Good afternoon.
Welcome to Yellowknife. I hope you have enjoyed your stay.
I would like to begin this presentation by pointing out that there were Francophones here as soon as exploration and development of Western and Northern Canada began. Whether we are talking about the coureurs des bois, the Métis who came from the Red River, the Oblate Fathers, the Grey Nuns or the merchants, Francophones from a variety of backgrounds played an important role.
For a very long time, Francophones had been working hard to preserve and promote French in an environment where they formed a very small minority. We suffer from a high rate of assimilation and, in the face of that threat, we recognize that French-language education plays a key role.
All across Canada, French-language school communities have had to make their case in the courts in order to resolve the issue of a lack of support for their constitutional rights with respect to education. The Northwest Territories are no exception in that regard.
There are four major reasons that underscore the need to promote the French language in Western and Northern Canada.
First of all, it is the central purpose of section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, specifically, the development and preservation of minority language communities. In our case, it is French, of course. The second reason relates to the welfare of our children, and their ability to become fully bilingual and develop a Francophone cultural identity. Third is the role of French-language education, as a means of encouraging and protecting Canadians' interprovincial mobility, including that of French Canadians. The final reason is globalization and the linguistic expectations associated with it.
Two of these points warrant special attention. The first relates to the central purpose of section 23. The demands of the Commission scolaire francophone in its law suit against the government of the Northwest Territories, are based on the fact that our programs have no opportunity to develop because of a lack of infrastructure and resources.
In our pre-trial factum, our counsel, Mr. Lepage, points out that the case law has clearly affirmed the central purpose of section 23, which is the development and preservation of minority language communities. He states that the Supreme Court has laid out four principles that are fundamental to the achievement of that central purpose.
Section 23 addresses substantive equality in education for Francophone and Anglophone communities in Canada. It includes a positive obligation for governments to build the necessary educational facilities to achieve that substantive equality.
Section 23 creates a positive obligation for governments to act expeditiously to implement section 23. That section also gives rights holders and their representatives an exclusive right to manage their educational institutions. Finally, section 23 has a remedial component to it which is intended to right the wrongs of the past.
The development of Francophone educational communities in Yellowknife and Hay River has been hindered, because there is no substantive equality. Our schools do not have gymnasiums, nor do they have easy access to other gymnasiums. As a result, our students travel to different facilities, to wherever there is a willingness to let us access a gymnasium. The physical education portion of the day is cut back because of the time wasted, or students are told at the last minute that the gymnasium is not available.
The government argues that other schools in small rural aboriginal communities have the same problem, since they do not have a gymnasium, but they forget that those schools have almost exclusive access to the local gymnasium. So, the situation really is not the same.
Still on the theme of inadequate space, our schools do not have the specialized facilities that are needed to provide education of equal quality, particularly at the secondary level. We do not have fully equipped laboratories or special rooms for home economics, music or other subjects. We are also lacking sufficient office space for advisors and guidance counsellors. We can also give you other examples.
This lack of space results in insufficient classroom facilities, thereby forcing us to put students at two or three different levels together in the same classroom. That lack of space also complicates class organization, which becomes a real nightmare, since we really don't know where to put the students.
Infrastructure modifications require money, and the NWT government prefers not to fulfill its commitments under section 23 by conferring upon itself a right that it does not have. I refer to the right to manage admissions. This occurred when a ministerial directive was issued in July of 2008, under which the ministry now controls access to our programs and greatly restricts that access by limiting it to only those who meet the very narrow criteria listed in section 23, showing a complete disregard for the broad and remedial nature of the provision, and granting the minister the right to decide, based on no particular criteria, who will receive an exemption and who can be integrated into our programming.
This directive poses a very serious threat to the fundamental enforcement principles—as defined by the Supreme Court—with respect to “exclusive management” and “remedial nature”. If we are forced to work on the basis of that restrictive definition of who is allowed to study in French, then people should not be surprised to see the French language completely disappear from Northern Canada.
It is our position that the government of the Northwest Territories shows complete disregard for its positive obligation to implement section 23, as the Francophone community is constantly having to go to court to protect its rights. We are currently witnessing the systematic erosion of our powers as a community, the weakening and disintegration of the Francophone population, which is surviving only with the greatest of difficulty, and the denigration of section 23, the thrust of which is not respected.
Let's move on now to the second point, which is the need to adapt to globalization and ongoing change in modern societies.
It is our submission that this adaptation cannot occur without the preservation of the French language and cultures that acknowledge each other's existence. We also believe that Canadian bilingualism is a key asset in a world where countries encourage their populations to become citizens of the world and speak several languages. We know that our French-language schools produce better examples of bilingual citizens.
Globalization and ongoing change translate into such phenomena of urbanization as immigration, pluralingualism and multi-ethnicity. How can Canada position itself to face the world of the future? We say it can do so by protecting the rights of Francophones and taking responsibility for their full development.
Bilingualism is, in effect, the best way to instill concepts such as pluralingualism and multi-ethnicity. Bilingualism also enables us to prepare them for societal changes that we experience on an ongoing basis in the major urban centres.
A child that already speaks two languages and has been exposed to two cultures will have an easier time coping with these changes and will be more open to the reality of immigration and the challenge facing aboriginal communities that seek to preserve their language. This will result in a future Canada that is more sure of itself, with fewer complexes and better prepared to meet the global competition. In the Northwest Territories, we will have young people who are prepared to call for measures that meet our needs at the national level, in both official languages.
Some people may respond by saying that the four above-mentioned phenomena are peculiar to the major centres, like Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver. They might also argue that this kind of adaptation to globalization is not needed in the context of the Northwest Territories, but that would be a grave mistake. And it would also encourage the development of a two-tier Canada: urban Canada, on the one hand, preparing for the world of the future, and rural Canada, on the other, which would remain on the sidelines of globalization. Such an error would be folly indeed in Northern Canada, which is actively seeking major industrial and mining projects, as well as the construction of a gas pipeline in the Mackenzie Valley.
Not respecting the rights of Francophones and the bilingualism principle is also extremely prejudicial to the students of today who will have to compete for jobs in the future. If we still believe in the importance of our two official languages, let's demonstrate that conviction by offering better support to French-language schools in Western and Northern Canada.
Thank you.