stems from the labour market and economic development issues. As previously mentioned, immigrants tend to settle where they find work and a solid and attractive economic infrastructure. There’s significant work to be done in partnership with the communities and employers.
Senator Dalphond: Thanks to our three witnesses. This is really very interesting. I understand that there are two challenges: recruitment and retention. Are there any studies showing that a larger percentage of francophone students who come to study in Canada, whether it be in Moncton, Quebec or elsewhere, subsequently try to stay in Canada than the percentage of students who use another language, such as English, or are they similar phenomena?
Is there a lot of mobility? Once we have people who are settled here, can we retain them in their local community or do they move after a period of time? For example, will those who have gone to Toronto stay there or move to Montreal to work in French? Is there a kind of interprovincial mobility? Will people generally move to the major centres and stay there, or do family aspirations encourage them to move a few years later to another francophone environment where French is the majority language?
Mr. Corbeil: Thank you for your excellent question. This is an extremely important issue. I know that studies have been conducted on migration and mobility. I also know that you’ll be questioning my Statistics Canada colleagues later on. Yes, we have a lot of data on interprovincial migration. There’s the database on immigrants to Canada, which informs us every year where immigrants have moved. We also have information on follow-up to students, once they’ve completed their postsecondary degrees, which tells us where they go. I don’t know of many studies on francophone immigrants in that regard, but we do have the data.
Mr. Traisnel: I know that a study’s coming. It will be very interesting to see the findings, but we’ll have to wait a while.
Local communities are increasingly interested in this new pool that international francophone students seem to constitute. We’re noticing this in Moncton, for example, where the Centre d’accueil et d’accompagnement francophone des immigrants du sud-est du Nouveau-Brunswick, or CAFI, and the Université de Moncton have introduced programs. Other programs have also been established to enable interested international students to explore the labour market in cooperation with that community organization. Initiatives are starting to develop and programs are beginning to come together. Yes, it’s an indication of interest among the local communities.
Mr. Sall: We can nevertheless find some consolation here because, if I compare Moncton in the early 2010s to its present situation, progress has definitely been made.
The transition used to be extremely difficult for international students, even for obtaining permanent residence. They had to have a job in their field or a related field. That’s no longer the case now because international students can become permanent residents even if they have a job at a call centre. That’s how we’ve retained a lot of international students who were heading to Quebec or Ontario, but especially to Quebec. Our proximity to Quebec can be a factor against retention of students or other francophone immigrants. Someone living in New Brunswick, an international student or francophone immigrant, is more tempted to move to Quebec than someone who lives in Vancouver. Moving costs, proximity and networks are already factors. So a lot of progress has been made.
On the other hand, as Mr. Corbeil said, we’re dealing with small numbers here too. We don’t recruit enough international students or francophone immigrants. It’s a drop of water in the ocean, even if we retain them.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Senator Clement: Thanks to the witnesses for their excellent presentations.
I come from Cornwall, Ontario. It’s a community of 50,000 inhabitants, 25% of whom are francophone. Our challenge is to attract people, but especially to retain them.
I attended a Juste pour rire gala in Cornwall last weekend, and there was a young Moroccan comedian who told some very good jokes about the immigrant experience. He described the confusion that reigns when new Canadians arrive in the region: Who does what? Where do you go to get help and to find out how to settle in?
What’s the municipality’s role, and how can we improve cooperation among the various orders of government?
Mr. Traisnel: That’s actually a really relevant question.
The municipalities have a strategic role to play, simply because they’re the first order of government. They’re the first institutions that people landing in the country discover. When newcomers arrive… Earlier I said it was quite a difficult experience for newcomers simply because they arrive in Canada with an enchanted image of the country in their minds. You can’t blame immigrants for that simply because that’s what motivates, mobilizes and encourages them to come to this country when they choose Canada. Refugees are completely different, of course. When they make that choice, a process of disenchantment takes place because they’re faced with the local reality, administrative procedures or hassles and setbacks of all kinds.
Earlier Mr. Sall mentioned housing. We could limit those setbacks that aren’t anticipated at the outset. Municipalities are often closest to the migration experience and thus have a crucial role to play. I would say we now realize that local immigration partnerships, for example, are developing and increasingly taking their place in the process.
The same is true of francophone minority communities. They’re also on the ground. With the francophone immigration networks and a whole series of initiatives, we’re increasingly trying to coordinate the many decisions that are made regarding admission, settlement and consolidating settlement and retention.
Earlier I said that public services are also retention factors. That’s something that’s too often forgotten. Of course, employment is the number one factor in retention, together with income, but there’s also the welfare of the family accompanying us. If you’re happy in your job, but your spouse isn’t, and if your children aren’t happy at school or are frustrated because they don’t have access to extracurricular activities, that has a negative impact on your migration plans and prompts you to leave. We have to be very attentive to the quality of the public services offered.
Senator Clement: Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you. Does anyone else want to answer the question?
Mr. Sall: I entirely agree with what my colleague said. There are two key public services: housing and transportation. Immigrants are very sensitive to that and will be all the more so since the inflation we’re experiencing in Canada will be a decisive factor in their choice of place to settle.
