Official Languages Committee on March 3rd, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the sixth meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages. This is the second meeting of our study on braille in linguistic minority communities, from the standpoint of its standardization across the provinces.

This morning, we have the pleasure of welcoming witnesses from the Quebec region. Mr. Jacques Côté is here as a member of the Council on Access to Information for Print-Disabled Canadians, and Ms. Diane Mitchell is here as a representative of Jymico. Welcome, both of you.

Later, we will also hear from a representative of the New Brunswick Department of Education. Our witness is Ms. Jasmine Gallant, Education Officer for Students with Sensory Impairment.

Ms. Zarac has also tabled a motion. I would like us to set aside 30 minutes at the end of the meeting to discuss it.

First of all, I will explain to our witnesses how we proceed. Each of you will have 10 minutes for your opening statement. After that, we go on to questions by parliamentarians.

So without further ado, I would invite Mr. Côté to break the ice.

[Jacques Côté, Member, Council on Access to Information for Print-Disabled Canadians]

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for receiving us this morning.

I imagine you are not very familiar with braille, though you are most likely familiar with the name. This year, we are celebrating the 200^th anniversary of the birth of Louis Braille. Without going into details, I will give you an overview of what braille is so that you can ask appropriate questions when there is something you don't understand.

Braille is not a language, but a method for reading and writing. That means we would take an English printed text, and transcribe it into English braille. The same thing is done on the French side.

I would like to say a few words about the history of braille, because I don't know whether you are familiar with it. In previous years, braille was transcribed in different ways in French-speaking countries. Transcription rules and standards varied from country to country. Thus, a project to standardize braille has been initiated. That standardization project targets French-speaking Quebec, France, Switzerland, Belgium and even Africa. The goal of the standardization—that is, always transcribing French braille in the same way, regardless of the country of origin of the printed text—is praiseworthy. The goal of standardizing braille is praiseworthy indeed.

Please allow me to take a brief moment to tell you something about myself, because what I do will become clear as I speak. I am a teacher. I am now retired from teaching in Quebec, where I taught blind children. All my life, I have used braille as a teaching method. Personally, I am strongly opposed to the standardization. I will give you some of the reasons for my position.

First of all, standardization means making the transcription similar, regardless of where it is done. People believe that, once braille has become standardized, francophone countries will be able to exchange manuals and books. That's true, they will indeed be able to exchange books, novels. France will in fact be able to transcribe some books and Quebec others, and they will then be able to exchange those books with no problem at all.

However, that will not work in schools. Schools will not be able to exchange textbooks and school manuals, for a very simple reason—there are no common educational programs in France and Quebec. France and Quebec will be able to exchange novels, but certainly not textbooks. But it is in schools that children need to do that exchange, and they particularly need access to textbooks and manuals.

I've told you my position. Now, let me explain how things are. I would like to say a few words about the new code, a copy of which I have submitted to Ms. Dumas. I will ask you for a special permission to do something that will help you. I would like to ask for special permission to table a document that is only in French. It is part of the Code braille français uniformisé pour la transcription des textes imprimés. I will certainly not have the authority to translate this into English. It's as if I were tabling a copy of a French grammar book, and you asked me for an English copy of the French grammar book—it could not be translated. So I am asking the chair of the committee: may I table the first 20 or so pages of the Code braille français uniformisé , the standardized French braille code?

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

You could table it, Mr. Côté, but before I can give you permission to do so I would need unanimous consent from all members of the committee.

Do we have unanimous consent? Yes, so we can distribute the document.

Thank you, Mr. Côté. Please continue. You have about four minutes left. After that, my colleagues will have a chance to ask their questions.

[Jacques Côté]

Please let me know when everyone has received a copy.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

I will.

Everyone now has a copy, Mr. Côté, except me. Please go on.

[Jacques Côté]

The title alone is enough to show there is a problem. The document is entitled Code braille français uniformisé pour la transcription des textes imprimés. Just below that, it says: “Édition québécoise — Mai 2008. ” So from the very start, we can see that this is a territory-specific addition, and that is already a problem from the standpoint of standardization.

On page 7, at paragraph (a), which indicates the territory it covers, it states that the code applies to all of Quebec. However, the goal of this was to standardize everything. I find this difficult to read, but I have no choice because that is what is written.

On page 8, paragraph (b), the code states that it has exclusive authority in Quebec. And yet, the goal of this exercise was to have a code that was standardized across all French-speaking countries.

I have one last comment. The braille alphabet is just like the printed text alphabet—a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, etc.—but it has no numbers. There are no braille characters for our numbers like 1,2, or 3. Yet, we do need to write numbers. How do we do that? Louis Braille came up with something quite ingenious. He took the first 10 letters of the alphabet—a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, and j, —and put a number sign before them. That number sign transforms them into numbers by giving each of those letters a numeric value. For example, if I want to write the number 12, I put down the number character and then add the letters a and b which are then transformed into 1 and 2. That method of writing numbers has been used for 200 years, and is still used almost everywhere in the world.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Côté. Could you please conclude your presentation?

[Jacques Côté]

I will conclude, if I may.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Excellent.

