Official Languages Committee on Oct. 3rd, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Good morning everyone. Welcome to the committee members and our witnesses.

We have two witnesses this morning: Mr. Daniel Jean and Mr. Marc Arnal. I believe that you will be sharing your time so that you can each make a presentation. Then there will be the first seven-minute round of questions.

Mr. Arnal, you may begin.

[Marc Arnal, Co-Chair, Community Side, Steering Committee Citizenship and Immigration Canada - Francophone Minority Communities]

Thank you, Mr. Lauzon.

Ladies and gentlemen, first, I want to thank you for inviting us to take part in this meeting. Today, we are extremely please to present you with an overview of the progress in immigration as a result of the work done over the past four years by the Citizenship and Immigration Canada—Francophone Minority Communities Steering Committee. As Minister Selinger from Manitoba said, this is clearly a federal title because it is so long.

On September 11, the Citizenship and Immigration Canada Steering Committee took another step forward with the launch of the five-years strategic plan on immigration. In actual fact, this is a 15-year plan, but targets have been set for the first five years. This strategic plan, which came out of the strategic framework, is the result of cooperation by many partners.

What is remarkable about our committee is that it brings together people from the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, other federal departmental agencies with a stake in this issue, the Office of the Official Languages Commissioner, a number of provinces and community institutions for the Francophonie. Even with all these people, with some 40 or so individuals sitting around the table, we still managed to function, and I think we have achieved something quite remarkable.

For the communities, immigration has benefits that go beyond demographic statistics. I would refer you to the document for the list of those benefits.

We covered a great deal of ground in order to develop this strategic plan that we are presenting today. Five years have passed since the final report on the Dialogue round, organized by the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadiennes du Canada, recommended the creation of a national committee to develop an immigration action plan.

Four years ago, the Department of Citizenship and Immigration announced the establishment of the Steering Committee on which I am honoured to sit, along with representatives from the department and communities. Three years ago, the committee released its strategic framework, which is a key document because it contains the objectives that have guided their efforts since that time which include: increasing the number of French-speaking immigrants; enhancing the capacity of francophone communities to receive immigrants; and ensuring the economic, social and cultural integration of immigrants.

The plan we are talking about today continues the momentum initiated by the strategic framework by presenting three major policies that should guide the selection and focus of initiatives to be implemented: first, better integrating immigrants already settled within communities, which includes significant secondary immigration, particularly to western Canada; second, recruiting new immigrants; and, finally, integrating retaining and establishing these newcomers in communities.

For each of these policies, we propose a series of actions to be taken in various sectors and with various target groups. In order to ensure that this strategic plan produces results, each series of actions is accompanied by performance indicators that will allow us to determine if we have reached our goals.

Finally, still with regard to our three policies, the strategic plan identifies eight priorities for the 2006-2011 period: first, the implementation of and support for local networks responsible for coordinating francophone immigration to their region or their province; next, educating the local community; third, implementing English or French language training, based on needs, but within institutions of the francophonie where possible; fourth, research, in order to perfect our knowledge of what the reality is; fifth, supporting the creation of micro-enterprises; sixth, support for French language postsecondary institutions with regard to recruiting and integrating international students; followed by promoting and selecting potential immigrants; and finally, supporting French-speaking refugees.

When looking at these priorities, we see that there is much work yet to be done. In fact, we could say it has only just begun. Even if a number of things could be achieved through existing programs, the fact remains that some of these objectives require investments in new programs or the adaptation of existing ones. I am thinking of, for example, support for the creation of micro-enterprises and language training for the work place.

Obviously, implementing the plan requires a significant number of partners, such as federal institutions, provincial governments, municipalities, educational institutions, the private sector and community institutions.

The success of the strategic plan also depends on recruiting and establishing immigrants in the communities and reinforcing the capacity of those communities to receive those immigrants.

These objectives require increased cooperation from all the provinces. This also requires provincial involvement. We also believe in the importance of reinforcing language clauses in federal-provincial immigration agreements. For example, we are having trouble making Alberta understand a particular official languages clause.

Provincial commitment in this area makes a huge difference. For example, Manitoba is a leader in terms of initiatives to encourage immigration. Manitoba has set a goal of increasing the number of francophone immigrants from 4% to 7%. This province has adopted the means to achieve that goal by, for example, using the provincial nominee program. Manitoba's goal is 700 francophone immigrants out of 10,000, which is greater than the ratio of francophones in that province. We expect that this will have a restorative effect, as was the case with the Supreme Court rulings on French school boards.

