Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Official Languages
Issue 9 - Evidence - Afternoon meeting
MONTREAL, Friday, September 17, 2010
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day at 1:03 p.m. to study the application of the Official Languages Act and of the regulations and directives made under it. (topic: The English-speaking communities in Quebec.)
Senator Maria Chaput (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Honourable senators, and guests, welcome to the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages. I am Senator Maria Chaput from Manitoba, and I am the chair of this committee.
I am joined this afternoon in Montreal by several colleagues, members of the committee, and I invite them to introduce themselves.
Senator Fraser: My name is Joan Fraser. I am a senator from Quebec, but I am an English Montrealer. Before I was a senator I was a journalist in Montreal for many years. I am really looking forward to hearing what you all have to tell us.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I am Senator Suzanne Fortin-Duplessis, representing Quebec and from Quebec City itself. I was a member of Parliament for nine years and was appointed to the Senate two years ago next January. I am really looking forward to hearing what you have to say.
[English]
Senator Seidman: Good afternoon, I am Judith Seidman. I am an anglophone from Montreal, born in Montreal, parents born in Montreal. I am a new senator. It was exactly one year, two days ago, that I was sworn in by the Governor General. I am very pleased to be here with you now.
We have been travelling through Quebec and we have heard from the anglophone communities around the province. We were, in fact, at Bishop's University yesterday and I am delighted to be hearing from you this afternoon. Thank you for coming.
The Chair: We will begin our public hearings this afternoon with a round table on the topic of education. I would like to welcome three organizations: McGill University represented by Mr. Vaughan Dowie, Executive Head of Public Affairs; and Mr. Morton Mendelson, Deputy Provost, Student Life and Learning.
Concordia University is represented by Mr. David Graham, Provost and Vice-President of Academic Affairs; Mr. Ollivier Dyens, Vice-Provost, Teaching and Learning; and Mr. Russell Copeman, Associate Vice-President, Government Relations. Welcome.
The committee thanks you for having accepted its invitation to appear today. You are invited to make a presentation of approximately five minutes, after which the members of the committee will follow with questions.
David Graham, Provost and Vice-President, Academic Affairs, Concordia University: Thank you. I will begin by saying how grateful we are to have been able to accept your invitation and how much we have been looking forward to appearing before you this afternoon.
[Translation]
I will begin my presentation in French by telling you that, yesterday evening, I had the great pleasure of attending a reception in honour of Concordia's new international students. There were a lot of people in that one reception room.
Almost 30 per cent of our students attend Concordia as permanent residents of Canada or on a student visa. That is the highest number in Quebec, apart from some schools that specialize in one discipline only. It is much higher than the Canadian average.
We know that those students are first attracted to Concordia by the quality of our programs, but also by the opportunities provided by our unique role and mission as an English-language Quebec university profoundly rooted in a cosmopolitan and largely French-speaking setting.
In other words, to walk through the corridors of Concordia, as I do every day, is to move continually from one continent to another, literally immersing oneself in our reality of a multifaceted postsecondary education delivered in a minority language environment.
[English]
Concordia has four large academic faculties and the School of Extended Learning. Concordia's Faculty of Arts and Science alone is larger than about one-half of all Canadian universities. We are very fortunate and proud to be part of a unique urban environment in Montreal, which is rivalled only by Boston for the number and proportion of post- secondary students and faculty members. That may not be something known to all senators present.
I will not go into our academic strengths, which are many, as I do not want to get into any kind of rivalry on that score.
Concordia has about 45,000 students. Many of them — a very great many — are part time. A very great many are working full time while studying either part time or, incredibly, full time. They come from about 150 countries and speak over 100 languages.
This situation poses enormous academic and pedagogical challenges for us because of the highly diverse nature of our classes, but extraordinary opportunities for faculty members, students and society, or so we like to believe.
It is worth noting in passing that we provide infrastructure and administrative support to the Quebec English- Speaking Communities Research Network, commonly known as QUESCREN, in which Noel Burke, the dean of our School of Extended Learning, has been and continues to be a key participant.
Concordia provides access to university education to a significant number of permanent residents and Canadian citizens whose language of use at home is neither English nor French. It is remarkable to note that about 30 per cent of our student population falls into this category, and also that this proportion is rising over time.
This situation imposes an additional burden on us to ensure that their English language skills are adequate and also commensurate with their academic ability. We believe at Concordia that we have a unique role to play in helping students whose language at home is not French to have opportunities to improve their French. For example, Concordia is also giving active consideration to increasing our offer of courses in French. For example, we will be experimenting with a pilot project in our department of political science in this connection. Professor Dyens can tell you more about that if you are interested. I must say that support from the Canada-Québec accord on minority language education for such initiatives would be extremely helpful to us because they place considerable financial and administrative burdens on our university.
As an outcome of our mission, we would ideally like to see our allophone students leave Concordia as proficient in either English or French — ideally as proficient in both languages — as Quebec residents who have been through our primary and secondary school network. That is the standard of performance that we are setting for ourselves.
In other words, at Concordia we quite deliberately pride ourselves on what we see as our unique mission of social integration. We aim to bring international students to Canada, to educate them highly in English, while providing enriched opportunities in French and eventually to retain many of them as new Quebec residents and Canadian citizens so that they can continue to contribute to our national growth.
[Translation]
Take the issue of distance education and its role in our context. You need to know that, a number of years ago, Concordia University acquired the capacity to offer distance education courses, a capacity that continues to grow. This year, for example, we will be offering more than 40 distance education courses in a wide range of disciplines. We also plan to begin offering entire programs, likely starting with continuing education certificates. This ability will allow us to reach English-speaking Quebecers who, because of long distances, isolation or work, cannot get to a university campus. We hope that it will also soon attract international students.
In conclusion, Concordia University is proud to be in Montreal, in Quebec, and English-speaking. We also pride ourselves on having a unique mission of transformation in our society, a mission we believe to be essential in today's global society.
The Chair: Thank you very much. The next speaker is Mr. Mendelson.
[English]
Morton J. Mendelson, Deputy Provost, Student Life and Learning, McGill University: Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to present to you and to participate in these important discussions.
The mission of McGill University is the advancement of learning through teaching, scholarship and service to society by offering to outstanding undergraduate and graduate students the best education available; by carrying out scholarly activities judged to be excellent when measured against the highest international standards; and by providing service to society in those ways for which we are well suited by virtue of our academic strengths.
Founded by an immigrant pioneer, James McGill, and situated at the crossroads of Canada's linguistic and cultural communities in a great metropolitan city, McGill is a research-intensive, student-centered, publicly purposed university with broad international reach and impact.
McGill student enrolment, as you can see from the handout we distributed, was over 35,000 in 2009 and 52.3 per cent of our students spoke English as their mother tongue. Almost 18 per cent spoke French as their mother tongue and, like Concordia, about 30 per cent spoke other languages. Of the student population, 56 per cent came from Quebec, almost 25 per cent came from the rest of Canada, and over 19 per cent were international students. We welcome students from 160 countries to our campuses in any given year, and we count alumni in 180 countries.
Over the last years, we have also recruited nearly 900 new faculty members, 500 of whom came to McGill from leading institutions outside of Canada. As a publicly purposed university, McGill ultimately exists to benefit society by educating students, creating and disseminating knowledge, design, services and technologies, and by engaging with the world around us.
In order to remain a powerful contributor to the strengths of Montreal, Quebec and Canada, we at McGill can cast our net more widely — locally, nationally and globally — to attract a diverse group of outstanding students, faculty members and administrative and support staff.
We would be remiss not to note that one of our most illustrious and well-known graduates, Dr. Victor Charles Goldbloom, a Canadian pediatrician, lecturer and Quebec politician, who was the Commissioner of Official Languages from 1991 to 1999.
McGill trains professionals in the service-oriented vocations that can or could affect English language communities. These vocations include social work, education, law, psychology, linguistics, kinesiology, business and so on.
McGill's Faculty of Education trains teachers and school administrators for English language schools across Quebec. We have a wide variety of French language instruction options to meet the needs of current and prospective students. We offer courses in English as a second language, French as a second language and English for academic purposes. We offer credit courses and specialized language courses as well in pronunciation, communication and writing for graduate students.
We train jurists in the Faculty of Law, which conducts its programs in both English and French, and the programs are in both of Canada's legal systems: civil and common law. The law students provide free legal clinics to Montrealers, including the English-speaking community.
More importantly, McGill, through the Faculty of Medicine and other allied health disciplines, provides training for professionals in all health care fields — nurses, doctors, medical researchers, social workers — and especially the types of services supported through the McGill Training and Retention of Health Professionals Project, on which we will elaborate in a moment. Furthermore, McGill has established many partnerships with other related teaching and training institutions: for example, with University of Quebec in the Outaouais.
Vaughan Dowie, Executive Head of Public Affairs, McGill University: To finish quickly, because I know our time is ending, I want to talk about a couple of McGill projects that this committee may find interesting.
Professor Mendelson mentioned the McGill Training and Retention of Health Professionals Project, which is under the aegis of McGill University and is intended to ensure that English-speaking Quebecers have better access in their own language to the full range of health and social services available to the public as a whole. The project responds to an emerging context of modernization of health and social services system, new legislation governing the organization of work, demographic changes obviously affecting the English-speaking communities.
In this respect, it ties into the system initiative to implement a new clinical organization of services. Above all, the project is an additional tool to support the implementation of regional access programs of services in English in accordance with the act respecting health and social services. This is a project that is funded by Health Canada.
The point we want to make, because I want to talk about another project really quickly, is the complex federal- provincial regime under which we work. Under Quebec law, public or para-public organizations do not have the right to access federal funding without the permission of the province. When we are involved in programs that the province believes are potentially within its own jurisdiction — like health and social services or education and things like that — it requires a complex set of negotiations that are probably unique to the application of the programs in this province as opposed to others. This is one that has been successful in navigating its way through that labyrinth.
I want to talk to you about another program where we are having a little more trouble, to bring it to your attention. It is the university scholarships in translation, which is a Public Works Canada program. McGill would like to draw to your attention the fact that often federal-provincial jurisdictional disputes negatively impact access to programs, bursaries and other federal government resources for training McGill students in the two official languages of Canada.
For example, in December 2009, Dr. James Archibald, Director of Translation Studies at McGill, completed an application for a university scholarship in translation from the Department of Public Works. To this date, the agreement between the two levels of government — I remind you that this was in December 2009 — has not been signed and McGill translation students were barred from these scholarships in 2010 because we were not able to get an agreement between Canada and Quebec on that issue.
When trying to deliver programs within Quebec there are probably some difficulties that others do not see, but we are more than willing to answer any questions you may have in the question and answer portion. Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much. The first question will be asked by Senator Seidman.
Senator Seidman: Gentlemen, one of the things that we have learned over the course of this week and something that of course both the official language minority communities face is the serious issue of trying to retain young people and their schools.
We have heard about the difficulties and the real fear in the anglophone communities that their communities and their very survival will disappear.
I would like to know if your institutions have any programs to help youth from other anglophone communities in Quebec come to the university here and be able to learn in their own context, in their own culture.
Mr. Mendelson: I am not sure I completely understand what you are asking, but let me give you what I think is an answer to the question.
Of course we are interested in attracting students from across Quebec. We recruit in all CEGEPs in Quebec, francophone or anglophone. We are certainly open to students from across Quebec coming to McGill, and students who come from outside the city of Montreal are welcome to the university and can benefit from the services that we provide to help them adapt to Montreal and to the university. I do not see that there are any impediments.
Senator Seidman: I thought I would start in a general way, but I could be more specific.
As an institution do you feel a responsibility to the anglophone communities in Quebec? Do you feel that responsibility to the degree that you might have special programs, fellowships, loans, bursaries — I do not know — something that would demonstrate that as an institution, you might feel some special need to help support the anglophone communities in Quebec?
Mr. Graham: I am happy to say something to that point, if I may.
Concordia most definitely feels a responsibility to the anglophone community in Quebec; I have to say first and foremost on the Island of Montreal and in the Montreal metropolitan region. The demographic projections that we look at from the Government of Quebec indicate that the student population in the anglophone CEGEP is going to continue to grow for the next number of years. We, as an institution, have been growing so rapidly that it is a struggle for us even to accommodate the students in our local catchment pool.
Having said that, like McGill, we recruit systematically in all CEGEPs in Quebec — more aggressively in regions nearer to Montreal but across the province, both in English and in French.
It is worth pointing out that where bursaries and scholarships are concerned we depend largely on donors to help us create those opportunities. I think that the idea of focusing with donors on specific bursaries and fellowships targeted at English language students from outside the Montreal metropolitan area is an extremely interesting one, and it is definitely one I will take up with our advancement people.
Ollivier Dyens, Vice-Provost, Teaching and Learning, Concordia University: I have a question first for you Senator Seidman. You were talking about the anglophone community outside of Montreal in the regions?
Senator Seidman: Yes, specifically.
