Official Languages Committee on April 29th, 2010

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

It was wonderful, what we just heard! And that includes everyone.

I may surprise you, Mr. Castonguay. We must not be indifferent to the alarm you raised quite some time ago, in my opinion. I agree with you on that.

I am very disappointed to have only five minutes for my questions, Mr. Chairman.

First of all, Mr. Castonguay, I would say that your approach is an extremely mathematical one. That goes without saying, since you are a professor of mathematics. It is a very statistical and—I hope you will not mind my making a somewhat critical comment—very cold approach.

These statistics, whether they are from 1996 or 2001, may present a true picture of a new reality, to use Ms. Lamarre's expression. They do not include the impact, however minimal, of the emergence of Francophone school boards across the country, outside the infamous bilingual belt you referred to. I am talking about the die-hards in Zenon Park, in St-Boniface, at the Campus Saint-Jean in Edmonton, as well as those in British Columbia, and Whitehorse, in the Yukon. In Whitehorse, Yukon, they now have schools and a day care service that did not exist when the statistics were compiled in 1996—statistics which do not reflect the impact of these schools.

Do you take that in consideration, Mr. Castonguay? That is my first question.

[Prof. Charles Castonguay]

Yes, certainly. I am neither a doomsayer nor the bogeyman. I was the first, and almost the only, analyst to point out that having a French-speaking school system, alongside with day care services, all the way up to university, was yielding results in New Brunswick. Outside Quebec, it is the only province where Francophones have succeeded in reducing the rate of anglicisation among young adults. The rate was 12% in 1971 and 9% in 2006. So, there is also some good news in the statistics, and I try to make people aware of that.

You referred to management of independent school boards in Ontario. However, that right was secured long after the achievements of Mr. Robichaud, in New Brunswick. As early as 1969, an official languages act was passed. That is not a bad thing. It supports the communities; it gives them more independence and certainly influences the way in which things evolve.

At the same time, there is one region where we would like to see greater development, and that region is Ottawa, which includes Eastern Ontario. I am basically referring to the metropolitan Ottawa region, which includes more than a third of Ontario's Francophones. It is highly concentrated. In a way, it is like a small version of Acadia, with several hundred thousand Francophones. Using round figures, it is comparable to the entire French-speaking population of New Brunswick. And yet we are not seeing positive developments in Ottawa, which is not an officially bilingual city. No districts outside Quebec have been declared bilingual, as was recommended by the Laurendeau-Dunton Commission.

That was the cornerstone of the policy it was advocating in the sixties, and it was adopted in the first Official Languages Act of 1969.

But that was never implemented. It was set aside by the Trudeau government in about 1977, probably because it would have provoked a backlash. In Windsor, in particular, just such a backlash occurred when there was talk of declaring it a bilingual district. At the time, the rate of anglicisation was about 65%. Now it is more than 70%. Since the Official Languages Act came into effect, the rate of anglicisation among young adults in Ottawa has doubled and continues to rise. What can I say? If the news is bad, do not shoot the messenger.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Fine.

[Prof. Charles Castonguay]

I also have good news, but it is rare. I think we need to be realistic. The indicators on which the Official Languages Act was based are being called into question. I am referring now to the percentage of Canadians whose mother tongue is French, to the percentage of Anglophones or allophones, and to the language spoken at home. The Laurendeau-Dunton Commission had recommended that Statistics Canada ask these questions. It did so in 1971, thereby complying with a U.N. recommendation. The United Nations had in fact suggested that member countries collect this kind of information.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Mr. Castonguay, if the Chair does not interrupt you, I am going to have to. I have another question.

Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I would like to ask my question. I do not know whether I am going to receive an answer right away.

I, too, am a “Franglophone”.

[Prof. Charles Castonguay]

As am I.

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

My grandchildren are learning three languages: English, French and Hungarian. They may learn Spanish as well. Under current programs. immigrants are encouraged to learn only one language: French or English. The question I would like an answer to later is this: should we consider teaching two languages to our immigrant population—in other words, English and French?

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

I imagine a lot of people will want to answer that question.

We will move now to Mr. Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good morning to you all.

My heart starts beating wildly when we come to this topic. By that I mean the daily reality, what is actually going on on the ground, in real life, in terms of the French fact in North America as a whole, and particularly Canada and Quebec—for some fundamental reasons. Like Mauril, I am from Ontario, but from that part of Ontario which is right next to Quebec. I am from Hawkesbury and I am the member of Parliament for Gatineau. So we are still talking about the Ottawa Valley. I thank heaven that we were right next to Quebec. I am talking about Eastern Ontario. Things were different elsewhere in Ontario. I have cousins who are called Lalande instead of Lalonde, and others who go by the name of Nadal, rather than Nadeau, because at one point their parents moved, and at that time Francophones did not have the right to manage their own schools.