I’m going to address another aspect that comes from my personal experience. I first immigrated to Quebec and lived in Carleton-sur-Mer, where I had a job at the CEGEP, a high-quality job. Everyone was good; everyone was nice. However, what made me leave the place was that there was no place of worship, no mosque. As you can see, sometimes there are services that municipalities don’t think of and that are decisive factors in retaining immigrants. For example, the availability of a place of worship was a decisive factor for me in deciding to go to Moncton because there, at least… When I arrived in Moncton, I found a mosque and that was a decisive reason why I stayed there. So municipalities definitely play a major role because we’re talking about immigration and the federal government, but that’s only on paper. The municipality is the number one agent of retention.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Senator Moncion: Bill C-13 provides that the government will introduce a francophone immigration policy that is to include objectives, targets and indicators. Apart from those elements, which are obvious, what would you recommend that the policy include in addition to those targets?
Mr. Corbeil: Very briefly, I think the main point to consider is that immigration should not be viewed as a silo. It may be one of the issues and a danger we’re often faced with, as though francophone immigration were ultimately just an immigration issue. The francophone immigration issue is in fact a major driver of growth and vitality for official language minority communities across the country. It seems to me we tend to consider the immigrant aspect as somewhat separate from the development and future of those communities. Beyond targets, we must view immigration as an asset for the future of those communities and ensure that Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada isn’t solely responsible for it. There must be greater cooperation and a better partnership among all the departments concerned by the official languages bill. Without effective integration and clear thinking on mechanisms for integrating immigrants in those communities, I believe the whole enterprise may be bound to fail if we limit ourselves to thinking that a target will save francophone communities in future.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Mr. Traisnel: There’s a lot that I could say, but I will say two things. The first has everything to do with access to information. This may seem paradoxical, but immigrants are often unaware of the information that’s produced, particularly when they’re planning to migrate. A serious effort should really be made in that area.
The second point is that we should abandon an exclusively accounting-style approach based on targets. Targets are a means, not an end. We need to find a way to build francophone communities that are characterized perhaps by more diversity and inclusivity and that are more open and help create a much more dynamic francophonie.
That obviously requires strong and, in some instances, problematic relations among the identities as they currently exist, particularly the Acadian identity, the Acadian nation the Acadian people, which does in fact exist, but we must determine how to include immigrants and how to open that Acadian identity to diversity. That’s the issue facing francophone minority communities.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Traisnel.
Senator Mockler: I’d like to congratulate you on your work, Mr. Chair, because the issues being discussed here are very important and we have little time. Perhaps you’ll have an opportunity to ask the witnesses to appear before our committee again.
I’d like to discuss a few issues that are being debated in the same way as when I sat in the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick. I’ve previously been responsible for files concerning the francophonie and immigration. Improvements have definitely been made since that time.
It’s true that Quebec plays an important role in official languages, particularly for the people of Acadie and populations outside Quebec, whether in Ontario or western Canada.
For some time now, I’ve worked closely with Minister Sonia LeBel, who says that the Quebec government has a long tradition of cooperation with many partners, particularly with the Atlantic provinces. It’s thanks to the role that Quebec plays within Canada that we’re able to discuss the language of Molière this evening.
I have a few questions for our three witnesses. If they can’t answer my questions, perhaps we can have another debate at another meeting.
Should the 1991 Canada-Québec Accord relating to Immigration and Temporary Admission of Aliens be updated to promote francophone immigration to our country?
That being said, what impact has the accord had on the development and vitality of francophone communities outside Quebec and across Canada? Second, how can we reconcile Quebec’s objectives for maintaining its francophone character with Canada’s objectives for maintaining the demographic weight of francophones outside Quebec?
I’d like to hear your comments on that subject.
Mr. Corbeil: I’ll answer briefly. That’s a complex question that would require a lot of time to answer. What must be borne in mind is that dialogue is necessary. I don’t think Quebec currently wants to engage in a fuller discussion about harmonizing Quebec’s immigration objectives with immigration objectives outside Quebec.
There’s a problem with that kind of attitude, if I may put it that way, in that immigration is in fact taking place. It must be understood that francophone immigrants outside Quebec are coming out winners in exchanges with Quebec, by which I mean more francophone immigrants are leaving Quebec to live outside Quebec than the reverse. Consequently, for all kinds of reasons, Quebec clearly prefers to maintain a target of approximately 52,000 or 53,000 immigrants because it believes there are issues regarding French and the integration of immigrants within the French fact in Quebec. Since we’ve seen an announcement, as I said earlier, concerning a target of 450,000 immigrants outside Quebec, failing a fuller and more serious dialogue between Quebec and the francophone communities outside Quebec on harmonizing to immigration perspectives, I believe that poses a real problem.
It’s clear right now that the only advantage for Canada outside Quebec is that francophone immigrants are leaving Quebec to settle in the Outaouais and elsewhere, particularly in Toronto, because job prospects may be better there.