Mr. Dyens: Again, I think Concordia's mission is to be as accessible as possible and to reach different communities. I think people from outside of Montreal sometimes feel overwhelmed when they come to Montreal, not only the anglophone community but also the francophone community, and the First Nations, for example. We are trying also to focus on First Nation students.
We want to develop a series of summer initiatives where we use the summer much more strategically than we do now. We want to enable students to start becoming accustomed to Montreal and to use the summer to help students who might have academic challenges before they start the academic year. We are trying to do this and we are trying to ease the transition of students from outside of Montreal — outside of Quebec also — to this huge university and, for many of them, to this somewhat overwhelming city.
I would say that is what we are trying to do in a much broader sense for Quebecers, anglophones and francophones in the regions.
Senator Seidman: Thank you. I asked the question because we discovered that anglophones in the regions really see their schools as a cultural centre, a way to preserve one's identity, a way to bring up one's children into the community. It is from that point of view that I ask the question.
I will take it a step further, perhaps, especially since I know that McGill has a Faculty of Education and is very focused on educational training. I also sit on the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology, which just completed a study on access to post-secondary education. One of the most serious issues that came up over the course of that study had to do with young men and boys and how they are disproportionately represented in dropouts, both at the high school level and at the university level in faculties and programs that were traditionally dominated by men. This is an ongoing concern and problem.
The question is what role and responsibility the Faculty of Education has in training their teachers and in developing their educational programs to try to deal with something like this.
Mr. Dowie: I know, for instance, our Faculty of Education is very involved with the school commissions looking at ways and programs to reduce what is a horrendous dropout rate, not only in regions in Quebec but Quebec as a whole. We have a high school dropout rate of somewhere around 30 per cent, which is not acceptable.
We are working, both in terms of training of teachers in the techniques to try to keep children interested in staying in school, and similarly working with school boards and school commissions even in more abstract ways about how to design a school building in such a way as to create more of a community within the school. I know there is work going on in that area.
You can say similarly, because McGill is involved, as Professor Mendelson said, in the allied health professions, we are involved in people's lives from a faculty perspective in the area of social work, OT, PT, doctors, nurses, and on it goes. We work in terms of trying to support, first, the institutions of the community in the broad sense, but very often the English-speaking community.
Second, we are trying to work with parts of those networks to ensure that they are more successful. It becomes almost a raison d'être for professional faculties not only to train students but also to work with the systems and the institutions and the systems they work with, so they work better.
Mr. Dyens: On the broader perspective, the dropout rate of young males is a worldwide phenomenon, at least in the Western world. There was a recent interesting article in The Atlantic called ``The End of Men,'' talking about women taking over most of the professions that were previously held by men. This is a worldwide phenomenon, and I think it speaks to a profound transformation of our society that goes beyond Quebec, McGill, Concordia or the French and English communities.
This being said, I think Concordia realizes very strongly that there are two parts to that question. There are much broader societal changes, but there is also the fact that we need to be much more sensitive to student engagement in the university, at the CEGEP level and at the high school level. We are working very hard at the university level, and also in our department of education, to find ways to engage students to be much more interested and trying to stay away at the same time from edutainment, having a very demanding curriculum, but also engaging students in different activities, co-curricular activities and community engagement. We are working hard to try to address this problem, both at the university level and also the CEGEP and high school level.
We just had a grant application that was approved at Chantier 3, where Concordia and Dawson will work together to enable students who have not completed their CEGEP to be able to do so while taking courses at Concordia.
Instead of telling them, ``You cannot do this; you cannot do that,'' we are trying to work together so we bring these students back into the fold both at the CEGEP level and the university level.
The Chair: I would like to welcome Mr. Robert Kavanagh, Academic Dean from Dawson College.
Robert Kavanagh, Academic Dean, Dawson College: Thank you very much. I apologize for being late. I will keep my introductory remarks brief so that the dialogue can go on. I am already following the discussion and find I want to be involved.
My discourse today will relate specifically to English-language CEGEP education in the province. I will keep my mind on that focus and will try to address a number of questions given to us in a relatively straightforward manner and summarize what I think to be the three major concerns, which I would like to express in this context.
I would say that the fundamental issue that we experience at the CEGEP level for the English-speaking community is that there is an overall sense of fear for identity, and that shows itself in many different ways which may come up in the later dialogue. Connected to that is a growing need and reality which the youth face, in particular, with respect to having significant and acceptable competency in the French language so they can participate as more significantly involved members of our society.
We see unease in the younger community in the CEGEP system where the young feel that as English-speaking participants they sense that market opportunities, job opportunities and future employment opportunities are somewhat limited for them dominantly because of the strength of the French language and their non-ability to deal with a number of complex situations that come with that. Those are what I would call baseline challenges which the young experience.
When we talk about regional challenges, I would like to discuss challenges that occur for the CEGEP system on the Island of Montreal and in particular in the English-language CEGEPs. If we want to get into particulars and details on this subject, we can do so in our discourse.
There is a changing population in the English-language CEGEPs. Some of the CEGEPs have always had a significant diversity from a language, racial, cultural or ethnic base, but some have not. Over the last number of years, it is quite clear that the number of francophones entering this system is fairly predominant, as well as the number of allophones. This is interestingly problematic because it poses fairly important pedagogical issues when our teachers are trying to work in an English environment and the linguistic capacities of the incoming students are not always able to cope with what we expect of them. It is a matter of concern to all of the colleges. Dawson College has been working with this now for 30 years, but it finds it is always taxing to try to keep clear pedagogy using English in an environment where 50 per cent of the population does not have English as its mother tongue.
I would say there is some anxiety not only in the youth population but in the population that thinks of the English CEGEPs as their natural home for a certain kind of education with relatively frequent dialogue concerning the extension of Bill 101 to the CEGEP system. This causes, as you may imagine, certain shocks throughout the community.
With respect to the Government of Canada and some investments it may have made, the CEGEP system, unlike other levels of this presentation, is specifically linked in its own way to the provincial government. Over recent years, we have received what I would call important federal monies through either the transfer payments or infrastructure monies, some of which have been extremely beneficial to a number of colleges. I think of Dawson College in particular where approximately one-third of our new theatre was funded through federal infrastructure money.
I think the Canada-Québec Entente, which is part of the overall infrastructure dealing with minorities has been quite beneficial. We need to work on a better division of those funds so the CEGEPs can benefit from it more, but that has proven to be quite beneficial. The increasing access of research monies from the federal granting agencies to the CEGEP level has proven to be extremely beneficial and is becoming more and more accessible and useful to our researchers.
Overall, at our level of education, we recognize identity and anxiety around identity and the loss of a sense of community identity is a persistent issue. Access to intermediate post-secondary level education is somewhat limited, and the opportunities for youth to increase their capacity to learn French, function in French and become participating members of the larger society are general issues that are of considerable concern to the community.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: My question goes to the McGill representatives.
You mentioned that you train a lot of people in health care, doctors, nurses, technicians, and everything to do with health. You also said that you have a partnership with the Université du Québec.
When we went to Sherbrooke, which is not really very far from here, we were told that there were gaps in the health care provided in English to the elderly, to people with mental illnesses, and to those close to them.
Are you able to tell us if this is because your graduates leave Quebec once they have their degrees? Do you know what happens after they are trained?
Mr. Dowie: Not really in a scientific way. We know what happens to doctors, because the question is often asked in Quebec. Do McGill-trained doctors stay in Quebec or do they go elsewhere? The broad answer is that McGill attracts more doctors than those who leave when they have completed their studies.
However, in the world of health and social services, where I worked many years ago, there can be a number of aspects to the question, such as, are there people to serve English-speaking communities outside Montreal who work in health and social service networks?
First, it may be that many Montrealers do not want to go to Sherbrooke, but to stay here. Second, when people work in a predominately French-speaking institution, it is clearly a requirement of the job that they speak French. The vast majority of people in homes for the elderly or people with intellectual challenges, or in youth or rehabilitation centres, are francophone. To be hired, therefore, they need to be able to speak French.
Do all our graduates have the level of French they need to work in a predominately francophone environment? That is another question. In a way, it is why I mentioned the health and social services project at McGill, and its two goals: first to try to train anglophones in French so that they can get into the health and social services job market, especially in the regions; and second, to provide francophones in the network with training in English so that they can provide care to the people they meet there. A large aspect of the goal of the project I mentioned is just that: to respond to issues of that kind. We have enough graduates here. But a myth still persists — I know that it is not the case, but I am talking about doctors — that McGill doctors are only interested in going abroad. They do their studies at McGill and then they go home or they go elsewhere. In fact, 92 per cent of a medical school class in the Faculty of Medicine is by rule made up of Quebecers. The ones leaving are Quebecers. They are not from the USA, from Ontario, from Britain, or anywhere else. The people who decide to live somewhere else when they graduate are Quebecers. The same situation can be seen with a number of other professions.
As Professor Mendelson said, a large majority of our students, 56 per cent, are from Quebec. So many of them stay here. The doctors may make decisions later depending on working conditions, or the job market here or elsewhere, and depending on the places where they want to practice. This is why we have other kinds of programs to try to deal with that situation.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Of those who leave, there must be some who leave for a speciality somewhere in the United States, or France or wherever. But the worst thing is that they do not always come back.
Mr. Dowie: That is true; they do not, and everyone loses if people leave. But it is perhaps more to do with the fact that doctors, for example, feel forced to practice somewhere else because they cannot find work in their home city. That affects the whole health and social services structure in general.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Thank you. Now I have a question for the representatives from Corcordia. In which areas are training needs highest? I am talking about training in general; what are the most pressing needs as expressed by the public, and how do you respond to them? Do you change your programs, or do you keep them the same? That is the gist of my question.
Mr. Graham: Right off the bat, we have to say that the demand for management programs seems endless. This is something we see not only at Concordia, or in Montreal or Quebec. We see it everywhere in the world, certainly in Europe and North America. We have had remarkable growth in our school of management for ten years or more.
That aside, we are noticing that demand is increasing in all areas, except that there is less demand in some engineering disciplines, like electrical engineering and computer science. We all know that the bubble burst in 2002 and the market has not yet recovered from that crisis. In a lot of other areas, human and social sciences, fine arts, engineering, management, and other engineering disciplines like building and civil engineering, we are seeing strong and continuous growth. Perhaps my colleague Ollivier Dyens could add something.
Ollivier Dyens, Vice-Provost, Teaching and Learning, Concordia University: We see a demand in languages, and an astonishing demand in management programs, which are always growing. Humanities programs also continue to attract students, and those are programs that do not necessarily have completely professional opportunities at the end. But they seem to continue to attract students to their broader approach to the ways in which the world works. So we still have a lot of students there. Languages attract a large number of students. If there is one area where we could continue to expand, outside the more professional fields like, to repeat, management, engineering or even education, that is certainly it. Linguistics, the study of language issues, in French, English, Spanish in our case, of the kind that arise from translation and multilingualism. We need not only students who can be comfortable in Canada's two official languages, but also, if we want to have a rich society that is in touch with the world, we probably need people who are able to get by in three, four, five and six languages.
So, going back in a way to what Mr. Graham said earlier, our challenge in having a good proportion of our students whose first language is neither French nor English, is also an extraordinary opportunity to build on the ability to speak three, four and five languages.
That is something that greatly interests us at Concordia. The students are interested. When people are relatively effective in both languages, the task comes a lot easier, not only in Quebec, but also in Canada and elsewhere.
Senator Forin-Duplessis: My third question is for the Dawson College representative. I listened to your presentation carefully. I was struck by the fact that 50 per cent of your students are French-speaking. You said that makes English- speaking students uncomfortable. I was a bit taken aback with what you said.
Mr. Kavanagh: I must clarify something. About 17 per cent of our students say that their first language is French; about 25 per cent say that their first language is something other than English or French. When I was discussing the college's linguistic diversity, my concern was specifically from the point of view of teaching. In a predominantly English-speaking educational institution, if almost half the student population does not speak English as their first language, the college has some quite serious pedagogical problems. Professors have to be trained in a specific way and support systems for the students have to be in place. That is the background against which I raised the issue of the linguistic identity of the student population as a whole.
The identity issue that I mentioned is not so much a factor for the college itself, but for the students entering the college and discovering their place in society. That is what interests us, because we spend a lot of time at the college educating students to be increasingly aware of their place in society and the civilization in which they live. They tell us quite clearly that, as anglophones in the Quebec context, they have an identity problem. Where exactly do they fit? As members of the society, are they completely separate? That is the context in which I brought the matter up. Is that the question that interests you?
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I confess that I was shocked when I heard you say that it was making young anglophones uncomfortable.