I want to thank the support committee that coordinated the preparation of the plan and our consultant, Ronald Bisson, who worked with the committees.

In closing, I also want to thank everyone who helped us to get where we are today. I also want to say that the members of the Citizenship and Immigration Canada - Francophone Minority Communities Steering Committee are depending on each and everyone of you to help us ensure that this plan is a success. It is important for our communities, obviously, but also for the development of Canada's values and languages.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Thank you, Mr. Arnal.

Before allowing questions, we will hear from Mr. Jean.

[Daniel Jean, Co-Chair, Government Side, Steering Committee Citizenship and Immigration Canada - Francophone Minority Communities]

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, Vice-Chairmen and members, I am pleased to be here today to talk to you about the Citizenship and Immigration Canada—Francophone Minority Communities Steering Committee, its achievements to date and especially the priorities it has identified for the next five years. I am proud to co-chair the committee with Mr. Marc Arnal, an ardent supporter of the program with extensive knowledge of francophone minority communities.

The steering committee was created in March 2002 to develop strategies to promote immigration to francophone minority communities. In November 2003, it released the strategic framework, which set out key objectives: increase the number of French-speaking immigrants to francophone minority communities and facilitate the reception and the economic, social and cultural integration of those immigrants into the communities. In March 2005, the steering committee published a progress report called Towards Building a Canadian Francophonie of Tomorrow, a summary of initiatives undertaken and planned between 2002 and 2006.

As you know, the steering committee launched its strategic plan at a media event in Winnipeg on September 11 that was attended by the Honourable Monte Solberg and the Honourable Josée Verner.

The strategic plan flows directly from the five objectives in the strategic framework, but more clearly identifies the challenges to be addressed, proposes focused actions for the next five years, and sets out a course for the long term. Marc Armal has already presented the details of the plan to you.

When the strategic plan was launched, Minister Solberg announced the renewal of the steering committee's mandate for the next five years (2006-11) to ensure the implementation of the plan. The steering committee is made up of 10 CIC representatives from various branches and regional directorates, representatives from 12 federal departments, six provinces and one territory, one representative from the Francophone Intergovernmental Affairs Network, and 11 community representatives.

The success of the steering committee lies in the inclusion, contribution and commitment of key federal, provincial, territorial and community partners.

Examples of initiatives already undertaken include the new reception and settlement infrastructure within the francophone communities of Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg and Ottawa. Also, various tools have been developed to facilitate the integration of immigrants, like the reference guides on services available in French in six cities in Ontario. I would also like to emphasize the promotion and recruitment activities in countries like France, Morocco and Mauritius and the promotional events that were held in Nice, Brussels, Paris and Rabat to encourage skilled worker applications.

Tremendous progress has been made, but much remains to be done, especially as we officially begin to implement the strategic plan.

To ensure implementation, we will set up a committee smaller in size and reporting to the steering committee. This implementation committee will establish and support the necessary relations and collaborations, identify the need for studies and research, and follow up on the priorities and strategic directions identified by the steering committee, the regional and local networks and its federal, provincial and community partners.

Part of the funding to implement the five-year strategic plan will come from existing programs.

First, the Action Plan for Official Languages, launched in March 2003, allocated $9 million over five years to CIC to promote immigration within francophone communities.

Second, the additional settlement funds announced in the 2006 budget will support some of the initiatives of the strategic plan. These new funds will be used to meet the immediate needs of immigrants by improving existing programs and developing pilot projects for target client groups, including francophone minority communities.

Third, we will rely on the leverage effect that can be created by forming strong partnerships with other departments, be it the Department of Heritage, the Department of Health or others.

Fourth, the implementation committee will examine the existing funding mechanism for the implementation of the strategic plan and will identify shortfalls to ensure its success.

I would also like to mention some data that may help you in understanding the strategic plan. In 2001, about 3.1% of immigrants were French-speaking people who immigrated to francophone communities outside Quebec. The strategic plan sets a goal of increasing the number of French-speaking immigrants to francophone communities outside of Quebec, from 3.1% of Canada's overall immigration to 4.4% by 2008.

I would like to point out that, in the plan, we have also changed the definition of what we deem to be an immigrant whose first official language is predominantly French. Consequently, the objective is even more ambitious.

Based on historical levels of immigration, that could represent between 8,000 and 10,000 French-speaking immigrants outside Quebec every year.

