Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue 4 - Evidence - Meeting of May 11, 2010
OTTAWA, Tuesday, May 11, 2010
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day at 9:01 a.m. to study the application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it. Topic: Study on Part VII and other issues.
Senator Maria Chaput (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Honourable senators, we have a quorum. I would therefore like to call this meeting to order.
Today we have with us the Honourable James Moore, P.C., M.P., and Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, as well as the officials accompanying him: Mr. Pablo Sobrino, Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy, Planning and Corporate Affairs, and Mr. Hubert Lussier, Director General, Official Languages Support Programs. The committee is completing its study on the implementation of Part VII of the Official Languages Act, in light of the changes made in 2005. The committee has heard from many witnesses on this topic in recent months. The Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages is a key player in the implementation of Part VII of the Act.
While the committee has already questioned the minister regarding his role in implementing this part of the act, it was anxious to hear more about progress made and recent departmental initiatives. Furthermore, this appearance is an opportunity for the committee to hear from the minister about the annual report he tabled in Parliament recently, and other issues related to his responsibilities with respect to official languages.
Minister, the committee would like to thank you for accepting this invitation to appear today. I now invite you to make your opening statement.
Hon. James Moore, P.C., M.P., Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages: Madam Chair, I am very pleased to be appearing before the committee this morning. I would like to thank the committee for arranging this meeting in a way that accommodated my schedule. You are extremely flexible, and I greatly appreciate that.
Today, I would like to speak to you about how our government is demonstrating leadership in the area of official languages. I will let you know about our actions taken under the Roadmap For Canada's Linguistic Duality and our accomplishments in the field of culture.
In addition, during the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games, the entire world turned its attention to us. These were the most bilingual games in history. I believe that they demonstrated our desire to bring about our vision of a strong Canada that is proud of its two official languages, and I will speak to you briefly about this.
[English]
Forty years ago, our country put in place the Official Languages Act. Since then, it has become one of the country's fundamental operating principles and reflects the Canadian values of equity and respect. Much has been accomplished since that time, and we continue to work hard and to move forward.
Our government has displayed leadership in carrying out its responsibilities under the act. All government departments and agencies are more aware than ever of the place of official languages and the need for them to respect official language policies with regard to official language minority communities when it comes to their activities and programs.
A Guide for Federal Institutions, produced in 2007, has been widely distributed, and I am pleased to announce that a new good practices compendium will be available to the public and distributed to all federal institutions within the next few weeks. This valuable tool promotes best practices and lists concrete examples of how government institutions can continue to be proactive in supporting the development of minority language communities and the promotion of both of Canada's official languages.
I know this is something that the committees of both the House of Commons and the Senate have called for — a continued robust engagement with departments. This is the central element of your study at this committee, and I can tell you that we are already taking important action.
[Translation]
In addition, our government has made an unprecedented commitment to official languages by presenting our Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality. This commitment strengthens our ability to obtain real results in minority language communities across Canada.
I would like to mention a few important accomplishments in some of these areas. In the area of health, our government has set aside more than $174 million for training, to create networks, and to improve access to health services. Everybody wins: francophones outside Quebec and anglophones in Quebec have greater access to health services in their own language, and health professionals can develop their skills while contributing to the future of their communities.
[English]
Another example: More and more, business in Western Canada can be conducted in French. Thanks to the government's investments, 1,600 French-speaking jobs were created or improved as of 2008; and 716 francophone businesses were created, or maintained or improved their activities over the same period.
In the field of the arts, the volume of audiovisual productions in French made outside of Quebec experienced a sharp growth. It went from fewer than 50 hours in 2003 to 110 hours in 2009. What this means at the community level is jobs — jobs for writers, for actors, for technicians and for everyone in the arts and culture sector. It also means services and business opportunities in an industry that supports more than 650,000 jobs across Canada — an industry three times the size of Canada's insurance industry and twice the size of Canada's forest industry.
[Translation]
Several television series warrant mentioning: Belle-Baie, a Quebec-New Brunswick coproduction that was broadcast on Radio-Canada, and was filmed in Acadia and Montreal. Another series, Francoeur, was about French Ontario and was shown on Radio-Canada and TFO. In 2008-2009, 14 National Film Board films were produced or coproduced by artists from francophone communities outside Quebec, and 12 films were produced or coproduced by artists from Quebec's anglophone communities. These films enjoyed critical and popular success, particularly the Franco-Ontarian film Entre les lignes and the Quebec film Nollywood Babylon. All these works are a reflection of their community. As you can see, the promotion of our two official languages and support for official language minority communities have always been, and remain, priorities for our government.
