Official Languages Committee on Oct. 3rd, 2006

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

Mr. Bouchard would like to speak.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

It is Mr. Petit's turn. Then it will be Mr. Bouchard's turn.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

This is not the regular order, but I thank you.

My question is for Mr. Arnal. I am a member of the Conservative Party. The main subject of today's meeting is the plan presented by our minister, Mr. Solberg, entitled Strategic Plan to Foster Immigration to Francophone Minority Communities.

First of all, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that this is the only committee where there is unanimity, on this case, unanimity regarding the minority situation of francophones. So this is not about the linguistic duality. Our committee must go beyond partisanship, because we are all in a situation of survival around the table, since we are francophones. We set aside the partisanship that may be found in some other committees or issues. It is very important that we have solid support for the program. When Mr. Simard, from Manitoba, or Mr. Godin, from New Brunswick, talk to us, they need to feel that there is unity, because otherwise, your program will not work.

We may ask questions, but we have to present a common front, because we are all in a situation of survival. We all come from different provinces and we are all trying to find a way to enhance our culture and language throughout the country, throughout Canada.

You know, as I do, that the Conservative Party has created some tools. At the outset, some things must be acknowledged. We enabled Quebec to sit at UNESCO for cultural matters. We therefore have a vision. It must not be forgotten that Quebec is the centre and image of francophone culture are in Quebec. This did not exist beforehand.

In your presentation, you mentioned that immigrants like to have court services provided in French. You, like me, know what the language situation is like in the courts. In serious cases, we need to be able to understand the accused's language. Bill C-23, an Act to amend the Criminal Code (criminal procedure, language of the accused, sentencing and other amendments), which was tabled by the Conservative Party, ensures that the judge and the jury are able to understand the language of the accused.

Furthermore, we have just signed an agreement between Canada and France to assist, for instance, Haiti or the Democratic Republic of Congo, etc. As you can see, we are doing our best. You also said that when progress was achieved in the area of language rights for francophones in your province, it was the Conservative Party that had brought about the changes.

It is important that you be able to answer my question. We are working together for our survival because we are all francophones. Pierre Lemieux is a Franco-Ontarian, we have a Franco-Manitoban, a francophone from New Brunswick, a Quebecker and our chair is another Franco-Ontarian.

How are you going to do about this? You have drafted a strategic plan in cooperation with several federal departments, notably the Department of Citizenship and Immigration—we know that outside of Quebec, it is the Department of Citizenship and Immigration—the Department of Canadian Heritage, provincial and territorial departments and members from francophone communities. We know about this, and you spoke about this a short while ago.

This endeavour has enabled you to create some synergy amongst interested parties and to get the most out of will and vitality of the receiving communities. My question is therefore directed particularly to Mr. Arnal, unless Mr. Jean wishes to complete his answer. Could you provide the committee with some examples of initiatives that have come out of the communities to integrate immigrants? We have a problem with successful francophone minority communities. It has been implied that your strategic plan is pie in the sky. Do you have any examples that will show us that there have been some success stories? I am hoping that is the case.

[Marc Arnal]

Yes. There have been several. I think that we mentioned the fact that francophone communities had set up reception services in Calgary, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Ottawa, Toronto, etc. for francophone newcomers. I would also like to mention that we may have given the impression that Quebec was not involved in this initiative, but that is far from being the case. In Quebec, for instance, the SAIC subsidized a project making it possible for the Fondation de la tolérance, which is from Montreal, to visit francophone and immersion schools in Alberta. While not a huge grant, this $8,000 made it possible to tour throughout the province. The purpose of this tour was to make people understand that any form of intolerance could eventually lead to extreme forms of intolerance.

Gerry Clément, who is the Assistant Deputy Minister at the Manitoba Department of Labour and Immigration, went to Nova Scotia for consultations. The Nova Scotia department wanted to know what Manitoba was doing to integrate official languages objectives into provincial immigration targets. Mr. Clément met and spoke with these people. Similar concepts are now being prepared in Nova Scotia. The Commissioner of Official Languages was asked to assess language provisions to determine their effectiveness. All kinds of things are happening. Immigration steering committees have been set up in all provinces of Canada, with the exception of Newfoundland, I believe.

In the Yukon, the Association franco-yukonnaise provides reception services to all immigrants who arrive there. As you can see, things are moving. You think that nothing is happening or that everything is happening somewhere up in the clouds, but things are actually taking place at the grass-root level and changes are occurring.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Thank you, Mr. Arnal and Mr. Petit. Your five minutes are over.

