Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue No. 4 - Evidence - Meeting of May 16, 2016
OTTAWA, Monday, May 16, 2016
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day at 5:30 p.m. to elect an acting chair and 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.
[Translation]
Maxwell Hollins, Clerk of the Committee: Good evening. Welcome to this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages.
Honourable senators, as clerk of the committee, I must inform you of the unavoidable absence of the chair and deputy chair, and preside over the election of an acting chair.
I am ready to receive a motion to that effect.
Senator Mockler: Mr. Hollins, can I nominate someone even though I am here as a replacement?
Mr. Hollins: Yes, of course. As a replacement, you are a member of the committee for the duration of this meeting.
[English]
Senator Mockler: I would like to nominate Senator McIntyre.
[Translation]
Mr. Hollins: Are there any other nominations?
Is it your pleasure to adopt the motion?
Hon. senators: Yes.
Mr. Hollins: Thank you. I declare the motion carried, and I invite the Honourable Senator McIntyre to take the chair.
Senator Paul E. McIntyre (Acting Chair) in the chair.
The Acting Chair: Honourable senators, we are waiting for Minister McCallum to arrive.
Good evening. I am Paul McIntyre, a senator from New Brunswick. I am pleased to be chairing the meeting this evening.
Before I give the floor to the witnesses, I invite the senators to introduce themselves.
Senator Gagné: Raymonde Gagné from Manitoba.
Senator Mockler: Percy Mockler from New Brunswick
Senator Seidman: Judith Seidman from Quebec.
Senator Munson: Jim Munson from Ontario, but my heart is in New Brunswick.
[English]
Senator Doyle: Norman Doyle, Newfoundland and Labrador. I'm sitting in for Senator Poirier.
[Translation]
Senator Jaffer: Mobina Jaffer from British Columbia.
The Acting 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.
We are pleased to welcome the Honourable John McCallum, P.C., M.P., Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship. He is joined by Stefanie Beck, Assistant Deputy Minister of Corporate Services at Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada; and Corinne Prince St-Amand, Director General, Integration-Foreign Credentials Referral Office, in the same department.
On behalf of the committee members, thank you for participating in this meeting.
[English]
Minister, I understand you have opening remarks. Therefore, in the interests of allowing as much discussion as possible in the time available to us, you are requested to please limit your opening statement to no more than 10 minutes total.
[Translation]
Hon. John McCallum, P.C., M.P., Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship: Thank you and good evening, Mr. Chair. I was going to introduce my colleagues, but you have already done so. Sorry for being a little late. I won't speak for very long.
I'm pleased to have this opportunity today to appear before this committee as you continue your study on the application of the Official Languages Act. I would like to begin by acknowledging the work of my colleague, Mélanie Joly, the Minister of Canadian Heritage. She is developing, as part of her mandate, a multi-year official languages plan that will be critical in our work to support official language minority communities. Maybe she has already spoken before your committee, I don't know. She's in charge of official languages, as you know.
[English]
Over the past several years, my department has taken many steps to attract more French-speaking newcomers to Canada. We'll continue to do that. We undertake a number of activities to encourage francophone immigration and francophone minority communities. We're working to achieve a francophone immigration target of 4 per cent of economic immigrants by 2018 and 4.4 per cent of the total number of immigrants settling outside Quebec by 2023. Sadly we are quite a long way from hitting those targets as we speak.
First, my department regularly promotes francophone minority communities to French-speaking foreign nationals abroad.
[Translation]
We have increased our promotion and recruitment activities abroad to include more focused activities led by our missions to promote immigration to francophone minority communities. Information sessions are also available by webconference to immigration candidates around the world, and many events were organized to promote the Express Entry system.
Second, my department encourages the use of the Provincial Nominee Program as an avenue to permanent residency for potential French-speaking newcomers. Several provinces also have their own francophone immigration targets.
[English]
Third, my department pursues collaboration with francophone minority communities to explore new measures to increase the numbers of French-speaking newcomers.
Fourth, we work with employers to promote skilled francophone foreign nationals for permanent jobs in Canada. As you probably are aware, I recently announced that my department will re-establish the labour market impact assessment exemption for skilled francophone temporary workers.
[Translation]
Starting June 1, 2016, the Mobilité francophone stream of the International Mobility Program will exempt employers from the LMIA process when they hire francophone workers on a temporary basis in managerial, professional and skilled trades occupations from abroad to work in francophone communities outside Quebec. This will make it easier for employers to efficiently recruit French-speaking foreign workers for highly-skilled jobs on a temporary basis.
We know that many successful permanent resident applicants start out as temporary workers in Canada. We believe that, once they are in Canada and working, many will want to make that commitment to stay for the long term and become Canadian.
[English]
It's incumbent on employers, communities and governments to work closely together to ensure that this new Mobilité francophone stream is used effectively.
Let's not forget the goal of this program: The retention of new French-speaking workers in francophone minority communities.
Much remains to be done and challenges remain. For example, the proportion of French-speaking economic permanent residents admitted to Canada outside of Quebec has remained at 1.4 per cent of the national total, far from that 4 per cent target I mentioned earlier.
