THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON OFFICIAL LANGUAGES
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Monday, November 17, 2025
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met this day at 5:09 p.m. [ET] to examine and report on the strengthening of federal institutions’ arts, culture and heritage responsibilities in official language minority communities and in Canada; and, in camera, to study a draft agenda (future business); and, in camera, to examine and report on minority‑language health services (consideration of a draft report).
Senator Allister W. Surette (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Honourable senators, before we begin, I would like to ask you to consult the cards on the table for guidelines to prevent audio feedback incidents. Please make sure to keep your earpiece away from all microphones at all times. Do not touch the microphone. Activation and deactivation will be managed by the console operator.
Good evening. I am Alistair Surette. I am a senator from Nova Scotia, and I am the chair of the Senate Committee on Official Languages.
Now, I would like to ask my colleagues to introduce themselves starting from my left.
Senator Gerba: Amina Gerba from Quebec. Welcome.
Senator Moncion: Lucie Moncion from Ontario.
Senator Cormier: René Cormier from New Brunswick. Welcome.
Senator Patterson: Rebecca Patterson from Ontario. Welcome.
The Chair: This evening, pursuant to the order of reference received from the Senate on October 29, we are continuing our study on the strengthening of federal institutions’ arts, culture and heritage responsibilities in official language minority communities and in Canada.
We are pleased to welcome this evening: Nancy Juneau, Chair, and Marie-Christine Morin, Executive Director, of the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française. Welcome and thank you for accepting our invitation. As usual, you will have a few minutes to speak right at the start. That will be followed by a question period with senators.
You have the floor.
Nancy Juneau, Chair, Fédération culturelle canadienne-française: Thank you. I’m sorry we were late.
Mr. Chair, committee members, I am Nancy Juneau, Chair of the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française, also called the FCCF. With me is Marie-Christine Morin, our Executive Director.
Thanks for your invitation to appear today, and thanks especially for choosing to address this topic of study, which is central to our national mandate.
The FCCF has been the political voice of the arts and culture sector of the minority francophonie for almost 50 years. It represents 22 national, regional and territorial organizations and has over 300 organizations in its wider network.
I would note at the outset that participating in cultural life is a fundamental right under Article 27 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Thanks to your support for modernization of the Official Languages Act, the culture sector has been recognized as essential to the vitality and development of minority communities. Parliament also got it right when it provided, in general terms, for greater responsibilities regarding official languages on the part of federal institutions, including their duty to take positive measures.
We now have formal recognition of the decline of French in Canada and the need to protect Canadian cultural sovereignty. There is an urgent need for action. More than ever, it is essential to work toward achieving substantive equality of the official languages and making access to culture a priority in the things done by the government and institutions.
Marie-Christine Morin, Executive Director, Fédération culturelle canadienne-française: Since 1998, the FCCF has engaged in concerted action to promote the growth of the arts and culture in francophone minority communities under a collaboration agreement to which six key federal institutions are parties: Canadian Heritage, the Canada Council for the Arts, the National Arts Centre, CBC/Radio-Canada, the National Film Board and Telefilm Canada. That formal agreement, which was renewed for the 2024-28 period, commits the institutions that signed the agreement to carrying out concrete actions.
Even though we have this formal agreement behind us, sustainable development of the arts and culture sector in the minority francophonie is hindered by serious barriers associated with the institutions’ areas of responsibility.
It is estimated that from 2023 to 2025, 80% of departmental funding of the arts and culture sector in Canadian and Acadian francophone communities came from Canadian Heritage, 65% of which was allocated under its official languages programs. Those figures show that interdepartmental action did not produce the anticipated results to diversify our access to funding.
Despite the greater responsibilities on the part of federal institutions and the investments allocated in the last two actions plans for official languages, the culture sector’s access to envelopes from other departments, such as Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, Employment and Social Development Canada and Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, is still limited. This situation reduces the organizations’ capacity to expand and carry out activities in essential fields. The culture sector’s heavy dependence on envelopes that relate exclusively to official languages is a source of serious concern, particularly in view of the funding guarantee in the Action Plan for Official Languages beyond 2028.