[Jacques Côté]

As you can see, the standardization applies in Quebec alone. However, there are francophones outside Quebec, for example in New Brunswick, Manitoba and Ontario. What will happen to their documents, particularly to their school manuals and textbooks? What will happen to those? They will not be covered by the code.

If the point is to make all French-speakers learn the differences and features of the new code, who will have the authority, the staff, the human resources and the financial resources to extend the code to francophones outside Quebec? In my brief, I recommend that the Canadian Braille Authority, which has a French braille section, study the issue. It may one day be able to provide human resources or funding.

I will conclude with one of my strongest recommendations. Until such time as we have properly determined the resources needed and the costs involved, we ask that French braille outside Quebec continue to be transcribed as it has been for the past 200 years.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Côté. You have cut to the heart of the subject and have raised a great deal of interest among our colleagues.

We will now hear from Ms. Gallant. Ms. Gallant will have some comments, and would also like to speak on the topic Ms. Landry was to have discussed. Unfortunately, Ms. Landry was unable to be with us today.

Ms. Gallant, please go ahead.

[Jasmine Gallant, Education Officer for Students with Sensory Impairment, Department of Education, Government of New Brunswick]

May I make my own presentation first, and then try to do justice to Ms. Landry's comments?

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Do my colleagues agree? Yes, please go ahead.

[Jasmine Gallant]

I will be making two different presentations.

First of all, let me thank you for giving me this opportunity to say a few words. My name is Jasmine Gallant, and I represent the New Brunswick Department of Education. I am the education officer responsible for delivering services to French-speaking students with sensory impairment. Thus, I am responsible for providing teaching in braille to all French-speaking blind students in the province. Today, I am here on behalf of all visually-impaired students in the French schools of New Brunswick, for whom I am responsible.

First of all, I should point out that, in New Brunswick, all students with a disability are integrated into their local schools. The same therefore goes for blind and visually impaired students. Some 100 French-speaking visually-impaired students receive our services. Fewer than 10 of them learn braille, but regardless of the number that do, they are all entitled to quality teaching. Our service is the only one of its kinds, because all teachers working with the students are specialized visiting teachers. Thus, 10 visiting teachers specializing in the visually impaired meet the needs of blind and low-vision children in all parts of New Brunswick. We provide services as soon as the children are born, or as soon as an optometrist or ophthalmologist determines they are visually impaired. We provide early childhood services in the home, then follow the children through school.

In addition, an orientation and mobility specialist works directly with some children, and provides support for visiting teachers and parents. As well, a visiting teacher acts as a transition officer, helping secondary school students find summer jobs to assist them in their career choices, and provide support for those students until they reach the post-secondary level to make the transition easier.

I am telling you all this so you can understand how important we consider the needs of blind and low-vision students to be. The standardization of the braille code slated for September 2009 has been a surprise and is a source of concern, both from the standpoint of learners and from the standpoint of its application in schools.

As you know, New Brunswick is a bilingual province in every way, and all students learn both official languages. This means that, in order to receive their high-school diplomas, our students must not only know French, their mother tongue, but also English. I know that this is also done in other Canadian provinces, and that our children are not the only ones who need to learn braille in both languages, not only to succeed academically but also to prepare more effectively for their lives as adults.

We believe that applying a different code in English and in French makes the system inconsistent for students, and doubles the learning they have to do.

Given the large number of additional things a blind person has to learn in comparison with a seeing person in order to become a productive adult in society, we believe that we should be adding to their burden as little as possible.

If the standardization were to take place, students would be required to learn not only a specific code for mathematics and sciences and a code for language, but also a specific code for French and a specific code for English.

At present, New Brunswick students and visiting teachers are familiar with all the codes that make it possible to move through literary into scientific notation, without any difficulty. We find it inconceivable to view the education of students in any other way, since literacy is the means through which all learning is absorbed. We believe that changing the codes would increase the difficulties encountered by students in learning those codes, and would thus make their academic learning and pursuit of higher education more difficult as well.

We are convinced that those difficulties would be felt not only in New Brunswick, but in any place where students need to learn both French and English.

In addition, I am concerned about the costs that the standardization would incur. In New Brunswick, the visiting teachers and teaching assistants working with our young blind students are well trained, and the success of our students attests to that. How much time and money would it require for those visiting teachers and teaching assistants to learn the new code?

Our provincial exams have been adapted using the current code so that students can take their exams in a familiar context, such as their regular classrooms. Will the technical equipment used, for example the braillewriters, have to change? There again, what would the costs be in time and money to apply the change and to train everyone involved? At present, our activities and the equipment we use for everyday teaching, learning or transcribing make it possible for students to follow classes at the same pace as the seeing students. What impact would the changes have on children in learning situations? We believe it would be disastrous. Ladies and gentlemen, those are the reasons for which we are convinced we need to keep the flexibility of the current code.

Today, I am testifying before you as an educating officer responsible for visually-impaired students, in order to express my opposition to the changes. I will leave you with the following question. Our blind students are already severely disadvantaged by their visual impairment—what advantage would there be for them in having two different unified codes?