Mr. Traisnel: With respect to the senator’s last question, which is clearly relevant — and Jean-Pierre Corbeil is right on this matter — Quebec needs to set in motion a more systematic dialogue. There are nevertheless initiatives with francophone minority communities. However, as part of our research, we questioned francophone immigrants who had decided to leave Acadia. We wanted to know why they were leaving Acadia, and found that they sometimes just wanted to move. There may be room for a possible agreement between Quebec and francophone communities outside Quebec, insofar as the issue of retention is inextricably bound up with mobility. There might be some Quebecers who want to take a chance on working outside Quebec, in our communities, and conversely, people who perhaps feel ill at ease doing so because their English is not good enough to be able to go to Quebec.
There is a sort of back-and-forth dynamic that could definitely benefit Quebec and the francophone minority communities.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Traisnel.
Mr. Sall, you have time for a final short comment.
Mr. Sall: It’s difficult to sign agreements with Quebec on immigration, because the provinces are also in competition to attract immigrants. It’s all structured in such a way that immigration is a shared jurisdiction between the provinces and the federal government. I can’t see at what level one would exchange immigrants between Quebec and New Brunswick, because once immigrants are permanent residents, they can go and settle wherever they want. From that standpoint, it strikes me as rather unrealistic.
The Chair: Thank you very much Mr. Traisnel, Mr. Corbeil and Mr. Sall.
We are getting to the end of the first hour of the meeting. We could have continued longer. I think that you have highlighted the complexity, scope and diversity of the issues affecting francophone minority community immigration. We discussed the Atlantic region at length, but I believe it applies to the whole country.
I want to thank you for your generous contribution to this debate. You have given us a lot to think about for this study, which we are just beginning. I believe that we will have some very productive exchanges.
We are now going to make a smooth transition, without a break, to the next group of witnesses from Statistics Canada.
For the second part of our meeting, we have with us some officials from Statistics Canada, who will also speak to us about francophone minority community immigration through Statistics Canada’s lens.
With us today are Laurent Martel, the Director of the Centre for Demography and Éric Caron Malenfant, the centre’s Assistant Director.
Welcome to you both. Thank you for having taken the time to be here today. Following your presentations, there will be a round of questions from the senators.
You have the floor, Mr. Martel.
Laurent Martel, Director, Centre for Demography, Statistics Canada: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Honourable senators, thank you for giving us this opportunity to contribute to your work on the role of immigration for the future of French-speaking minority communities.
My name is Laurent Martel. I am the Director of the Centre for Demography. I’m responsible for Statistics Canada’s Language Statistics Program, along with my colleague here with me today, Assistant Director Éric Caron Malenfant, who you can also see on the screen. The two of us are in charge of the language statistics program at Statistics Canada.
As the national statistical agency, Statistics Canada collects information on Canada’s immigrant populations and language groups, as well as other populations, on an ongoing basis.
The census also plays a key role in this regard, providing a detailed snapshot every five years of languages and immigration — and this is very important — at various geographic levels and evidence-based data that inform many public policies.
On August 17, Statistics Canada will be publishing an updated picture of linguistic diversity based on the new data from the 2021 Census. The results on immigration will follow on October 26, and then on languages of work on November 30, as well as the very first data on children eligible for education in the minority official language under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. These data will be the first major component of a data ecosystem on these children that Statistics Canada intends to develop in the next few months and that will also include data from the new Survey on the Official Language Minority Population.
Using censuses prior to 2021 and other data sources, we were able to determine that between 2001 and 2016, the demographic weight of the French-speaking population in Canada outside Quebec, measured using the criterion of first official language spoken, was declining. This does not mean that this population decreased in absolute numbers, because it actually increased slightly, but it grew less quickly than the rest of the population, hence the decline in the percentage of the population it represents.
At this stage of our presentation, we feel it is important to specify that this observation applies to all of Canada outside Quebec and that the situation may be different at a regional level. Here, I am drawing a parallel with the previous meeting because these factors were mentioned by Mr. Corbeil and Mr. Traisnel.
Before discussing the specific role of immigration, we would like to quickly mention the reasons for this decline in the demographic weight of the francophone population outside Quebec: a) The natural components of population renewal, being births and deaths, as a whole, are unfavourable to maintaining the demographic weight of the French-speaking population in Canada outside Quebec; b) language transitions that happen between the parents and their children and over a lifetime for a given individual generally favour English, again adversely affecting French-speaking minority communities.
In this context, it’s clear that migration plays an increasingly important role in the demographic dynamic of Canada’s minority francophone populations. This is also true for the entire Canadian population, where natural increase is declining; demographic growth in Canada is therefore increasingly dependent on immigration.
Migration includes both international immigration and migration between regions, for example between Quebec and other regions outside Quebec.
From 2006 to 2016, the French-speaking population outside Quebec posted population gains overall from its migratory exchanges with Quebec. In other words, internal migration was a positive factor during this period. To illustrate the importance of these migratory exchanges with Quebec over time, it’s important to note that according to the 2016 Census, approximately one in five French-speaking people in Canada outside Quebec was born in Quebec.
The proportion of international immigrants in this population was also on the rise, indicating a positive contribution of immigration to these communities. It increased from 9% in 2001 to 13% in 2016.
If we factor in both internal and international migration, approximately one in three French-speaking people in Canada outside Quebec came from either Quebec or abroad. However, the contribution of migration does not make up for other deficits, particularly natural increase, hence the drop in demographic weight mentioned at the beginning of our presentation.