The second issue relates to the capacity of federal cultural institutions to collect, analyze and disseminate data about OLMCs. This situation gives rise to doubts regarding how well the institutions may actually understand our needs. The fact that they are unable to incorporate that knowledge into their strategic planning is also a source of major problems for our communities, particularly when it comes to equitable access to the existing funding programs.
The third and final point that the FCCF stresses is the importance of ensuring that federal institutions have the resources to evaluate the impact of their services and the funding they allocate so they are able to help us measure the progress made in relation to sustainable development of the culture sector.
Ms. Juneau: To conclude, federal cultural institutions will be able to fulfill their responsibilities regarding official languages when they are able to provide diversified, structuring financial support, maintain reliable data and invest in developing digital skills.
Thank you for listening. We will be pleased to answer your questions.
The Chair: Thank you for your excellent presentation. We will now move on to the question period.
Senator Cormier: Mr. Chair, I would like to mention right off that I held the position of chair of the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française in the early 2000s. That is quite a while ago, but I still wanted to point it out.
Thank you for being here and for the work that the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française has been doing for so many years.
My first questions will be about the multiparty cooperation agreement I was familiar with in a different era. I would like to know how this agreement operates and how effective it is. At that time, there was an action plan associated with it and the priorities were determined by actors in the community. Does that still exist? Is there still an action plan as part of this collaboration? I have looked back over the list of departments and agencies. Obviously, there are some actors that don’t appear there, including Global Affairs Canada. I would like to hear your thoughts on the collaboration agreement itself.
Ms. Juneau: Thank you for your question, senator.
In fact, we realized that the terms of reference of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages for this study correspond to the objectives of that agreement. That is a parallel worth drawing. The agreement was developed 25 years ago, and yes, it was accompanied by an action plan containing structuring projects that had been identified by the community. A group of partners, working together under the umbrella of the agreement, committed to implementing all of that. I can give the example of the distribution networks we have today in Atlantic Canada and the West, which arose out of the action plan under the original agreement.
Since then, with the second and third versions of the agreement, there has been no action plan per se. That does not mean we would not like to have one. We adopt cross-cutting themes. For example, digital skills is one, as are training and human resources development: themes on which all of the partners who meet around this table agree. We commit to working on them together. There are no concrete measures, however.
The other problem we have regarding the agreement is the entire subject of data collection. It is difficult to measure the progress we are making together, for certain partners more than others. For example, there are partners like the Canada Council for the Arts where data is collected and is available, so we can actually monitor progress there. This makes it difficult to really get an idea of the effectiveness of the agreement.
In fact, for a number of federal institutions under the umbrella of the agreement, what enables them to identify needs and influence the strategies to be adopted is the ongoing communication and dialogue with the sector. This sometimes results in collaborative development of solutions. For example, for some years, the NAC has had a residency in cultural management that was made up out of whole cloth, in collaboration with us, to meet the needs of our community. The residency takes in a cultural management cohort each year to provide them with training.
Senator Cormier: The infrastructure issue was also important for official language minority communities, and there were projects that came out of that agreement. Other than the one you just mentioned, are there other very concrete examples of projects that you believe have come into being as a result of the collaboration agreement, or is it only about collaboration and discussion?
Ms. Juneau: My answer to your question will be qualified. Once again, it is difficult to monitor the progress of projects. We have working groups associated with these agreements in theatre, publishing, the visual arts and song. Within those working groups, progress is made in terms of organizing program criteria and jury composition. There are initiatives like that. Yes, concrete results have come about under this agreement. However, in terms of major projects like we saw in the beginning, there really are not any.
Zones Théâtrales is an eloquent example of a project that was originally part of the action plan. That project has lasted and has expanded and become an event not to be missed for French‑language theatre outside urban centres, including those regions of Quebec.