Thank you very much for inviting us to make this presentation today. We would be happy to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Thank you, Mr. Jean.

Before we start with the questions, there is something that caught my attention. You mentioned that reference guides on services in French had been developed for six municipalities in Ontario. Which ones?

[Daniel Jean]

Mr. Chair, I do not have the names of those municipalities here, but I would be pleased to send this information to you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

That information would be very interesting.

After much deliberation, I think that Mr. Murphy from the official opposition will ask the first question. He has been chosen by his colleagues.

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

It is an honour to have the support of my team.

Thank you for your presentations.

I represent the riding of Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe. As you are no doubt aware, Dieppe is experiencing both economic and population growth. This city has a population of approximately 20,000 people, almost exclusively unilingual francophones. The city of Dieppe has a policy based on respect for the official languages. The language of business for the municipality is French and, if necessary, English. As you may know, the neighbouring city, Moncton, is officially bilingual, and 40% of residents are French-speaking Acadians. Finally, with regard to education and training in our region, our schools offer English immersion programs.

In listening to your presentation, I got the impression that there are no problems in regions outside the major centres for immigration in this country, such as Toronto, Vancouver and others. No doubt you are trying very hard to improve the situation.

However, when I look at the table on page 18 of your strategic plan, I am surprised. In fact, despite what you have said and the efforts you have made—which I want to highlight because we appreciate your efforts a great deal—statistics show that, in Moncton, the heart of Acadia, where the highest percentage of francophones outside Quebec live, only 60 immigrants out of 10,000 can speak both languages when they begin the trip that will take them to Moncton.

Could you tell me, and the people of my riding, if that number is enough? Is there anything else that we could be doing?

[Daniel Jean]

It is clearly not enough, Mr. Murphy. These are people who immigrated in 2004 and who reported having a knowledge of French or of both languages, French and English. Indeed, the number is low. I think this demonstrates the scope of the challenge we face in general.

The figures for Moncton are also low. However, initiatives were undertaken in your region, and I think they have a lot of potential. In our strategic plan, we show how our foreign student program can be used as a lever to attract immigrants, in this instance, students who want to remain in Canada after completing their studies, to promote francophone immigration.

A few years ago, Citizenship and Immigration Canada began testing initiatives that are now implemented nation-wide. The first initiatives were tested in your region two or three years ago. Students were allowed to work for over a year at the University of Moncton and other institutions in the region, two years after receiving their diploma. That way, they can remain in the region much longer after graduating and find a job. They can ultimately apply to immigrate, either through the New Brunswick Nominee Program or our federal programs.

When we talk about research, this is the kind of measure that seems to have a much greater impact on whether immigrants remain in a region such as Moncton. Other provinces have implemented similar measures, and we hope that this will lead to better results.

[Marc Arnal]

If I may, I want to point out that, in my opinion, we need to consider three things. First, people in other countries know relatively little about our communities. We noticed this when we travelled to places like South America and Central Europe. In many cases, people think that French is spoken only in Quebec. So there is an information problem, and CIC is working with us to develop tools that will make information about our communities more accessible.

The second point may not pertain so much to Acadia. In that region, francophone communities, because of their history, have often had to isolate themselves. This is clearly the case in my home province where, until 1957, I was forbidden to learn French in French schools. The provincial Conservative government of the day changed the law. These events have left scars; our communities are much less open. I think that they are becoming more open now, and this is reason for optimism.

Third, we have realized that integrating immigrants into a geographic community is not quite the same thing as integrating them into a linguistic community. In Moncton, we are working with Magma, an organization offering bilingual services. However, the Société des Acadiens et Acadiennes du Nouveau-Brunswick is helping out by ensuring that people know that services are available in French, that they enroll in French schools and, with regard to post-secondary studies that there is the University of Moncton, for example.

These are all reasons for hope. Furthermore, the New Brunswick provincial government has hired people to recruit people outside Canada.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Thank you very much, Mr. Arnal.

We will continue with Ms. Barbot.

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, gentlemen, for presenting your action plan to us.

The objective to bring in francophone immigrants to your community is very commendable and no one can criticize you for wanting to promote this issue. However, when I read your document, I am under the impression that it is based on lip service rather than actual data. Moreover, you yourselves have said on several occasions that the data used was not reliable and needed to be checked. In some instances, the data has been interpreted incorrectly.

For example, on page 5 of the strategic plan, you said:

The second group of challenges relates to immigrant mobility. An immigrant population is highly mobile.