Of course, I’d like to repeat that these components play out differently from one region of the country to another. For example, it’s been shown that the transmission of French is higher in northern New Brunswick and in Ontario than in the other provinces. The demographic weight of French-speaking immigration is also higher in some large cities, such as Toronto.
With these observations in mind, what does the future hold? If I could tell you, I’d probably be rich. In fact, as a demographer, I’m probably already rich since our toolbox comprises population projections, which are very useful to get an idea of the trajectories of populations and test different scenarios on how these populations might evolve. Ultimately, they help to inform decision-making today.
In 2017, Statistics Canada published projections on language groups. A powerful model was used to produce these detailed projections, which also accounted for many changing factors, including language transfers from generation to generation and over a lifetime.
We were also able to create multiple scenarios — sometimes theoretical — to understand the impact of a single factor, for example.
These complex projections used the 2011 National Household Survey as a starting point, and projected populations until 2036.
From these projections, we learned several things. Here are a few to keep in mind as I wrap things up.
If the trends in the level of immigration and its composition observed in these projections were to continue, we would see a further decline in the demographic weight of the French-speaking population in Canada outside Quebec. That is very clear.
An increase, as was observed recently, or a decrease in immigration could, with all other things being equal, lead to an increase or decrease this population in absolute numbers, but would have little effect on the course of its demographic weight, if the composition of immigration does not change significantly. This is because increased immigration, with no change in its composition, would also lead to an increase in the other language groups.
We ran a simulation in which we changed the composition of immigration, rather than the number, in order to keep the weight of the French-speaking population in each province at its 2016 level, which was just under 4%. For Canada as a whole, the proportion of French-speaking immigrants required to meet this objective would be above 4%. Immigration must also be able to offset the effects of other components, such as natural growth and language transfers, which often do not contribute to maintaining this proportion, as I said at the beginning of the presentation.
The results also vary depending on the province or the territory: Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia would need to increase this proportion the least, while Manitoba and Prince Edward Island would need to increase it the most.
In addition, other scenarios isolated the potential effect of other factors on the evolution of this demographic weight. They revealed that favourable migratory exchanges with Quebec could slow, rather than completely halt, the projected decline. Higher transmission of French from parents to children would have a positive demographic effect similar to the one I just mentioned in connection with internal migration.
In conclusion, it’s clear from the results of the projections that francophone immigration outside Quebec could maintain the demographic weight of that French-speaking population if the proportion it represents among all immigrants were higher than the demographic weight of French-speaking people outside Quebec.
We also have to keep in mind that the situations are very different from one region to the next; that’s very important. New detailed projection exercises would be useful to measure this proportion regionally given the upcoming results of the 2021 Census on the language situation, which will be available very soon, and the new Immigration Plan published in February by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, which forecast a relatively strong increase in immigration to Canada.
Éric and I thank you for your attention and we would be very happy to answer any questions you may have.
The Chair: Thank you very much for this presentation, Mr. Martel and Mr. Caron Malenfant.
We will now move on to the round of questions. Once again, we will have five minutes for the questions and answers in the first round.
Senator Poirier: Thanks to our witnesses for being here. I have only one question, and it’s about research and data collection.
Based on your experience, does the government need to improve its data collection on francophone immigration to improve francophone immigration policies?
If so, what data do you feel would be useful in increasing francophone immigration to francophone minority communities?
Mr. Martel: Thank you for that interesting question, senator.
Jean-Pierre Corbeil, in the first part of the committee meeting, also mentioned that. There is already a lot of data available, including census information. Of course we have the “traditional” variables that have been used in the census a number of times now, such as first language learned, language spoken most often at home and knowledge of the official languages.
We added some other factors to those I mentioned at the beginning of my presentation, like language of schooling, to meet the requirement to collect data on children eligible for schooling in the minority language.
There is the data being added as we speak. We also have the new post-census language survey which will soon be used to collect data.
I therefore believe that we now have a major body of information. We also have some administrative data, for example about the children who attend minority-language schools across Canada. This information is being collected by Statistics Canada at the provincial and territorial level, and of course there is the well-known Canadian immigration database that was referred to by Jean-Pierre Corbeil in the first part of this meeting.
There is already a lot of data. We added to this body of data in 2021 and will soon do so in 2022. So that’s my answer. I think that we can do a great deal with the existing data.
One thing you mentioned was internal migration by francophones. We can already obtain a pretty good approximation with the mobility data in the census. Canadians are asked: “Where did you live one year ago?” and “Where did you live five years ago?” By looking at the answers to these questions in the census, we can learn a lot about the mobility of Canadians, including immigrants and francophone immigrants.
I’ll stop there. Perhaps Éric might like to add something?
Éric Caron Malenfant, Assistant Director, Centre for Demography, Statistics Canada: No. That covers the sources of current and future data pretty well.
Senator Poirier: If you think the amount of data you have is enough to meet requirements, why are we unable to meet the immigration targets?
We haven’t met the targets; we haven’t even reached 4%. The data is there to provide an answer, but at the same time, it doesn’t meet our needs.