Thank you for your attention.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you. You finished your first presentation in six minutes.

Would you also like to share some of Ms. Landry's notes with us?

[Jasmine Gallant]

I have her document. She mentioned some specific things to me, but I do not know if I should read all her notes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Have you understood the main points of her text?

[Jasmine Gallant]

Yes. However, she included some historical elements in her document.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Go ahead. It is up to you, Ms. Gallant.

[Jasmine Gallant]

I was invited to this meeting as an expert on braille. Let me first introduce myself. I am Huguette Landry. I am the President and Chief Executive Officer of Braille Edition & Transcription Inc., located in Shediac, New Brunswick. I began working in the field of braille transcription in 1986. From 1988 to 2003, I was an active member of the Comité québécois de normalisation du braille français en éducation under the direction of the ministère de l'Éducation et de l'enseignement supérieur du Québec. I am a transcriber, reviser and user of French and English braille. I am thoroughly familiar with several codes currently adopted in Canada in both official languages, and in the United States.

In Toronto, in 1993, I obtained from the Canadian National Institute for the Blind a certificate in literary, mathematical and scientific braille transcription. Since 1988, I have been training francophone schoolteachers to use French literary and mathematical braille under the direction of the Department of Education of New Brunswick. Since my company was created in 1993, I have been offering services such as the transcription of documents into French or English braille. These services are aimed at a clientele in schools, colleges and universities as well as in government and private sector organizations. Over the past years, great efforts have been made to review the meaning of braille symbols in order to establish a single unified code to group literary, mathematical and scientific braille codes.

On the other hand, a francophone committee and an anglophone committee are currently working independently to develop two different unified codes. Even before the final acceptance of these two codes, we can state that they will create extra difficulties for users and transcribers of braille when they have to learn all the differences between the two languages.

From the point of view of users and transcribers, what would be the ideal unified braille code? First, it would allow us to use one single braille code for reading and transcribing simpler, literary texts and more complex mathematical and scientific texts. The use of a single braille code allows us to use in French or in English, the same typographical, mathematical and scientific braille signs in the printed version. It allows us to use a braille code that does not have any radical changes, so that we can apply our acquired knowledge. Such a code would not have any serious or overly serious impact on implementation and learning in terms of cost and effort.

New Brunswick is a bilingual province. I think it's important to keep the similarities that currently exist between both official languages with regard to the meaning of braille symbols. Currently the Abraham Nemeth Code allows us to do that. This code was adopted in the United States in the early 1960s. It has been used all over Canada in both official languages since the early 1970s. We were able to adapt this flexible code to the French language. With regard to braille transcription in both languages, be it literary, mathematical or scientific, it very successfully meets all the real requirements of printed braille as they stand today. All the figures, typographical symbols, scientific formula, linear or spatial formula, chemical structures, etc. that we find in print are available in the Abraham Nemeth Code. This code is already a universal code in itself.

When texts are transcribed entirely into braille, be they simple literary texts or mathematical or scientific texts, all the braille symbols are identical and have the same meaning for the user, in French as well as in English. The Abraham Nemeth Code can even be adapted to other languages.

In my own opinion as an expert, the codes currently in use, called The Nemeth Braille Code for mathematics and science notation, English version and the Code pour la transcription en braille de la notation mathématique, French version, are the ones that best meet the desired objectives of users as well as transcribers of braille, and they can serve as a solid foundation for creating a future ideal unified code in both of Canada's official languages.

Now, with your permission, for clarification, I would like to use the table to show you the current and future developments of braille codes.

Do the people have the document?

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Ms. Gallant, the document we received is only in French. This morning we only received one copy of the table.

[Jasmine Gallant]

In this table, Ms. Landry shows the difficulties or the dissimilarities between the braille that is proposed and the current version of braille in both languages.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

If the committee members agree, I can distribute Ms. Landry's table.

Does everyone agree? Therefore, we can distribute it. Thank you.

You can continue, Ms. Gallant.

[Jasmine Gallant]

The first part of the table shows three different currently available ways to represent, for example, the printed percentage sign in braille. In a literary, mathematical and scientific environment, the printed sign always remains the same, which is not the case for braille. In the first part of the table, we see the three methods: in French, in English and in braille.

As for the two unified French and English braille codes currently being studied by the francophone and anglophone committees, the second part of the table shows us, once again, the different ways of writing the percentage sign in braille in both languages. As compared to the currently existing form of braille, the braille symbols of these two unified codes are also differently configured in both languages. Let us also note that the current study of both unified codes seems to be incomplete with regard to mathematical and scientific transcription.

Do you follow me regarding the second part? Do you see the difference between both systems? There is no similarity between them.

In the last part of the table, the Abraham Nemeth Code offers the alternative of a unified braille code that enables us to transcribe literary, mathematical and scientific texts. Ultimately, the printed percentage sign and all the other symbols will have identical braille representations in both languages. Given the fact that this code has been implemented for the past 20 years, it will be much simpler to integrate and to adopt it.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Ms. Gallant wore Ms. Landry's hat with gusto.

Now let us begin the first round of questions with Mr. Rodriguez.