Russell Copeman, Associate Vice-President, Government Relations, Concordia University: I would like to add something to one point my colleagues raised. I have three children; two are graduates of Dawson College and my youngest son is now a student at Concordia. What we in the anglophone community notice, quite surprisingly, is that, for families who chose French immersion at elementary and high school, as we did, a significant part of the day is spent in French, both in elementary school and in high school. When you get to CEGEP or university, English-language ones, you are much more exposed to studying in English. So Concordia, like other institutions, puts a lot of effort into making it possible for our students to continue their formal studies, or have other more informal opportunities, and for so-called anglophone or allophone communities to continue to improve their French. We firmly believe that it is to our graduates' advantage to be able to speak both of Canada's official languages. In Quebec, especially for a future in a profession or in business, we recognize the importance of being able to speak French. We are looking for more possibilities to provide our students with courses in French, but also with more informal opportunities like exchanges and conversation groups. We firmly believe that it is part of our role. It means that we have requirements in human and financial resources, but we are absorbing them at the moment because we are not always compensated for those efforts, which can involve significant investments on Concordia's part.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Thank you very much.
[English]
Senator Fraser: I have one general question and I have a couple of questions for McGill University about the two projects you mentioned. The first project, which was apparently going fairly well, involved the retention of health professionals.
I think your answer to Senator Fortin-Duplessis was about intensifying language training, but what else is involved in retaining health professionals?
Mr. Dowie: There is a research component to it that is a university program; nothing happens without a research component to it. The research looks at the question of retention of minority language professionals mainly in the health and social service field. Part of it is working with community organizations across Quebec, so whether it is Gaspé or the Townships or the Outaouais or the North, to try and get them to work at ways of attracting anglophone professionals into their communities.
For instance, one of the things that people in the Gaspé say is it is hard to attract social worker students in field placements there, and the strategy in the community would be: If we can attract people to do placements here, maybe they will stay. We can get them to know the community. When they leave Montreal and they find out what a great place New Richmond is, or wherever, maybe we can get them to stay.
There is some funding available to work with community groups to look at different strategies within different communities. The world in the Lower North Shore is a much different than the world of the Eastern Townships in how community organizations can work to attract professionals and work with their network of health and social services because part of the other problem is trying to make the Réseau aware of the need. Often people who are at the regie, or the agency as it is now called, will say they do not have a big anglophone clientele and they do not really understand how many English-speaking people there are in the community and what their needs are.
Senator Fraser: Other witnesses have told us that we do not have the data.
Mr. Dowie: Yes and there is some funding available for that as well. That is another component of this project.
In the end, it is a unique partnership because it is not the university PI approach to research. It is a partnership with a number of community organizations around Quebec to try and work out strategies of how we can do community development — really in the end that is what it is — and support to try and meet the needs of English-speaking people whether it be in the west end of Montreal or the west end of the Outaouais.
Senator Fraser: Have you any results to share with us?
Mr. Dowie: The research part is slow off the ground. It is all anecdotal. Health Canada required a pretty rigorous evaluation phase but that was more in terms of how many people were affected by it and whatever. These kinds of projects have to look over a period of time and ask whether we have been able to attract people here and have they stayed. It is not only recruiting but retaining is always the issue in a lot of these things as well.
Senator Fraser: What was the second project?
Mr. Dowie: It was a translation project.
Senator Fraser: It seems like a no-brainer for this society.
Mr. Dowie: It is a small amount of money.
Senator Fraser: What is the problem?
Mr. Dowie: The problem is we are in provincial jurisdiction. The federal government would decide to have a translation scholarship program, and the Government of Quebec says, ``I am sorry, but education is a provincial jurisdiction, and we are not sure that we want this to happen.''
I do not want to tell you how many person hours went into discussion on the first project I mentioned. There were discussions with the ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux, the Secrétariat aux affaires intergouvernementales canadiennes and the ministère de l'Éducation, du Loisir et du Sport. A sizeable amount of money was attached; I think $23 million over four years, so it was a big money project. This is a small money project, but it means that students who were taking translation could get scholarships to do that.
That money is given out in many other provinces in the country. However, Quebec is sensitive about spending federal money in areas of provincial jurisdiction. The Government of Quebec's position is if the federal government has this money available, the Government of Canada can give it to Quebec and Quebec can figure out how to use it. The Government of Quebec holds true to education as a provincial jurisdiction. Quebec might feel if the federal government has this money maybe the province can put it into what it thinks is an unfair transfer payment model.
When it is a larger money project, you can obviously get more people's attention than a smaller money project. We just used as an example the need to try to build within programs aimed at official language minority groups for some modus vivendi between Ottawa and Quebec. We need to find how to de-bureaucratize this maybe by having shared views, putting the fleur-de-lis and the maple leaf beside things, whatever is required to try and get the service to the people who need it.
Senator Fraser: When you say a small amount of money, what would we be talking about?
Mr. Dowie: It is $30,000, $40,000. By government standards, this is not — who pays attention to little money, right?
Senator Fraser: It gets bogged down at low levels.
Mr. Dowie: Yes, because you cannot get that on a deputy minister or minister's desk without setting fire to the building. Yes, it is in the hands of people who are under — the Government of Quebec is under relatively strict instructions about ensuring there is a rigorous process — I will try to put it as fairly and I can on Quebec's behalf — of examination of whether federal spending in an area of provincial jurisdiction is required, necessary and fair. Sometimes that process can take a while.
Senator Fraser: This one should be rubber stamped by the receptionist. The federal government wants to pay for translators. No one in the country and not many people in the world, I suspect, do as much translation as the Government of Canada, and why should Quebec students not be getting their share of that opportunity? It is mad.
I will restrain myself and go for a second round, Madam Chair.
Senator Seidman: As an academic and research professional, my orientation has been what has often been referred to as applied research. I do not think I need to define it for you gentlemen, but for members of the audience here, essentially that means that you take account of the real world situation and try to approach a given problem that you see and find a solution, so it is not lab research.
When we were in the Eastern Townships, the Townshippers' Association made a very moving presentation to us, among many others. They spoke about the importance of the anglophone minority language communities being what they called ``actors'' in our lives here rather than merely reactors.
We have heard from many groups across the province, from the anglophone minority communities, and I think we have been moved to tears, all of us. It has been so traumatic. There have been key words, and I think Mr. Kavanagh referred to identity. That word has come up in every single presentation that we have heard. Thank you for bringing that up because it is exceedingly important.
Basically, anglophone communities in Quebec have problems of identity, culture, political traction, isolation, employment services, community development, access to education, access to health and social services, business development. The socio-demographic groups that are especially vulnerable are youth and seniors. They run the gamut.
I open up Concordia University's beautiful book here and see they have the School of Canadian Irish Studies, correct? Is there some idea out there, some momentum in the academic institutions in Montreal —, which in my opinion have a huge responsibility because we have these two wonderful anglophone academic institutions in Montreal — to establish a place that could produce sound, objective public policy options for the English-speaking community of Quebec? For example, there could be a centre for anglophone studies.
Mr. Graham: Thank you very much. I will begin by referring back to something that I mentioned in my opening remarks, which is Concordia's involvement in and our support for the Quebec English-Speaking Communities Research Network and its involvement in systematic outreach, particularly to English-speaking communities on the North Shore.
The dean of our School of Extended Learning has been involved in that research network. Before he came to Concordia, Dean Burke had been involved with outreach activities in the Ministry of Education in Quebec to English- language communities throughout the province.
I can certainly state unequivocally that we are committed to that effort. I do not have to tell you, with your background, of the kind of resources it takes to mobilize that kind of effort, particularly when we are dealing with far- flung communities in huge geographic areas. This is Canada's largest province, one of Canada's most sparsely populated provinces once you get out of the very thin strip of populated territory along the St. Lawrence River. I do not have to tell you how thin our resources are already stretched in trying to meet the immediate demands of our local communities.
We are also committed to public policy research generally. We have a very strong department of political science, which has public policy as a major option. We offer a master's program in public policy and public administration, which has an internship component. The majority of the students undertake their internships working for one or another federal government department in Ottawa. Therefore, we certainly do view an attachment to public policy development as integral to what we do, not just in the department of political science, but in allied departments such as our School of Community and Public Affairs, which is the home to our new program in First Peoples studies, where I am proud to say we have just hired two wonderful Aboriginal academics. We will be getting that program off the ground in the months ahead. We are committed to it.
As for a centre for anglophone studies, no one has pitched that to us and we do not have the resources to do it. If you can find us a donor and make a proposal, I would be delighted to consider it.
Mr. Mendelson: Professor Graham beat me to the punch; that is exactly what I was intending to say. At McGill, we certainly have the wherewithal to mobilize people who are interested in issues related to a wide variety of concerns of the local community and communities across Quebec. We do have, for example, a centre for Canadian studies, but what made that happen was money. That is the issue.
Senator Seidman: That is always the bottom line, is it not? Thank you.
Mr. Graham: Perhaps, I could say a word about the School of Canadian Irish Studies. That school is a particularly interesting example because it has been a long time in the making, over 10 years. We started with a single faculty member chairing Canadian Irish Studies and the support of the Canadian Irish Studies Foundation, which is a community grassroots organization that is committed to raising funds to support this effort.
Between 10 and 15 years later, we are now at the point where we have an academic unit. We would not have had that unit without the incredible community support we have encountered. We have a second funded chair, we have a visiting scholar program and we have a host of scholarships for students in Canadian Irish studies. We have a brand new major program in Canadian Irish studies, with a strong focus on the Irish presence in Quebec, I should say, and I do not have to tell you how powerful and widespread that is.
None of this could have happened without the incredibly powerful support that we have had from the local Irish, largely anglophone community, but not exclusively anglophone.
To add to what Professor Mendelson said, that is absolutely the way things happen in universities. We have some shining examples. McGill's wonderful centre for Canadian studies is certainly another. We see no reason not to be proud of the School of Canadian Irish Studies, precisely because I think, if I understand your question correctly, it fits exactly into the kind of optics that you are talking about.
Senator Seidman: Thank you. Precisely; I think it is a shining and wonderful example of what drives it and why you now have it. It is, of course, a slow, arduous process. I appreciate that recitation very much.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I always like to ask witnesses who come before us to give us an example of their greatest successes. So let me ask each one of you, representing Concordia and McGill universities and Dawson College: What are the best things that have happened to you in recent years, what were your biggest success stories?
[English]
Mr. Graham: If I had not already spoken about the School of Canadian Irish Studies, I would certainly bring it up here.
[Translation]
Senator, I would like to go back to a feature of Concordia University that perhaps we did not highlight enough. This is the community involvement we see in our students. Several years ago, Concordia students set up a volunteer program in Uganda. A group of Concordia students goes there each year to spend several weeks in a refugee camp helping with the schooling provided to Uganda's war orphans. That is typical of the student activities at Concordia.
I could also mention the efforts of students from the John Molson School of Business who spend several nights each year on the street in the depths of winter helping to provide support to Montreal's homeless and less fortunate.
I will end by mentioning LIVE, a volunteer centre not only for students, but also for members of Concordia's support staff and designed to encourage community involvement. Concordia tries to both talk the talk and walk the walk when it comes to community involvement.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I think that is absolutely outstanding, especially since I was in Uganda several years ago. It is true that there are a lot of orphans; their parents have often died of AIDS. What you, and all the other organizations you have established, are doing is extraordinary. You are training people, adults with a sense of responsibility who are caring for others. I think that is just super.
Mr. Dowie: As the person in charge of communications, I can tell you that every day is a day of success at McGill; there is no such thing as failure! At Concordia, Dawson, Bishop's — the school where you went yesterday — or McGill, there are so many stories that it is difficult to single out one contribution that makes a project successful, given also the types of people who are drawn to the universities, whether professors, students or even support staff.
If you have a couple of minutes between the various witnesses, or tonight before going to bed, I suggest that you read our document. In this document, we tried to share with you some of the less known stories from McGill, but I suspect that any university could say the same thing.
Mr. Kavanagh: There are some stories of success and special achievement at Dawson. We must remember that we are talking about the CEGEP level, so our students are usually between 17 and 19 years old.
I would like to give two examples. The first is Dawson's creation, some years ago — between 25 and 30 years ago — of a Liberal Arts program at the CEGEP level, which was unheard of in the CEGEP system at the time. Not only is the program now at Dawson, but it is also an integral part of the English-speaking system, and it has been accepted in the francophone system too. The program sees to the intellectual and conceptual development of outstanding students. Dawson College developed a program that changed an aspect of the CEGEP system across the province.
Another quick story is about our program called North South Studies that gets students involved in somewhat unstable situations in Central America. They are exposed to situations, villages, quite rural areas that allow them to experience a life that is completely different from their daily lives. It is generally a life-changing experience not only for the villagers there, but obviously also for the students at Dawson. It is a unique program at Dawson College that gets young people involved in a completely different world.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Thank you.
[English]
Senator Fraser: Thank you. This is the mirror image of Senator Fortin-Duplessis's question.
You have come here in some measure to celebrate your institutions and that is great, we need to hear good news. These institutions are not only worth celebrating in their own right, but in terms of this study of the English-speaking community in Quebec, it is important for us to know not only about the problems but about the great strengths that exist thanks to institutions — well, I cannot say such as yours because you are all unique, but I think you know what I am driving at.