[English]
The Speech from the Throne is clear: Our government's commitment to bilingualism is fundamental and we see it as a fundamental element of Canadian society. Our Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality 2008-2013 allows us to make this vision a reality. This unprecedented, government-wide initiative of $1.1 billion calls 15 government departments and agencies to action. To date, more than 71 per cent of the commitments made in the road map have been the subject of formal, detailed announcements by my department or by other departments involved, representing more than $792 million in investments. Canadians have access to this information through the Official Languages Secretariat section on the website of the Department of Canadian Heritage.
[Translation]
As your committee has dedicated a recent report to cultural matters, allow me to come back to this topic while highlighting what the Roadmap has accomplished in this area.
Last year, I announced the implementation of the Cultural Development Fund. This fund, which has a budget of $14 million over four years, helps strengthen arts, culture, and heritage in minority communities.
Several organizations all across the country have received funding for their projects through this fund. In Alberta — Senator Tardif, you may be familiar with this — Uni Théâtre invites young francophones to discover the world of writing. The best texts are produced and the plays are presented during the festival. This is a project that enriches the lives of our youth and prepares the next generation of francophones. That event was funded through our Roadmap for official languages.
In Manitoba — your home province, Madam Chair — the cultural organization Le 100 Nons also offers learning opportunities to the community. It creates venues for francophone music that contribute to the vitality of French in both rural and urban regions of the province.
In Nova Scotia, the Conseil des arts de Chéticamp is working to create a dozen art installations throughout the town to highlight francophone culture and Acadian traditions. Senator Comeau, who was a long-time member of this committee, will certainly by familiar with this program.
[English]
These are just a few examples. I am pleased to say that other programs, like the Music Showcases Initiative for Artists from Official Language Minority Communities and the New National Translation Program for Book Publishing are already playing their role in promoting francophone artists and their works outside Quebec and the work of anglophone artists in the province of Quebec. What happens in our francophone and anglophone communities across the country is a reflection of who we are.
This brings me to the Olympic and Paralympic Games. In February and March, more than 3 billion people around the world turned their attention toward Canada during the Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games. Our government made record levels of investment to ensure that these were the most bilingual games in Olympic history. The cultural Olympiad featured approximately 650 live performances, over one third of which were by francophone artists. The Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games torch relays, all 15 Olympic venues and every Olympic site were fully bilingual and served Canadians and visitors in the official language of their choice. At the Place de la Francophonie, thousands of visitors were shown the talent of our francophone artists and the vitality of our communities, particularly those of my home province of British Columbia. The Canada Border Services Agency developed an information kit on official languages for its employees and ensured that bilingual officers were present in Vancouver. With its partners, it distributed a pocket guide on francophone tourism.
[Translation]
Canadians who did not have the chance to go to Vancouver and Whistler were able to follow the competitions at home in the official language of their choice, thanks to the broadcasting agreement between CTVglobemedia and its partners.
I would like to add that we are pleased with the achievements of VANOC. We can all be proud that the Vancouver Olympic Games set a new standard for bilingualism on the international stage. In welcoming the entire world, we offered a bilingual image of our country. These were Canada's games, and I am particularly proud of that commitment and of all we accomplished in that area.
If you do not mind, I would just like to quote a few people in that regard. Graham Fraser said, and I quote:
I am very impressed by the level of bilingualism at the Olympic Games. I am especially pleased that the federal government took steps to ensure that the Olympic Games would be bilingual from start to finish.
Pascal Couchepin, the Grand Témoin de la Francophonie who attended the Olympic Games said this:
The Vancouver Olympic Games are a model to be followed in future when it comes to linguistic diversity. It is difficult to imagine how anyone could do a better job.
In conclusion, I would like to thank you again for allowing me to describe our government's work to be a leader in the field of official languages. I am now ready to answer your questions.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Minister. Honourable senators, Mr. Moore must leave by 10 a.m., so I invite you to ask questions that are as brief as possible so that everyone will have an opportunity to question the minister.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Minister, you appeared before the Standing Committee on Official Languages of the House of Commons in October of 2009. At the time of your appearance, you acknowledged that there are delays for francophone organizations that receive funding from the government. You even said that they are unacceptable. The purpose of that appearance in October was to redress the funding delay issue.
Organizations that serve the Franco-Saskatchewanian community are facing significant delays. Yesterday, we heard from Mr. Michel Dubé, of the Assemblée communautaire fransaskoise, and I asked him whether he had noted any improvement in that regard. From your standpoint, would you say there has been an improvement in that area since you appeared before the House of Commons committee?