Senator Cormier: Does the Action Plan for Official Languages, or APOL — and you mentioned this — address the arts, culture and heritage sector? You also talked about core funding. I understood that one of the major issues you are facing is ensuring that organizations have core funding. Various departments are involved in implementing the action plan. Are they involved in core funding for your organizations? What can you tell us about this?
Ms. Juneau: I will begin and Marie-Christine may be able to add to my answer. Regarding the APOL, we would like to highlight three major items: the limits of funding, the need to give, and funding for initiatives with Quebec and internationally. I will give you some quick details about each of these items.
Regarding funding, as Marie-Christine said in her introduction, the APOL is still an essential lever for the francophone minority culture sector. For operating purposes, we do not have access to other forms of funding, so we are very dependent. The intended effect of the APOL was to focus efforts and provide for greater coherence in the investments made in OLMCs. The perverse effect is that it limited the efforts of all institutions, which refer us back to the APOL.
In the Action Plan for Official Languages, there has been historical underfunding of the arts and culture sector. I can give you the example of the Association des groupes en arts visuels francophones, which was granted $110,000 in operating funding in 2018, but that has barely changed. They received increases at the same level as all the other better-funded organizations, but that does not make up for the historic lag, and this limits their ability to do things.
In fact, with the renewal of the APOL in 2028, we are concerned that there has been no indication of whether it will continue or whether it will be raised. We only know that we need a raise. We need additional core funding and access to other departments. We do not have access to social economy and social development funding. Although our sector contributes heavily to economic benefits, and we have a study to show this, we do not have access to immigration funding, for example, for cultural mediation activities for newcomers.
The second point concerns data. We had a meeting with Canadian Heritage about data a few weeks ago, and we have realized that they are not able to offer us a clear picture of the funding that the arts and culture sector receives. They do not have those figures. We need data in order to know where we stand and how we are progressing.
The last element is Quebec and the international scene. The arts, culture and francophonie sector is a tight-knit one, with organizations in Quebec and organizations that deal with international issues relating to culture, such as the Coalition for the Diversity of Cultural Expressions. However, APOL has no funding to assist us in our activities with those organizations. The APOL is deficient in this regard.
Senator Cormier: Thank you.
Senator Gerba: Welcome once again. I am going to speak to the issue of cultural diplomacy. I know we are still waiting for a national cultural diplomacy strategy. I would like to hear your thoughts about this. Why do you think a national cultural diplomacy strategy is necessary? What role could you play in that strategy?
Ms. Morin: Thank you for the question. In 2018, we took part in the Senate committee’s study on cultural diplomacy, at which time the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française submitted a brief. In preparing for this meeting, we went back over it and found that the recommendations we made are still topical and necessary. One of those recommendations, regarding the arts and culture community, was to develop a Canada-wide strategy to promote artistic works and artists abroad. At present, there is no action plan or concerted efforts among actors whose mission is to promote the Canadian francophonie’s arts and culture abroad or that have programs for that purpose. I am talking about actors like Canadian Heritage, but also the Canada Council for the Arts and Global Affairs Canada, to some extent. There is nowhere that these three actors are currently coming together and developing something specific concerning us in relation to cultural diplomacy.
Another recommendation we made at that time was to diversify the markets in which our artistic works and artists circulate. To date, we have been going to markets where our industries can make very few connections. These are not markets they have explored. They are markets where they are marginal, where there is not much potential for growth at present, such as in francophone Africa.
This is the kind of exercise where closer attention needs to be paid to the needs of the industries in the Canadian francophonie, and this would make it possible to develop a whole network for promoting arts and culture.
In addition, of course, funding for international mobility is the poor relation. Works are circulated, but the artists are not. A book is sent abroad, but its author is not.
These are genuinely barriers to promoting and developing an arts and culture sector that has a presence abroad. We know that it takes time to make business connections or establish relationships with partners abroad. So funding needs to be continuous, not ad hoc. People need to be given time to develop relationships.