Mr. Martel: One of the things Statistics Canada suggested, and which is useful in decision-making, is what I referred to in my speech, and that’s demographic projections.
It’s only to be expected that, as a demographer, I would want to mention how useful demographic projects can be, because these projections make it possible for us today to test multiple evolution scenarios for one or more factors at the same time. We can understand the isolated effect of a single factor to see population trajectories for the future.
Statistics Canada recently made some new projection tools available to decision-makers that will clarify debates and perhaps even make better-informed decisions for the future of these communities.
Senator Poirier: Do I have a little bit of time left?
The Chair: Yes, just a bit. Go ahead.
Senator Poirier: My question is about the most recent 4.4% target. What do you believe are the factors, federal or provincial, that led to this failure?
Do we need to make adjustments? Was the target wrong from the outset?
Mr. Martel: That too is a very appropriate question.
My answer would be to tell you, once again thanks to our projections, that we could do things like test of various levels in the composition of francophone immigration within Canadian immigration generally, particularly in view of the new levels that the Department of Immigration recently announced. Using the tools we now have, and which we did not have 10 or 5 years ago, we could easily test different levels and acquire an understanding of a threshold, for example, that would maintain the demographic weight in a number of francophone communities outside Quebec, while continuing to use a regional approach. It would even be possible to set a proportion for certain regions in relation to other regions.
That’s how I think our new tools will enable us to improve the decisions that you will soon be making.
Senator Poirier: Thank you very much.
The Chair: Before giving the floor to Senator Dagenais, I have a minor question that may be complementary to that one.
Mr. Martel, does your data enable you to identify the different categories of immigrants who come to Canada? By this I mean economic immigrants, foreign students, temporary workers?
Can you get specific data for these various categories?
Mr. Martel: That’s a highly relevant question, given the different categories of immigrants to Canada. There are four major categories, but it can be subdivided even further.
Éric, I’m going to rely on you as well, to make sure I don’t mislead the senators.
The census does not provide us with data by category of immigrant. However, under certain conditions, Statistics Canada can establish linkages with administrative or other databases that would allow us to enrich our sources of data, for example in terms of the immigration category under which a Canadian immigrant settled in the country.
I can also say that in our detailed demographic projection toolbox, which I mentioned in my presentation, we included immigrant categories. We can even, if certain people want it, develop different scenarios pertaining to things like the proportion of economic immigrants or the proportion of immigrants admitted to Canada for family reunification, and include the data in our projections to see what that can give us in future.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Senator Dagenais: My first question is for Mr. Martel. If Statistics Canada had more resources, would you be able to dig deeper into the profile of immigrants who actually use French within the family and in the workplace?
Mr. Martel: That’s a good question. I think we have the data needed to do that. I believe that it would be possible with the existing data. However, as for incorporating that into the projection models... We would need to see what the components required to project this kind of variable would be. There are often underlying variables that also require projection, but I think that we could do that work. I will now ask Mr. Caron Malenfant to finish answering the question.
Mr. Caron Malenfant: Yes, I could add that the census provides a lot of information about the languages spoken at home and at work as well. We can also distinguish between immigrants and non-immigrants, by region and by the various characteristics collected via the census. The census asks about the language spoken most often at home and other languages spoken at home. There is also a question about the language used most often at work and other languages used at work.
Given that we know an immigrant’s status, age, occupation and the industry in which that immigrant works, the census can be used to obtain highly detailed profiles of the immigrant population in terms of various linguistic characteristics. There is also data about mother tongue and knowledge of languages. Can people speak French, English or both languages? The census can be used to obtain information for profiles like these.
Senator Dagenais: On to my next question now. Does the research you have been doing provide information about the number of French-speaking Canadians and immigrants who have put their language on hold to gain access to jobs, particularly higher-level jobs, in the country’s major corporations?
Mr. Martel: I know that we did work just recently on the relationship between the language of schooling and language of work. Some studies are about to be published. Mr. Caron Malenfant, would you like to take this from here?
Mr. Caron Malenfant: I believe the census is a source of data that can provide this kind of information. Without necessarily saying that people have put their language on hold, we can determine whether people who use French at home, live outside Quebec and whose mother tongue is French use this language at work. Are they using a different language or are they using both French and English?
The vast majority of people use French or English at work. There has been a significant increase in the number of people whose mother tongue is a language other than French or English, and who speak this language at home. But at work, the official languages are those nearly always used. So there are many people who speak a language other than French or English who do not use their mother tongue at work, but who use French or English. The census allows us to identify these various profiles within the population.
Senator Dagenais: For a francophone who obtains a job for which bilingualism is required, do you know what proportion of the working day is spent speaking English? I would imagine this is something we have to know if we are to accurately measure the requirement to speak English.
Mr. Caron Malenfant: I don’t know that proportion.
Mr. Martel: Neither do I.
Mr. Caron Malenfant: So we’re talking about the number of people who generally speak French and about how much time they spend speaking another language every day, right? Who use English?
Senator Dagenais: Yes.