I do not think that this is true, but let's say that it is. You also stated that people who have already been uprooted once are more likely to be uprooted again. I do not think that this is true. However, you asserted, in the following paragraph:

Between 1981 and 1995, the percentage of immigrants who still lived in their initial province of destination was 85% for all of Canada.

In other words, this data contradicts what was stated previously. As far as I am concerned, an 85% retention rate is wonderful; it is much higher than the retention rates of several regions in Quebec with respect to people born in the province. I feel that your interpretation proves the opposite of what you stated at the outset. I would like to hear your comments on the matter.

You then go on to say, in the same chapter:

No data on the mobility rate of French-speaking immigrants within Canada are available.

If the data on the community in general has been misinterpreted and, based on what you have said, there are no documents on francophones, I am wondering what you have based your action plan on.

As regards the action plan itself, you said that Parliament intends to accept between 225,000 and 250,000 immigrants in 2006. During the launch, the target was set at 4.4% based on general data. If the number of immigrants remains the same between now and then, that would mean, based on your figures, that anywhere between 9,900 and 11,200 francophone immigrants per year could settle in a francophone community outside of Quebec. Moreover, you stated:

According to estimates, approximately 15,000 French-speaking immigrants should settle outside of Quebec over the next five years.

I am wondering what is true. You talk about 15,000 immigrants, but that figure represents only a quarter of the objective you set. In other words, your own estimates lead us to believe that the number of francophone immigrants will represent only to one quarter of your target. However, you have set your target at the maximum rate. This does not make sense to me.

Given that statistics are essential to assessing whether or not a program has been successful or failed, I would like you to provide us with data on the number of francophone immigrants who have opted to settle in a minority francophone community in 2004 and 2005; in other words, I would like to know what data you based yourselves on.

[Daniel Jean]

I will respond to your first question regarding the statement that immigrants are more mobile. The mobility rate for individuals born in Canada is 85% and this rate varies greatly from one region to another. We are making our comparison at that level.

With regard to the plan and our experience of the past few years, we decided to redefine the standard on francophone immigration. By redefining the standard, we are no longer talking about immigrants who voluntarily report having knowledge of French. We are now talking about immigrants whose mother tongue is not French, but whose first official language is French.

What we want are immigrants who will use French, who will settle in francophone communities and contribute to the vitality of those communities. After a few years, we realized that, based on available statistics, those who voluntarily reported having knowledge of French or English often had only a limited knowledge of French. Therefore, those individuals would not settle in francophone communities and live in French. We know that the availability of data is limited and I want to talk about this later.

Page 4 of the strategic plan reads as follows:

The Strategic Plan modifies the definition of the term “French-speaking immigrant” as an immigrant whose mother tongue is French, or whose first official language is French if the mother tongue is a language other than French or English.

Based on the former definition, the one to which Ms. Barbot is referring, we nearly reached our objectives at least twice in the past four years. However, we know full well that this definition will not give us the kind of French-speaking immigrants we want. Why?

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

Why then are you continuing to use this definition in the strategic plan? That is what I do not understand. You are saying that the reality shows that these immigrants will not settle in francophone areas. Therefore, the plan should be amended accordingly, in order to work.

[Daniel Jean]

That is exactly why our forecast is for 15,000 people, instead of 10,000. If I were to tell you the number of individuals who are reporting having knowledge of French, that figure would be approximately 9,000 or 10,000 individuals.

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

I am not asking you to tell me which figure is correct. Base your plan on what you consider to be the true figures.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

I am sorry but your time is up. I know that Mr. Godin has an extremely important question. Ms. Barbot can continue during the next round.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You talked about foreign students being encouraged to stay here after their arrival. That was what you said.

[Daniel Jean]

Those who want to remain, yes.

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

Could not Canadian students studying abroad be good ambassadors to encourage new students to come to Canada?

[Daniel Jean]

Absolutely. It would be an excellent idea to use the networks of alumni who return to their home country. They could encourage new foreign students to come to Canada. Similarly, students who had a good experience in Canada could encourage other people to come here.

Yes, such individuals could probably be used as ambassadors.

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

You are talking about Canadians who go abroad.

[Daniel Jean]

Yes.

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

That is a major decision. Last week, the government abolished funding for study-abroad programs. We have just lost all our ambassadors at foreign universities.

[Vivian Barbot, Bloc, Papineau, QC]

When you ask the question, you answer it.