It is now Mr. Bouchard's turn.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you for your presentations.

You presented your strategic plan as well as the initiatives and objectives that have been established. I would like to know whether the francophone immigrants are more inclined to choose big cities such as Toronto or Vancouver and to settle there rather than opt for smaller communities.

When they settle in large cities such as Toronto, Vancouver or other large urban centres, how long does this French dimension remain vibrant as compared to the situation in smaller centres? Is it more viable in larger centres or in smaller ones?

[Daniel Jean]

At the outset, we know that 70% of immigrants—and here I'm referring to immigrants in general and not to francophone immigrants specifically—settle in the three main centres. It would appear that francophones are inclined to settle in urban areas, but not necessarily in the same numbers as immigrants in general.

In addition, we noted—and the plan refers to this—that francophone immigration was much weaker than general immigration and that creating relatively significant pools in Toronto or in Vancouver was definitely a good idea. Indeed, these pools will probably be able to attract people in the future.

As far as regionalization is concerned, the plan states that we want to continue encouraging immigrants to settle in all francophone communities able to integrate them. However, we are now saying that it would be beneficial, given our objectives and given the low francophone immigration rate in Toronto and Vancouver, to promote the creation of francophone immigrant pools in these areas.

[Marc Arnal]

Reaching a critical mass, whether it be in the region or in small towns, is a key factor. For example, we realized that the community had been changed substantially when 200 Congolese families from Montreal were settled in Edmonton. Now that these families have settled, they have their own organizations, their religious ceremonies, their groups. They are using the institution I run as a community centre, and that attracts other people.

I will give you the example of my wife, who immigrated from India. Upon arriving here, her family settled in Spirit River, which is located way up in northern Alberta. They were the only Indian family in northern Alberta. The members of her family travelled every weekend, for four or five hours, in order to be with other Indian nationals. They then moved to Edmonton because there was an Indian community there.

In my opinion, everything depends on whether or not there is a critical mass in these locations. I think that you will see, during the next census, that the immigration rate in Edmonton, particularly immigration from sub-Saharan Africa, has increased considerably. This phenomenon is basically, the result of families we received in from Quebec.

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

I am going to put the ball back into your court.

The key is to reach a critical mass of immigrants from the same ethnic or religious group. And yet, if this is your premise, I would like to be sure that the challenge for integration is not to set up ghettos or ensure that there is some place where 200 Congolese can set up their own institutions. The purpose of integration should be to enable these people to become full citizens. Based on your example, I do not get the impression that this is the case.

We are increasing the number of immigrants, but are we increasing the resources that will be needed for cultural purposes? Is the community making more efforts to assume responsibility for these individuals? I do not know.

Are you aware of programs that worked well? For example, in Sherbrooke or, more recently, in Saint-Hyacinthe, immigrants were retained because of work. Your document does not mention work whatsoever. When we talk about it, it is all very interesting and lots of things are discussed. There is this action plan and what is really happening, which perhaps explains why it is as though this was well done in a vacuum. I get the impression that this action plan was put together very quickly in order to satisfy I do not know what need, but it does not reflect reality. That is too bad.

I have the impression, when I read this action plan, that people are not aware of the work that you are doing and of all the efforts made.

You said that the local coordinating structures will emerge from the communities. You also talked about networks. You said that you have been given funding. However, these groups have just had their funding cut off.

How can we, as a state, as a government, base our objectives on groups when we know that they do not have the means to do this work?

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Please provide a brief response.

[Daniel Jean]

There are three very important points. First of all, the plan is very clear. Social and economic integration within all of the communities receiving these immigrants is very important. We are certainly not trying to create ghettos. Mr. Arnal said that having a critical mass creates a comfort zone, enabling immigrants to develop in their community. That is important.

Secondly, the plan states very clearly that its success depends on employing students and economic workers. This is very important. There is no point in recruiting immigrants if we cannot keep them in the community because we have no work for them.

Thirdly, as far as funding is concerned, I do not know what programs you are referring to and which have allegedly been cut. Funding for integration has been increased by $307 million, with $77 million going to provinces other than Quebec and Ontario, and with $230 million as part of the Canada-Ontario agreement. So the funding has been increased.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Thank you, Mr. Jean.

It is now Mr. Godin's turn.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

In 2002, the Commissioner of Official Languages published a report entitled “Official Languages and Immigration: Obstacles and Opportunities for Immigrants and Communities”. Does your plan deal with the obstacles highlighted in this report?