Mr. Caron Malenfant: I don’t think we can find the number of hours spent using another language at work. But we will soon have access to new information from the survey on the status of francophone minority language communities outside Quebec and anglophone minority communities in Quebec, which will collect more information about languages used at work. This will go beyond the questions asked in the census about the language used most often and the languages spoken regularly, which are already in the census. There will be additional questions about the context in which these languages are used, and with whom they are used. Is a language used to perform tasks or to speak with colleagues? There will be information on things like this in the new field survey to be conducted in 2022 on languages used at work. The census will also provide a lot of information, because it can tell us which languages are spoken most often and used on a regular basis at work.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Martel and Mr. Caron Malenfant.
Senator Gagné: Welcome Mr. Martel and Mr. Caron Malenfant. I just wanted to ask you a question, and I apologize if you already discussed this in your presentation. What is the definition of a French-speaking immigrant?
Mr. Martel: That’s a good question. I would say that a French-speaking immigrant is a person born abroad. The term French-speaking is used because we use the variable for the first official language spoken, which is often most relevant for immigrants, because their mother tongue may be neither French nor English, but they may also speak one of Canada’s two official languages. I think the first language spoken criterion is useful in connection with francophone immigration.
Senator Gagné: Has the definition used by the federal government changed over time?
Mr. Caron Malenfant: There are in fact several different ways of defining the French-speaking population. As Mr. Martel said, we often use the first official language spoken criterion. The criteria for first official language spoken have remained the same in recent years. The population can be defined on the basis of their knowledge of the official languages; that means the population that speaks French or whose mother tongue is French. There are also continuous data sets for these populations. By this I mean Statistics Canada data from the census. There is no official definition of a francophone immigrant, but several tools are available to various users so that they can establish their own definition. At Statistics Canada, we often use first official language spoken.
Senator Gagné: When targets are being set, is the same definition that had an impact on reaching the 4% target still being used, or not necessarily?
Mr. Caron Malenfant: When simulation projections were done to determine the number of additional immigrants that would be required by province to maintain the demographic weight of the French-speaking population in each of the provinces, first official language spoken is used. It could have been based on other criteria, but the Department of Immigration’s target was established on the basis of first official language spoken. The 4.4% target was the proportion of people whose first official language spoken was French in the 2001 Census. So for the projections, we used the same criterion.
Senator Gagné: Could you comment on the transmission of French to children of French-speaking immigrants outside Quebec, and how would this transmission compare to the children of francophone parents?
Mr. Caron Malenfant: That’s a very good question. We would need to check for French-speaking immigrants. For the French-speaking population, what we can say is that there is such transmission through the intermediary of the French-speaking population outside Quebec. This was mentioned in passing by Laurent Martel in his opening speech. The transmission of French outside Quebec is incomplete.
One might say that through intergenerational transmission, there are some transfers to English that are closely related to exogamy and the fact that in certain circumstances, the two spouses speak a different language and use English with their children. That can be an important factor for the decline in the demographic weight of the French-speaking population.
In the projections, when a simulation was run to see what would happen if there was higher transmission of French, it showed that the demographic weight was declining more slowly.
As Mr. Martel mentioned, it varies enormously from place to place and it’s related to the geographic concentration of francophone populations in some regions. There is a higher level of French transmission in regions where there is a larger concentration of francophones, such as northern New Brunswick, which was mentioned by Mr. Martel, or some regions in Ontario, whereas in other locations, there is less transmission towards French and more towards English.
Senator Gagné: It would be interesting to see the comparisons.
Mr. Caron Malenfant: For immigrants, that’s definitely something that could be looked at.
The Chair: Thanks for your responses.
Senator Mégie: I have a question for Mr. Martel.
You said in your speech that increased immigration, without any changes in composition, would also increase the size of other language groups. Does that mean it would not promote francophone immigration at all, and that we would fail to meet our goal?
If that’s what it means, then what composition should we be promoting?
Mr. Martel: Our projections have in fact shown that an increase in immigration, without a change in its composition, for example in the number of francophone immigrants, the situation would not really change. The decline in the demographic weight of French-speaking populations outside Quebec would continue to decline. Immigration would contribute to the same extent and even more so to other language groups like non-official language populations or anglophone immigrants. The other populations continue to grow more quickly than the French-speaking population outside Quebec, so the situation would not change.
A change needs to be made in the composition of immigration, and the much-discussed proportion of francophone immigrants will have to change in future if we want to maintain the relative weight of francophone communities outside Quebec. What we also found was that this proportion had to be higher than the current proportion of francophones outside Quebec. Why? Because other factors that have a negative impact on maintaining this demographic weight need to be offset.
So it’s not simply a matter of trying to achieve the same demographic weight for francophones outside Quebec. What’s needed is a higher target to counteract the other negative impacts.
Do you have anything to add, Éric?
Mr. Caron Malenfant: I’d like to add something to link it to another factor that was mentioned in the introduction.
Increased immigration, even without a change in its composition, as Mr. Martel mentioned, would not slow down the decline in the demographic weight of the French-speaking population outside Quebec. But an increase in immigration would increase the number of French-speaking people outside Quebec. There’s a distinction to be made between the number and the proportion. If there was an increase in immigration and this increase was proportional for each of the languages, then the number of French-speaking people outside Quebec would be higher. That’s what the projections showed: By increasing or decreasing immigration, the number increased or decreased, but it didn’t have much of an impact on demographic weight, meaning the percentage of the French-speaking population outside Quebec.
