Official Languages Committee on May 11th, 2010

[Elizabeth Mills]

No, there will not.

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

Would you be prepared to reconsider that? I might argue from this end that the federal immigration act requires it and, therefore, if you're planning on having an agreement with the Government of Canada, as I expect you would, that would have to be included in there. If a case for that were made to you by federal officials, would you incorporate such an objective in your strategic plan?

[Elizabeth Mills]

Well, I was not aware there was a clause in our agreement that says there is a percentage to be stated percentage as the target--

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

No--

[Elizabeth Mills]

But if that is the case, then of course, if we have a signed agreement with another level of government, we would be required to honour that clause.

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

What I'm saying, ma'am, is that the federal immigration act requires that whatever is done, whatever programs exist, and I suppose whatever agreements are signed with our provincial partners, the overall immigration of the country reflects the current demographic weight of the official language communities. Therefore, it would flow that there would need to be an objective, certainly of no less than 4%.

Would you agree with that? I'm putting you on the spot here. I understand that. Tell me to go fly a kite if you feel I should, and I won't take offence.

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

I'm not suggesting that there is such a clause in the agreement; I'm suggesting that there should be.

[Elizabeth Mills]

Oh.

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

And I will take it upon myself to have a talk with FANE to see if they're prepared to also encourage their government to include such an objective.

If I may dare to say it, since we all seem to agree in this room that Manitoba is a good example to copy, then it would flow that their objectives would also be good examples to copy. I would argue that perhaps it should be higher than 4%, as in the case of Manitoba, so that after you factored in the retention component, indeed, the relative weight of the francophone community in Nova Scotia would not be adversely affected by immigration. Au contraire, it would be sustained and perhaps even expanded. It's a noble objective, would you not agree?

[Elizabeth Mills]

Very noble--

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

Thank you.

[Elizabeth Mills]

--if the resources are available to support it and the job opportunities are there as well.

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

We're of the view that where there's a will there's a way.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bélanger.

Now, we are going to—

[Elizabeth Mills]

I look forward to bringing you to Treasury Board with me as well.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

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

You know what? I used to be on Treasury Board. I'd love to go.

[Elizabeth Mills]

Great. You're on.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Mr. Weston, you have the floor.

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

Thank you.

Welcome. Bienvenue. Huan ying dao wo men de committee.

In my opinion, the most interesting question is the one my colleague Richard Nadeau asked, the “Nadeau question”. He wants to know the assimilation rate for francophones coming to Canada.

If you do not ask the right question, you do not get the right answer. If the question is how to attract francophones who want to keep speaking French in Canada, we get one answer.

But if the question is how to attract francophones who are interested in what Canada has to offer, a good environment, good education, a good economy, equality, and so on, we get a different answer.

Mr. Rempel spoke about the ability to live in a bilingual setting and about the ability to raise children in both languages. My colleague, Mr. Nadeau, asked a question about the assimilation rate.

But we can ask another question: have we really failed if francophones coming to Canada live and work in English, or have we succeeded? Because we have attracted a lot of francophones who will have an influence on the rest of Canada and will teach in the schools where my own children will benefit from their presence. If we ask that question, the answer will be different.

What do you think about that question? How do we define assimilation and what conclusion do you come to?

[Ben Rempel]

That's a complex question. I'll try to do justice to it.

In general, I'm not sure that assimilation and the rate thereof is the right question. I think we have to look at the reality on the ground and what we're trying to achieve. Certainly that has been the case in Manitoba.

We wouldn't be having this conversation today if we had taken the status quo in 1998 and said, “Why are we bothering?” If we'd said that immigrants weren't coming to Manitoba and they'd be crazy to, which was certainly the attitude that potential immigrants received from some immigration officers overseas, we wouldn't be having this conversation today, because we wouldn't be in the process.

You have to start somewhere. The reality for a lot of minority official language communities outside of Quebec is that you have to start with the bilingual reality first before you can talk in realistic terms about being able to both live and work in French in most areas.

We feel that with the objective we have—the 7% target—and the partnerships we have on the ground, we can transform and bring more vibrancy to communities. If we had brought them to the table today, they would probably tell you that St. Boniface today is different from what it was 10 years ago.

Whether we're talking about St. Pierre, St. Malo, or any of the other communities we have throughout Manitoba, we are seeing possibilities and an optimism that stagnation and assimilation are not the only things on the table. The potential for growth, expanding communities, and the francophone reality in Manitoba are there.

We have work to do. As we said, it means more investment in the services available across all walks of life. You started with the question of assimilation; I would start with the question of how we build on the successes we've achieved so far.

[Elizabeth Mills]

I think I tried to answer that question earlier, but your answer is quite a bit more eloquent and positive than mine.

Nova Scotia is not a bilingual province. We do have the French-language Services Act, which ensures that all French-speaking individuals have access to services in French. But having said that, it is true that anyone who comes to the province will need to speak English as well as French.

We have excellent French schools in our province. I'm very proud of that. Our French-language parents have the opportunity to send their children to those schools. They are excellent schools academically and community-wise. We have a very rich and old culture in Nova Scotia, and we think that by attracting more francophone immigrants we'll be able to preserve that culture and language much longer.

I see it as a very positive initiative, and although we haven't set targets, we are very keen and proactive in our efforts to attract more immigrants. Certainly we don't want to have their language assimilated; we want to celebrate it and have cultural diversity preserved in our province.

[The Chair, Conservative, Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Mr. Weston.

Now we move on to Mr. Nadeau.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am coming back to the question of French schools. Do you think—either Ms. Mills or Ms. Désy—of an immersion school and an Acadian school as French schools on the same level, or do you make a distinction between the two?

[Joëlle Désy]

For myself, I see a major difference between the French schools that are part of the Conseil scolaire acadien provincial and immersion schools. The former are wholly French-speaking schools; the latter are for students whose first language is not French.