The issue of digital diplomacy was discussed in 2018. I would say this is more topical than ever. The big issues that today relate to the discoverability of francophone content and to artificial intelligence are being discussed in various international bodies, be they UNESCO or the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie.
Ms. Juneau: There is also the international coalition.
Ms. Morin: So the participation of the arts and culture sector in that kind of forum and its involvement in the discussion in the digital arena is more real than ever.
To conclude, there was also a recommendation that still holds today: that the structure for concerted action be expanded. We have people abroad who are promoting artists and their works, but they are not familiar with the arts and culture sector in the Canadian francophonie. We need to expand connections with the people doing the networking, whose mandate is to develop markets or support organizations and artists who want to develop those markets. We have to give them an opportunity to come and see what is being done here, to meet the artists and get to know the works being created here. We have to find this kind of place, where people can meet. This is probably the basis of an entire network of relationships, as I was saying earlier.
Thank you for your question. This is still an important lever for development in francophone Canada and the arts and culture sector in particular. It is directly related to the difficulty we have in obtaining funding for our activities at the international level. It is an obstacle to development.
Ms. Juneau: I have a little anecdote to add to my colleague’s remarks. For the last two events to which we were invited by the federal government, first at the Sommet de la Francophonie in Tunisia and then in Paris, we knew only four or five days before leaving that we would be part of the delegation. That does not allow for proper preparation. We are waiting. That is an anecdote, but it is a small illustration of how things are done.
Senator Moncion: You submitted questions in your request to be invited. I would like to hear your thoughts about the federal institutions that are making arrangements to incorporate artificial intelligence in their practices and programs. How will this shift impact the francophone minority culture sector, and what deficiencies do you see when it comes to support or training?
Ms. Morin: Thank you for the question. As I said at the outset, artificial intelligence has shaken things up in terms of the practices not only of all federal institutions, but also of our organizations and the arts community.
At present, no specific funding is provided to the francophone minority culture sector to support the AI transition. The Canadian francophonie is not alone; the culture sector in general is also not among the priority sectors for the federal government’s current AI investments. The culture sector has no representatives on the advisory committee that has been set up. The funding available for AI training and skills development does not allow for not-for-profit organizations and the culture sector to qualify for those envelopes. It is therefore difficult to support our organizations in the digital transition, because there is insufficient literacy and capacity to generate data to be able to take part in an area as enormous as artificial intelligence.
That is why we are recommending the explicit inclusion of the francophone arts and culture sector in the $2.4 billion to be invested at the federal level in AI. We are recommending that the funding that will be available from Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada include the culture community, so it can do AI training, and we are recommending that Employment and Social Development Canada’s innovation and training programs be opened up to cultural organizations.
That is still one of our explicit recommendations. I also want to say that there is an entire arts and culture sector that is working very closely on these issues with the organizations that include the Coalition for the Diversity of Cultural Expressions, for one, to make sure the voice of the sector is heard.
Clearly, this issue is of particular importance to us. If we want to protect the diversity of cultural expressions we represent, we have to be able to take part fully in this — I am going to call it a revolution; I think that is an accurate word.
Ms. Juneau: If I may add something, since we do not have access to these funds at present, the FCCF has taken the initiative of developing a project it refers to as digital bandwidth, the objective of which is to provide our members on the ground with support for this transition. The approach taken is to pool services. This works very well, but we drew on the APOL’s strategic envelope in order to do it. There is no guarantee that this initiative will continue beyond March 2027, even though the services offered to our members have become an integral part of how we operate, since they enable our members to go after assistance in other envelopes, as my colleague said.
Senator Moncion: The danger is that the government will expect you to do that when there are reciprocal needs. You need something, but the government also needs something. It has to fund it and you need money to do it.
I am going to go on to something else. My concern is the proliferation of imposters that can be found in the arts sector when we are talking about writing and about music and film production. We have seen this with the actress who has been completely digitized. There is concern on the part of that guild, which is starting to say that if they are capable of creating an actor by computer, they will no longer need actors. That affects another sector. There is an entire aspect we have to be aware of.
