Evidence of meeting #13 for Official Languages in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was castonguay.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:50 a.m.
Voices
Yes.
10:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
We will have a full fourth round and will end the meeting at that time.
We will now start the fourth round.
Ms. Glover, Parliamentary Secretary for Official Languages, you have the floor.
10:50 a.m.
Conservative
Shelly Glover Conservative Saint Boniface, MB
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to welcome our witnesses.
I had shivers up and down my spine as I was listening to you, Ms. Lamarre, because you were speaking for me. I was born an Anglophone, but at the same time, I am very proud to be a Francophone. I acknowledge that, if I am asked which language I am most attached to, I would have to say it really is both. And everything you said, Mr. Castonguay, just broke my heart. But my heart is very strong, and I think we have the potential to change your data.
When officials from Statistics Canada appeared before the Committee at the last meeting, we talked about the fact that the questions asked do not reflect reality. You also made that point, Ms. Lamarre. Rather than asking respondents what language they speak at home, we should be asking them which languages—in the plural—they speak, in order to truly reflect the current reality.
As Mr. D'Amours said, we are not taking a broader view of things. We are so focussed on excessively detailed questions that we are actually missing the reality.
I am sorry, Mr. Nadeau, but I do not see the situation in Canada as a cancer. It is a country that offers great opportunities to our immigrants. They helped me continue to perfect my French. It is thanks to people like Mr. D'Amours' sister, a Francophone who moved to Saint Boniface, that my children are bilingual. So, that is very important.
Mr. Jedwab, in an article you wrote entitled “Where there is a will there is a way?”, you answered questions that are not necessarily asked by Statistics Canada. That answers one of my own questions. I would like to talk about your data. Mr. Castonguay is always talking about the decline of French in Francophone communities, but in your article, you talk about the number of Anglophones born here who use French at work. Statistics Canada puts the number at 400,000, but Mr. Castonguay seems to ignore all of that. It is important to point out that Francophones' influence over the rest of Canada helps us to increase the level of French.
Can you tell me in what ways Francophones in Canada influence and enhance the level of French throughout the official language minority communities?
10:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Association for Canadian Studies, As an Individual
Personally, I think that it is primarily in Quebec, New Brunswick and the National Capital Region that we have historically noted increased numbers of Anglophones who speak French in the workplace. And it is precisely because of the pressure to do so—something that is due in large part to the federal government, which has brought that pressure to bear in terms of job requirements, such as knowledge of the official languages—that we are seeing that increase.
Never, in the history of Quebec, have so many Anglophones and non-Francophones spoken French. That is equally true for New Brunswick and Ontario with respect to actual numbers of non-Francophones and Anglophones who speak French. There has been a progression. Even Mr. Castonguay cannot deny that increased numbers of Anglophones now speak French in Quebec. It is now at an historic level never seen before.
So, there is good news, and we have to continue to bring pressure to bear—not just by getting the message out that we would like people to speak French, or that it would be very nice or kind of them to do so. This is going to take pressure at the federal level, notably in communities where it is possible to encourage people to speak French through different means. Companies that deal with the federal government should also be encouraged to provide services in French. I know that that may be tough, tough measures are what is needed. Personally, I remain hopeful and optimistic about the future.
If you do not mind, Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a point. We have deviated from our initial topic, which was Francophone immigration. Mr. Weston raised a very important point. This idea of discouraging immigrants from settling outside Quebec conveys a message. The message may well be more important than the numbers. If our message is that Francophone immigrants should not settle anywhere else than Quebec, we may be sending the same message to Francophone Quebeckers who would like to move somewhere else in Canada. We could also talk about a scenario, if we follow the logic—a logic that I am sure neither Mr. Nadeau nor Mr. Castonguay share—where all Anglophones who live on the other side of the bridge--
Is it all right if I continue? Mr. Castonguay, I know that you like… Please allow me to finish; I have not spoken much today. I will be finished in a few seconds, Mr. Blaney.
10:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Association for Canadian Studies, As an Individual
The logic I refer to is one which says that all Anglophones should live on one side of the National Capital Region and that all Francophones should live on the other. I know that you do not share that vision, Ms. Glover, but by telling Francophone immigrants that they should not settle outside Quebec, we are sending them a somewhat broader message which is that, logically, ideally, all Francophones should be on one side, and all Anglophones, on the other. I could never tolerate or accept such a message. But that is sort of what we are saying. Beyond the numbers, be they good or bad, and beyond the indicators—good and bad—there is a message we are conveying to our society and our children—my children, Ms. Lamarre's children and many other children.
