Official Languages Committee on Dec. 6th, 2011

[Jean-Luc Racine]

The program involves seniors. Actually, it depends, because we have a number of projects. The project we carried out took the form of workshops where, for two and a half hours—or even three hours, in some cases—about a dozen young people and a dozen seniors got together. We did awareness work. We got them to let go of their preconceived notions about one another. Calmly, we also encouraged them to develop an intergenerational project together. Following the workshop, they were asked to develop a project.

Some very interesting projects took shape. For example, some young people told us they were interested in learning more about more traditional trades, like fishing. So fishing workshops were given to the younger children. The sharing of experience was very interesting. Various projects like that took shape.

[Bernard Trottier, Conservative, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Can we use senior citizens, for want of a better phrase, as ambassadors for francophone heritage?

[Jean-Luc Racine]

Of course we can.

[Bernard Trottier, Conservative, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Do they have the training to help young people?

[Jean-Luc Racine]

In Ottawa, as an example, there is a program for retired people called Parcours Lecture. It has retired people going into schools and reading stories to children in French. Of course, that leads to some great opportunities to talk with the kids and they find those connections to be interesting and meaningful.

We also have a project with the Canadian Association of Immersion Teachers. We applied to Heritage Canada and are waiting for their answer. We want to set up links between grandparents and French teachers in immersion schools. We also hope to set up between grandparents and anglophone children who are learning French. We want them to have meaningful connections with francophones.

These are all projects we are working on at the moment. Funding often comes piecemeal, project by project, but we are still hoping that it will let us move a little further forward. That's sort of the way it works.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Trottier and Mr. Racine.

Mr. Aubin.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First, I would like to extend a warm welcome to the committee to Ms. Ambler. But I hope that she is not here because Mr. Galipeau has a health problem. We are getting a little worried over on this side.

And to our guests this morning, thank you for the particular light your comments have shed and the questions that have occurred to me as a result.

In this process of evaluating the roadmap, I am hearing that you want both it and the funding to be renewed. I am hearing you tell us loud and clear not to leave you hanging. As a parallel issue, it also seems that there is some difficulty in distinguishing between regular funding and roadmap funding.

My first question goes to the people from the Alliance des femmes de la francophonie canadienne. You said in your statement that six of your 10 organizations received funding. So the question that immediately popped into my head was: why not the other four? Is it because each organization has to submit its own application or is the available funding distributed wrongly? How is it that all your organizations do not receive funding?

[Louise-Hélène Villeneuve]

Our organization is a network and all of our member associations are independent. They exist all across the country, but Heritage Canada's money is not evenly distributed. Each community has its own overall development plan, and it looks to us that, when women are considered a priority “sector” in those communities, groups of women become organized and services are provided to the people.

Anything to add, Manon?

[Manon Beaulieu]

I would just like to mention the vicious circle that our 15 member associations find themselves in. There is no core funding, just the operational funding that we hear so much about.

This morning, we talked at length about funding project by project. The part-time staff and volunteers in our offices are not always able to apply for funding for each project, which means that they don't get it. There must be funding for one person whose job it is to find other sources of funding. They are out there. But you need trained people to find them. Also as we mentioned this morning, people are often underpaid and do not always have job security, so we lose them. With our groups of women, and there are precious few of them, these things always go in waves…

As Mrs. Villeneuve mentioned, especially in the provinces and one territory, we see that, wherever women are seen as a “sector” in the agreements between Canada and the communities, the communities benefit from the efforts those groups of women make.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you. I have to stop you because I really have very little time.

You know that this committee is an advocate for linguistic duality in this country. We also have to consider the equality of men and women, another objective that we have not yet attained. I imagine that you would like your organization to be recognized as a priority stakeholder. I prefer that expression to the word “sector”: women are not a sector.

So what specifically would that status—being recognized as a priority stakeholder, that is—allow you to do more of in the next roadmap?

[Louise-Hélène Villeneuve]

I feel that it would provide us with the ability to work more directly with departments, in the sense that funding women's groups would be part of their mandate. I also think that it would allow us to continue with the initiatives that we have started. We would like to get to the point where we do not have to sit around this table anymore. Let me make one comment.

If you look around this table, you see that most of the seats are occupied by men. So are decision-making positions. We are trying to increase the number of women in leadership roles and to open up more possibilities for them, as you did when the opportunity arose for you to take decision-making positions.

That would mean that, when programs are developed and evaluated, the specific needs of women would be considered and our society would be better served.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you.

On that subject, I would add that, while our numbers may not be representative this morning, the NDP is actually 43% women. Our goal is 50%.

Mr. Racine, something else surprised me in your statement. You said that you got funding from Fonds Jeunesse. I don't know if that came as a surprise or a gift. Does this mean that you had not applied for it, or that you were not holding out any hope of getting it?