I have another question, and you may find it odd. You spoke specifically about the Canadian francophonie, but you did not actually speak about the Quebec francophonie. There is a split in the global culture market, where you have Quebec’s francophone arts sector and Canada’s francophone arts sector. Am I wrong about that?
Ms. Juneau: I wouldn’t say it is as clear-cut as that, in my opinion. For a long time, the federation and its members have maintained relatively close relations with Quebec. The most recent evidence of that is the new Quebec discoverability legislation. The FCCF was invited and we submitted a brief. The Quebec government considered our requests and included us. There are occasions when we work very closely with Quebec, but in other areas, there are occasions when we have to act separately and promote our products and content in a way that is not necessarily autonomous, but is proactive, because it can’t be done all alone.
Ms. Morin: I might add that where the difference is seen is in the markets involved. In some locations, for example when it involves audiovisual production, we participate in the same festivals. These are festivals that have a certain reputation abroad and we are in the same location. However, the markets in some disciplines may be more narrowly targeted, may be smaller, and that is where there is a difference. If the government’s strategy is to focus on large arts and culture events so we get access to markets where we are evidently not present, there we will not be in perfect alignment. There may be a difference between the francophone markets in Quebec and the francophone markets in our ecosystem. I think there is a difference in that regard.
For some markets — I mentioned francophone Africa earlier — and from having attended some of the meetings about cultural export strategy, Quebec is just as interested in developing markets in francophone Africa. There is potential for collaboration, but I would say that in some disciplines, we are in other, more narrowly targeted markets.
[English]
Senator Patterson: I am new to this field. You have told us some incredibly comprehensive pieces and you’ve actually answered a large chunk of my questions, but I do want to go back to data exchange.
There is a lot of waiting for Heritage Canada to give you data. If you could fix this, what would that look like? Rather than waiting for them to give it to you, what data do you need, and do you wish that they were also pulling from you?
Ms. Juneau: That’s a good question. We actually talked about that before coming here.
[Translation]
We were talking about developing a data collection matrix. The FCCF would need financial support for it to develop a matrix it could use to collect a certain amount of data from its members, but the government could also adopt a data collection matrix with its various departments and agencies. There is already the CADAC and the Canada Council for the Arts, and the NFB also collaborates in this. Telefilm Canada is in the process of adopting a common framework for collecting data that could be extended to other departments and agencies. We have some too that we can get from our members, but we need help to do the work. We need support for developing the matrix and having our members contribute the data.
Ms. Morin: I would add, in addition to federal agencies and quantitative data: the amounts funded, the number of projects supported and the geographic coverage. The other element relates to qualitative data, that is, the impact of these investments. This is something that is a little more complex and calls for a bit more work in order to get to the impact. We have an entire accountability process that requires us to report on the benefits of our projects on the ground. There is undoubtedly a discussion to be held across federal institutions regarding the impact of these investments.
I am not saying that we have the data on the quantitative side; even there, it is problematic. However, there is also a second component that should be examined, involving the benefits and impact of investments. This whole discussion needs to be held. Under the Action Plan for the Official Languages and in connection with the work to be required under Part VII of the act, calling for the concrete impact of investments on the development and promotion of the communities to be measured, there may be an evaluation framework that would allow for the two to be combined and the sector’s needs to be met.
Ms. Juneau: It would be useful if that framework could be co-developed with the community and we could participate in how it will be designed, so we could provide the data we are asked for and so the government could access that data.
[English]
Senator Patterson: Thank you. I come from a standards background, and you need to have collaboratively developed indicators of success, and it’s very hard to have a department tell you what those indicators are without your input. Much of what I hear is that you can’t even get to the table right now.
Under Part VII, it certainly talks about the framework, but maybe under the regulation it would be beneficial to have the requirement for collaboratively developed indicators on success because $7 is $7. But as you had very clearly stated, so what? Would this be something you think would help?