However, we do also need to know about problems, and I am assuming that you all face the problems that all institutions of higher learning face, notably not nearly enough money. However, can you tell me if there are problems that are in any way peculiar to or accentuated for institutions of higher learning in English-speaking Quebec because you are in English-speaking Quebec or whatever?
Mr. Mendelson: I will touch on one issue, and that is the availability of stage positions in training our occupational therapists, physiotherapists, psychologists, social workers and so on. There is a long line of teachers. It becomes difficult at times to find positions for our students because the institutions do not necessarily have places for them or have places for a McGill student.
It is sometimes difficult because we do attract — as you have heard, not all our students are French speaking. With respect to many of our students, in a recent survey, a large majority of them are bilingual French-English at least, if not three or four languages. As Mr. Dowie mentioned, they do not always speak French at a level that is necessary to operate in a predominantly French milieu, so it becomes difficult for us to have programs that attract anglophones from within Quebec and from outside of Quebec and then have a place for them to fully train. I think that is the sort of thing that is way down in the weeds, I understand, but it is related to the issue of our location in Quebec.
Mr. Kavanagh: I think that it is important to remember the mode of education that is delivered in a CEGEP system. The CEGEP system, generally speaking, has two options. When you come in as a student, you are normally in what we call a pre-university program or what we call a technology program. At schools like Dawson, they have 72 per cent to 73 per cent of our population in pre-university programs.
Senator Fraser: What is your student population?
Mr. Kavanagh: We have about 8,000 regular day students and about 2,000 or 3,000 night students. That means that we have approximately 28 per cent or 29 per cent of our population in technical programs. Technical programs used to be geared primarily to the workforce. That is slightly changing, so there is an increasing interest in that population in going on to further studies, university as a general rule. However, there is a significant present and upcoming social and market need for people involved at the technology level in Quebec. It is not just in Quebec. I am talking about Quebec because that is our orientation.
Touching briefly on the question of money and space, we have a cultural history in the anglophone community toward university education, and it is approximately the same in the other large anglophone colleges.
When we set out to promote technical programs to our conventional communities, it does not mesh with how they see themselves in the world, and it is concretely organized over a short period of time to move into the workforce, predominantly in French, which takes me back to my earlier concern about the French-language capacity of people entering this level of education. That is an issue that we do not really know how to address. We set out to attract more; we have no space and we have no money, but we know that this is a real social, economic and market need and it would provide an opportunity for young people to move more fully into the workforce and become active members of society at that level.
Mr. Graham: Senator Fraser, I will raise three points briefly, if I may. The first is one that you yourself mentioned, the level of overall resourcing of the university system in Quebec. I think what must be said here is that in comparison to the rest of Canada, the Quebec university network is comparatively under-resourced. It is probably true to say that universities will never have enough resources and, in fact, I am sure you could never get us to admit that we have enough resources.
Having said that, if you look at the indicators in the Maclean's rankings, for example, you will see that year after year, with the single exception of McGill, Quebec universities struggle to get off the bottom of the rankings. That is not because of a lack of quality in the Quebec university system; it is because of a lack of money, pure and simple. I will not insist on that, but it is just a fact.
The second point is one that my colleague Mr. Dowie already raised, and it has to do with the layers of bureaucracy. We live in a heavily bureaucratized society in Quebec and when we add on the federal-provincial interface questions about jurisdiction, I have to say that I entirely agree with everything he said. We saw this in the knowledge infrastructure program where Concordia did extremely well, but where we find ourselves behind the eight ball trying to complete our projects because they were delayed by months as a result of interface issues, pure and simple. We are really struggling there, and that is a major problem for us.
The third issue is the question of competition. We compete for graduate students and faculty on a different basis from our colleagues in the French-speaking universities. Here I hope I am addressing your wish that we speak to issues specifically connected with our existence as English-language institutions. We are forced to compete for graduate students and faculty members in a pool that extends far beyond the borders of Quebec, through Ontario and the Northeastern United States most immediately, but across Canada, throughout the United States and internationally.
At the same time, as I have already said, we are comparatively under-resourced in comparison to our colleagues in other Canadian and many American universities. Offering competitive salary and competitive graduate student funding is next to impossible for those of us that do not have the kind of endowment that McGill has. I raise that as a third issue.
Senator Fraser: Take it as read that all Quebec universities are underfunded. Within that context, is it your belief that the present funding formula operates fairly for English-speaking institutions as compared to French-speaking institutions? I am not saying there is someone up there saying, ``Do not give money to the anglos,'' but formulas are set up with different criteria and different norms. Does it all work out fairly, in your view?
Mr. Graham: That is a question that preoccupies us considerably at Concordia; it is one we look at often. It is our view that the funding formula and recent revisions to it certainly have not worked to the advantage of Concordia. Like you, I do not see any kind of evil manipulation of the funding formula in that. It is established collaboratively with participation from the universities.
Having said that, Concordia is perhaps unfortunate in offering a range of disciplines that are not well funded. In particular, I would point to the fact that we have a very large and flagship Faculty of Fine Arts. Of all the areas that are offered, in part because of the lack of comparators, it is impossible to establish a proper basis for the funding of fine arts. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that fine arts is comparatively, significantly underfunded in comparison with other disciplines. Because it is such a large component at Concordia and because business and engineering are also comparatively underfunded and weigh very heavily with us, it is true that the formula works to our disadvantage. It is not specifically because we are anglophone.
Senator Fraser: It just works out that way.
Mr. Kavanagh: In general, I think it would be fair to say that there is a sense of equity in the Réseau for the CEGEPs. I think the only area where we experience difficulty, which we do not view as something that relates predominantly to language, is regional divisions of money.
In general, on the Island of Montreal, we tend to experience a sense that the funding that is allocated in the regions is not on a similar system allocated to the colleges on the Island of Montreal. There are reasons for that, of course, but that tends to be our interest in inequity. It is a regional one rather than one that has anything to do with language.
Senator Fraser: Students, who want to practise a controlled trade or profession in Quebec, have to obtain certificates of proficiency in French. What do you do to help the students qualify for those certificates? Do you do anything?
I am sorry; Professor Mendelson, you actually wanted to say something earlier.
Mr. Mendelson: If I may answer, I will just talk about two differences in the funding formula, two issues in the funding formula that differentially affect anglophone and francophone universities. One is the issue of special grants. In addition to the formula, there are special grants, and my understanding is that McGill and Concordia are the only universities that do not have a special admission grant. That is one thing.
Another thing that I think is more serious in terms of the amount of money involved is the issue of tuition from international students. International students pay a certain tuition, and except for certain disciplines — there is some movement on this file — the formula is that they pay a certain tuition and then that tuition gets clawed back by the MELS, the Ministry of Education, Leisure and Sport, and is redistributed in the network. Our students bring in tuition that benefits the network as a whole.
The feeling, or the misunderstanding, is that international students cost the same as Quebec students, which is just not the case in terms of the recruitment needed, the social services needed, the extra support needed and so on. There is a net loss to the university in terms of the amount of money we return to the province and what we get in grants.
Senator Fraser: Would you send us some documentation on the special mission question? That is all news to me.
Senator Seidman: Professor Kavanagh, I asked a question about young boys and young men and their growing dropout rate and under-representation in our programs.
It is interesting that you brought up your vocational program because one thing that another Senate committee discovered in their study on access to post-secondary education was that vocational training was grossly undervalued and underrated on the part of parents and communities.
I discovered that Quebec was in a unique situation because of our CEGEP system. In no other province was there access to a built-in vocational training curriculum as we have in Quebec because of the CEGEP system, in that it is sort of naturally integrated into the system.
Could you say a few more words on that subject? Clearly, that very important component is grossly undervalued. Would you please tell us about your experience at Dawson with the vocational program? How many types of specific lines of training are in the vocational program? How many students are there? Is it more male than female? Please give us an indication about those things.
Mr. Kavanagh: I will try to be succinct. Our population is approximately, globally speaking, 60 per cent female and 40 per cent male. Approximately 28 per cent of our programs are in the technology sector, and 28 per cent of our students in technical programs are in that area. In that area, we have approximately 65 per cent male. We have one or two large programs that are exceptions, nursing being the most common.
We have been working and have received a certain amount of funding under the Canada-Québec Entente to help us try to promote technical programs to the larger community, and that has been helpful. We have been doing that in part because we simply do not get the applications for the programs. We understand and believe that this is a cultural phenomenon, much beyond our capacity to control. In this case, we went to the Canada-Québec Entente to try to get money to cooperate with all the other English colleges in the province. We tried to have an impact on the larger population and to see whether we could not have some impact on how people view things. We have had discussions with the ministry on this matter as well because things have to take place at different levels, otherwise you cannot influence the society.
We do have important difficulties in trying to attract students to these areas. We offer 21 technical programs, from nursing to graphic design to electrical engineering, et cetera.
Senator Seidman: Do you have students from outside Montreal?
Mr. Kavanagh: Do you mean in the technical programs?
Senator Seidman: Yes.
Mr. Kavanagh: We have students from outside of Montreal in all of our programs.
Senator De Bané: First, I apologize to our witnesses that an official activity prevented me from hearing your presentations.
Throughout this week of hearings, we have heard of many sad and unfair situations. This morning, we had people from the cultural area, artists and writers. They told us that often juries from le Conseil des arts et des lettres du Québec do not read or speak English fluently and it makes it difficult for these artists and writers to obtain grants when the jury is unable ``to fully comprehend the substance and content of the projects being presented for evaluation.''
I can give you a long list of things that we heard that are very painful. I suggest that the younger generation in Quebec is different from the generation 60 years ago when I grew up. Young people in Quebec today are not prisoners of their past as our fathers were. The realities of the world have changed, Quebec has changed and Canada has changed.
I think that with your sociologists and political scientists, if you can think about how to frame things in this era of communications, how to instil gradually that we are blessed to have in this country, in this province, the two most important languages of the Western world, how fortunate we are. It is a great asset that we belong to these two cultures. I am sure that with your very competent sociologists and political scientists, we can help start a new era. I find it unfortunate that so few people in this room are particularly from the French-speaking community.
[Translation]
That is the message I wanted to share with you. And I would like to apologize once again.
[English]
In your letter to our chair, if you compared the three institutions, how many students from France, Belgium and Switzerland attend your university? I am very much interested to know how many French-speaking from Europe attend. Please let us know that when you will be corresponding with our chair.
[Translation]
Senator Fraser: There is also the question of what they do to help students to acquire the necessary level of competency in French to be qualified for the professions available there.
The Chair: Perhaps the members of the committee have other questions. If, at some stage, other questions are raised and we need answers, we will send you a letter, since I have to close this meeting out of respect for the next witnesses. Dear colleagues, this sitting is suspended and we will resume in two minutes.
[English]
Honourable senators, I would like to welcome the Quebec Federation of Home and School Associations and its representatives, Carol Meindl, President, and Marion Daigle, Attendant to History and Archives Services and Past President.
Carol Meindl, President, Quebec Federation of Home and School Associations: Good afternoon, Madam Chair and senators. We welcome this opportunity to consult with the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages and our fellow community organizations. My remarks here today are intended to give you an overview of the Quebec federation and our activities relating to the home, the school and the community. I will outline the issues and challenges of concern to us as parents and will follow with our conclusions and our recommendations for the committee.
The Quebec Federation of Home and School Associations is an independent, incorporated not-for-profit volunteer organization, dedicated to enhancing the education and the general well-being of children and youth. The QFHSA promotes the involvement of parents, students, educators and the community at large in the advancement of learning, and acts as a voice for parents.
The QFHSA was founded in 1944 and has been an active participant in the educational system of Quebec for more than 65 years. The QFHSA is a charter member of the Canadian Home and School Federation.
We are a federation of local associations driven by one objective: to provide a caring and enriched educational experience for students. Members of QFHSA come from all sectors of society: working parents, stay-at-home parents, grandparents, educational professionals and other citizens with an interest in maintaining a high level of education in this province. The schools their children attend are scattered widely across the province and represent the cultural diversity within our minority English-language school system: anglophones, allophones and francophones. Our membership is open to individuals with or without a school affiliation.
Today, the QFHSA is composed of 80 local associations, with a membership of 5,000 families. Members are involved in various aspects of school life, from organizing after-school programs, enrichment courses and social activities for students and parents alike, which foster community spirit. Members volunteer in the school libraries and provide financial support to their school for material acquisitions, be it books for the school library and classrooms, sports equipment for the physical education program or computers for the technology program. Volunteers often provide teachers with an extra pair of hands in the classroom and offer tutoring and mentoring to students.
The Quebec federation is grateful for the financial support received from the federal government through our current partnership with Canadian Heritage through the Official Languages Communities Support Program, and we look forward to future collaborations.