[Translation]
I have said in the past that international students are an important component of Canada's immigration system, and that we need to do more to encourage them and, more importantly, help them stay in Canada after their studies are finished.
[English]
This is something I have said quite frequently. We are going to act on it. I think we should make it easier for international students to remain in Canada should they choose to do so. They were shortchanged in a number of ways by the Express Entry system, and it is difficult to think of a group more promising than international students to become future Canadians. Not only are they by definition educated, they also speak English or French, know something of the country and tend to be young, so they are just the kind of people we want. We will be taking measures to make access to Canada for international students as permanent residents easier. We've already made it easier for them to become citizens by restoring the 50 per cent credit for time spent in Canada into our Bill C-6.
This is not something that is exclusively of benefit for the francophone community. I think it is a benefit for all Canadians, including the francophone communities.
[Translation]
In January, I was in New Brunswick and met with Minister Francine Landry, who is responsible for the refugee file in New Brunswick. We spoke about the opportunity New Brunswick has to welcome refugees to communities of both official languages. She invited me to take part in the upcoming federal-provincial-territorial forum on francophone immigration. This event will bring together not only ministers of immigration but also ministers responsible for francophone affairs.
[English]
I'm looking forward to this conference in New Brunswick. I think it's in September, but I don't think a precise date has yet been given, unless it has and I'm not aware of it.
[Translation]
In March, I was able to meet with the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne, FCFA, at their tenth annual Journée de réflexion sur l'immigration francophone. I look forward to maintaining a warm relationship and collaboration with the FCFA. Today, I had the opportunity to meet with FCFA representatives.
[English]
I would also like to mention the Réseaux en immigration francophone, or Francophone Immigration Networks. Since their inception in 2003, these networks have helped foster dialogue about the needs of new francophone arrivals in all provinces outside Quebec.
[Translation]
In collaboration with local and regional partners, the Réseaux en immigration francophone have mobilized community players and governments, leading to better quality services for francophone newcomers.
This type of collaboration is increasingly important as we work to reach our targets, not only to attract French- speaking newcomers, but also to welcome, integrate, and retain them in francophone minority communities.
[English]
It's not in my speech, and perhaps there was a reason for that, but the last point I would comment on is that we're actively considering changing the definition of "francophone." I was speaking earlier today to the representatives of the francophone community, and they were in total agreement with this. Right now, the definition is based on one's maternal language, but the new definition would be based on —
[Translation]
— whether the person was comfortable in French.
[English]
The problem with the maternal language is if someone comes from Senegal, the maternal language may not be French or English but a local non-French, non-English language. However, those people in reality are francophones, and so the institutions agree that it is a more realistic and sensible definition of "francophone."
It also has the unintended consequence of boosting the percentage. I said the objective was 4 per cent. The reality today is 1.4 per cent, and I think under this new more realistic definition, that percentage might go to something in the order of 3 per cent, at least. I'm not suggesting we achieve our objectives by changing the definition, but if one has a better definition of what is a francophone and a by-product of that is to increase the percentage, then I guess we'll accept that.
[Translation]
Mr. Chair, this is the end of my presentation. Thank you, and I am ready to answer your questions.
[English]
The Acting Chair: Thank you, minister, for your opening statement.
[Translation]
We will start the question period with Senator Seidman.
[English]
Senator Seidman: Thank you very much, minister.
I'd like to ask you about the minority English language communities in Quebec, if I might.
In the past, IRCC has testified to this committee that it cannot undermine the provisions of the 1991 accord, and for that reason the department's options for supporting English-speaking Quebec are limited. Could you explain to us how a bilateral agreement can affect the IRCC's responsibilities under federal law to consult and support English-speaking Quebec?
Mr. McCallum: Of course we consult and support the English speakers of Quebec, just as we consult and support all communities, but if you are talking about our role in immigration, then under the Canada-Quebec accord, the Province of Quebec has primary responsibility for immigration. That means that in that domain, our responsibilities are less. While we undertake measures to support francophone immigration in provinces outside Quebec, because immigration is under our control in those provinces, we are less able to do so in Quebec where immigration is more under the authority of the Province of Quebec given this accord.
That being said, we do contribute to the English-speaking communities of Quebec in other ways. For example, our research team has funded 12 research projects on English-speaking immigration in Quebec. I recently reached out to the Quebec Community Groups Network to initiate a dialogue on how to combine our efforts to better ensure the development, sustainability and enhancement of Quebec's English-speaking communities.
I myself am an English-speaking Quebecer. It's still the case. I have lived half of my life in that province, so I know something about that community, and naturally I am a supporter of it, having been a member. There are various indirect ways that we try to support that community, but given the jurisdictional issue regarding immigration, we are more limited in what we can do.
Senator Seidman: Have you already had talks, then, with the Quebec Community Groups Network?
Mr. McCallum: I have not yet.
Senator Seidman: Is there a regular process of consultations that you're aware of between IRCC and the English community groups in Quebec?