Ms. Juneau: Thank you for the question. As I say, the answer is in the question. It would help. It’s better to work together at something that will serve both purposes. An occasion is coming up very shortly, as I understand your next study will be the regulations. It would be very good initiative.
[Translation]
Senator Cormier: Because I see time is limited, I am going to ask you some rapid-fire questions and I don’t want to play the part of chair, but the shorter your answers, the more we can ask.
The 2025 budget provided for $6 million to be granted to the Canada Council for the Arts over three years. The Canadian culture sector has asked for a $140 million raise. I don’t think we have heard very much about this issue. I would like to hear your thoughts, briefly: does the funding for the Canada Council for the Arts allow it to do the job, particularly for OLMCs?
My second question is this: You do work for the government. That work involves consultation, which calls for a lot of investment on your part. What can you recommend for getting support that will help you conduct consultations and participate in data collection? What would your recommendations be in that regard? I have one last point: I was not aware of the proposal you made for a federal economic sectoral table on culture. I would like to hear your thoughts on that, briefly, because I think it is a promising element in our current socio-economic context. Thank you.
Ms. Morin: Regarding the Canada Council for the Arts, the $140 million was a request from the sector. Obviously, the sector breathed a sigh of relief with the last federal budget, because we expected cuts in most of the programs that affect us. That didn’t happen, because the increases were extended over three years for a majority of the investments. So a degree of stability was granted.
On the creative side, because that is the realm where the Canada Council is involved, we did not get the amount hoped for. Although we are told that $6 million will be provided on the ground, there is no doubt about that. It is nonetheless considerably less than what was proposed.
Obviously, a portion of the $140 million was logically going to go to our communities. So certainly there is concern when it comes to the production of works, which is the raw material. We also see that, generally speaking, there was no investment by the federal government in the last budget for that. So that is as regards the Canada Council. As regards consultation —
Ms. Juneau: That’s right. For the “festival of consultations,” as people like to call it, the present act, with its new obligation, requires that agencies hold consultations. In fact, we have just completed a period in which we had five, spread over four weeks, and we only learned two weeks ahead of time that they would be happening.
So regarding our capacity to contribute to all these processes, as an organization that is supposed to be expert in a large number of subjects and particularly regarding immigration and economic development, we would need an increase in our operating funding. That is going to become a regular activity: in our organizations, we will have to respond to these invitations to consultations. This is important. What would be even more important and worthwhile, once we have been consulted, would be to consider what we have offered to be potential solutions. We would have to have an increase in the funding available to us to create a kind of research and brief-writing branch for these consultations, which are increasingly frequent and are going be even more so.
Senator Cormier: The economic table.
Ms. Morin: The economic table, yes. The arts and culture community has actually known for some time that it will have to have closer ties with the economic community. The economic table was precisely a way of getting these actors around the table. We know that the sector generates major economic benefits.
We have had a study done on the impact of the economic sector. It generates $5.83 billion per year of GDP. Those are figures from 2022. We also relied on data from the 2021 census, which will soon be updated, but we represent 36,000 culture workers across Canada. So there is economic activity in the Canadian francophonie. We know we are a major economic force in terms of economic development. Sectoral tables already exist. We know there is one for tourism, but there are no arts and culture representatives at those economic tables. That is why we decided that one is needed, given the economic activity we can generate. That was the suggestion.
Senator Cormier: Thank you.
Senator Gerba: I am going to come back to AI for a bit. What do you think are the real opportunities that artificial intelligence brings to your field, and how could creators and francophone institutions benefit from it in their everyday work?
Ms. Morin: I would say that there are two aspects: the first is opportunity, the fact that business intelligence is a whole thing, and how administrative productivity can be improved using AI. Obviously, it has to be done ethically and transparently.
Parameters need to be developed around tools like generative AI, but there are certainly efficiency gains we could benefit from in our organizations’ administration.
