Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I agree that it is sometimes necessary to stop looking at what other governments have done. We should be focussing on the future and doing better. And in order to do better, we have to be proactive. I completely agree with the government members in that regard, except that they are talking out of both sides of their mouth. On the one hand, the government says we need to be proactive but, on the other hand, it brings in budget cuts that are a setback and result in our losing everything that we've gained.
It's great to be proactive and focus on the future; in fact, it's absolutely necessary. I don't agree with people who say that Francophone communities are living in the past. That is completely untrue. Mr. Hubert, based on what you said earlier, you are living proof of that. In a way, the 12 initiatives that you mentioned are good deeds.
Do you believe that in future, the government will fund such initiatives? They could be as small as ensuring that our students have access to the local Francophone newspaper. Indeed, what can be better than a newspaper if you want to read and understand your own language? That was only one of the 12 initiatives, or good deeds, that you mentioned.
Ms. Roy said that the federal government does not support the grass roots, which is both disastrous and negative. And yet the government should be providing small amounts of money for the development of initiatives such as yours or those of Ms. Roy — initiatives that directly benefit the communities.
I'm sure a newspaper cannot possibly cost a million dollars per semester. These are small amounts of money, but they foster an incredible vitality. The problem of assimilation that you referred to earlier might not be completely resolved, but it would certainly be partly resolved.