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.