Official Languages Committee on Oct. 3rd, 2006

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

I have another question. The department has a new program that municipalities are currently participating in. I think it might be called Emerging Cities. Do you know what I am talking about?

[Daniel Jean]

In our agreements with the provinces—as you know, immigration is an area of shared jurisdiction—cities are encouraged to become increasingly active in immigration. Under the agreement with Ontario, there is also a tripartite agreement that will be signed with the City of Toronto.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

I am very aware of the agreement reached between Canada and Ontario. I insisted that there be a role for the AFMO, the Francophone Association of Municipalities of Ontario.

I would like to give you an example. I went to Halifax, and the municipal authorities were patting themselves on the back. They were proud because they had finally become active in immigration issues. I asked them whether their program had a language component, and the answer was no. I was surprised that the department did not insist that there be such a component in the programs they participated in. Municipalities are interested in such programs because they realize that their populations are declining. Because the department did not insist on making language a prerequisite, there was no such component.

[Daniel Jean]

Concerning provinces, they have been encouraged to imitate what is being done in Manitoba, that is to say to adopt specific objectives for Francophone immigration in order to promote it.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Don't you think that we should maybe do more than only encourage? Isn't there a legal prerequisite, Mr. Jean? I ask you with all due respect.

[Daniel Jean]

In the agreements signed with the provinces, we included a provision asking them to make efforts in this respect. On a practical level, we want to show the other provinces the results achieved by such initiatives as those in Manitoba, in order to encourage them. We also hold meetings with the communities in the municipalities and provinces so that they encourage their provincial authorities to do the same.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Unfortunately your five minutes are up.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

I would like to put my name in for the next round, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Very well.

Ms. Barbot, you have the floor.

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

I would like to come back to the initial document. The plan sets out the general strategies, priorities and examples of initiatives, but does not describe the process that led you to develop this plan.

Could you describe your approach? How were you able to develop this plan? With whom did you meet in your consultations?

[Marc Arnal]

I think I can describe the process and tell you what, in my view, was the key element.

The people around the table came from various communities, bringing with them their local issues. There were also representatives from various departments, with their list of programs, criteria, regulations, etc.

I believe that our approach started to bear fruit once people—as Mr. Petit said earlier—considered the problem, and not their programs or geographic locations. From that moment on, we were able to develop an action plan that is, in certain respects, suitable and not overly aggressive.

For example, everything having to do with housing—Mr. Simard addressed this earlier—is a phenomenal problem. All you have to do is come to Edmonton to understand that the Francophone neighbourhood is one of the areas that are in greatest demand and where house prices are at the high end. That leads to problems.

There is also the question of international tuition fees. Quebec and a number of Francophonie member States have reached bilateral agreements, under which foreign nationals pay Quebec tuition fees. Provinces that compete with Quebec for students and charge $16,000 a year for school tuition have to be very persuasive. There are some issues that we have not talked about, but do exist.

I believe that the plan does reflect a consensus. I am most proud of the fact that people who attended the meetings put aside their personal circumstances. They wanted to settle a collective problem by using their various skills, but not limiting themselves only to the programs they were required to work with.

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

Within the same context, I would like to know on which analyses you based your decision not to exclude Toronto and Vancouver from the preferred areas where francophone immigrants could establish themselves?

[Daniel Jean]

This comes back to the issue of critical mass Mr. Arnal referred to earlier. The numbers are so small that the problem of concentration, which exists for immigration in general, does not apply here.

In fact, having pools of a few hundred francophone immigrants settle in Toronto or Vancouver is a good way to establish francophone immigration in those areas. This is how we came to that conclusion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Thank you, Mr. Jean and Ms. Barbot.

Mr. Shipley, you have the floor.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Thank you for coming out.

It's interesting. I'm filling in this morning and appreciate the opportunity to be here.

As I look through the original part of your study, on page 17, I'm wondering about the number of immigrants settling outside Quebec who claim to know French and English. Then there's the superior knowledge of French as opposed to English, and then the superior knowledge of English as opposed to French.

