The point I want to make is that we very clearly respect jurisdictional boundaries. When it comes to first language, second language, educational...we don't go there.
What we do have are partnerships with many francophone-interested bodies and entities. We look for the common ground. We think there is enough mutual interest that our children who are studying French as a second language have the opportunity to engage with, to mingle with, to learn, and to profit from....
There are some very functional and pragmatic reasons for that. For example, on the east coast, when there are touring groups from the arts and cultural organizations, we often get together with francophone groups to split the cost. It's a very pragmatic, practical thing. We both benefit.
We encourage that. We think that's very beneficial for our parents and our families that there are those opportunities. We think francophone bodies benefit as well.
On the university side, we have been actively spending time with universities to encourage them to provide a wider range of course offerings for students. If we take that one variant of French second-language immersion, we have 350,000 students across the country enrolled in immersion. The question is what happens to these students when they leave public school? They are not all going to the University of Ottawa. They are not all going to Université du Québec en Outaouais, Université de Moncton, or Faculté Saint-Jean at the University of Alberta. They are going into anglophone universities. Our question to anglophone universities is what are they doing for this population?