Mr. McCallum: I have only been on this job six months, and I have not covered all the bases. Perhaps I will ask Stefanie Beck to deal with that question.
Stefanie Beck, Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada: Yes, there is, as a matter of fact. We will be meeting with Canadian Heritage and the English-language community groups of Quebec just next week. That will be a whole-of-government consultation to cover a range of different issues, but we also do meet bilaterally, if I can call it that. Most recently was last November when we organized a research symposium to go over the needs of the different communities and how we can respond.
Senator Seidman: What you are hearing from me is a certain degree of frustration because this is an ongoing issue, and I'm wondering if there is some way for this department to undertake some kind of study in partnership with the English-speaking community to look into ways that they might enhance that community's vitality in a fashion that would meet federal legislation and obligations while respecting the terms of the 1991 accord.
Mr. McCallum: Maybe I could say a brief comment, and Ms. Beck may have something further.
As I've said, we've funded 12 research projects on English-speaking immigration in Quebec. I don't know exactly what those were about, but maybe they address your point. Maybe Stefanie Beck can answer.
Ms. Beck: I think you're after something even more proactive, right?
Senator Seidman: Yes. Exactly.
Ms. Beck: That's what it sounds like to me. Of course, yes, we have done research on socio-economic profiles, retention and all of those kinds of things. It isn't clear what more we can do within the limitations of the accord.
With the annual consultations with Canadian Heritage, we were looking at what more we could do for the one hundred and twenty-fifth anniversary and whether or not there were possibilities with the English-language minority communities in Quebec. I know some proposals were received. I haven't seen the final outcome from colleagues at Canadian Heritage.
They also now have the multi-culturalism program that is being transferred from our department, and there may be some opportunities with that. As a matter of fact, by dint of well-timed lobbying, I've just agreed to go to Montreal and meet with the English-language communities myself.
[Translation]
Senator Jaffer: Mr. McCallum, thank you for being here with us today. I would also like to take the opportunity to thank you for and to congratulate you on your work with Syrian refugees. As you know, I visited Syrian refugee camps, and the situation is extremely difficult. Your work is very important. Thank you again for your dedication.
[English]
Minister, I had all kinds of questions for you before you said the thing that you were not supposed to say, and that is that you were loosening the definition. In my province, people who come from African Francophonie countries are very frustrated because they are often not considered francophone. I'm hoping that opening up the definition means they can now also go for education in French schools, because as of right now, they're not seen as French because they were not born here, according section 23 of the Charter. That's a huge issue in my province.
Perhaps it's a work-in-progress and you may not have an answer, and I respect that. I meet with them regularly, and they wanted me to bring this issue to you because they want their children to learn, as they say, their mother tongue. It may not be their mother tongue, but you know what I'm saying. They consider themselves francophone. I'd like to hear your point of view on that.
Mr. McCallum: First of all, thank you for your kind comments about the Syrian refugees. On the whole, that has gone very well and Canadians have reached out in an amazing way, to the point where I think one of the biggest challenges I have is I cannot deliver refugees fast enough to satisfy the overwhelming generosity of Canadians who want to take them in. It's a good kind of problem to have because it reflects the generosity of our people, but it's still a problem that we are addressing.
In terms of your question, I understand from what you said that you agree with this change of definition that I have proposed.
Senator Jaffer: Yes. I'm very happy with it.
Mr. McCallum: I'm not sure why it wasn't in my speech. Is it a secret of some sort? Because I do think it's a good idea, for the reasons you propose and for the reasons I set out. It seems to me definitely a good move. It also has the advantage that if people are officially classified as francophones, then they would be subject to certain financial benefits they might otherwise not receive. I think that would also be good for the people to whom you refer. I'm not quite sure when we would do this officially.
Ms. Beck: We will start counting them internally like that as of September, but from our research perspective, our portal and our systems won't change until early in the New Year, in 2017.
The minister is quite right; that's how we decide where the money goes. If we know there are larger pockets of francophones in British Columbia than we expected, then we know, for instance, we will need more French-language training there than is currently the case. It's really helpful for us.
Senator Jaffer: Minister, one wouldn't expect such an interest in French and the Francophonie in British Columbia. Let me draw a picture for you. We don't have to be Francophonie to want to learn French.
In my province — I'll give you a personal example — when my grandson began going to school, my daughter-in-law applied to 14 immersion schools, and he didn't make it into one. Later he did, but that was just through the persistence of my children. It shouldn't be that way.
What I'm saying by that is, yes, the francophones get language training and go to French school, but if we want to grow and truly be a bilingual country, then we have to find — this is not just directly to you, but you sit at cabinet, so I put this to you: We have to find ways to grow both languages. If we say francophones speak French but immigrants who come from other countries or an ethnic person who was born in Canada or have had family here for hundreds of years are not entitled to learn French because it's not their heritage, when will we grow this language? We will still be having this debate with my great, great, great grandchildren, and I want to stop it and declare that everyone should be entitled to learn both languages, as happens in Europe. I would love to hear what your vision is. How do we make our country bilingual?