Core funding grants from PCH have allowed us to maintain our office operations and part-time staff so as to provide ongoing support to our local associations. Our regular programs of activities, such as our fall leadership conference and our spring annual general meeting, remain opportunities for parents from diverse regions of Quebec to come together, discuss ideas and share common concerns. These parents can then go home ready to implement new programs and activities in their schools.
It is a challenge to maintain a not-for-profit organization. It requires adequate and continued core funding and countless hours of volunteer work. Through various partnerships, the QFHSA has been able to support several literacy initiatives, such as a literacy and library program for schools, community learning centres and other child-centred organizations; the development of our children's literacy resource guide; and our Born to Read programs, which promote reading to preschool children. With the ongoing production of our quarterly newspaper, the QFHSA News, we have faithfully, for the past 65 years, reported on federation activities. We have published articles and opinions by experts on educational, cultural and social issues and in particular, showcased the local associations in our ``Focus on the Locals'' feature. This is where the local association's enhancement of cultural life has been so well recorded and has been highly regarded by researchers and historians.
One of the challenges facing English community schools in Quebec today is their diminishing numbers and shrinking student populations. As provincial funding is linked to school enrolment, small schools are at a disadvantage when it comes to receiving adequate resources.
We need wider access to English education in Quebec. A great deal of time, effort and careful thought went into our brief on Bill 103 to the Committee on Culture and Education at the National Assembly. We spoke very clearly that the English community has, is, and will continue to make enormous efforts in promoting French as a second language in their schools and the QFHSA sees restrictive legislation such as Bill 103 as excessive and completely unnecessary.
Issues and challenges that are of a concern to our federation include community growth and development, official- language minority community support programs, wider access to English education, accountability for the funding of minority language education and second-language instruction, and the Languages Rights Support Program.
We are providing this committee with a consultation document to further explain our position. The QFHSA strongly supports the efforts of the federal government and its various departments to strengthen the status of official languages in Canada. However, we do wish to emphasize the need for increased recognition of the status of the English-language minority community in Quebec.
The three recommendations we offer the committee are as follows: first, increased consultation opportunities with both provincial and federal official languages departments by the grassroots level of stakeholders; second, an increased support to help widen access to English education, essential for the survival of the schools and communities of the English-language minority in Quebec; and third, increased efficiency in the reporting procedures for the accountability of funding for minority language education and second languages instruction. Increased opportunity for public scrutiny on the spending of our tax dollars in this area must be respected.
Thank you again for this opportunity to be here today, and we are ready for your questions.
The Chair: Thank you. Your association represents other associations and school boards. How many members do you have?
Ms. Meindl: When parents in a school want to be involved and want to have a structured organization to interact with the principal, school and teachers, this is an organization that helps them do that. They are the ones who come together and have a president and treasurer. They set out goals for the year and raise the money to hire the staff for enrichment courses. Not all English schools in Quebec have this ability to come together, but I think there are 350 English schools in Quebec and 80 schools that have a local association within their school. They pay a membership fee. The individual parents pay a membership fee to our organization, and we provide services for the schools, but the parents in the schools also provide services for the students.
The Chair: Is there some way that you are being consulted in regards to the priorities? Do you have a link with the provincial government?
Ms. Meindl: We have been invited to various forums on the roadmap that the Quebec government is putting out for education.
Marion Daigle, Attendant to History and Archives Services and Past President, Quebec Federation of Home and School Associations: We are connected to the Ministry of Education, Leisure and Sport, MELS, in the sense that the ministry provides us with an annual grant, and has done so since the mid- 1970s. The ministry recognizes us and from time to time when we have asked for certain monies for projects it has come forward, not to the extent, I must say, that Canadian Heritage has. However, as an example, two years ago, Geoff Kelly, an MNA who is very interested in our literacy projects, provided us with small grants through his office, and we had a grant from MELS in addition to his grant because he was so encouraging about that.
We do have meetings from time to time with the ministry. Two or three years ago, we met with Madame Courchesne, when she was the minister, to talk about the issue of the upcoming school board elections. Ministers along the way have attended our spring annual meetings and so on, so we do have a liaison with the ministry.
The Chair: What are your main challenges?
Ms. Meindl: One of our main challenges is the declining population in the schools and the declining number of schools. We can have a local association set up in one school and one set up in another school, and when the schools shrink, they have to merge. If we are lucky the associations find a way to work together and set up a new association. If that school also shrinks and disperses, then those children will be sent to schools that maybe do not have an association, and it cannot be carried on. It is a challenge. Because we have a reduced population, we also have a reduced volunteer pool of people. There was a time when the organization had a membership of 20,000 parents and families, and we had a huge pool of people. If only one out of 1,000 wanted to serve on the board, we were okay. Now we have a pool of 5,000, and now the parents are working and have their children involved in things. They do not have the same time to give. It is a problem across the country.
Senator Seidman: Thank you very much. You have an often forgotten, wonderful organization.
I am looking at your first recommendation concerning ``increased consultation opportunities with both provincial and federal official language departments by grassroots level stakeholders.'' Of course, I cannot speak for the provincial level, but I would like to know what consultation opportunities you might see.
Your second recommendation is ``increased support to help widen access to English education,'' and I find that fascinating, so I would like to hear something about that as well. I am lining up my questions.
Your third recommendation, namely, the issue of accountability, has come up repeatedly in our hearings this week, and with it, the complicated aspect of federal monies going into education, which is provincial jurisdiction, and the lack of so-called accountability in that no one knows where the money goes. There is no budgetary accounting. It is not a line-by-line kind of budget, so that we could say, ``Yes, that money was spent; it went to the official languages committee in Quebec.''
Please elaborate a little on your three recommendations.
Ms. Daigle: We submitted a document to you today, and in it we noted that in 1962, the Quebec Federation of Home and Schools, had what I would call the ultimate in terms of a brief to the Quebec government at that time. Those of you who are from Quebec will recall that in 1962 the Province of Quebec was going through a great overhaul in the Quebec education system, both French and English. We had 27,000 members at that time. We submitted a brief that included 176 recommendations, including 17 areas of challenge that we saw, to the Parent Commission, which was the commission of inquiry at that time. It was exceptionally well received by the Parent Commission, and some of our recommendations were implemented. One recommendation was support for a department of education, perhaps not as centralized as it is today, but at that time, we had great faith and hope in that.
I mention that because central among our recommendations was improving the quality of instruction in the second language, which the QFHSA had promoted from the time that we began in 1944.
When it came time for the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, we submitted a brief to that royal commission again, giving our support for official languages. By 1970, when we had the Official Languages Act and when the first federal funds were coming in to the provinces to promote bilingualism, as it was called then, the QFHSA began to track that money. We have continued to track that money for 40 years.
In our brief, we say that tracking that money has often been frustrating. I have been helping to track that funding since 1976 until about two years ago when I thought I was retiring from all of this. I am not, perhaps, as up to date over the last two or three years on the various agreements, but I do know that the new Quebec-Canada agreement is coming out, and I believe it and P.E.I. are perhaps the only two provinces that do not have the complete agreement.
I have read the protocols. The protocols, to my mind, are pretty much the same protocols that I have read forever; they have not changed very much. However, when it comes to asking for real information about how this money has been spent, if you want a detailed reporting, you will have difficulty getting it from either the provincial or federal level. Much of the difficulty is a result of delays.
To my understanding, if Quebec sends its accountability report, it will send it in French, which is fine, but then, of course, the federal government must look that all over before even wanting to go to translation to make it official in the two languages. The back and forth can result in a couple of years and for those of us at the ground level looking for monies to come through those agreements and to get ahead, we do not like the delay.
We do not like some of the accountability procedures. Across the country they have been uneven in some respects because education is a provincial matter, and so the protocols sort of read that the province can do it its own way. It is an uneven kind of national standardization for reporting in some ways. At least, that is our perception.
Now, with respect to the last action plan report we had, as you will see in our brief, the parent who was looking into this said, ``I think this is an improvement. We have a bit more information about what they are planning to spend the money on.'' However, as he described it, it is ``not parent friendly.'' In a way, he is saying that this is not friendly to the taxpayer at the grassroots level. It is difficult for a person to wade his or her way through this bureaucratic maze, as the university people spoke of earlier this morning.
I have had the privilege of travelling throughout this province, especially on the Lower North Shore and in the Gaspé in widely scattered communities. Many people in these areas have difficulty getting away from home to obtain an education. I work in the field of literacy, too, and we all know what it is today to be able to read documentation. Therefore, we are looking for plainer language and, when it comes to financial situations, the kinds of financial reports that will tell us whether we are getting our fair share under whatever formulas.
The consultation portion in this case would be for community organizations like ours, and I think Quebec Community Groups Network, QCGN, has said that we need more consultation at the grassroots level, so that we can give input on where we would like to see some of this money go.
For example, we have been doing a lot of work to help school libraries, which are now community libraries on the Lower North Shore and the Gaspé, and we do need money to support those cultural institutions.
The Chair: I will ask honourable senators to ask one question only. If you have a second or a third question, I will ask senators to submit them in writing to the clerk of the committee. The clerk will see that Ms. Daigle receives the questions.
Senator Fraser: I am going to read into the record something that was in the brief that you presented to us, and I thank you very much for having gone to the trouble to produce that brief. These numbers are important:
In 1971, prior to the Charter of the French Language, Bill 101, enrolment in English public schools was 250,000 while today it stands at 93,000, a decline of 62.8 per cent.
We know that decline was not all because of the anglophone exodus, aging populations, et cetera. Nonetheless, that helps to explain the institutional reality that you and so many others have been grappling with.
You note that there are perhaps 10,000 children attending French schools who could attend English public schools. Do you know how many children attend English private schools who could attend English public schools?
Ms. Daigle: We have 10,000 eligible students who are in French schools by choice, which is their parental choice; we have always supported freedom to choose. We also have 10,000 who are ineligible. We should find out those figures specifically from the Quebec Association of Independent Schools as to how many are in private schools who are eligible for public schools.
Senator Fraser: The phenomenon of private school attendance is much greater in Quebec than in any other province.
Ms. Daigle: Yes, definitely. I am not absolutely sure that the numbers are tremendous in terms of the ineligible numbers, but they certainly are there as well.
Senator Fraser: Anything you can send us will be helpful. Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Your presentation was great and very dynamic. Are you aware whether young English- speaking families leave Quebec because they do not receive the services they expect, and do you know whether an adult who needs to take a French course to get a job can take it for free?
[English]
Ms. Daigle: We have English-speaking parents who may be choosing to leave Quebec because of their job requirements. In other words, the English-speaking population has a lot of mobility when it comes to being able to move freely, much more so than, unfortunately, a unilingual francophone young person who may want to move widely, go to the States or wherever, but does not do that because he feels that he is inadequately prepared.
What was the second part of your question?
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Can an English-speaking adult who needs to speak French take a course for free?
[English]
Ms. Daigle: I may be wrong, but what I understand about that situation, which was often a problem, for example, in the Gaspé region where young anglophone adults wanted to have free tuition in French, the Government of Quebec was not providing free tuition for English speakers to learn French. Free tuition was being offered to new immigrants to learn French, but not for English speakers who had been born and brought up here. They had to pay their own way.
I use the Gaspé as an example because the largest unemployment rate in Quebec is in the Gaspé region, French or English, if I understand correctly. Many young people there knew that they could not go very far in Quebec, either in the Gaspé or Montreal, without adequate French speaking skills. Many of them, who were on very low incomes or on welfare, simply could not afford to shell out the money for French language instruction, and they wanted to do it, but they could not afford it. I find that that is a very unequal situation to be in, that our own native-born anglophone Quebecers could not have the same tuition-free program as a new immigrant. Where is the balance? I do not know.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: Thank you very much, Madam, I am okay with that.
Ms. Daigle: I am sorry, but I do not speak French very well.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: No problem, we have all the services here to help you to understand me very well. I did not think that the situation could go that far for anglophones who want to learn French.
[English]
Ms. Daigle: I do not think it has changed.
Senator De Bané: I have read your brief carefully, and the topic I would like to hear more about is with respect to that problem identified by my colleague about the declining English-speaking community. On that issue, as you know, we are governed by the Constitution of 1982. The government of Mr. Trudeau, because Quebec did not sign, came up with a two-pronged policy, one that would apply immediately and one they hoped Quebec would join later when the other provinces signed.
What has been enshrined in the Constitution is that the children of parents who speak one of the two official languages who are in a minority can attend schools in that minority. What you are suggesting would mean that the Constitution has to be amended. Politically, I do not see that happening in the near future.
The other thing that you should keep in mind is by saying it should be essentially open to all. As you know, the Constitution of 1982 says those who have been educated in Canada can send their children to those schools, which means that someone coming from the U.K. or the United States cannot pretend to have English education in Quebec. Incidentally, that is the only difference between Canadian citizens born in this country and those who have been naturalized and became Canadian citizens later. That is the only difference we have in Canada between the two categories of citizens, namely, that article in the Constitution of 1982.