11 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Ms. Glover.
I see that there are other witnesses, and three Committee members who are still hoping to ask questions. We will surely have an opportunity to hear the other witnesses.
On that note, Mr. Bélanger, I believe you asked for the floor.
11 a.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
It is fascinating, Mr. Chairman. Here we have a microcosm of Canada and of its future. That is what is fascinating. I thought I would follow Mr. Castonguay's example, but instead I am going to say exactly what I want to say. Phrases were coming to mind as I was listening to the discussion. I was thinking of my desire to make Canada a place where I could live as a Francophone. Earlier I said that I was a “Franglophone”, but really, I am fundamentally Francophone. At the same time, I want to live my life in English as well, because I made the effort to learn that language. It is my second language, and I would like to learn a third. All of that is personal, however.
In terms of the overall picture, I agree with Mr. Castonguay. Throughout its history, Canada has witnessed the steady decline of the French fact. The real issue for me is: with a determined effort on the part of the Canadian government, mainly, and provincial governments as well, would it be possible to stop assimilation and, possibly, reverse that trend? That is the fundamental question driving our efforts, or that should, at least, be driving them.
In a French version of the Reader's Digest, I read one day the infamous phrase about the pessimist and the optimist both being necessary to society: one invented the airplane and the other, the parachute. I am on the side of the optimists. My question is simple, but extremely complex. I do not expect to receive an answer today. It is an answer that will require some work, in my opinion.
With a determined effort by the government to create institutions, as was done with the school boards across the country and day care centres—and I come back to my example of Whitehorse, where there is a day care centre called the Garderie du Petit Cheval Blanc; I just love that name—and foster Francophone immigration, whether it is concentrated in Quebec or elsewhere, would it be possible to reverse that trend?
11 a.m.
Adjunct Professor, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
Institutions are not enough. I think we missed the boat in the 1960s. We gave the Royal Commission of Inquiry a specific mandate.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
11:05 a.m.
Adjunct Professor, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
The working paper, or the mandate, whatever it was called, that was given to the commissioners was to see how Canada could develop “on the basis of an equal partnership between the two founding races”. Pearson signed that, and that is not the direction that the commission took and that the Government of Canada later took under the leadership of Pierre Trudeau.
We're in a situation now where we're not in a bicultural country, where we're not in a binational country. It's very strange mathematics. Sometimes figures stagger me, too. We have one nation, two official languages, and many cultures—one, two, many. I don't know how you want to count that, but it just doesn't stick together. The non-recognition of a French Canadian nation, as such, as an equal partner—a potentially equal partner—for the English Canadian nation is where we went wrong.
Now, that type of recognition takes more than just a vote in a house of Parliament, saying “Quebec is a nation”, whatever that means. You also have to put your money where your mouth is.
11:05 a.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Mr. Castonguay, forgive me for interrupting.
I do not want to play the schoolmaster here, but if you are willing to do your homework and send us the results of your inquiries, I promise to read what you send us.
I would like the other two witnesses to use the remaining time.
11:05 a.m.
Associate Professor, Joint responsibility (languages) for the Centre of Ethnic Studies, Faculty of Education, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
I would like to add one important point to the debate. I come back to the initial question: what should be done about Francophone immigrants? Where are we going to try and send them to settle? This dilemma also affects Quebec. Are we going to try to send them to the regions of Quebec, to introduce diversity into the Francophone population outside of Montreal? In actual fact, we can tell them to settle in a specific place, but subsequently, they will chose where they want to go. And where will they go? Well, that will vary from one person to the next.
11:05 a.m.
Conservative
11:05 a.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
We discussed the definition of Francophone. I do not want to come back to that, but I would like to come back to the recommendations.
That is the most important part of your testimony today. Beyond the debate about whether we should just put all of this on the shoulders of Francophone communities outside Quebec, one assumes that we are all interested in promoting the French fact all across Canada, and balancing that with the rights of Anglophones that already exist in Quebec. That balance is important.
My first question is for Mr. Jedwab and Ms. Lamarre. What clear recommendations can you make with respect to maintaining or even increasing the presence of Francophone immigrants outside Quebec and improving their quality of life in French?
11:05 a.m.
Executive Director, Association for Canadian Studies, As an Individual
I'm favourable to supporting the direction of those immigrants who are recruited and attracted by the communities outside Quebec on the basis of community-driven initiatives to support francophones emigrating outside of Quebec, and that the federal government extends support to that idea but also provides the resources those communities require in order to properly receive those individuals.
Now, let me say something—
11:10 a.m.