Mr. McCallum: That's a very good question. I'm an Anglo Quebecer myself and have lived most of my life there, but I did live for four years in British Columbia, in Vancouver, so I know a little bit about the province.
There had been a school of thought that French doesn't really matter anymore in British Columbia; it's going to be either English or Mandarin. It's certainly true that Mandarin is becoming more and more important, and many people are learning it. You are not the first person I've heard say there are long waiting lists to get into French immersion, so the Mandarin theory is wrong in the sense of meaning that people no longer care about French. It's true they also want to learn Mandarin. There's nothing wrong with knowing three languages.
This is not my domain, but I know that two of my colleagues, Stéphane Dion and Mélanie Joly, are both very interested in this whole issue of bilingualism, and certainly Stéphane has spent many years on this issue. I will talk to them to see if there's something we as a government can do to encourage that vision. I certainly subscribe to it 100 per cent.
Senator Jaffer: Minister, I think this does fall on your doorstep, if I may humbly say so to you, because the world is changing. Yes, you can absolutely call Mandarin a second language in B.C. and that's great and that's fine and I would be proud of it. But if you were to go to Alliance Française today, it's full of Mandarin-speaking children. People get that you don't need barriers. You can learn as many languages as possible. It's an opportunity for your children and also to build your country.
I would like to suggest to you, minister, that you inform people that we are a bilingual country and one has the opportunity to speak both languages here. I think your department should do more in publicizing that we are a bilingual country.
Mr. McCallum: That's a good point. I was thinking more in terms of the provision of French immersion, but you're talking more in terms of describing to people who we are when they come to the country. We have a good opportunity to do that because we're in the process of rewriting the citizenship book. It's not that we're going to make huge changes necessarily, and we certainly don't want to politicize it in any way, but we want to describe Canada as we believe it to be.
I do hear what you just said about emphasizing this to these new citizens who will be reading this book and will have to learn what's in it. It's the basis of the citizenship test, so there's an incentive to study it. I think there's an opportunity to emphasize the linguistic duality at the moment these individuals arrive in our country more than perhaps has been the case in the past.
Corinne Prince St-Amand, Director General, Integration-Foreign Credentials Referral Office, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada: Just to add to what Minister McCallum has said, in terms of our pre-arrival integration services overseas, newcomers to Canada are advised about Canada's linguistic duality and that there are specific services available to them upon their arrival. They're also provided information that they can access before they leave their home countries that's on the Internet.
Ms. Beck: We are also reviewing those documents now to make sure it's very specific that you can live and work in both official languages in pretty much every part of Canada, particularly every province and territory. I think we would agree that helps with retention, because that's one of the issues. If our newcomers know that their children can go to kindergarten in French, right away that's one of the reasons people would continue on in the French language.
Our understanding from our colleagues at Statistics Canada, who probably presented here before, is that the numbers of children in immersion across the country have grown exponentially. We know there's an interest there, and it's a question of how you get them in early and maintain it after high school so that it doesn't disappear.
One of the benefits of working in the public service, as you know, is that we get a bilingual bonus. It's clear to people in the public service that if you speak both official languages, you will get a better job. Across Canada, we know it, but it would be a good thing for employers across Canada to understand that too.
Mr. McCallum: You also have an advantage as a politician if you know how to speak both languages.
[Translation]
Senator Gagné: Mr. McCallum, thank you for being here this evening. As part of the mandate given to you by the Prime Minister of Canada, you led the efforts to welcome the Syrian refugees. Your goal was to welcome 25,000 Syrian refugees. According to your website, I believe that 27,005 Syrian refugees have arrived. It is a wonderful humanitarian project, and I would like to congratulate you. You should be proud of this accomplishment.
Mr. McCallum: Thank you very much.
Senator Gagné: For immigration purposes, francophone minority communities have a stake in promoting themselves as host communities and recruiting francophone immigrants.
For example, Manitoba welcomed approximately 150 Syrian refugees. Most of them did not speak either English or French. How does your department plan to make adjustments in order to take positive steps toward involving communities in immigration from the start of the arrival process? There is language promotion, but also integration, housing, employment and education. Ultimately, an entire community is needed to support the immigrants. Obviously, this requires a great deal of resources. How do you plan to create exemplary welcome centres in our francophone communities?
Mr. McCallum: Thank you very much for these questions, and for your comment on the humanitarian aspect of our refugee project. I agree with you, but I would add one thing. At the start, it was indeed a humanitarian act. However, in the medium term, I believe that it is also an investment.
Which province do you come from?
Senator Gagné: Manitoba.
Mr. McCallum: This situation does not completely apply to Manitoba, but in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, the aging population is a much greater concern, and there is huge demand for immigrants. Our experience with refugees from Vietnam, Hungary, Ukraine and other countries showed that, after some time, the people manage quite well in Canada. It was therefore a good economic investment. It was, of course, a humanitarian act, but it was also fruitful in the long term for the country.
I would now like to answer your question about community involvement. One thing I learned from francophone groups outside Quebec that I spoke with today is that, in order to welcome francophone immigrants, it is not enough that the people in the welcome centres speak French. It is also important that the first people who welcome the immigrants represent francophone institutions.