[Daniel Jean]

We have covered a great deal of ground since this report was published. In 2002, further to discussions with the Commissioner of Official Languages, we included, at the outset of the process, very clear objectives in our act. We want to promote the linguistic vitality of francophone communities. We established a strategic framework. Since then, we have all of the concrete tangible measures which we referred to today. We have done a great deal of work on our integration plan.

Does all of that respond to the challenges noted in 2002? Probably not. Let us be honest, we still have a lot left to do. We changed the numbers. The objective is even more ambitious than it was when our first publication came out, in 2003.

Progress has been accomplished. The most recent report published by the Commissioner of Official Languages clearly pointed out that the future and vitality of francophone communities depend on changes in the diversity of francophone communities.

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

Mention was made of the reception services set up in several large cities. Mr. D'Amours is not here, but I believe that he had a pilot project in the Madawaska region.

[Marc Arnal]

It was in Saint-Léonard.

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

That is correct.

Was this reception service successful? Did the province and the federal government participate in this project, as a partnership?

[Marc Arnal]

That is correct, the provincial government participated in this project and, on the federal side, Immigration Canada, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and the department responsible for rural development all participated. I believe that this project worked rather well, but it also had its problems, created by a difference in opinion between the main promoter of the project and certain members in the community.

Another reception service has been established in Prince Edward Island. It is starting to get off the ground now. The project was running well for a certain while in Saint-Léonard, but there are currently some problems. It did, however, enable us to set up another development centre in Prince Edward Island. This one appears to be running well because it does not have the interpersonal conflicts encountered in Saint-Léonard.

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

I would think that if I were an immigrant, I would need some support, but perhaps not. I see Mr. Petit smiling.

It is important to know what resources have been earmarked for this activity. Is money available? Are there any regulations? Is there such a centre in Moncton? I know that we don't have one in my region, in the Acadian Peninsula.

[Daniel Petit, Conservative, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Immigrant integration and orientation programs do exist. We have programs that provide them with certain tools, particularly language training, etc. The francophone reception centres try to satisfy some very particular requirements. I recently visited the centre in Edmonton. The centre provides, for example, homework clubs for young children. You can imagine the situation where a family of immigrants whose mother tongue is French decides to settle in Edmonton. Both the father and mother are working, so they are in the process of integrating economically into Canada. Their child attends French school. Our traditional immigration services would have not been able to provide this type of support for the children. They can now deal with the reception centre and there is a website for immigrants, where all of the services are provided in French. The reception centre has produced a variety of publications.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Mr. Godin, your time is up.

This morning, we have a special guest, the Honourable Mauril Bélanger, who will ask you a question.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

First, I would like to congratulate the Faculté de Saint-Jean. Now that I am in the opposition, I have learned to enjoy the summers a bit more. My wife and I indulged in a vacation in Tunisia. I met with our ambassador there, on a courtesy call. He told me that the next week, there was going to be a forum on education. I asked to see the list of Canadian institutions that were going to be participating and saw to my great delight that the Faculté de Saint-Jean was one of them, as was the Université de Moncton, by the way.

Mr. Godin, I must tell you that to my great disappointment, the University of Ottawa was not there. I went and spoke to them about it afterward! Please convey my congratulations to the Faculté de Saint-Jean.

I have a few questions to ask. There was a goal of increasing the percentage to 4.4%. Where are we at with that today?

[Daniel Jean]

Under the strategic plan, that standard was redefined. The old standard had to do with immigrants who voluntarily declared on their immigration application that they knew French or English. Of course, only in the economic class is knowledge of English or French assessed objectively and with tools. No assessment is done for the other classes. After assessing that objective for a few years, it was decided that that was not really what we wanted. We are now targeting immigrants whose first language may not be French, but of Canada's two official languages, it is the first one they know. It is their dominant official language when they come to Canada. We want to bring this kind of people into the communities. If you measure the current results against the old objective, you can see that we are very close, but the objective has been redefined. We want it to be immigrants whose dominant official language is French. As a result, our objective is far more ambitious. We probably won't reach it for 10 or 15 years, but it is a much more laudable goal.

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

Don't forget that the objectives have to, to some extent at least, come from the act. It says in the preamble to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act that Canada's immigration programs have to respect and reflect the country's current demographics. The 4.4% objective came from the act, in a way. So we can't stray too far from that either.

[Daniel Jean]

That's right, and that's why we have kept the 4.4% objective. However, since we also have a more ambitious standard, we need to give ourselves more time to meet it.