Ms. Juneau: Hence the need to train them.
Ms. Morin: Hence the need to train our people, yes, on these kinds of tools.
Second, regarding creation and consumption, there are certain issues that we absolutely need to examine and on which we need to have a say in this regard. AI issues for the arts and culture community are closely related to copyright issues. The parameters that are to be established around artificial intelligence will therefore have to be established alongside, or in very close relation to, the entire copyright discussion.
On this subject, in fact, Canada is not completely settled. We have not net modernized or amended the Copyright Act. It will have to be examined, because when it comes to the raw material, the artist’s product, it will have to be assigned a value and protected in the same way as any other entrepreneur’s product. That will have to be done under two closely connected rubrics that will have to work in tandem, I believe.
Senator Gerba: You spoke a lot about African markets. I just wanted to know whether you were aware of Canada’s African Strategy, adopted by the Government of Canada. I believe there is a culture section in that strategy. I have also seen that the government is counting on diversifying markets outside the United States. So yes, when it comes to culture, Africa is a market to be considered. Are you working with Export Development Canada?
Ms. Juneau: Thank you for the suggestion; I can tell you that it doesn’t fall on deaf ears. We will be taking action; we will be focusing on that plan and seeing how we, too, can benefit from it.
The Chair: While we wait to see whether there are more questions, this is mine. You talked about the challenges you face and about funding. The consultations being held now are one impact, as you said, and I’m not sure whether it is negative or positive, when I think about how you described it. Other than these consultations, have you noticed any positive impacts following on the modernization of the 2023 Act for the Substantive Equality of Canada’s Official Languages? I will also be coming back to this point about consultations.
Ms. Juneau: That is an excellent question; thank you. I am going to let my colleague, Marie-Christine, answer it, because she is closer to the nitty-gritty of all that. From my perspective as chair, the fact that we have been recognized in the new act as an essential sector makes it easier for us to articulate our needs and advocate for them to institutions, because that is what we base what we are saying on. However, I am eager to see the regulations under the new act, to see how it will make tangible changes in the way things are done for francophone minority communities.
Marie-Christine, do you have any other observations that your work would suggest?
Ms. Morin: I think it has started conversations about the importance of the sector in the sustainable development of a francophonie, which is a subject that was not systematically or always addressed. From that perspective, in terms of developing our thinking around the sustainable development of a francophonie, I think the culture sector is part of this public policy discussion, thanks to this new act.
We were talking earlier about the collaboration agreement. When the agreement that was renewed in 2024 was being negotiated, we were able to specifically cite and describe the responsibilities of federal institutions, because there was legislative support for all that.
So it isn’t nothing, because all of a sudden, these are no longer cross-cutting responsibilities or something that is not explicit; now it was explicit in legislation and it could be included in the text of an agreement.
So the level of responsibility is not the same and is not understood the same way. I would say there has been progress made in raising awareness. Is there still work to be done? Absolutely. Do we all have a part to play in this? Yes.
However, I think it has opened minds, thanks to the work that was done and was supported by you, in fact. So that is important progress.
There is one last thing: We have not yet seen the effects, but I think it will become very difficult to make no provision for the arts and culture sector in a future action plan for official languages, because it is being done now.
It would be difficult for the arts and culture sector to be completely forgotten about in a future action plan for official languages, because it is now included in the act as an essential sector.
We have not yet seen what that will look like, but I am sure there will be things that are very structuring for the future.
Senator Moncion: I want to take you to another question that you gave us, because I was curious about your thoughts on Bill C-11; you talk about discoverability and the ways the federal government could support you in this regard.
Is Bill C-11 an adequate response to discoverability issues in the minority francophonie sector?
Ms. Morin: Bill C-11 is in development when it comes to issues relating to the discoverability of content. This is not an issue that has been addressed so far; we are working as a team on Bill C-11. So the regulations relating to discoverability are not yet complete…. This is certainly an issue that will be of considerable interest to us, because the ability both to produce and to consume content depends on it being discoverable.