It seems that these francophone groups are very welcoming to the immigrants. It may be because they need francophone immigrants more than anglophones, who already welcome many immigrants. They want the people welcoming the immigrants to be members of francophone institutions outside Quebec. They not only want French spoken to the immigrants, but they also want the immigrants to be welcomed in francophone communities outside Quebec.
One thing I will try to do for welcome centres funded by my department is promote the idea that the people welcoming the francophone immigrants should not only speak French, but should also be involved in francophone communities outside Quebec. I believe that this will help to provide a warmer welcome and maintain and enhance the vitality of these communities.
Ms. Prince St-Amand: I would like to add to the minister's statements on services for and by francophones. In last summer's call for proposals, our department prioritized Arrimages francophones. Through this call, we received many proposals for services in French. As a result of these agreements, in the next three years, we will be better able to provide services in French.
Mr. McCallum: I know that this point is very important for institutions that fight for francophones outside Quebec. They explained the situation to me at least two or three times. I hope to have understood it correctly, at least after the third time.
[English]
Senator Munson: A supplementary to Senator Gagné's question: Senator Gagné talked about the Syrian refugees, and just to give you fair warning, minister, you're coming before the Human Rights Committee on Wednesday, and we do have a lot of questions for you. We'll pat you on one shoulder, and then we'll ask you questions on your other shoulder.
Mr. McCallum: I'm used to that. That's fine.
Senator Munson: We've been around, as somebody would say, since a long time.
Mr. McCallum: Not as long as you. You welcomed me when I first arrived.
Senator Munson: That's a long time ago.
Mr. McCallum: Yes, it is.
Senator Munson: It is.
This has to do with the Syrian refugees. We have government-sponsored and privately-sponsored refugees. They've been in refugee camps in Lebanon. In Lebanon at a certain time in life, at least among the educated, French was and still is a very important language. I'm personally involved in sponsoring a family, so if it's a conflict of interest it's a good conflict of interest.
A refugee gets off the plane in Ottawa or Montreal, private or government, and when they get the plane, some are surprised. "My goodness, I'm in Ottawa; I thought I would be in Toronto." And we do live in a bilingual environment here.
What criteria is there for a refugee, privately or government sponsored, when they say, "I would like to have my children educated in French?" Education is a big deal here. Do you go to school in Vanier? Do you go to a French- speaking Catholic school? Do you go to a Protestant school board school? Do you go to another school that doesn't have religion as part of their group?
Does the department make choices for these families? How can you fulfill the percentages here without encouraging the people in those communities where it's predominantly French by saying, "Look, we think it would be better off if you went to a French school?"
Mr. McCallum: First of all, there's a distinction between government-assisted refugees versus privately sponsored. The privately sponsored ones go to wherever the sponsors live. They would go to schools or live in communities connected with whoever are their sponsors. I think your question is really about the government-assisted ones.
I've said this more to francophones than to anglophones. The fact that most of the refugees don't know a word of English or a word of French is true for the government-assisted ones. In a way, you're inheriting or receiving a blank slate — no English, no French. That person could be put into a French environment and be taught French or an English environment and be taught English because they start out knowing neither.
How do we decide where they go? The department, with other departments, decides on their dispersal across the country at a huge operation centre. My view was that we certainly did not want them all to go to the big cities of Toronto and Vancouver, and I could add Ottawa. We wanted them to be spread out quite evenly across the country.
A lot of the smaller towns were anxious to receive refugees, so we tried to accommodate them. The downside of that is you don't want to send a single Syrian refugee family into a community where everybody is a WASP like you or me, if that's what we are, and they had none of their own compatriots. We would send them in clusters to those towns. The idea was to send them broadly to lots of places, subject to wanting them to have some companionship from their own community.
Once they get there, the language they're taught in largely depends on where the community is. We would work with New Brunswick, for example, to try to send some to francophone communities. But it's a problem, because I was dealing with Minister Landry, the New Brunswick minister, and she was saying that even if you send them to Moncton, which is at least as much French as English, probably more French than English, they would somehow end up in English schools. To really get them to be fully immersed in French, you would have to send them to somewhere like Bathurst or one of those truly francophone communities.
I think, on the one hand, if you have a blank slate, they can be taught English or French. The outcome will depend where they end up. On the other hand, where they do end up, it's not everywhere that has the opportunity of teaching them in French. We struggled to find enough places to send the refugees where they truly would be brought up and taught in French rather than in English. Is that fair enough?
Senator Munson: I'm an Ontario senator, but I am from New Brunswick. You hit a chord there when you talked about Bathurst. My wife is an Acadian from Bathurst. I am from Campbellton. Even in that part of northern New Brunswick, it will be extremely difficult unless there is substantive federal government support to assist the only official bilingual province in the country because there too, even in a community like Bathurst, it will be difficult with playmates to do that.
Just to give you an example, when coming back from China as a foreign correspondent, we moved to Halifax. It took a lot of will of a lot of francophone families to get a school that was federally funded in Halifax, because you had French-speaking people all over the Halifax area not being able to find a school for their child. Iit was a hard deal, and that was only in the 1990s. Carrefour du Grand-Havre was the school in Dartmouth. It's working.