Mr. Moore: Yes, we have made changes. We were made aware of concerns in that regard by other organizations as well. As you know, several organizations receive only government funding. In an economic crisis, it is very important that they be able to receive that money effectively. So, we have changed the way we deliver the good, to these organisations. For example, we now provide concessions, rather than contributions. We have cut back on red tape. The number of applications, of placements and multi-year arrangements continues to grow, even as we cut back the bureaucracy.
Since April of 2010, we have had new service standards in place. We have changed our system. Now the process is far quicker. A single remittance date for all the provinces for 2011-2012 is now the norm. That reduces the time needed for administration. Perhaps Mr. Sobrino could tell you more about some of the other changes we have made.
Pablo Sobrino, Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy, Planning and Corporate Affairs, Canadian Heritage: I would just like to add that in early April, 90 per cent of organizations had received funding approvals, which was not the case last year. Processing time for each application could be as much as 30 weeks, but now we have brought that down to 24 weeks. So, we have sped up the process by a month and a half.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Yesterday, Mr. Michel Dubé, who is from Saskatchewan, mentioned that small organizations that want grant money in order to survive sometimes have trouble filling out their application. Mr. Dubé suggested issuing a single cheque for the province, because the Assemblée communautaire fransaskoise assesses all the projects and is in a position to determine which organizations are doing a good job and which are not.
I do not know whether this is something that might be problematic for the public service, because it will definitely result in positions being cut. The idea is that Canadian Heritage would receive applications from a single organization for all the groups doing a good job. I would like to hear what you think of the idea of a single cheque.
Mr. Moore: We have to comply with certain requirements and regulations set by Treasury Board regarding the way we provide funding to each organization. At the present time, when investing funds, we provide 50 per cent of the funding up front under multi-year agreements. I think that is the best approach. Perhaps Mr. Lussier could add something about the specific case of Saskatchewan?
Hubert Lussier, Director General, Official Languages Support Programs, Canadian Heritage: The minister is correct; requirements relative to the application that must be submitted by the different groups would be very similar to what they now have to provide, even if Mr. Dubé's organization was ultimately the service provider. We have to ensure that, when these groups make an application, that it is complete and includes financial information regarding results; so, the simplified process that Mr. Dubé hopes to see is not possible.
Senator Tardif: Minister, I would like to thank you for supporting L'Uni Théâtre; it is a very interesting initiative.
The 2007-2008 Annual Report on Official Languages has just been tabled. Last night, I had the chance to read both volumes.
Volume 2, which deals with the achievements of designated federal institutions, particularly in relation to the implementation of section 41, provides a compilation of results for each of the designated federal institutions.
Do you not think your department should be requiring more of a critical assessment of what each of the federal institutions is doing to attain the desired results; and, in particular, an evaluation of the ``positive measures'' that have been implemented in each of these federal institutions in recent years?
Mr. Moore: Our agreement with the departments and agencies is clear; we have expectations and they understand their responsibilities.
As you know, the Commissioner of Official Languages, Graham Fraser produces reports on each department and agency. The department also has agreements with the departments and agencies; the most important thing, however, and what we expend most of our energies on, is finding the best way to invest funds and work with departments and agencies to ensure that they have the assistance, expertise and funding they need to administer their programs and policies effectively and responsibly, while at the same time protecting our official languages. That is what we do.
The 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games were a success thanks to the cooperation of many different departments and agencies; it is important to stress that. We work with them to help them provide the best possible service to Canadians.
Mr. Lussier: I would just like to add one thing, Minister. Your deputy minister writes to his colleagues at the designated institutions and departments every year to make critical comments — in the positive sense of the term — regarding the plans and reports that they submit to us. So, there is an ongoing exchange regarding the quality of the initiatives taken by these departments and institutions.
Mr. Moore: But let us be clear: we are not watchdogs. We are the department whose job it is to help the other agencies and departments deliver services in both official languages. It is the responsibility of every minister, deputy minister and department to comply with their commitments with respect to official languages.
Senator Tardif: If your department is not acting as a watchdog, whose job is it to do that regarding federal institutions that do not meet their commitments under Part VII of the Official Languages Act, do not take ``positive measures'' or make decisions that have a negative impact on the communities?
Mr. Moore: That is everyone's job. That is the reason why we have your committee. That is also the reason why we have an Official Languages Commissioner, a committee in the House of Commons, and reports from the House of Commons. That is why everyone has to be available to communicate with the public and with committees. That is why I am doing this job and am constantly in touch with the departments and agencies, to remind them of their responsibility to strengthen their mandate in terms of providing services in Canada's two official languages.