We have focused on issues relevant to the production of Canadian content and the funding for that part, to make sure the money available from foreign companies gets to actors on the ground. So we have addressed these issues; this leaves discoverability and another important issue: how to consult the communities. So we have been consulted about how to consult us and we are awaiting responses about that.
That will have an impact on what comes next, because the CRTC will have to examine our needs and explain to us how the decision it makes takes the needs of the communities into consideration. To date, this mechanism has not yet been applied. We are therefore waiting to hear the result of the consultation, because it is truly critical for what comes next.
Regarding discoverability, Quebec has made progress in this area. We took part in the exercise around Quebec’s legislation respecting the discoverability of content. The Fédération culturelle canadienne-française submitted a brief for those consultations and the recommendations we made would be the same as we would make on the federal side. One of the things we strongly emphasized was the importance of aligning the legislative schemes. Those schemes must be complementary, to ensure that one side is not gaining ground while the other is losing. This is important.
We have made recommendations regarding content and the visibility of content and also regarding the francophone content that concerns us in an upcoming Quebec bill; we talk about francophone content quotas, quotas for content originating in the Canadian francophonie and quotas for francophone content that also affects young people. This is an important issue, because we know that how to reach young people with this content will become crucial for what comes next. The mechanics of discoverability have to reflect this. In addition, there is transparency on the part of companies in what they promote and the algorithms they will have to put in place and how they go about ensuring that content is visible to consumers.
These are recommendations that we will be submitting to the federal government when the CRTC invites our opinions on this subject; we are told that this should not take much longer.
Senator Moncion: I have a comment to make. I quite like the way you talk about the Canadian francophonie and the Quebec francophonie, and you don’t talk about francophones outside Quebec. I find your choice of words inclusive, whereas when we talk about outside Quebec, we are always talking about exclusion. So bravo! I think that will become my choice of words, the “Canadian francophonie.”
The Chair: Thank you. We are coming to the end of the meeting. Are there questions you have not been asked that you would like to address? You are our first witnesses; we definitely still have many other witnesses to hear from.
Out of curiosity, I am listening, but we are still far from being in the position of an artist on the ground, so I am curious to see what the artist will be telling us.
Before concluding, would you like to add something about the consultation structure, about the new act, about —
Ms. Juneau: I actually have a general comment I would like to share with you. From our perspective, in the ecosystem of arts and culture organizations in the francophonie, in all organizations in the francophonie, in fact, including those working in arts and culture, we are kind of a way for the government to operationalize its official language obligations on the ground. We are kind of like agents of government responsibilities on the ground. In that sense, I think the government depends on us as much as we depend on it.
I think the government’s vision when it comes to official languages has to incorporate that observation and our way of working together has to be transformed, not in some paternalistic way, but rather as partners on the ground who contribute to implementing the Official Languages Act.
I don’t know how this could be done, but I think that in a future action plan for official languages we could try, before we start, to work in a relationship based on that observation, so that what comes next develops that way.
The Chair: That has prompted one last question from Senator Cormier.
Senator Cormier: It is more of a comment, in fact. I do want to take this opportunity, and obviously I am not objective, to thank you for the process you have followed. The reason you can say, today, “We want to be partners with the government,” is also the tremendous progress this sector has made, the professionalism it has adopted and the unique experience it has acquired, and, in the case of the Canadian francophonie, the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française and its members have developed that expertise. It has to be said: The expertise and wealth of expertise have to be put to work for that partnership.
We are coming out of a relationship that was really one of dependence at one time, that was a relationship in which we were the clients of something, whereas now, I think you are participants in the current economic context, in the context of cultural sovereignty and the need to protect our cultural sovereignty.
I want to thank you for that, being completely objective.
The Chair: Thank you; that was very well said.
That concludes the public portion of our meeting; we will suspend for a few minutes and then resume in camera.
(The committee continued in camera.)