Executive Director, Association for Canadian Studies, As an Individual
Ms. Lamarre talked about community resources and community-school projects. In fact, this is tricky because of provincial jurisdiction. Perhaps it would be possible to work with provincial governments to that end, if there is a will to do so. Let us hope there is.
Also, there is a need to clearly establish the conditions that exist in those communities and not tell immigrants who are anxious to settle in these communities that English is not part of the reality they will face there. There are varying rates of linguistic decline. We saw the experience in New Brunswick. Mr. Castonguay noted the good news in New Brunswick. So, anything is possible.
In answer to Mr. Bélanger, it is possible, in some areas, to get around that reality, according to Mr. Castonguay, who referred to New Brunswick. However, that is something that is difficult to accomplish and it takes time. At the same time, it is essential that this reality be made clear to potential immigrants and that they be given an explanation of the specific circumstances in various places.
In Saskatchewan, under the circumstances, it would be very difficult for a Francophone immigrant to preserve his language without extraordinary resources being put in place. Even then, it would be difficult. That does not mean that, wherever possible, we should not be supporting Francophone immigrants or even Francophone Quebeckers who decide to go and live in Saskatchewan. We have to ensure that communities are supported with the necessary resources, so that immigrants or Quebec emigrants are able to live socially in French, because it must be acknowledged that it will be very difficult for them to do that in the workplace.
11:10 a.m.
Associate Professor, Joint responsibility (languages) for the Centre of Ethnic Studies, Faculty of Education, Université de Montréal, As an Individual
Just very quickly, I think you need to speak to some more people, not just to the three of us who are here. If you talk to francophone associations from Alberta and Saskatchewan, you'll hear that their definition of community includes diversity and that they want that immigration. They're there, and they want them. So you need to hear from those people, not just the three of us here.
The other thing is that I think there's still a perception of a francophonie hors Québec that is rural. That's not necessarily true. There is Toronto.
There is a Francophone community in Toronto, just as there is one in Moncton and Vancouver. It has already become diversified and is alive and well, even though some would like to think it is dead and buried. And if you ask them, they themselves will tell you that they are alive and kicking. I am sorry, but we are here.
11:10 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Steven Blaney
Thank you very much, Mr. Julian.
We will, in fact, be hearing from representatives of the official language communities, and particularly the Francophone communities.
Before I allow Mr. Nadeau to have the last word, I would like to thank our witnesses for travelling to Ottawa to appear before the Committee. You have given us a great deal of material for our study. In fact, you have helped us to develop the questions we will be asking our future witnesses.
Mr. Nadeau, you have the last word.
11:10 a.m.
Bloc
Richard Nadeau Bloc Gatineau, QC
Thank you very much.
I am continuing with the question-and-answer approach. According to what Mauril was saying earlier, and what Mr. Castonguay also said,
“You also have to put your money where your mouth is.”
I remember a gentleman from La Broquerie, in Manitoba, whom I like very much, who now lives in the region and who used to be my boss. His name is Ronald Bisson, Executive Director of the Fédération de la jeunesse canadienne-française. He had asked Roger Bernard, who, unfortunately, has departed this world, having passed away, to carry out a study entitled Vision d'avenir de la Francophonie. He said that this study in four volumes was an initial blueprint that would lead to zero assimilation and advanced “refrancisation”. When I was at the Fédération des Francophones de Saskatoon, I had proposed that this be a battleground for the Association culturelle franco-canadienne de Saskatchewan, as it was known at the time, its new name being the Association communautaire fransaskoise, but people laughed at me. I have no problem with people laughing at me. However, that is just the problem: there people were saying that nothing could be done. Imagine! These were people in Moose Jaw rethinking the future of Franco-Saskatchewanians. I continued to fight for that, however. We were demanding a bilingual province and that the actions of the Conservatives under Grant Devine be reversed: they had simply done away with things that affected Francophones, and we thought it was terrible. So, it is important that people know that.
You are right, Ms. Lamarre, that there are still communities out there, and I realize that we have to support them. However, it is also important to be aware of assimilation and acknowledge the fact that the Francophone critical mass in North America, in a specific region and forming a nation, is Quebec. We must not forget to focus on that. Because if Quebec suffers assimilation or shrinks, its influence… We must not weaken the strongest part. We should provide support to the weakest ones in this struggle, but we have to look at where is appropriate to devote our energies.
Mr. Chairman, could Mr. Castonguay table his two studies so that we could have them translated? That way we could have them eventually, once the translation is available.
11:15 a.m.
Conservative