[English]
It is not my job to be a tattletale — to point out and to chastise publicly. It is my responsibility as minister to work with departments and agencies to ensure they have the necessary funding. The funding is coming in envelopes that are helpful and responsible over a five-year period to ensure they have the support necessary to deliver the services and to fulfill their mandates in both of Canada's official languages. That is my job.
[Translation]
Senator Tardif: Do you not agree that Canadian Heritage has a special leadership and coordinating role in relation to all the other departments, and that it has a duty to play that role?
Mr. Moore: Yes, absolutely, and I think we show that leadership on a daily basis when we make agreements with the departments; when I talk to my cabinet colleagues and my team, when I work with them, writing letters, pressuring people and telling them they have to provide their services in Canada's two official languages.
Furthermore, the Prime Minister has clearly shown leadership, in the midst of a global economic crisis, by implementing our economic stimulus plan. We decided, not to cut budgets or maintain the status quo but, rather, to increase our commitments and investments in Canada's official languages by 20 per cent. That shows strong leadership.
Senator Losier-Cool: I have a specific question about the annual report. I tried to find information in the report regarding the amount of money given to the Community Radio Fund of Canada. Could you tell us how much that contribution amounted to?
Mr. Moore: Approximately $650,000.
Senator Losier-Cool: Thank you.
Senator Champagne: You are absolutely right to say that our 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games were the most bilingual in terms of the two official languages, not only of our country, but of Olympic sport. At each of the venues, and in every discipline, there was always someone introducing the athletes in French and English.
However, we were all very disappointed with the lack of French at the opening ceremonies. Over the two week period, we noted an improvement — at the closing ceremonies of the Olympic Games and opening ceremonies of the Paralympic Games.
Following the opening ceremonies, you said that you were sorry. Personally, I was simply furious, because we had talked to the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games organizing committee right here and they had assured us, most emphatically, that the show would be bilingual. Obviously, they did not have the courtesy to show you the program for the opening ceremonies.
Also, the government had invested a great deal of money in this. I believe I said, in a message that was addressed to you, that on Broadway, the angels who invest in a show have an opportunity to see the show before it premieres. It is obvious that you were not able to see the show in advance. You might have spoken up, and since you are not a small gentlemen, the francophone content at the opening ceremonies might have been more substantial. Do you not agree?
Mr. Moore: Our agreement with VANOC was clear. It was actually quite detailed. I do not know whether you received a copy of the contract that we signed with VANOC with respect to the use of the Official Languages at the opening and closing ceremonies.
When I said that I was sorry about the lack of francophone content at the opening ceremonies, it is important to mention that there were two aspects to it. The show itself was absolutely extraordinary, but the fact that there was practically no francophone content was a problem.
Senator Champagne: Except for one song.
Mr. Moore: I regret that aspect of the opening ceremony. The committee was sending the same message in private as it was in public.
So, yes, I do regret that, but that was the only area — a very important one at that — where the games were not perfectly bilingual. The other shows, each of the sporting events, the television coverage, the signage, all the volunteers and the website team were all perfectly bilingual.
It is important to remember that there are fewer than 60,000 francophones in British Columbia. That is about 2 or 3 per cent of our population. The working language of the city of Vancouver is practically exclusively English. The organizers did work with partners to improve the bilingual capacity, based on a responsible standard for such an event. It was very difficult, but we were very successful at many levels. Special commitments were made, such as the Place de la Francophonie, where francophones from across the country put on amazing shows. Large numbers of anglophones attended the shows put on by francophones and Acadians from all over. I myself attended a fantastic show put on by Louis-José Houde.
I regret what happened with the opening ceremonies, but I think that the closing ceremonies were a lot better.
[English]
John Furlong, as we have come to realize, is not close to being bilingual. However, he stood on an international stage, while literally billions of people watched, and delivered a speech that opened and closed in French and had key moments in French. He showed a kind of bravery, as a Canadian, by standing up there, making the effort and exposing a bit of himself to some ridicule. I thought the ridicule he got was unfortunate and school yard stuff. He learned some French, went up on stage and made an effort as a sign of respect and recognition that what happened before should not have happened. He opened himself up to some laughter and ridicule, which was unfortunate, but he showed the kind of leadership that individual Canadians in positions of leadership should do more of. John Furlong deserves a great deal of praise for what he did that night.