Senator Mégie: For the census, we all know that in 2011, the Conservative government announced that the long-form census would henceforth only be completed on a voluntary basis. After that, the forms became shorter. Do you think that would have an impact on your demographic projections?
Did the pandemic affect your projections? If so, how?
Mr. Martel: Thank you, senator. Those are good questions and I’ll make a start on answering them.
The voluntary basis 2011 Census, which became the long-form census questionnaire, and then the National Household Survey, is something I mentioned in my presentation. In fact, our initial language projections, released by Statistics Canada in 2017, used the National Household Survey as a starting point. This decision did not have an impact on the projections. We were able to make very successful use of the National Household Survey to make projections about the major language groups in Canada, including French-speaking populations living outside Quebec.
As for the pandemic, it’s important to understand that a census is a snapshot of the population at a very specific time, namely the day of the census, which was May 11, 2021. This snapshot shows what impact the pandemic had on certain aspects. For others, the consequences will show over the longer term. I’m thinking for example of the impact of the pandemic on the fertility rate of Canadian couples. A certain amount of time will have to go by before we see how the pandemic affected the fertility of couples in Canada. The census can sometimes capture some impacts of the pandemic, but less so for other situations. When we can start talking about the effects of the pandemic in light of the 2021 Census, we do that, and we did so in February when we presented the figures on demographic growth.
Will the pandemic affect the demographic projections? When we run our series of projections, we will definitely factor in the effects of the pandemic. As for projections with respect to fertility, and the internal migration of Canadians, the pandemic may well have had an impact. We will, of course, take this into account when we develop our future evolution scenarios.
The Chair: Thank you very much for your answers.
Senator Clement: Thank you for your presentations.
Senators Gagné and Poirier asked the questions I was going to ask, but I have another one.
Based on your data, are there any regions in particular that did better in terms of increasing the size of their francophone population, or at least having less of a reduction? If so, could the data give us indications about why they did better?
Mr. Martel: That’s also a very good question. I’ll make a start and then ask Éric to provide more details.
The answer is yes, I know that there are some regions that did better than others. In fact in some regions of Canada, the demographic weight of francophones outside Quebec did not decrease. That then is the evidence that there were very different situations. It’s one of the messages I wanted to get to you today, which is the importance of taking regional variations into consideration. I think that others, earlier in the meeting, did the same thing that I did.
For example, there are places like the greater Toronto area, that receive a relatively large influx of immigrants every year, because many Canadian immigrants choose to settle there. Of course the francophone community in Toronto receives a certain number of these immigrants every year, and some of them, though not very many, speak French. That of course increases the size of the francophone population living in Toronto. The situation is probably very different in northern Ontario for francophone communities that receive far fewer immigrants each year, and very few francophone immigrants.
Éric may want to add something to what I’ve said.
Mr. Caron Malenfant: That’s right. There are major differences from one region to another. One of our simulations clearly showed the extent to which immigration had to be increased to maintain the demographic weight.
Some regions were excluded, including Newfoundland and Labrador, and the Territories, because the demographic weight projections were not downward in these regions because of their migratory patterns. We also saw that the situation was very different from region to region. As Mr. Martel just mentioned, Toronto gets a lot of immigrants. In fact Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia receive many immigrants. In the simulation we ran in these regions, the increase required to maintain demographic weight was lower than elsewhere. So significant differences were identified, and the migratory patterns play an important role, although they are not the only factor.
Senator Clement: I’m less interested in the situation in Toronto. I’m from Cornwall, Ontario, and I’m more interested in the dynamics of small centres, which have more trouble attracting and retaining francophone immigrants.
Did your regional data help to shape the government’s policy announced in February 2022?
Mr. Martel: Statistics Canada works very closely with many federal departments to help with their decision making. We contribute to IRCC’s development of its immigration plans by providing data, and sometimes even the outcomes of demographic projections, in areas like the ethnocultural diversity of Canada’s population. Scenarios are drawn up using different numbers of immigrants to determine the impact of various levels of immigration on Canada’s population from different standpoints. So I’d say that these are things Statistics Canada does every day.
I would add that for smaller urban centres, the distribution pattern for immigrants in Canada has been somewhat different in recent years, and is changing. Twenty years ago, large numbers of immigrants went to the three biggest cities in Canada, Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver. But things have been changing somewhat over the past 10 years. Our immigrants are attracted to the regions partly on the basis of their economic vitality and the fact that there are existing immigrant communities, which can play a key role in the integration for new immigrants. These are factors that perform an important role in the capacity of small urban centres to attract immigrants, including French-speaking immigrants.
Once again, Éric might want to add something.
Mr. Caron Malenfant: I don’t have much to add, except perhaps to say, once again, that the census provides information about each of the regions. We can get extremely detailed linguistic data on a regional scale to help monitor the situation.
Senator Clement: Thank you very much.
Senator Dalphond: I’d like to thank our guests. I have two questions.