I lived in Saskatchewan and I worked to secure the right to school management. As you know, the Conservatives in Saskatchewan abolished French-language schools in 1931. The New Democrats only brought them back in 1995, some 64 years later. I arrived at the end of that lengthy period, in the early 1990s. I will always remember the day I went to Willow Bunch. It is a small Franco-Saskatchewanian village that used to be called Hart-Rouge, which then became Talle-de-Saules, and eventually, Willow Bunch. Most of the people who live there have names like Duperreault—a name which is no longer pronounced that way—Granger, a name that is also no longer pronounced that way—or Boisvert—an another name that is no longer pronounced that way. When we got to the village, we needed the signatures of 10 parents to have the right to establish a French-language school there. But we were unable to collect those 10 signatures, even though we spent a week there. Some of the grandparents were in favour, but not the parents.

Now we are asking immigrants who come to Canada to do the work in these communities where assimilation has occurred—not because Francophones wanted it, but because of the social pressure associated with the Canadian reality. Think of it: Francophones in Saskatchewan went for 64 years without any rights; that destroys communities that already have a minority status. In 1931, there were 63 French-language schools, but we were only able to reopen eight of them—not because people were no longer there, but because the communities had been assimilated. There are only 6,000 people for whom French is the language spoken at home. I say it is the language spoken at home, but that does not mean they do not speak English.

Given that reality, do you not think that we are asking that immigration… Quebec only represents 2% of the North American population. There is a critical mass there. Assimilation is certainly quite possible, as we can see in the Pontiac region and Montreal, where 47% of Quebec's population lives. But to be perfectly frank, when I go to Montreal, I am really not sure that I am in a French-speaking city.

Why not direct our energy towards what should be our focus, rather than asking Francophone immigrants to maintain the French fact in communities which are having a terrible time trying to do that on their own? Mr. Castonguay, Ms. Lamarre and Mr. Jedwab, I invite you to comment.

[Prof. Charles Castonguay]

As I understand it, you are asking whether it is appropriate to scatter what I termed “a precious resource”.

I have already clearly explained that this is not the way it is supposed to be. We could talk about this at length, but some basic indicators allow us to ascertain over time the vitality of the different linguistic groups from one census to the next. It is very important not to abandon those indicators which have served us well, which will continue to serve us well in the future and which are so valuable. They allow us to identify which people speak primarily or exclusively French at home, or English at home. If people say they speak both English and French, I adjust my analysis the same way that Statistics Canada does: I count one half as being French speakers and the other half as being English speakers. That reflects the relative frequency of their use. We are trying to get a better handle on the grey areas that normally arise when both languages are in contact with each other. Admittedly, there is bilingualism.

When we look at population growth, based on statistics from the last two censuses, we see that the number of additional French mother tongue speakers in Canada was less than 10 000 between 2001 and 2006. We have reached an historic turning point. In the next census, I am expecting to see a decline in real terms in the number of French mother tongue speakers in Canada, after simplifying the data, and taking into account double answers that may have been given.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much.

[Prof. Charles Castonguay]

In terms of English mother tongue speakers, the number has grown by almost half a million over the last five years. There is a deepening linguistic imbalance.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much.

[Prof. Charles Castonguay]

The important thing is to put our resources where they will serve us best in the long term.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Castonguay.

[Prof. Charles Castonguay]

Every person counts, and unlike what Mr. Jedwab said, they are small numbers--

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

I am sorry, Mr. Castonguay, but in order to respect our schedule, we will have to try and… People want a chance to speak.

I would like to recognize Mr. Julian.

Welcome to the Committee, Mr. Julian.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am replacing Yvon Godin, the member for Acadie—Bathurst, who is our usual representative on this Committee.

Mr. Castonguay, I would just like to say one thing. I do not agree with everything you have said, except with respect to your comments about Ottawa as the national capital. I think it is terrible that the City of Ottawa has no respect for the federal government or French-speaking taxpayers who built this city. It is not acceptable that the City of Ottawa has not been made officially bilingual. So, I fully agree with you on that.

However, in terms of the vitality of the communities, Ms. Lamarre's comments are a breath of fresh air. The reality in British Columbia, as I see it, is very similar to what she described. As you know, British Columbia is one of the only provinces where the Francophone population is on the rise. There is finally a school system in place. And when you visit these schools, you really see a Francophone rainbow. There are accents from Africa, Europe, Asia and the Caribbean. It is remarkable. It is something that I have never seen in Quebec when I have been there. I lived in Quebec for 14 years—in Chicoutimi, Sherbrooke and Montreal. Yet I never saw the kind of Francophone diversity in Quebec that I see now in British Columbia. The immersion schools are overflowing. Parents often line up for an entire weekend to register their children at an immersion school. What does that mean? It means that all of these people are consumers of Francophone products—Francophone cultural products such as films, magazines and books. That is what contributes to Quebec's vitality in a major way. When there is a network in place outside Quebec, that contributes to the vitality of Quebec and Acadian cultural products. I think it is important to maintain and enhance the Francophone presence outside of Quebec.