Do you foresee working with other ministries with financial, federal support to have these schools and make sure these children do stay in school and are involved within the francophone community? Even in Ottawa, like the De La Salle high school where you have an English mother, a French father, the language of the schoolyard can still be in English. I think there's an incredible amount of work that has to be done federally to make sure we have this.
Mr. McCallum: I certainly didn't mention New Brunswick and Bathurst because I was going by your connection. I knew you had a New Brunswick background but not that particular city. What I'm saying is even the New Brunswick Minister of Immigration agreed that it was an uphill struggle for the reasons you've indicated, and how exactly we can do that better.
Stefanie Beck has been at this longer than me. Perhaps one of my two colleagues could try to answer that question in greater depth.
Ms. Beck: There is no easy answer, I think the short version. The minister is absolutely right.
From a federal perspective, we were a little surprised on the PSR side, the privately sponsored refugees, at how few of the private sponsors were recommending that their new families go into the francophone system. There I would have expected a lot more.
Interestingly, Quebec as a province has probably the largest privately sponsored communities. They took the highest numbers of PSRs from the Syrian refugee groups that we had coming in.
Obviously, there's interest and capacity, but there's no reason that francophone schools or French immersion schools could not be the destination for the Syrian refugees. We can do that here, of course, with the GARS, the government-assisted refugees. If they're living in the catchment area, say in Ottawa, where there's a French school, of course the children can go to that school. We explain that to all the families, but we don't force it. That's where it can get a little difficult. It's more possible for PSRs.
Senator Munson: There's been so much conversation about infrastructure in this country, and it's always economic infrastructure, and there has to be educational infrastructure that takes place. Provinces don't have the kind of money to do what we're just been talking about. I know they can't be forced, but I believe there's a federal role.
Ms. Prince St-Amand: Absolutely, Senator Munson. Just to add to what's already been said in terms of the government-assisted refugees, when the Syrian initiative began, the department and Minister McCallum recognized that there weren't enough Resettlement Assistance Program reception centres to manage the flow and volumes within the period, so the department invested in creating eight additional reception centres across the country so that the GARs would be sent to the centres. In the first six weeks of their time in Canada, they are located at a reception centre where they're given accommodation, there's medical assistance on-site and they are registered in language programs and employment counselling, if that's needed. Their children get registered in schools, et cetera. These additional RAP centres were important to branch out the reception service for the GARs, in particular.
Mr. McCallum: This was partly because of what I said earlier, that we didn't want them all to go to the big cities. In theory, it was supposed to be a hub-and-spoke model, so they would arrive at a big city which was the hub and be farmed out to smaller places. That didn't always work, so we added places like Victoria, Peterborough and others in order to more diversify.
In terms of francophones, which was the issue, I think there is still a lot more work to be done in this area. I think some progress has been made, but my experience, talking to the representatives of New Brunswick government in particular, suggests there is a lot more that could and should be done to make this more of a reality.
Ms. Prince St-Amand: We do have a reception centre in French in Manitoba and in Winnipeg.
[Translation]
Senator Mockler: Mr. McCallum, I would also like to congratulate you for your work with the refugees. I think Canada as a whole welcomed this humanitarian act with much optimism and a desire to improve the refugees' quality of life.
I would like to address issues that affect New Brunswick and the Atlantic region. To become a Canadian citizen, an immigrant must be between the ages of 18 and 65 and must know one of the country's two official languages. Your government announced that the age criteria would now be 18 to 55 years old.
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages published a report in December 2014 that states as follows on page 27:
Several recent studies found that proficiency in the official languages, especially English, is a key determinant in the integration of immigrants.
Can you explain how this change will benefit newcomers, when the research indicates otherwise?
Mr. McCallum: I think we are speaking of nuances here. I completely agree that one of the most important factors for integrating immigrants into Canadian society is proficiency in both official languages, either one of the two languages, or, if possible, both languages, or even both languages and Mandarin. I think we agree that the more languages we speak the better.
However, in this case, we are talking about a minor change. One of the criteria established by the previous government was that an immigrant aged 14 to 64 must pass a language test or show knowledge of one of the two official languages to become a citizen. We changed the criteria to set the age range at 18 to 54, as was the case before. The change was made because, like some of my colleagues, I believed that, as of a certain age, let's say 54 or above, a person's mastery of English or French will not be perfect, but the future generations will be more comfortable speaking in both languages. When they arrive in Canada, older immigrants, whether they be Chinese or Italian, will not necessarily master the language very well, but in almost all cases, the future generations will master it.
We consider that Canada was quite successful in the past with a system in which people over the age of 54, for example, even if they did not speak perfect English or French, nevertheless significantly contributed to the country as citizens.
Senator Mockler: Thank you for making that nuance.
I have no doubt that, when you are in New Brunswick, you will be well received by Minister Landry, as always. She is very dedicated to the immigration file.