With the help of your toolbox, can you measure the use of French at home in minority communities by francophone immigrants whose mother tongue is French? Is the rate comparable to the use of a different mother tongue for immigrants who speak other languages? In other words, are we seeing the same language transfer to English?
Mr. Martel: I’m not sure that I’ve seen studies on that. Éric, I need your help to answer this specific question on the use of French at home. I don’t remember seeing any recent studies on that.
Mr. Caron Malenfant: You’re talking about the use of French at home by people who speak a third language?
Senator Dalphond: Well, I’m talking about people whose mother tongue was French, who immigrated to a minority language community in Canada, outside Quebec. Are we seeing the same language transfer to English, as for people who come here and speak another language, like Italian or German?
Mr. Caron Malenfant: That’s a very good question. Provisionally — because we have to check and follow-up with you — I’d say that immigrants whose mother tongue is French and who live in a region outside Quebec undergo several transfers. There are losses to English. A relatively large number of people use English at home. Your question asking whether the rate is comparable to what happens with people who speak of third language is a very good one. We’ll have to get the data to you and follow-up. This information can be obtained from the census. However, there are some net losses for French-speaking immigrants. There are more transfers to English than the other way around.
Senator Dalphond: My second question is about deciding on the language of schooling. Do immigrants to Canada whose mother tongue is French choose to send their children to a French or an English school in a minority community in the same proportion as francophones born in Canada?
Mr. Martel: Do you know the answer to that Éric? That’s a very narrow question. I’m not sure that studies or numbers have been published on that subject recently.
Mr. Caron Malenfant: I believe that takes us back to the issue of children eligible for elementary and secondary French schooling in the minority official language. On the basis of the 2021 Census, information will be released in November that will show, for the whole population, the extent to which people attended French-language programs outside Quebec. This will include information about immersion programs. The survey on French-speaking minority community populations will also measure other facets of post-secondary education, such as which language is chosen when the time comes for people to choose a university.
So that’s one dimension, but at the local level, everything depends on the presence or absence of French-language institutions, meaning elementary and secondary schools. Everything depends on where immigrants settled and whether or not they have options. Likewise for post-secondary and university education. People will often move to another city to attend a post-secondary educational institution. We will have more information on all of these patterns very soon, based on the new survey of official language minorities. Needless to say, some opt for French schools. As for proportions, we should have data on that very soon.
Senator Mockler: Mr. Martel and Mr. Caron Malenfant, I’d like to congratulate you on your extremely relevant work on behalf of the social and economic development of our communities. In connection with demographic projections, I’d like to talk about the partners who make collaboration possible when demographic projections are studied.
I have two questions. First, based on your experience, should the federal government increase or review its collaboration with provincial and territorial governments on immigration? How should this exercise be conducted?
Second, what concrete form should be taken by the federal government’s commitment to supporting immigration as a key community development sector, compared to how this is dealt with in Bill C-13?
Mr. Martel: Thank you for those astute questions, senator. They are complex.
I would say that in carrying out its mandate, Statistics Canada is already working closely with several provinces and territories, and even with some municipal bodies. This includes areas like demographic projections and demographic estimates, which are based on a partnership between Statistics Canada and the provinces and territories. We are in contact with them on a daily basis.
We sometimes use provincial and territorial data in making our own demographic estimates and projections. The provinces and territories constitute a key partner for my own work at the Centre for Demography. There are others, and we hold federal, provincial and territorial meetings every year to take stock of the work and discuss future collaborations between Statistics Canada and the provinces and territories. In the field of statistics, the language projections released in 2017 were the outcome of many consultations with our outside partners, and in some instances with other provinces and territories. These are held on a regular basis.
For your second question, I’ll call upon Mr. Caron Malenfant. I believe you were speaking about the commitment to, and role of, immigration as a key sector. My view of this is that currently, Canada’s demographic growth has been steady, but largely based on immigration. We have major challenges to meet with respect to workforce renewal and labour shortages. Immigration is increasingly becoming one of the ways to deal with these Canada-wide challenges. The role of immigration in maintaining the vitality and demographic weight of French-language populations outside Quebec becomes crucial because the other growth factors, like natural population growth, are no longer as significant, and negative trends have surfaced for other factors, such as the various types of language transitions. So yes, immigration is becoming a key factor in terms of demographic trends, along with its attendant consequences.
I often say that immigration is still highly concentrated in certain regions of Canada. One might even say that there are immigration “winners and losers” because some regions receive very few at the moment, for all sorts of reasons. Would you like to expand on that Mr. Caron Malenfant?
The Chair: Please be brief, because we need to wrap up our meeting soon.
Mr. Caron Malenfant: I don’t have anything to add.
The Chair: Senator Mockler, we’ll have to take your question at another meeting.
Thank you very much, Mr. Martel and Mr. Caron Malenfant, for your presentations and your helpful answers. You have demonstrated the important contribution of Statistics Canada to our study, and also how it is helping us work our way towards more francophone immigration to Canada.
Thank you for coming. Thank you, colleagues, for your questions and your commitment, and I’d also like to thank the staff. I want to remind subcommittee members that they need to reconnect on Teams for our meeting. We need to leave Zoom mode and connect to Teams. Thank you very much, and I’ll see you next week.
(The meeting is adjourned.)