[Jean-Luc Racine]

No. When the roadmap was presented, we found out about the existence of the Fonds Jeunesse. We saw the activities we conduct fitting under some programs, but not necessarily that one. We applied as a result of the call for proposals and we got funding.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

When you get funding from a program like Fonds Jeunesse, doesn't it mean that you have to establish an excellent program? I'm not denying the quality of yours. If you get funding that does not support what you're already doing and does not allow for long-term development, you end up investing a lot of resources in a parallel program that is bearing fruit but has an uncertain future. The human resources do not seem to match the financial resources.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Aubin.

[Jean-Luc Racine]

It certainly becomes a little more difficult and complicated. Once the project ended, we tried to make it part of our programming. We realized that it was relatively easy to bring seniors together, but getting school kids mobilized is a whole different story. It is very difficult. At the moment, we are providing workshops, but just for seniors. There are no kids at them. Going to look for kids to take part in our programs is too difficult. It takes too much time and energy and too many resources that we do not have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

Mr. Weston, go ahead.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I also want to thank the witnesses.

Since I am a native of British Columbia, I want to thank all the French speakers for their efforts to speak slowly and clearly. As an anglophone, I have been able to follow along perfectly.

Thank you, Ms. Villeneuve, for reminding us of the nightmare that occurred at École Polytechnique. If we do not remember the nightmares of the past, we will not be able to dream of a better future. And since we are talking about dreams and such, I am going to ask you a very tough question.

The roadmap is not necessarily intended to help your agencies and businesses flourish but rather to support your mission, which is to promote the use of the French language and, in minority communities, the use of the English language. Let's imagine that, in 50 years, everyone can speak both languages but government funding is less than it is today. How do you think you can fulfill your mission, in other words, promoting the use of French, without an increase in government funding?

Mr. Racine, could you give us two or three brief answers.

[Jean-Luc Racine]

If I understand correctly, there may be less funding for the roadmap, but you are going to ask a lot of us. I hear the same thing time and time again. As far as resources go, they are already pretty limited. If we want to take things to the next level, and ensure that programs can be developed and that more and more people can live in French and speak the language, that people can truly live in an environment of linguistic duality, we must maintain our current assets.

I will you give you an example to show you what I mean. Ours is a national association. It receives $120,000 a year to operate. Of course, that's something. But we have an employee on the payroll and we bring people from across the country to take part in meetings. Every year, we hold one meeting, and sometimes two if we have the money. Our resources are already so meagre that we don't even have an office. We try to operate in a virtual space to save money. We can't even afford an office. So if we have to tighten up our belts further still, it would be quite a blow.

We must keep what we have. If the plan is to cut roadmap funding, then yes, we will try harder to do even more, but it will be incredibly difficult. That's asking a lot.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

I would like to hear your thoughts, Ms. Williams.

The question of charitable status troubles me. It seems that if charitable status comes with the promotion of humanitarian needs, which is the traditional perspective, then perhaps that can be overcome. I encourage you to get your MP, or someone who takes this seriously, to revisit that.

Do you have any suggestions? Fifty years hence, we've dealt with some of your missions as Canadians, but the money just isn't there because of increasing pressure on the taxpayer. What's your suggestion? I'm not saying that this is present. I'm looking well into the future.

[Dorothy Williams]

Looking well into the future.... That seems to be one of the real nubs in our community. It is one of the things that generates a lot of questions and helps to accentuate marginalization, particularly of the English-speaking black community, which we serve at BCRC.

I don't really think you would need more funding. Particularly because we're referring to Quebec, I think there needs to be much more openness to allowing more people into the programs they have already. There are lots and lots of second language programs in Quebec, but they're only for specific people. They're not for everyone.

There is, within Quebec, a culture that has ignored the population that existed in Quebec for decades. People who are served by language services are usually those who have come post-Bill 101. There are generations of blacks in the English-speaking community who have no access to French language services and to gaining French language competency. They continue, again, generation after generation, to be marginalized. That's very unfortunate, but that's a reality.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you very much, Madame Williams and Mr. Weston.

Madame Michaud.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you all for being here.

I want to begin with a comment for the AFFC representatives. You mentioned that there were not many women on the committee. You are lucky that there are two. Usually, I am the only one. If Mr. Galipeau's absence continues, this may be the reality for a while yet. This is a trend that I encourage my colleagues to follow. So you are lucky today.

Mr. Racine, you talked about plans to develop a Canada-wide strategy for French-speaking caregivers. I would like to hear a bit more about that. I am very interested in the subject.

[Jean-Luc Racine]

Actually, it is not just for caregivers. The strategy targets home care service in general. Receiving home care services in French in a minority language community is no easy feat. There is a lot of turnover when it comes to home care service workers. If you are able to receive French-language services, it usually lasts three or four weeks, and then the service provider is replaced by an anglophone and French services stop. In order to qualify for home care services, a senior is necessarily in a vulnerable position. The senior is in a very difficult situation.

I would also point out that when you do receive those services, you don't tend to complain for fear of losing services in French.

[Élaine Michaud, NDP, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Could you briefly explain how the next roadmap could help you.