Senator Champagne: I was not aware that the quality of his French was ridiculed. I wished that he had done it at the opening ceremony.
[Translation]
As regards the Court Challenges Program, we are finally seeing that the initial animosity and complaints are receding, and people are now talking about the new program, the LRSP. I understand that you only announced it on February 5, 2010 — so it is quite recent — and you said that everything was in place and the University of Ottawa would be delivering the program as an independent organization. However, people have been telling us that the application forms to access the program are very hard to understand, that at the administrative level, it is very difficult to determine whether or not you are eligible or whether the issue that you want to address is acceptable or not. I realize that it has only been in place for four or five months but you must have been thinking about it for quite some time, since the Court Challenges Program was abolished quite a while ago. Perhaps Mr. Lussier could answer this, because I am wondering whether every possible effort has really been made to ensure that the forms are easy to understand. At only $1.5 million, funding is obviously limited, but at least it has to be available and people have to know whether they are eligible or not.
Mr. Lussier: The program was officially opened in December of 2009 for clients wishing to file an application. The minister had announced several months earlier — in September, as I recall — that the University of Ottawa would be managing the program.
With respect to the forms, the program delivery principle is such that the University of Ottawa is responsible for producing these tools. Because governments can be sued using money provided under the program, there was a need to create a reasonable distance between program management authorities and the contributor, which is Canadian Heritage. I have not seen, nor have I been involved in developing the application criteria, and nor would it be appropriate that we do that; however, based on my experience, the first attempts at producing a form are rarely ideal and there is always room for improvement. There are also new components to this program, particularly the focus on out-of-court settlements, where possible.
Senator Champagne: And mediation, where possible.
Mr. Lussier: That adds a level of additional subtlety that had to be considered when the forms were developed.
Senator Rivard: I had an opportunity to meet Minister Moore in 2001 when he came to Jonquière during a by- election, and at the time, his French was fair. Despite his duties as a member of Parliament and then as a minister, he knew enough to surround himself with francophones and probably took French courses. I want to commend you, Minister; you have set an example that many others should follow.
Indeed, I would extend the same compliment to our Prime Minister, whose mother tongue is English but who manages very well in French now.
Coming to my question, under the Economic Action Plan for 2009-2010, contributions for major events have increased considerably. The idea there was to compensate for the loss of certain sponsors who had withdrawn. Our economic action plan will be ending in 2010, and I am concerned that, in 2011, we will have to return to 2007 and 2008 levels.
I do hope that major event promoters know that they will have a challenge making up for assistance that could decline, unless you can reassure us that it will continue to rise, or at the very least, remain at the same level.
I am apprehensive about a potential ``revolution'' among these promoters, who act as though the financial assistance we provide should not only remain in place, but be increased.
Mr. Moore: Are you talking about the Marquee Festivals Program?
Senator Rivard: Yes, for Marquee Festivals and events.
Mr. Moore: That program is administered by Tony Clement and his team at Industry Canada, as well as by ourselves, at Canadian Heritage. Yes, when the economic crisis began, we looked at the best way of making investments and the arts and culture are a key sector.
As I said in my opening statement, that industry represents 650,000 jobs in Canada and injects $46 billion into our economy. It is a major part of our economy. An economic action plan that does not include investments in arts and culture is not a true action plan. That is why we have made unprecedented investments in that industry. Our level of investment is unmatched in every segment of the industry.
Former governments decided, in times of economic crisis, to cut the arts and culture.
Senator Robichaud: Which government?
Mr. Moore: You can —
Senator Robichaud: Why mention it then?
Mr. Moore: A Liberal government cut CBC/Radio-Canada's budget by 40 per cent, or 4,000 jobs.
Senator Robichaud: Does it please you to say that?
Mr. Moore: Four thousand jobs, 40 per cent or $414 million were cut.
Senator Robichaud: Unbelievable!
Mr. Moore: That is the truth, Senator Robichaud. The Liberal Party decided to cut the budget of CBC/Radio- Canada by $414 million, whereas our government increased its budget as well as funding for the arts and culture.
Senator Robichaud: Yes, because we are the ones who dug you out of the hole left by Brian Mulroney. But, of course, you do not bother to mention that.
Mr. Moore: I believe Senator Rivard has the floor to ask his questions, but if you wish to debate the issue —
Senator Robichaud: Anytime.
Mr. Moore: Anytime, because the Liberal Party cut funding to CBC/Radio-Canada in a way which was irresponsible and was strongly criticized by the cultural communities in Quebec.
Senator Robichaud: Just as you have been criticized elsewhere.
