Official Languages Committee on March 3rd, 2009

[Jasmine Gallant]

I would like to add that Ms. Landry was a member of the committee until 2003 and, to her surprise, she learned in September 2009 that they suddenly wanted to adopt this new code.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you for your remark, Ms. Gallant.

Mr. Petit, it is your turn.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good morning, Mr. Côté, good morning Ms. Gallant.

First of all, I am glad to see that one of my electors has taken the witness stand. We had suggested your name especially as we were aware of the work that you have done. We know that in our riding, there are at least three companies directed by blind persons, which is almost a record in the province of Quebec. The same subject was also raised by Ms. Guay, whose father has visual problems, and by myself, as my godmother was born blind. We are interested in the subject from a slightly different point of view.

Let me first make a comment, and then I will put a question to you. First, Ms. Gallant said something very important: her province is bilingual. Therefore, it must deal with people who come from anglophone or francophone families. The school curriculum for these people must apply identical methods, so as not to confuse the students. A couple may well consist of a francophone and an anglophone. Their child might be registered in the anglophone or in the francophone system. This would create an extra problem for them.

There is no end to the problems that we can find, Mr. Côté, but you raised this matter and I have the same question as Mr. Rodriguez, who represents the Liberal Party. I am a bit skeptical regarding your version and what we heard previously. If I correctly understand your explanation and the explanation from Ms. Gallant, the unified code does not seem to please anyone because it transfers the Code Antoine into your number system, which causes problems for you. This means that a young student who has finished his schooling up to the CEGEP level and who has to switch overnight to the unified code could not even recognize chemical formulae anymore. There would be a risk that he could blow up the laboratory. I am exaggerating slightly, but this is more or less the situation.

Canada has two official languages: French and English. We learned that there was a problem with creating a unified code. European and African francophones are trying to implement a system in Quebec. This seems to have had repercussions in your province of New Brunswick. I can affirm that there are repercussions in Ontario and in Alberta as well, because they have the same problem.

When a young person registers with a school system, no matter what subjects are taught, he ultimately wants to get a diploma. Ms. Gallant, Mr. Côté, I thought I heard you say that you are currently using the braille code, which really consists of the six graphic forms of braille writing that can exist in English as well as in French. Am I right?

[Jasmine Gallant]

Yes.

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

What is the difference, with the exception of the Antoine Code problem? Is there another problem regarding the plan to transfer Quebec's standardized code to Alberta, Saskatchewan, etc.? Setting aside the numbers, is there a problem?

[Jacques Côté]

Earlier I talked about the 10 figures. As for the mathematical code... If I may, I would like to give you an illustration.

Let's take the example of a child in first grade who is learning the Antoine Code. He will learn the Antoine figures in first, second and third grade, right up until the end of high school. That will not create any problems because he will also learn the Antoine Code.

All of these courses provided in English will not use the Antoine Code, let's be clear on that. In New Brunswick, where there are two official languages, there are many more courses offered in English than there are in Quebec.

A student who has completed high school using the Antoine Code and who wants to pursue sciences at the CEGEP or university level will find that most of the school books at the college and university level are in English, particularly in the scientific field. Despite the fact that this student may have been brilliant when he used the Antoine Code, once he's at the CEGEP or university in Quebec, he will no longer be able to use the code. He will no longer be able to obtain books made in France, because nothing is the same.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you.

Please be brief, Ms. Gallant.

[Jasmine Gallant]

Right now the new code has not yet been completed for mathematics and science. So what will happen?

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Petit.

Mr. D'Amours.

[Jean-Claude D'Amours, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to thank the three of you for appearing before us this morning. I too am finding this somewhat difficult to understand. Our colleague from the Bloc asked us to study the standardization of braille. It seemed to be an important issue, but today, you're telling us the complete opposite.

Perhaps the people who spoke to us last week are not living the same reality as you, Mr. Côté. In my opinion, the use of braille is very important to you. I understand your reasoning and that of Ms. Gallant very well. Standardization is the best way of confusing all of those people who will try to understand what is no longer understandable. Writing French properly is already difficult when you're able to see and read. When an individual changes educational levels and can no longer use the same tools and has to learn everything over again, this individual will be at a disadvantage for the rest of his or her life and may have problems at the post-secondary level. Furthermore, this individual may not be able to attain the same job level as someone else who has not had to deal with such an obstacle.