Statistics Canada tells us that in 2026, in 16 years, 100 per cent of the increase of the Canadian population will come from immigration. We are aware of the attraction of the English language in this part of the western hemisphere.
In view of the increase in the immigrant population and of the attractiveness of the English language, do you think that the solution that you are suggesting might be politically difficult to achieve? What do you think?
Ms. Meindl: It is difficult to achieve in this province because of the perception that the French language is threatened and that the more people that are put into French school the better.
One of the main differences we have found throughout the schools between the English sector and the French sector is that in the English sector, 100 per cent of the children in those schools want to be there. In the French sector, there is a large proportion of children who do not wish to be there, who have to struggle with trying to achieve an adequate education in a language that is difficult for them. It is not surprising that perhaps by secondary four they drop out and then decide to go to adult education to learn English because they can cope better, and then they finish their high school education in English.
Ms. Daigle: If I may add to that, you are speaking about the Canadian Constitution, section 23, in which, of course, we have section 59, which abrogates section 23(1)(a). We would like to think in a pipe dream that the Quebec government would decide one day to petition to the Queen and Governor General to ask for the removal of section 59, at least. That would allow a little window of opportunity for those who are English speakers from other parts of the world to choose because they may well come here as English speakers and choose a French education. I have met some of them who have been discouraged when they come because they felt they were not adequately told, let us say, in Britain, by the embassies that they would meet up with this problem. They just automatically thought, ``Two languages are to my advantage; I will choose English, and I will get a good second language instruction.'' Sad to say, for some, going into the French-language system in Quebec — and there are French-speaking people who have trouble with this — there is not an adequate second language in English even yet. That is harming us down the road economically, socially, culturally and anyway you want to look at it.
We are looking for some window because we are shrinking so quickly it is unbelievable. The university people, the people from Dawson College and so on spoke earlier about this huge influx we will have the next few years. We gave you the brief on Bill 103. Look at the kindergarten numbers now. This will come to an end more quickly than we believe, and we should not lose this two-culture experience in this province. We just should not.
The Chair: Thank you for those wise words. I apologize. It is a very short meeting, but, as I said before, once we have all read your brief and the materials that you have given us, I am sure there will be more questions and, if so, the clerk will send them to you.
Ms. Daigle: Could I make one remark related to the man who spoke earlier about technical vocational education? I happened to work as a teacher in a technical vocational school, Lasalle Protestant High School, when it was a state-of- the-art technical vocational school back in the 1970s. I agree with those who spoke this morning that both through QFHSA and through my experience as a teacher, parents have not valued the so-called trade and technical areas. We gave you a copy of the Children's Literacy Resource Guide, which was funded by Canadian Heritage. Look at pages 94 and 95. I co-authored that guide, so I am familiar with the numbers. I have used those examples with elementary school teachers. You have to start talking about what it takes to be an auto mechanic today, and it should be automotive technician. It involves the same basic skills as someone who is heading to university. Many parents do not understand that, and they do not understand that students who pursue these trades can have a very top-notch financial career.
We support what they are trying to do.
The Chair: Thank you.
Welcome to the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages. I am Senator Maria Chaput from Manitoba and I am the chair of this committee. Several colleagues, members of the committee, join me this afternoon and I invite them to introduce themselves.
Senator Fraser: My name is Joan Fraser. I am an English Montrealer, now in the Senate, previously for many years a journalist in this city and we are delighted to have you with us today.
Senator Seidman: Good afternoon. My name is Judith Seidman. I am an anglophone Montrealer and I have been in the Senate for exactly one year and maybe two days by now, and I am very much looking forward to hearing from you this afternoon.
Senator De Bané: Pierre De Bané; I am a member of the Senate, and before coming to the Senate I served in the House of Commons. I firmly believe that we are very fortunate to live in a country where the two official languages are the two most important languages of the Western world, and that have contributed so much to the Western world and we are so blessed to have those two languages. We should remind ourselves of that every day.
The Chair: I would like to welcome the Quebec English School Boards Association, represented by Debbie Horrocks, President; and David Birnbaum, Executive Director.
I would also like to welcome three school boards of the region: The Sir Wilfrid Laurier School Board, represented by Carolyn Curiale, Vice-Chair; the English Montreal School Board, represented by Ms. Angela Mancini, Chair; and the Lester B. Pearson School Board, represented by Angela Nolet, Vice-Chair.
The committee thanks this panel for having accepted its invitation to appear today. You are invited to make a presentation of approximately five minutes, after which the members of the committee will follow with questions.
Debbie Horrocks, President, Quebec English School Boards Association: Good afternoon honourable senators. The Quebec English School Boards Association is pleased to have this opportunity to contribute to the Senate committee's better understanding of Canada's other national minority language community.
We, and our member school boards, think it is essential that the senators, Canada's Parliament and the federal government of the day, recognize that English-speaking Quebec and its public schools have unique challenges, opportunities and history.
Allow me to offer some general background about the role of our association and its vision of federal support for minority language education. Then the representatives of English Montreal, Lester B. Pearson and Sir Wilfrid Laurier School Boards, will present a portrait of their communities.
Our nine member boards, some of whom you have met already in your travels across the province, serve approximately 110,000 students in 340 elementary schools, secondary schools and adult and vocational centres across Quebec. Those schools are a portrait of diversity, running from one-room rural schoolhouses to inner-city high schools. They all have in common a unique English-sector approach that includes Canada's, and perhaps the world's, best French second-language programs; a high school success rate that already averages at 80 per cent, which is the target that the Ministry of Education has set for the year 2020, and a unique and essential role as cornerstones of their communities.
Education, of course, is a provincial jurisdiction. That said however, our school system must be able to count on the federal government for crucial protection and support. English public education in Quebec, unlike francophone minority schooling in the rest of the country, is always in the eye of political storms. English school boards in Quebec represent the only level of universally elected government that is accountable to the minority language community. Their rights to control and management of the English schooling stem, of course, from section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
QESBA believes it is essential that your committee understand that English-speaking Quebec is distinct. We have watched as successive federal governments, and sadly this current one in particular, appear to apply a one-size-fits-all approach to official languages in Canada. That approach does not serve us well.
While francophone Canadian communities continue to face enormous challenges, our own are unique and different and must be recognized as such by the federal government. I will point to these examples: Access to English schooling. To our profound frustration, QESBA continues to deal with the prevalent provincial government attitude that every child who gets into English schooling in this province is a child who is lost to French Quebec. We are continually cast as the problem rather than part of the solution. This is despite our determination to give every one of our students the tools to stay here and build his or her future here in Quebec.
QESBA would like to remind this committee that our frustration was only intensified by the federal government's appalling decision to oppose our position on access to English schooling before the Supreme Court in October 2009.
These Canada-Quebec ententes in education and health and social services particularly, are vital to the future of our school system and the communities they serve. The education entente funds a wide range of things, including curriculum support, translation and materials development, the growing network of community learning centres — which you had the opportunity to hear about last evening — and the dedicated provincial bureaucratic team that supports minority language schooling.
The health and social services entente provides a level of access to services in English. Both are not perfect and my colleagues will tell you about some of the gaps. That said, we cannot emphasize enough that these ententes must be renewed and strengthened in the future.
QESBA joined the loud chorus of Canadians, admirably led by the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada, against the destructive decision by the federal government to eliminate this essential source of data for our communities. The long form helps identify the size, demographics and service needs of minority language communities. Cancelling it will make it more difficult to plan and serve our school network. The decision could make it easier for the federal government to neglect our needs and cut support to those essential ententes. We cannot help but question whether this is in fact the current agenda.
QESBA is very proud of the educational and community services our member boards provide. Our association hopes and expects that Canada's government will better support those efforts in the future. Thank you.
Angela Mancini, Chair, English Montreal School Board: Good afternoon; I am very pleased, as the chair of the English Montreal School Board, to have this opportunity to address the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages. I think it is very timely that you are learning and hearing from school boards.
When the federal government gave its consent for Quebec to switch its public school boards along linguistic rather than religious lines, we did not know what to expect. The English Montreal School Board was very pleased that after three years in existence the enrolment numbers had gone from 25,000 to 27,000. Sadly, our provincial government was troubled by this and Bill 104, an amendment to the Bill 101 language law was adopted. As a result, our student population began to plummet to the point that we are now at 21,310 students and falling.
The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Bill 104 was unconstitutional. Regrettably, it gave the Quebec government a year to come up with a new law and Bill 103 was created and is presently before a parliamentary committee. It does not provide us in any way with the oxygen that we need to prosper.
Let me be frank: We are greatly disappointed by the silence of our federal government when it comes to anglophone rights. We echo the sentiments of QESBA that the federal government's decision to oppose our position on access to English schooling before the Supreme Court of Canada in October 2009 was unacceptable.
The English Montreal School Board covers a vast territory in the central east portion of the Montreal Island, including many communities where non-francophones are very much in the minority. We have an extremely diverse population and many of our schools are in economically disadvantaged areas. We cover much of the same territory as Quebec's largest board, Commission scolaire de Montréal, and our high school success rate of 82 per cent is close to 20 points better than the Commission scolaire de Montréal. The vast majority of our students are enrolled in French immersion or bilingual programs that go far beyond the actual government prescribed curriculum for French instruction.
We face major challenges in securing English health and social services for students at risk, particularly in the east end and in areas beyond the downtown core. Psychological support, ortho-pedagogical, mental health and drug prevention services are rarely available in English in those areas.
When federal manpower services were transferred to the province, there were worries that minority language services would fall by the wayside. The EMSB has seen problems in this area. Our graduates from vocational programs have a good record of being placed in jobs, but in many regions, there few support services available from Emploi- Québec.
Again, I salute the presence of your committee here today, but I would like to tell you that we need the help of the federal government. Thank you.
Angela Nolet, Vice-Chair, Lester B. Pearson School Board: Thank you. The Lester B. Pearson School Board is an English school board, serving a geographical territory from Verdun in the south and the centre of Montreal, west to the Ontario border. In the 2009-10 school year there were approximately 24,000 students registered in the board's youth sector, serving in 39 elementary and 12 secondary school buildings. In addition, there are approximately 7,000 to 8,000 individuals registered in the adult education and vocational training sectors of the board.
The board has created an international learning centre and residence. This centre houses a variety of language programs, an international, multi-language pre-school for three- and four-year-old children and accommodations for as many as 100 live-in students from more than 20 countries. Our board is responsible for four social affairs schools in Verdun, LaSalle, Pointe Claire and Beaconsfield. There is also one administrative centre located in Dorval.
We are responsible for an annual budget of $220 million and have never experienced a deficit. The government has penalized us for our strength in managing our budget by restricting our current $7-million surplus. This accumulation of the surplus was to offset expected diminishing revenues due to diminishing enrolment, which for obvious reasons will continue to dwindle over time.
Our problems lie in constraining bills — naturally Bill 103 and Bill 104. These bills are an outright attempt to further inhibit and ghettoize the English community and to tighten the already choking restrictions on access to English schools. They also unjustifiably deny English school boards and, by extension, English communities a viable future in Quebec.
The fact is that Quebec is more interested in pursuing a pseudo-ideology at the expense of the people, whether they are anglophone, francophone or new immigrants, rather than give a larger segment of the population a fighting chance to be productive citizens, with the ability to live, learn and remain in Quebec as equal partners in society.
It must be noted that Quebec English public schools are already respecting and promoting the French language and are providing effective environments for the reception and integration into French culture. We clearly acknowledge the importance of learning French as a fundamental to achieving success in Quebec, and our students graduate bi-literate, speaking, reading and writing in at least two languages. We have proven that we are able to teach French as a second language better than anyone and ensure that those learning the language will be able to take a productive place in Quebec society.
English schools and their predecessors have always been an important part of the Quebec education system. The English schools of Quebec have always outperformed the average of all Quebec schools in terms of graduation rates, retention rates and lower dropout rates. English schools have always been leaders in programs, in technological innovation, in global awareness and in the integration of immigrants into Quebec society.
In addition, Quebec English schools have always been at the forefront of second language teaching and learning, and were responsible for the development of internationally recognized French language immersion programs. We have perfected the teaching of French through immersion to the extent that people come from the world over to learn our methods for acquiring a second language. We are a significant employer of francophones in Quebec and fluency in French is a mandatory criterion for much of our hiring.
Education and schools are the cornerstones of the community, and we will continue to pursue all avenues to maintain our constitutionally guaranteed right to operate and manage our own school system. It must be understood we do not do so in isolation of the rest of Quebec society.
We have always been active partners with our English school communities across Quebec and with our French school boards and partners on and off the Island of Montreal. The Lester B. Pearson School Board participates in the CRÉ de Montréal, CRÉ Vallée-du-Haut-Saint-Laurent, Forum des partenaires socio-économique de Montreal, and at the commissioner and administrative level with other Montreal school boards. We share ideas, buildings, programs, staff, and are as helpful as possible in times of emergency and special need.