Mr. Moore: It was inexcusable.
The Chair: Senator Robichaud.
Senator Robichaud: My apologies, Madam Chair.
Mr. Moore: It was totally irresponsible, and again, CBC/Radio-Canada is still recovering from the damage done by the Liberal Party of Canada.
So, we decided to make key investments. In answer to your specific question, the program you referred to is for Marquee Festivals. It is an investment over two years specifically under the Economic Action Plan. We are making a number of investments over a two-year period — in infrastructure, for example — but also in arts and culture.
Under our Economic Action Plan, we decided to make investments over five years. This is an unprecedented amount of guaranteed funding over five years for such organizations as the Canada Council of the Arts. and we are also investing in music, training for young people and cultural spaces.
I could quote some of the comments made by artistic communities in every corner of the country which are very pleased and proud of this government's commitment to delivering the goods when it comes to arts and culture.
Senator Tardif: Minister, could you tell me what amount of money has been earmarked for arts and culture in official language communities outside Quebec?
Mr. Moore: Yes, $14 million. I assume you are talking about the Roadmap?
Senator Tardif: Well, whatever vehicle through which you are providing funding, Minister. If it is the Roadmap, that is fine. Have you earmarked a certain amount of money for francophones, including Quebec and communities outside Quebec?
Mr. Moore: That is the case for each of the organizations involved — for example, the Canada Council of the Arts or the New Media Fund. For instance, the New Media Fund represents an investment of $350 million with our private sector partners. One third of that fund is set aside for francophone content, and 5 per cent, for official language communities outside Quebec. There are set percentages included in the conditions for delivering the money to these organizations. We do that regularly with each of our investments.
Mr. Sobrino: In all our arts and culture programming, there is a component for minority communities, as well as specific investments under the Roadmap which go beyond what we are investing on a daily basis. I could get back to you with the numbers.
Senator Tardif: We would very much appreciate your forwarding that information to us.
The Chair: Will you be sending those figures to the committee?
Mr. Sobrino: Yes.
[English]
Senator Seidman: In your 2007-2008 annual report on official languages, Volume 1, I see that your Official Languages Support Programs branch conducted interesting research analyses on the socio-economic changes to Quebec's anglophones between 1971 and 2001. On page 22, the report states:
The survey showed the considerable impact of the exodus of Quebec's Anglophones during that period. The result was a pronounced social polarization in Quebec's remaining Anglophone community: a greater number of Anglophones than normal were found in the upper and lower social strata. This raises special public policy challenges.
That is particularly interesting and is being borne out more and more in recent studies published in various media in Quebec.
I would like to know how this particular finding might impact the way federal institutions proceed with regard to consultations with these communities in Quebec, and even in the consideration and implementation of positive measures.
Mr. Moore: This is one of those things. Often, people do consultations, but when you have these kinds of findings — I will cut straight to it. There are many communities where people may think there is sufficient economic support within the community such that there is not a need for government investment. However, a level of wealth in a particular community that has a minority-language situation does not necessarily equate to full engagement in protecting, promoting and preserving the language. The velocity of engagement is an important question as well.
These are important elements when you do research. It is not enough to say there is X percentage of francophones in a minority situation in a community or X percentage of anglophones in this situation and they have X wealth, so we do not need to worry about it. The question for the government is this: To what degree are Canada's official languages being supported, promoted and celebrated in communities, and how do we best do that given the dynamics of these communities?
The largest francophone settlement west of the Red River is my community of Maillardville. There are many people with last names such as Laframboise and Lefebvre who are proud of their francophone heritage. They are fully engaged and doing everything they can to engage communities and young people, to support students and to ensure that the French fact remains healthy and strong. However, when you have virtually no support from a provincial government, there is a special responsibility for the federal government to ensure that needs are being met.
In the other parts of the country, there may be an anglophone minority community that is not as aggressive in promoting or supporting their language, but they might be seen to be doing so in terms of a raw analysis of the statistics. Statisticians describe the difference between doing static and dynamic analyses of data and doing a thorough dynamic analysis of groups with regard to minority situations. It is a complicated task that our department undertakes to gain a real sense of the health of language communities and to what degree we can invest funds and provide support to not only maintain but also celebrate Canada's official languages.
I hope there was an answer for you somewhere in there.
Senator Seidman: Could we talk a bit about positive measures? You have been particularly proactive in this area, and we have talked a lot and heard a lot from witnesses about the importance of positive measures. Could you explain what that means from your perspective and how you try to ensure that approach?