I believe it is a well-known fact that we are facing an enormous challenge, in both New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. Our challenge is that New Brunswick, along with Nova Scotia, has more senior citizens per capita than any other province, and indeed more than elsewhere in North America.
Minister, when you go to New Brunswick to meet with Minister Landry as well as the ministers responsible for immigration and for francophone affairs, we should develop a specific strategy for OIF countries if we want to attract more francophone immigrants, both to Quebec and outside Quebec. I am convinced that the Fédération acadienne de la Nouvelle-Écosse, the Société de l'Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick, as well as Prince Edward Island's Société Saint- Thomas-d'Aquin, will help you reach that four-per-cent target.
New Brunswick is facing another challenge I would like to bring to your attention, and it's that of respecting the 30- per-cent linguistic composition, whether it's Edmundston or Campbellton, which is one of the most bilingual regions in New Brunswick. There was the case of Edmundston, which took in refugees who spoke almost no English or French, when, unlike Fredericton, Moncton and Saint John, Edmundston lacked the necessary infrastructure to accommodate them.
How can you help us ensure that immigration to New Brunswick respects the francophone linguistic composition of 30percent?
Mr. McCallum: Your question touches on two aspects: the fact that New Brunswick and Nova Scotia need immigrants owing to their aging populations, and the linguistic question.
I am well aware of the importance of your first point. I have spoken with the immigration ministers and premiers of both provinces, because immigration is extremely important. The current premiers, like former premier Frank McKenna, place much importance on immigration. I am working with these people and with colleagues in this regard, most notably with Dominic LeBlanc, but also with my counterparts from the other Atlantic provinces. There is much enthusiasm for immigration, and we are trying to meet the demand.
Another aspect pertains to retention. We want to welcome many immigrants, but if they don't stay in the region, if they arrive in New Brunswick and then leave for Montreal or Toronto, then it's not an ideal situation. So we have to work not only on bringing in more immigrants, but also on retaining them.
Lastly, there's the linguistic aspect. On this point, I will say, as I've said before, that we have done a number of things. We have re-established the Francophone Significant Benefit program, we are going to change the definitions, we're going to try to ensure that welcome centres are involved in local communities, and so on. Nonetheless, even after all of this work, it remains a challenge. Ms. Landry herself told me that it has been difficult integrating immigrants into a francophone environment in Moncton, and that they had to go to Bathurst or Edmundston. It's a lot of work. I am working with her, and I know the provincial government is enthusiastic in its support. We want to welcome 30 per cent francophone immigrants and we are working hard to achieve this, but I don't want to hide the fact that it's not easy meeting that objective.
Senator Mockler: Mr. Chair, I would like to ask one last question.
Minister, you mentioned former premiers, such as Mr. McKenna, but you forgot Camille Thériault and Bernard Lord, who have also played important roles.
Mr. McCallum: That's true; I wasn't trying to discriminate against any political party.
Senator Mockler: As former Premier McKenna has previously said, do you believe that we need to impose a condition in order to retain immigrants in New Brunswick or the Atlantic region? This condition could prohibit immigrants from leaving the Atlantic region for a five-year period. What do you think?
Mr. McCallum: Although I am a great admirer of Mr. McKenna, I think we must respect the Constitution. If an immigrant is a permanent resident, we can't force them to stay in any particular region of the country.
Senator Mockler: Thank you, minister.
Ms. Prince St-Amand: I would like to add a precision. In order to retain people in a province or territory, the key factor is employment. The department is working closely with the Réseau en immigration francophone du Nouveau Brunswick to see to it that employers are able to provide jobs. Thanks to the province's demographics, we think we'll be successful.
The Acting Chair: Minister, you mentioned Bill C-6; the bill is at third reading in the House of Commons at the moment. In your view, is there a chance the bill will be passed or is it in danger of dying on the Order Paper?
Mr. McCallum: The bill will certainly be passed by the House of Commons. The question is when. I hope that the bill will be passed by the House of Commons before the end of the session, in June. Then, as you know, it will be referred to the Senate. Since a number of other bills are important to the government, there is no certainty that it will be passed by the House of Commons in June, but I hope it will be. One thing is certain, the committee's work is finished and all we are waiting for is the debate and vote at third reading.
[English]
The Acting Chair: Minister, you have been more than kind. You have been answering our questions for over an hour. Do you want to take a few more questions?
Mr. McCallum: I'm happy to take a few more questions.
Senator Munson: Very briefly, you talked about the Express Entry system. Could you comment on that and its impacts on settling immigrants into official language minority communities? We've talked around it a bit.
The other question has to do with the language proficiency evaluation services. There has been some controversy about the affordability and the cost of the testing in French and English. I want to make sure you that you received the complaints filed with the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages about the cost of testing. Has your department taken steps to make access to French testing more equitable?
[Translation]
Mr. McCallum: I don't want to give the impression of being too pessimistic. Stefanie just gave me numbers indicating the number of francophone permanent residents coming to New Brunswick; they have been increasing for a number of years. So I don't want to seem too pessimistic.