We are active in our communities and many members of our community have contributed to the successes of Quebec in business, in health, in social affairs, in education and in the community and political life. English school boards are actually the only elected officials representing the English communities.
Quebec's future growth, both demographically and economically, will depend on the arrival of new Quebecers from foreign countries. We can encourage both immigration and investment if we allow those immigrants arriving from the U.S., Britain or Australia and other such countries to move to Quebec as permanent residents. We want people to choose Quebec as a place not only for a job but as a place to set down roots, to bring up their families and to invest in the future here, to become Quebecers and Canadians.
The English communities will continue to erode as funds are currently distributed without consideration of the needs of these communities. Adequate funding must be directly accessible to English institutions, especially to the education sector. We are committed to our communities in Quebec and require financial support to be proactive in meeting the needs of the community.
English services are few and far between and service agents available to respond to individuals in English are few. We can provide opportunities through professional development to assist English Canadian citizens in Quebec to access municipal, provincial and social services, Emploi-Québec, hospitals and senior residences. However, assistance, networking and support, which are basic needs, come at a cost. These are the determining factors just for survival for our English communities.
Carolyn Curiale, Vice-Chair, Sir Wilfrid Laurier School Board: The Sir Wilfrid Laurier School Board covers the vast territory of three major administrative regions north of Montreal: the City of Laval, the Lanaudière area and the Laurentian Region. Our school board is a blend of suburban realities, high demand suburban areas for their quality of life and proximity to large centres, and the rural and more distant regions where the English school is often the only institution that can create a sense of belonging in a community.
Our board is also unique in that its population, which is currently about 15,000 students, is moderately growing and as a result has prompted requests for new schools over the past few years and to this day.
The Sir Wilfrid Laurier School Board has been a leader in staying tuned to its community, holding frequent focus sessions on topics of interest and in implementing action plans deriving from those consultation exercises. We believe that this has kept us on our toes, abreast of current needs and open to adapting our services to meet the new demands of today. For example, we developed an Accelerated Learning Program for those fast learners who need to be challenged in high school. We sought partnerships with businesses and corporate partners to support a career exploration centre to help our students find what motivates them to stay in school and pursue higher education in a field that interests them and one that would also be in high demand in our three regions.
Well versed in supporting alternate paths to learning, our board is a strong user of the services of LEARN, which is a major non-profit consortium managed by the school boards and supported by the Canada-Québec Entente. The maintenance of that entente and of our role with the QESBA and other boards to set funding priorities for the monies that flow from it is essential and allows us to be at the leading edge of pedagogical trends to support student learning.
Several inroads have been made to equip our schools and centres with state-of-the-art technologies that are often used only in the private sector. This has been done with the solid support of our foundation, which has contributed $315,000 since its inception in 2005 towards the purchase of multimedia projectors and smart boards for all of our schools, as well as other projects answering the needs expressed by our schools.
As you can observe, we have a very dynamic approach and see opportunities in the challenges we face. Outside of the urban sectors our families encountered difficulties to access English-language support services in their communities. Imagine living in Morin-Heights, Lachute or Joliette and being told that you have to go to Montreal to access the services of a social worker, drug counsellor or any kind of therapy in English. It is difficult enough for families to seek help for these delicate issues, but not having services in their own language makes it even more difficult.
We want to make your committee aware of these crucial needs of the English-speaking community because they are a growing reality. The lack of accessibility to services compromises the success chances for our population.
Many services, including post-secondary education, are hardly accessible on our territory and for families it implies having a child leave home at 17 years or 18 years of age to move to the big city. Hence, we strongly believe that they too have the right to access services in their language in order to better themselves and actively contribute as future young adults.
We value your support and sensitivity to the portrait of our communities that we are bringing to you here today. Thank you for taking the time to listen to who we are. Hopefully together, with the support of other partners and with an increased awareness of needs, we can create a better tomorrow.
The Chair: Thank you.
[Translation]
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I was not here earlier when you started your presentations. I am Senator Fortin-Duplessis from the Quebec City region. I live in Quebec. I was also an MP for nine years. I was pleased to listen to your presentations.
As to the census form, I just wanted to tell you that the long form still exists, but what changed is that people who refuse to answer will no longer be prosecuted. That is the only thing.
David Birnbaum, Executive Director, Quebec English School Boards Association: What we can talk about more specifically and with conviction is the importance of data. We trust experts. The former chief statistician, the universities and the governor of the Bank of Canada said this morning that data collected through a voluntary census are not valid. We maintain our opposition.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: You would still like to keep penalties in place for those who do not want to answer, is that it?
Mr. Birnbaum: Yes, and we trust other experts on that, like the commissioner of human rights, who suggests that there were no complaints that it was a violation of human rights to ask people to fill out the mandatory form. We maintain our strong objections to the elimination of the mandatory long form.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I will keep your comment in mind. As to the brief on the Lester B. Pearson School Board, it says on page 4:
[English]
The English communities in Quebec will continue to erode as funds are currently distributed without consideration for the needs of these communities.
[Translation]
How can we help you to allocate the funds according to the needs of the community?
Ms. Nolet: I understand that the funds come directly from the Province of Quebec at the moment, and that the anglophones never know how much they get, if they actually get anything. What is happening right now is that the government has cut funding from school boards, even in professional development. Yet, professional development is absolutely necessary for the survival of a school board; it represents the vitality of the school board in question. If we have no funds to exist, everything will eventually collapse.
Senator Fortin-Duplessis: I hope they will rethink it. It was the only question I had for you at the moment, thank you.
[English]
Senator Fraser: I want to ask about the next sentence in the same brief on page 4, which says, ``adequate funding must be directly accessible to English institutions.'' That seems to me to go a bit further than you did in your response to Senator Fortin-Duplessis, where you sounded more as if you were talking about accountability, stability, transparency, predictability and those good things, but ``directly accessible'' sounds to me as if we are wading into a constitutional thicket; am I wrong?
Ms. Nolet: To exist we need money for our communities. We are elected representatives; we are the only elected representatives of the English community. If we cannot reach them, if they need services and do not know where to go, all of these things cost money. We hardly ever see any money coming from the Quebec government for the English community to say directly that here; we are giving you a lump sum of money to be used for your school board because you are a minority language. They just do not; they just will not. That is something they put into the large fund, and I believe everybody throughout Quebec has access to it, and we seemed to be penalized at every turn.
Senator Fraser: Would it respond to your concerns if federal-provincial agreements on funding included more specific provisions for minority language education?
I think there are some now for specific programs and there are negotiations that have produced some very interesting programs that we have heard about this week, but I think any English Quebecer can understand the level of frustration that you are feeling. I am just trying to figure out how to do that, how to achieve what you want without creating a constitutional fight that will end up wounding everybody and helping nobody.
Ms. Nolet: I am not too sure myself. Whether it is requested that the Quebec government actually officially give us a percentage or that we have access to this money without restriction or that the federal government perhaps retain some money and, considering us a heritage minority group, give it to us, I do not know.
Senator Fraser: It is for the other politicians other than you to figure out how to do it, and you just want it done.
Ms. Horrocks: One concern we have as school boards is that much of our funding tends to come targeted to this initiative or that initiative. Certainly, the federal money that the school boards receive comes through the Canada- Québec Entente, and we would like to see that maintained and increased. Less targeted, I think, is something that the boards would like to see. Each board operates differently, each board has its own strengths, and each community that our board serves is different, so targeted funding is often very restrictive.
Senator Fraser: Less targeted but more.
Ms. Horrocks: Less targeted would be more appropriate.
Senator Fraser: Ms. Mancini, you talked about the quite alarming drop in your enrolment. We have been told that, at least recently, there has been a little bit of an increase — I think we were told this in Quebec City — in total English language school population, and some of that has been borne out here.
Ms. Mancini: Just our board.
Senator Fraser: You are the only board that has come in with that kind of a huge, terrifying drop just in that short period of time. To what extent could some of that drop be attributed not to language of access to school legislation but to what I think is the continuing movement of many English Quebecers toward the West Island?
Ms. Mancini: I think you are correct in part. Demographics show that in not only the West Island but also Laval, and my colleague inherits some of our families that go that way. We are doing the numbers because we are preparing for the brief that we get to do next week. In English Montreal because of our multicultural groups and Bill 104, we had a drop of 5,000 students from 2002 only in the elementary years. In some of our schools, the drop was so drastic that we went from very viable schools of 500 or 600 students to 200 students. It has hit us probably the hardest, and I think that maybe that is why you are seeing that drop. There is no question the demographics, the fact that families are having less children, is also an effect.
The fact that we as an English community do not have access except to students whose parents have gone to English school, as you know with Bill 101, also has an effect. However, we have been probably the most hit, along with Lester B. Pearson School Board, with the language laws being further restrictive to us, and we have seen major drops specifically in our elementary years.
Senator Fraser: Have you been able to accumulate any authoritative data breaking down why, or is this the board's best belief based on the experience you have gone through as distinct from actual data?
Ms. Mancini: We have data.
Senator Fraser: I am driving at the reasons for it.
Ms. Mancini: I think we are seeing that the schools that had the greatest multicultural groups that were availing themselves of pre-Bill 104 have seen the most drops. There is that kind of data. I do not know if we would be able to tell you demographically. Between the Lester B. Pearson School Board and our board, we have lost approximately 1,000 students per year. That is about 500 to 600 for us, and 400 for Lester B. Pearson. That is since the inception of Bill 104 in 2002.
Senator Fraser: Any data you could supply us with would be interesting for us. I reiterate that we are a committee of the federal Parliament, not of the Quebec National Assembly. We have no mandate over provincial jurisdictions. However, what you tell us helps us to understand the context in which we will be making recommendations, and obviously some of our recommendations go straight to the encouragement of Part VII, the vitality of the communities. It is all pertinent, but do not expect us to transform provincial legislation.
Mr. Birnbaum: We understand that, but we would expect that one of the arguments you have heard in different shapes and forms all week is that, from the uniquely federal perspective, there is a necessity to understand that Canada's two minority language communities are not mirror images of each other. There is tremendous respect, admiration, collaboration between us, and there are differences.
We see repeated evidence of a federal government approach to official languages that suggests that one size fits all. However, two very self-evident and daily differences manifest themselves in the ways you are hearing about during these hearings. To start with, and with the greatest respect to the smallest francophone community in the rest of the country, they do not wake up each morning with their future being perceived by decision makers as in some way running counter to the interests of the majority English language community in their provinces. That is our institutional reality.
The second institutional reality that seems to be different is that you have a federal government of whatever stripe with political exigencies that seem to prevent it from fully speaking on behalf of this national minority language community. The federal government will not speak fully because there are countervailing political obstacles, stakes that do not present themselves in the admittedly difficult and challenging situation that francophone Canadians in the other provinces and territories face.
I think there is one general message we want to reiterate and that you have probably already heard is that there is a need for a made-in-English-Quebec understanding of federal minority language policy-making and funding.
The Chair: I believe, sir, that this committee is here visiting the English-speaking communities in Quebec because this committee has thought, or is thinking, that something needs to be done here. The committee decided to come and hear about what has been happening with the English-speaking communities. Unfortunately, in a sense, you are right. When we talk about official languages minorities, we tend to think that they are francophones outside Quebec, but we never seem to realize that there is another official languages community, and it is the English-speaking communities in Quebec. Your needs are different and you are different, no doubt. I wanted you to know that.
Senator Seidman: Thank you for coming to see us today. As you can imagine, I find this rather heart-rending, and it has been heart-rending the entire week of our travels in this province. I think this committee has learned a lot and, as our chair said, we are here because we understand that there are differences here in Quebec with the anglophone minority communities.
To pick up on the portrait you presented, all of you mentioned words like ``sense of belonging,'' ``community,'' ``survival,'' ``identity.'' One thing that we discovered in our travels is that schools are more than educational facilities: they are community centres. They bring people together and offer a community a sense of belonging. They help vulnerable people in our communities. They are much more than a school. I think that we have learned that. Even if we might have known it intellectually, we felt it emotionally this week when we saw the people in the Gaspésie by video conference and the people in the Lower North Shore. We have heard a lot. We have received information on political traction issues, isolation issues, and access to education, health and social services.
I guess I am pursuing a similar track in that you have talked about access to adequate funding. We know the issues about provincial and federal responsibilities. Something else that came up in our travels is this whole issue of transparency and accountability. The federal government gives monies for education to the provinces. I would like to know how you think about this procedure. Is there something in the area of more transparency and more accountability? We understand this money kind of disappears into some big black pot that gets doled out but no one really knows how. There is not any budgetary accountability or line item accounting for where it goes. Would you give us some indication of whether there is something useful in pursuing that?
Mr. Birnbaum: From our perspective, and we can only speak about the educational entente, while we are mysterious beneficiaries of the health and social services and other ententes, it is the education one that we know, and it would be only fair to note that there has been substantial improvement in how that money is distributed. One thing that is essential to our delivery of educational services is that we do have a designated bureaucracy within the provincial Ministry of Education, Leisure and Sport. There is a deputy minister for the anglophone community and aboriginal affairs, and that person and his team are very involved in the administration of this agreement.