Mr. Moore: You see many community groups across the country. For example, in Nanaimo, the francophone association is in a strip mall and has 1,200 square feet of office space that contains some French content, books, CDs and DVDs. It is a quiet place where members of the small francophone community can speak to others in French and where students who are in French immersion at the elementary school across the street can go to be in a francophone environment. The public library is unilingual anglophone; the staff members are all anglophone and the books are all anglophone.
When I was in French immersion, after you crossed the threshold of the doorway to the classroom, a student got five minutes of detention for each word spoken in English. Full immersion in the French language was critical to being able to learn to speak French in an environment that was almost uniformly anglophone outside the walls of the schools.
To have places where students can continue their education past three o'clock until their parents pick them up an hour or an hour and a half later, places where students can be immersed in the French language, is critically important. When you go to these organizations, you say hello and they will say, ``Hi, I am the executive director, the teacher and also the accountant.'' It is the same person all the way through. In many circumstances, these organizations are held up by leadership bravery, at times with a lot of sweat and tears. These people are proud of their language and do not want to see it disappear in small communities in this country.
We have locked in official-language support for five years for organizations in those communities. You do not have to worry about year over year funding being cut. We have increased the amount by 20 per cent. These groups get 50 per cent of the money pushed up front. We are simplifying the application process so that these organizations can focus on what they do best: proudly stand up to defend and promote the teaching of the French language to young kids in a small town in B.C., for example, that is otherwise linguistically hostile to being proudly francophone.
Senator Seidman: That is a fine example.
[Translation]
The Chair: That is a very good example of a ``positive measure.'' We only have five minutes left until the minister has to leave. I therefore ask that you be brief and concise in asking your questions.
Senator De Bané: We are living in a era where the media play a very significant role. We had to wait 50 years for Radio-Canada to start broadcasting a newscast from Saint-Boniface.
Recently, the University of Moncton did a study on coverage of the French fact in Canada outside Quebec by Radio-Canada. It concluded that Radio-Canada devotes barely 2 per cent of its coverage to the French fact outside Quebec.
I do not know whether you are aware of this or not, but there is a daily radio program called L'essentiel des nouvelles canadiennes et internationales broadcast by Radio-Canada. That program presents Canadian and international news, whereas Quebec news is presented in another program. News from Canada and abroad is grouped together.
I wrote a letter to the President of CBC/Radio-Canada and, based on what I have been told by his assistants, it seems clear to me that he takes no interest in content and leaves decisions in that regard in the hands of managers in Montreal. He concerns himself with financial management.
Perhaps Radio-Canada should be called Radio-Québec instead, since it is broadcasting the Quebec perspective on what is going on in the rest of the world, and lumps Canada in with the rest of the world.
I am perfectly aware of the fact that you appoint the board of directors of the corporation and that they are responsible for managing it. However, I see absolutely no comparison between Radio-Canada, in terms of explaining Canada, and, say Euronews, which broadcasts news for 27 countries in the European Union.
How many times have I seen the death of Canadian soldier in Afghanistan presented as the first item of the English- language newscast, while no reference whatsoever is made to that in the same newscast, broadcast at the same time, on the French-language network.
It is high time that people woke up. You appoint the directors, so you had better be sure they have the same perspective as you do. It's about time the President stopped priding himself on the fact that he does not deal with content, that these issues are not his responsibility and that they are sent to Montreal to be dealt with. That is exactly what he said in answer to my letter: ``I have forwarded your letter to Montreal''. I wrote to him as President of the Corporation, citing a number of cases that I believed were unacceptable. To hear a radio host make the statement, every day, in referring to the English language, that it is like Chinese, when it is one of the country's two official languages. . .
I wrote to Montreal and did not even receive an acknowledgement. Imagine the uproar that would result if radio hosts on CBC referred to the French language as being like Chinese. I never even received an acknowledgement, Minister!
The Chair: And what is your question, Senator?
Mr. Moore: What should I do?
Senator De Bané: Ask whether there is any senior managers in Montreal who have been posted to Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton or Winnipeg. These people are in Montreal, but could people from other places not be appointed to work in these regions? The Radio-Canada correspondent in Edmonton might well be an expert on energy issues, whereas the correspondent in Toronto could be an expert on international trade issues.
The Chair: Excuse me, Senator.
Senator De Bané: I am trying to explain, Madam Chair! That is what needs to be done, rather than confining people to a single vision.
The Chair: Do you have a question?
Senator De Bané: Are we going to wait another 50 years for Radio-Canada to take an interest in Saint-Boniface, as it did recently?