It is too bad that Ms. Guay is not here. I'm trying to understand why our committee wants to push this study regarding the standardization of braille. Although neither you nor Ms. Gallant use braille in everyday life, you have clearly explained what the impact of this standardization will have on future generations.

[Jacques Côté]

If I may, my answer will be twofold. First of all, the aspect we are discussing this morning is huge. I am not surprised by what you are telling me. Indeed, those who had very significant aspects to present were dismissed. As I said earlier, I worked on these committees, and in 2003, when we were supposed to deal with this issue, I was dismissed, because people knew that I was able to defend my point of view.

Secondly, I would like to give you an example. Earlier I explained how we write the number 12. We take a numeric symbol and we add the letters a and b. This is done throughout the United States, Australia, in the rest of Canada and in the United Kingdom. This is still being done in Quebec, but just until September. It seems to me that if we really want to standardize braille, we should have gone this route, which has been accepted everywhere with the exception of France. Instead of standardizing with France, we should have standardized with the rest of the world.

I don't know how you feel about this, but this makes sense to me. I would have to give you a course on braille in order to explain why we chose to write figures and scientific coding differently, but that is another issue. The people who came to talk to you about this topic had the advantage of presenting this as being something that was very simple and easy, something that didn't pose any problems. However, the problems are going to crop up at the academic level, in teaching this method, and not amongst those who read reviews.

[The Acting Chair, Liberal, Jean-Claude D'Amours]

Thank you, Mr. Côté. I know that my time is up, but I would like to thank you. You have clarified the situation by talking about the practical aspects and this attempt to convince us that standardization is the best approach. You have said that this approach was the best way to destroy the future of our young people and others as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Côté.

We will now hear from Mr. Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to react to the comments made by Mr. D'Amours, who has in fact pointed out an aspect that I had referred to earlier, namely the contrast between the two positions. This serious dichotomy is easy to understand.

Earlier, Ms. Gallant informed us about the comments made by Ms. Landry, an educator who teaches the codes to people who need to learn them. You referred to the Abraham Nemeth Code. If I understood correctly, this code is a type of standardization. This is understood in both French and English.

Moreover, as Mr. Côté pointed out, France, through some kind of organization that I am not exactly familiar with, wanted to standardize the French language. It is different from the standardization brought about the Abraham Nemeth Code. If we can draw a comparison, this code is for people, I presume, who use the alphabet that we use in both French and English.

I'm going to ask you a $10-question. Would not the Abraham Nemeth Code be a solution to this standardization which would make the job easier? I know that this would be one reform on the heels of another, but would not this be simpler than going ahead with this so-called French standardization of French that we are already familiar with in Quebec? In this way, the people from New Brunswick or elsewhere who are learning the code in English would not have to deal with three different codes, namely the code from France, the one from Quebec and the one used in anglophone Canada. Would not the Abraham Nemeth Code be a comprehensive solution to the situation currently being experienced by people using these codes?

[Jasmine Gallant]

That's what Ms. Landry pointed out in her comments earlier. Since the Abraham Nemeth Code is already very flexible, it would provide a very good base that would enable us to continue doing work which would perhaps be more adequate, given our situation.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

It's about letters but numbers as well. Would the Abraham Nemeth Code also enable us to deal with the problem of numbers?

[Jasmine Gallant]

Absolutely. You can switch from literature to scientific texts much more easily than if you had a code for French and another one for English. The proposal before us does not have any code for mathematics and sciences.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

In Acadie, which is francophone, which code is being used? Is it the Quebec code? Will Acadie standardize to the French code?

[Jasmine Gallant]

It is the Abraham Nemeth Code.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

That's what you were saying. Indeed, the way I see it, there are three codes for the francophonie: the very recent French standardization, the Acadian code, which is based on the Abraham Nemeth Code, as well as the Quebec code, which has been based on braille for the past 200 years.

[Jasmine Gallant]

No, it is the same code. We are currently applying the same code in Quebec and in New Brunswick, for both francophones and anglophones.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Both provinces use the Abraham Nemeth Code?

[Jasmine Gallant]

Yes, until September, when the proposed standardization will be complete.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

So the Abraham Nemeth Code will no longer be used in Quebec?

[Jasmine Gallant]

Correct.