Now, there are still some big bumps, and one we would point to is that the consultation and the deadlines are often unworkable. This is typical of governments, with the greatest of respect. You are being asked to suggest how the planning of allocation of funds might be done, and you are waiting for the signed cheque to pay for an approved program that you have already delivered. There are those kinds of bureaucratic difficulties, and probably not enough transparency with respect to consultations on what the general priorities should be in the Canada-Quebec education entente.
However, to be fair, within the network we understand which programs are funded and have some involvement in those. The part of it that is never going to go away is clearly the Quebec government's insistence that they operate two parallel school systems, which is true, and a great portion of the funding simply goes into that operation. There is something in the order of $265 million, I believe, over the five years in the current agreement that is allocated for minority language and second language programs to which we are fairly privy, so it is much better than it used to be. There is room for improvement though.
Senator De Bané: Madam Horrocks, in your brief, particularly on page 3, there are a wealth of acronyms and abbreviations, and I have no idea to what they refer. Would you would be so kind as to send us a document explaining the multitude of abbreviations on page 3 of your brief?
[Translation]
There are a lot: CLD, CDSV, CRE, CGTSIM. . .
[English]
I have no idea what you are talking about.
[Translation]
It is like a disease in Ottawa, they send us documents full of acronyms. I think it is what bureaucrats do just to confuse us.
[English]
Now, on serious issues, in the last paragraph on page 3, you comment on the immigrants arriving from the U.S., Britain and Australia. This is precisely where the Constitution of 1982 closed the door by saying those Canadian citizens educated in Canada have the following rights, which meant those from the U.K., Australia and the U.S. do not have those rights. It was very traumatic, because it is the only distinction in Canadian law between Canadian citizens born in Canada and those who received their citizenship later.
I understand why you put that there, but think whether that could be achieved in the near future. You and I lived through that period in 1982 and we saw the upheaval it caused. Of course, the language clauses at section 23 are not what we had in mind, but that was it.
Now, to finish with Lester B. Pearson, on page 2, the last paragraph, you say something that I think is absolutely true.
The English schools of Quebec have always outperformed the average of all Quebec schools in terms of graduation rates, retention rates and lower dropout rates.
Would you be so kind as to send us the data concerning that statement? It is your honour to have achieved that, and it would be very interesting to have that information. Maybe my colleagues and I would like to put that in our report. This is very important. I remember Mr. Parizeau a year ago saying the dropout in the French system is double the one of the English system. I would appreciate having the data.
Ms. Nolet: Because we are proficient at delivering an education in a second language, this is something our French mother tongue is not capable of. When you have an influx of immigration, children that come from different countries, they do not seem to have the methodology to teach them French in the same fashion that the English boards do.
Senator De Bané: You mention on page 3 that people from around the world come here to learn from you how to do that and to learn your methods. This is extraordinary. Give us more details. It will be very interesting.
Ms. Nolet: Okay. We have an international school, so we receive students continuously from China, Japan, Australia — many different places.
Senator De Bané: Perfect. One last item to the representative of the English Montreal School Board: Madam Mancini, I am a member of the opposition in the Senate, so I am not a supporter of the present government, but I respectfully beg to differ with you when you say on page 2:
Let me be frank: We are greatly disappointed by the silence of our federal government when it comes to anglophone rights. We echo the sentiments of QESBA that the federal government's decision to oppose our position on access to English schooling before the Supreme Court of Canada in October 2009 was unacceptable.
The government has to rely on the opinion of the lawyers of the Department of Justice to plead before the court. You say you are disappointed they have not followed your opinion or stand. I am uncomfortable with that. The law is the law. When the Supreme Court of Canada said discrimination against gay and lesbian rights is against the Constitution, the government had to obey, whether the politicians liked it or not. This is the law.
Mr. Birnbaum: If I might, that point was raised on the advice of our legal counsel, a legal argument about the federal government having not upheld its obligation to defend the Constitution of Canada and section 23. We insisted that in the question of law, the federal Attorney General, at the instructions, from our information, after consultations from the PMO, had made a political decision on how it would interpret the legal question of the extent to which section 23 protected minority language schooling, pure and simple. On that basis, we indicated our great dissatisfaction and disappointment with the federal government. It was clearly a political decision to have the provincial jurisdiction writ very, very large and in a question of law that we feel contravenes the full import of section 23, which is there for us as well as francophone minority schooling in Canada.
Senator De Bané: Yes, but you see, Mr. Birnbaum, the Supreme Court of Canada spoke through Judge LeBel, who is, incidentally, from Quebec City.
[Translation]
He repealed the legislation based on the legal arguments that were brought forward.
[Translation]
The Supreme Court of Canada upheld your position. Now, Ms. Mancini says she regrets that the Supreme Court gave Quebec one year to come up with something compatible with the Constitution. Come on; this is elementary. We cannot leave a void, an absence, a vacuum in place. They had to move and say, ``Hey, your law is not valid; we give you one year to come with a better clause.''
[Translation]
Ms. Mancini: Senator De Bané, the problem here in Quebec has always been that legislation is sometimes interpreted politically. It is always the same story: should we separate as a province or not? And the federal government will often walk on eggshells when it deals with the province of Quebec.
The problem with the fact that they allowed a year for the review of the bill is that now we have Bill 103, which is even more detrimental to our communities than Bill 104. As a result, Quebecers, Canadian citizens, will be going to court. These parents want their children to come to our schools. We will now have an act that says they must go to an unsubsidized private school for three years, and someone in an office somewhere will sit down and ask the parents to prove why their child has to go to an English-speaking school. It is absolutely ridiculous, but that is what the decision did for the citizens, who are not only Quebecers, but also Canadians.
We are here to say that the federal government has a responsibility to provide support, and that we, as a minority in Quebec, are constantly suffering. We have a hard time obtaining services at all levels and our schools will continue to close if we do not get help. I am not sure if you see my point.
Senator De Bané: We hear you loud and clear. I just wanted to say respectfully that I have a different opinion on two of the points you mentioned. First, the Supreme Court makes its decisions on political grounds. And second, you are surprised that the Supreme Court gave the Government of Quebec a year to come up with another bill. That is generally the rule when the Supreme Court repeals a piece of legislation because it is unconstitutional, or inconsistent with the Constitution. It gives the parliament in question some time to come up with something that complies with that. There you go, that is the rule.
[English]
Senator Fraser: Further to the last discussion, I would agree entirely that the Supreme Court of Canada has an admirable history of ruling on law and on a generally — not always, it varies — but on a generally broad and generous interpretation of Canadians' rights, including their language rights. My own view, however, about federal government representations in these cases is that, as a general rule, if the federal government cannot support a minority, it should do nothing. It should shut up. There is a political message involved in the federal government's decision to take a position even if that position is narrowly argued on technical legal grounds. The mere fact that the Government of Canada, with all its great weight, has chosen to side against a minority, not just a language minority, all kinds of minorities, sends a message in its own right that, in the vast majority of cases, in my view, is not necessary and can be harmful.
That said, back to mundane matters. Ms. Horrocks, you said, and I think it was echoed by other people, that English language schools have a high school success rate that already averages 80 per cent, but we have been told that the dropout rate in English schools is somewhere between 30 per cent and 40 per cent. Can you explain the reality to this committee?
Ms. Mancini: Absolutely. The average graduation rate of the nine boards is over 80 per cent. A couple of our boards are experiencing some challenges — certainly, Eastern Townships, and you probably heard from them yesterday down in Sherbrooke, and possibly Eastern Shores.
The Quebec English School Boards Association represents all nine boards, so when we bring all nine together the graduation rate is, on average, over 80 per cent. We recognize that some boards have challenges.
Senator Fraser: As a matter of interest, when you make that calculation, are you calculating people who start in secondary one and just keep on going to school until they finish secondary five, or are you including folks who may drop out for a while and then come back later?
Ms. Mancini: It is the five-year cohort, as they call it.
Mr. Birnbaum: It could be seven years.
Senator Fraser: It is a consistent attendance in school.
Mr. Birnbaum: It is an interesting segue into why we need the Canada-Québec Entente. When you talk about dropout rates, I can relate one specific example of a situation that two of our boards have been dealing with for five years now. Their figures are clearly skewed for very specific English speaking reasons. In Western Quebec and Eastern Shores, great numbers of parents and kids choose to move over the border to New Brunswick or Ontario. Their kids in secondary two, three or four are technically leaving school, but they are not dropping out; they are going to school in another jurisdiction. We are trying to get to the bottom of this, and now we finally will with a small amount of money from the Canada-Québec education entente and with the intervention of the assistant deputy minister in Quebec. We will use those funds which would not otherwise be available to get a credible study done on this question that is specific to us. This is a good example of how this entente is essential to our operations.
Senator Fraser: Since you raised Mr. La France, from whom we did hear and about whom we heard quite a lot, I believe it is under his aegis that consultative committees and things have been set up — a structure, in other words, that helps the English-speaking schools and school boards and other actors to participate fully. Are you satisfied with those structures?
Ms. Horrocks: Absolutely. I think Mr. La France and his department do amazing things with very few resources. We have heard about doing a lot with very little resources; I am sure you have heard it a number of times in your travels. Mr. La France is a tremendous asset to the English community. If we had more money, could we do better? Yes, I am absolutely positive of it.
Senator Seidman: I would like to continue on the subject of dropouts and the issue of the statistics concerning dropouts because they are big issues. Although we heard about the statistics yesterday in the Eastern Townships, I actually heard this from a member in the audience who was a teacher. You might just perhaps confirm this: Students who move from one school to another are counted as dropouts. If a student moves jurisdictions, changes school boards even in the same province, even in Quebec, if he or she moves from one school board to another rather than within the school board, he or she is lost in the system because the statisticians only use aggregate data. They do not track individuals; they only track numbers. That is what I heard. Therefore, the statistics inherently are just simply incorrect on that basis.
Ms. Horrocks: I know that when a student moves out of the province, that is definitely considered a dropout. I was not aware. I do not believe that between English school boards that you would have that issue, but potentially, and I do not know for sure but potentially, particularly between linguistic modes, if a student moved from an English board to a French board, the lines of communication might not be as open. We can try to find out more about that and let you know.
Senator Seidman: Thank you.
We talked about political issues, and I respect your viewpoints; I feel I need to say that. We talked a lot about families and kids, but we did not get to the teachers. I would like to ask you a question about the teachers and their needs. Are teachers fulfilled in terms of training, development, whatever one hopes for in teacher training and then ongoing development once they are in the system?
Ms. Horrocks: One thing we are proud of in the English sector is the relationship we have with our English teachers. We are in contact with them on a regular basis. We have our own collective agreement separate from the collective agreements of the francophone sector. There are many provisions for professional development, but I think there is always room for more.
Mr. Birnbaum: It is worth noting that like the QESBA, the teachers intervened before the Supreme Court of Canada in the Bill 104 case. They did so because they quite clearly share our interest in protecting the institutional future of English schooling. On that major question that you have heard a lot about, our teachers are four square with us.
Senator De Bané: We have heard of many situations that are unfair to the English-speaking communities. I would like to put before you an idea or suggestion that you might want to consider with your advisers and lawyers, et cetera. At the moment, we have in our constitution the equalization payments. Those started under Prime Minister St. Laurent. In the first year, the payments totalled $30 million. Today, of course it is dozens of billions of dollars. Equalization payments are unconditional transfers to the budgets of recipient provinces. The provinces can do whatever they want with the funds. They can open embassies, whatever they want.
I wonder, in view of what we have heard, and we have heard many things that are unacceptable, if the federal government should not offer the provinces money under very detailed agreements with each of the recipient provinces concerning their minorities for different topics and different reasons. I think something very detailed, because many things we have heard today concern provincial jurisdiction. What if the federal government offered the provinces the payments with details concerning where some of the funds might be spent. Maybe there are pluses and disadvantages to it, but I think unconditional transfers are not a solution.
The Chair: I thank you for appearing before this committee this afternoon. It is always very interesting. It could go on and on, but we have to close the discussion.
This marks the ending of our five-day visit. The program was very busy with public hearings and meetings in Quebec City, Sherbrooke and Montreal. We had great opportunities to hear from many organizations and individuals and to ask ample questions. The members of the committee want to thank all the witnesses and the participants who made this visit a success.
I also thank the Quebec Community Groups Network, its President Ms. Linda Leith and her team for facilitating our visit.
We are returning to Ottawa with a lot of information. The members of the committee will take some time to reflect on the discussions that took place, and we will talk about our findings at our first committee meetings in the fall. I am sure there will be a few more following. I invite you all to continue to follow the work of the committee and to learn more on the next steps of this study and on future studies.
Honourable senators, thank you very much.
(The committee adjourned.)