Mr. Moore: That would make a good editorial. I am not sure what to say.
Radio-Canada is a very important organization for Canada's official languages. I can tell you that when I return to Vancouver, the third largest city in Canada, it is clear to me that without Radio-Canada, there would be no French in the regions of Canada. It is absolutely critical that Radio-Canada understand its important role with respect to Canada's official languages.
If you have specific concerns, I know that Mr. Lacroix is available and could appear at one of your meetings.
I am sure you know, as evidenced by what we see in the newspapers, that you are not the only ones to have concerns about the way Radio-Canada determines the content of its programming. As the public broadcaster receiving $1.1 billion from Canadian taxpayers, it is appropriate that the corporation's practices be debated.
It is important that members of Parliament and senators, such as yourselves, hold a public debate on content broadcast by Radio-Canada. It is an extremely important organization and an essential means of communication whereby we are able to talk about our concerns, our future and our successes. We must ensure that Canadian content is carried in both official languages. That is a key point.
I encourage you to speak to Mr. Lacroix and the entire board of directors of Radio-Canada, because it is their responsibility, their duty and their job to listen to what you have to say. Please get involved, because Parliament, the House of Commons and the Senate are the ones who decide whether or not their budget should be increased and how that should be done. It is also based on legislation. They must fulfill their mandate. And that is also part of your responsibilities, as defenders of minority official-language communities.
Senator Robichaud: Minister, please forgive me for interrupting earlier, but I hope you understand that, from my perspective, when a person tries to make himself look good at someone else's expense, it makes my blood boil.
You say that you signed an agreement with the Organizing Committee of the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games. To what extent was it the Department's responsibility to verify the content in both official languages — for instance, at the opening ceremonies?
Mr. Moore: What we requested verbally or in writing is not what we saw at the opening ceremonies of the Games. I was very disappointed, because that was not at all what was planned.
Senator Robichaud: We will not be hosting another Olympic Games in the near future, but if other major events such as this occur in future, would it not be a good idea to have some mechanism in place to ensure that this cannot happen again? They did not comply with written instructions, but we only realized that when it was too late.
Mr. Moore: There are ways of ensuring that commitments are met, and most of them were met. I cannot speak for them, but I must say we encountered some technical issues as well as problems with certain artists as concerns their commitments.
It should also be pointed out that the official language standards applied by the International Olympic Committee are far less demanding than what the government of Canada wanted. Our commitment is different.
[English]
The International Olympic Committee standard for bilingualism and respecting French and English equally is not anywhere near the standard that is delivered and expected in Canada. My view, talking after the fact, is that I think for a lot of these elements, VANOC was aiming for the IOC standard for bilingualism, not the Canadian standard. They overshot the IOC standard in everything else they did, but obviously with the opening ceremony, there was a disappointment.
It should be noted, however, that the Paralympic Games have one official language, which is English. The Olympic Games have two official languages, French and English, in that order. You will notice that the Paralympics, from start to finish —
[Translation]
From the opening ceremonies to the closing ceremonies, all the events and everything related to the Olympic Games were perfectly bilingual, despite the fact that this was not what was expected under international standards.
Senator Robichaud: You say that the Organizing Committee of the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games simply wanted to meet the IOC standards. However, our committees met with the organizers several years before the Games to ensure that everything would be done in both official languages, and we received assurances at that time that this would be the case. That is why we are rather disappointed to see that, even if the committee met with the people in charge, that level was not attained.
To maintain a francophone presence, it is often necessary to make a more sustained effort than just what would be needed in an average situation.
Mr. Moore: Let us be clear; they were a success. They were the most bilingual games in history.
Senator Robichaud: Yes, I do not deny that.
Mr. Moore: I think we need to be quite clear in saying that we are only talking about the opening ceremonies; otherwise, everything else was perfect.
Senator Robichaud: Yes, I agree.
Mr. Moore: The opening ceremonies were an isolated case. Now they are open to criticism. But the rest of the Olympic and Paralympic Games were a tremendous victory, according to Pascal Couchepin.
Senator Robichaud: I agree that the Games were a success.
The Chair: Minister, on behalf of the committee, I would like to extend my sincere thanks to you for coming this morning and answering the senators' many questions. I would like to ask that you take steps to ensure that the funding provided under the Roadmap, which has been renewed until 2013, as well as funding earmarked under other agreements that you have renewed — such as the ones involving arts and culture — continues and that commitments are met. That is always a concern for us, because other programs will be reviewed. We are in your hands and we are counting on you, minister.
(The committee adjourned.)