When we look at the number of immigrants who have come in since 2002 to 2004, there's about a 20% total increase. The number of immigrants who have a superior knowledge of French has dropped, and the number who have a superior knowledge of English, as opposed to French, has risen.

In terms of working knowledge and the ability to settle into your community, be fluent, and work, can you help me to understand the significance of those numbers and what they actually mean?

[Daniel Jean]

Actually, this one of the reasons we justify changing the performance measure we've been using. As I said, if we were to go with what was put in place in 2003—4.4%—we're very close to meeting that objective, because that was based on people who declared voluntarily on their application for immigration that they knew French.

First of all, we know there's a bit of inflation on what people declare as their actual proficiency. In the immigration program, there's only one category for whom we measure objectively with tests, the knowledge of French or English, and that's the skilled workers, that's the economic class. The table you refer to refers to the economic class.

So when you look at more reliable measures and see the percentage of immigrants who had French as their first official language—their mother tongue may be different, but French was their first official language—you can see that in 2002, based on our data, it was 75%, and in 2004 it was 89%.

There may be some danger with the 2002 figure, because 2002 was the year when our new act came into force. and It was also the year when we started to use objective testing for all immigrants. So the data for 2002 may be reflecting a higher preponderance of “French as first official language” proficiency than is actually the case when you measure objectively.

What we mean by that is that when you come under family class, we don't measure your language proficiency. When you come as a refugee, we don't measure your proficiency. The only category that we really know, because we test with objective, standard tests, is the economic class of skilled workers.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

So there may be some interpretive measures needed in terms of understanding what those actual numbers are about then because of the kickoff in 2002.

[Daniel Jean]

Absolutely, and that's why, in redefining the performance measures, we said we think we'll probably be welcoming, on average for the next three years, 5,000 people for whom French is their first official language. In order to bring it to 10,000, which is our objective, it's probably going to take us ten to fifteen years.

And we also admit in the study that the data that is currently available—whether it's obtained through our research tools in CIC or whether it's obtained through the census data—does not give you good information about immigrants whose first official language is French.

The census data gives you mother tongue, but it does not tell you, for somebody whose mother tongue is some African language, whether actually their first official language is French. This is where we have gaps in the data, and that's why it's so challenging for us, so we need to invest some attention to this.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Then I hear that part about the attention likely being redirected to some of those issues.

I had the opportunity only this morning to take a look at this. In terms of your strategic plan initiatives, can you quickly talk to me a bit about how you feel they can be effectively implemented within community groups?

[Daniel Jean]

I think what we say there is that we believe we now have pools in various provinces where the communities, in terms of awareness, are ready to welcome new immigrants and embrace diversity, in terms of having vibrant francophone communities. They have welcoming infrastructure and the potential to go and target immigrants who are not only going to be recruited but are going to stay in their communities. We believe we have a number of successful networks that can be established. That's where we want to favour our attention.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Thank you very much, Mr. Shipley and Mr. Jean.

We are going to Mr. Godin for five minutes, with the last question of this round.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

We are talking about supporting immigrants, and I would like to give you an example of something happening back home in my riding. There's a physician who has been living in our community for the past few years. His family comes from an African country. He has settled among us and has a good reputation. He would like his mother-in-law to see her grandchildren—and this might be the only opportunity for her to do so—and the place where his family has settled, but Citizenship and Immigration Canada refuses.

Is this normal? The woman is 85-years-old; how likely is it that she would remain here? In such a case, can we say that we support immigrants?

I would be ready to sponsor her coming here and ensuring that she returns home. We have to consider the human side of such a situation. An immigrant should not be allowed to come here and then be told that he cannot see his family. I believe this is completely inhuman. I have been working on this case for almost a year and I am trying to help the grandmother see her grandchildren.

[Daniel Jean]

Thank you for your very good question Mr. Godin.

I suppose that this person would come as a visitor?

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Yes, as a visitor.

[Daniel Jean]

We definitely have—