Mr. Castonguay, you mentioned that in areas where there are Francophone post-secondary institutions, such as Sudbury, Moncton and Ottawa, the rate of assimilation is lower. That is a fact. These immigrants expand the Francophone community, where such institutions exist.

I have three questions. I would like to begin by addressing one question to Ms. Lamarre. First of all, in terms of French as a Second Language programs, what do you think can be done to improve the quality and quantity of such programs? French is often the second language of French-speaking immigrants.

Second, how can we enhance access to Francophone post-secondary institutions? There is no doubt that the availability of a Francophone post-secondary institution increases the Francophone presence.

Third, what other programs could be offered in order to continue to expand the Francophone presence and consumption of Quebec and Acadian cultural products? That is very important to our future.

[Patricia Lamarre]

The first question was about educational programs, and the third was about other programs, right?

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

The first was about French as a Second Language programs in post-secondary institutions. The third referred to other types of programs which would contribute to broader distribution of Canada's cultural products.

[Patricia Lamarre]

In terms of school programs, I could tell you about a project launched in Quebec three years ago. It involves Community Learning Centres, within the Anglophone community, through which small schools in remote areas were given video conferencing equipment. That means that people living in Harrington Harbour or Blanc-Sablon—regions that are far removed from everything Francophone—can connect to all kinds of cultural events in English. It could be 30 or so students in a small primary school who are thus able to visit museums such as the Canada Space Center.

What is even more surprising is that these small schools are in contact with other English-language schools on the coast of Labrador. All of a sudden, an entire network has been built up in an area where people—as is often said in Quebec about this Anglophone minority community living on the

the Labrador coast, wilting on the vine.

People say it has no chance of surviving, and that the population is in decline. But I was there in January and it was teaming with life. I think we have perceptions based on numbers that do not jibe with people's reality. I would suggest that you visit the Community Learning Centres, which have transformed these schools into community centres that are open 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. All of a sudden, the community has a place to go that is very easy to access, where people can play badminton on Friday night or do scrapbooking. Grandparents go there to tell stories to their grandchildren, because their own children are no longer there. It is an amazing experience that fills you with hope. It creates a community.

Don't underestimate what schools can do for community, all right? Who the community is, I'll come back to; it's something that could be made of many different types of people, but don't underestimate schools.

They're not being used. This kind of thing is not being used enough for exchange programs. I was recently asked....

Do you want me to take two minutes or stop?

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you.

That's a lot. Maybe you could keep your answer for the next question.

[Patricia Lamarre]

Okay. I've got too much to say.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you, Mr. Julian.

Continuing with questions from British Columbia, we'll now move to Mr. Weston.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

I would like to thank all three of you. I think you can see, by the length of the questions, that this topic is one that people feel passionate about. The comments I have heard today may be the most interesting ones I have heard since recently becoming a member of the Committee.

Ms. Lamarre, you just said that the numbers do not reflect people's reality. In English, there is an expression that goes:

“Figures lie and liars figure”. I mean no disrespect, mais

I am concerned that the figures you have given us, Professor Castonguay, may lead us to the wrong conclusions.

The problem I have is that your analysis leads us to a very stark and polarized anglophone-francophone reality, which would suggest perhaps that the existence of French would be stronger if we had only a Quebec and then a “Rest of Canada”.

What I'm hearing and feeling as a father of three kids in a French immersion school in B.C.--the lines are long, and it's hard to get into these French immersion schools--and what Mr. Julian was also saying is that in reality, French is so much stronger because of this large entity we call Canada, where the language is being promoted outside the province.

I have two questions that come from your evidence. First, we heard from you, Mr. Castonguay, that there's a squandering of a scarce resource if the francophone immigrants go outside the belt or outside Quebec. I would argue that this scarce resource is not only strengthening French but also encouraging other people who speak other languages to be sensitive to the importance and preciousness of French outside the belt.

Second, you said that anglo immigration to Quebec was proportionally double the francophone population, and I don't understand why that would be the case, given Quebec's unprecedented control over its own immigration.

I will first ask you, Madam Lamarre, to answer those two questions, and then perhaps Mr. Castonguay. I'm sorry we can't get everybody in because of time restraints.