[English]
In terms of your question, Senator Munson, I know the issue about the language tests being more expensive in French than in English, and I know we were looking into that to see if we could re-contract that or potentially subsidize it. I'm not sure where it stands. Perhaps, Ms. Beck, you could clarify.
Ms. Beck: In procurement terms, it's an open process. At any time another company can come forward and say that they would like to provide this service. They are all private organizations.
We have three at the moment that meet our standards. We are in discussion with a fourth one that would be able to provide the language testing in French. These are global services being offered. It is not tailored specifically for our needs in Canada. They run it like a business, so they charge what they can charge. They are available in the communities where they have the most business to transact.
It's simply for those reasons that it is harder. That's not to say we can't be as encouraging as possible in our conversations and show them where the business is that they might not be aware of, insofar as we know we have people living in one province or a territory that maybe they have not considered as potential clients. We can say, "Yes, but if you open an office here, we know you will be getting X numbers a day, a month, a week," and that might help as well.
Senator Jaffer: Minister, my first question was going to be that in your mandate letter it doesn't address the issue of bringing more French-speaking immigrants into Canada. I was concerned that you would not be paying as much attention, but after your presentation I can't really say that.
I do still want to say: Please look at bringing in French-speaking people across the country, because that's how we will grow the language. You have already said this in your presentation, but it's really important. In order to be a vibrant country, we need to speak French across the country, not just in Quebec. I would like assurance from you, even though it's not in your mandate letter, that you are focused on bringingin more French-speaking immigrants.
Mr. McCallum: I guess I'm not responsible for my mandate letter.
Senator Jaffer: No, you aren't.
Mr. McCallum: I think that we are a long way from our target of 4 per cent, at least if you use the old definitions. I don't think my mandate letter needs to increase that target, because we are so far from it today.
I do take that target seriously. I am here today. I will be going to New Brunswick. I have spoken to the francophone association a number of times. So, yes, I am taking it seriously.
Notwithstanding it not being in the mandate letter, I'm sure the Prime Minister would also take this seriously, because he is fully committed to the principle of two official languages, obviously, as are Minister Stéphane Dion and Minister Mélanie Joly.
Senator Jaffer: And this committee too.
Mr. McCallum: And this committee too. So it's across parties.
[Translation]
I think all the parties agree on this principle.
Senator Gagné: Minister, I would like to pick up on your comments with regard to the importance of bringing international students to our francophone colleges and universities in Canada.
Having worked at the Université de Saint-Boniface, in Manitoba, where I was president for 11 years, I noticed that the changes made to the Express Entry program nonetheless slowed the progress.
I would therefore like to make a suggestion. It would be to consult representatives of the Association des collèges et universités de la francophonie canadienne, who are relatively well placed, after all, to support the initiatives you will be bringing forward to welcome international students.
Mr. McCallum: That's a very good idea. As I said earlier, I will take measures to encourage international students to come to Canada. At that time, it would be a good idea to consult these francophone groups to see whether there are certain things we could do to help them in particular.
Senator Mockler: Minister, having been immigration minister in New Brunswick, I can tell you that you're on the right track with what you're hoping to put in place.
There's an important point I'd like to bring to your attention. There's urban reality versus rural reality. This is noticeable in small provinces whose economies are based on the agricultural and forestry sectors. I think we should leverage the rural sector. What's your take on this reality in francophone regions outside Quebec?
Mr. McCallum: Do you want us to focus more on the rural sector or the urban sector?
Senator Mockler: There would need to be a program in place to notify francophones and immigrants when there are labour needs in the agricultural sector.
I'll give you an example. In New Brunswick, when we sought to expand potato production, we went out and found some Dutch people, who had a culture based on agriculture. The same thing happened in the forestry sector. People came over from Europe and Asia. There are immigrants who have made their home in New Brunswick, who have invested and are involved in these forestry communities.
It seems to me that we should be using this type of mechanism more often. Even though our province has a high unemployment rate, there are still people who can contribute to our economy, because in New Brunswick, immigration has become an important economic factor in maintaining our current production.
Mr. McCallum: I think Ms. Beck may have a comment to make in that regard. In my view, we need to find a balance between rural and urban sectors. We are working in cooperation with the provinces, because Canada has its federal immigrants and the provinces have their provincial immigrants. I think this combination can help us achieve that balance.
Ms. Beck: A pilot project was launched a few months ago. It's an initiative that tries to match future francophone immigrants with employers in Canada. It's all done directly through Canada's embassy in Dakar. If this solution works well, we're going to extend it so that, right from the start, when someone submits an application, we'll find them an employer in Canada in their field. Indeed, it's much easier for that person if there is a job waiting for them, and, of course, it gives them more points for their arrival in Canada.
The Acting Chair: Minister, just now, you were speaking about the generosity of Canadians. You're Canadian, a member of Parliament, and a minister, and you have also been very generous in answering our questions, and we thank you for that. I would also like to acknowledge Ms. Beck and Ms. St-Amand.
Mr. McCallum: Mr. Chair, I would also like to thank my two colleagues, as well as the members of the committee for their good questions.
(The committee adjourned.)