Official Languages Committee on Dec. 13th, 2011

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Go ahead, Mr. Weston.

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

I concur with Mr. Godin. Actually, if we need to set a budget for the future, I'd like it if we could do it in advance. To avoid the same conversation in the future, I'd like it if we could receive the budget in advance. If there are expenses we are expecting for next year…

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

The budget was distributed to your offices yesterday. This budget is standard. Every study that any committee does has a budget for travel for witnesses and accommodation. There are no surprises in here. This is a standard budget. If you wish to change it, the committee can change it, but this is a standard budget for the number of witnesses we have.

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

Perhaps you aren't understanding me. In the future, if there are expenses for a future study, I would like it if we could get the budget in advance.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay, we will try to get it to you earlier. We did distribute it yesterday to members' offices.

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

Sorry, we're not communicating on the same wavelength. I'm just saying, given that we've just learned—

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

It's gone to the Supreme Court.

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

If we're doing a future study, it would be good to have the expenses in advance, rather than approving something we've already spent.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Yes, we will do that.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Are there any other questions on Mr. Lauzon's motion?

Okay, I'll call the question. Those in favour of adopting the budget?

(Motion agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Thank you very much.

The second point of order today is the francophone minority in Saskatchewan. This morning we have Mr. Lebel, of the Conseil scolaire fransaskois, and Mr. Roy.

Welcome. You have 10 minutes for your presentation. The floor is yours.

[Yvan Lebel, President, Conseil scolaire fransaskois]

Mr. Chair, committee members, good morning. My name is Yvan Lebel, and I am the chair of the Saskatchewan Conseil scolaire fransaskois. With me is Mr. Bernard Roy, who is the director of education.

Please allow me to thank you for this invitation and also for the opportunity to tell you about the Fransaskois school community in Saskatchewan and its challenges.

The purpose of this presentation is to make the members of this committee aware of the need for support from the Canadian government to ensure respect for the Canadian Constitution and to provide the Fransaskois community with the means necessary to promote its development and to enhance its vitality.

The situation we describe in the brief shows that our rights under the 1982 Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as well as the Education Act, 1995—on education in French in Saskatchewan—have been affected, and that the means available to the Conseil scolaire fransaskois—the CSF—are still too limited for it to assume its full responsibility.

The CSF is responsible for implementing a French first-language education system in Saskatchewan that is equal to that of majority schools. In addition, the CSF responds not only to the educational component of its mandate, but also to section 23 of the Charter, in the components of cultural community and the identity of our students, contributing to the development and vitality of the province's francophone community.

Early in the last century in Saskatchewan, there were 80 francophone communities where instruction was in French. In 1918, repressive legislation limited French-language instruction to one hour per day. In 1931, it became illegal to teach in French in Saskatchewan. It wasn't until 1967 that the Government of Saskatchewan again permitted a certain amount of French-language instruction in English school boards. When section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms came into effect on April 15, 1982, a group of entitled parents demanded that the Government of Saskatchewan establish a French-language school board to be administered by parents. The Saskatchewan government turned down their demand and an application for a court remedy was filed in 1986. A favourable judgment was handed down in February 1988, but it wasn't until seven years later, in 1995, that the government authorized the school management to be done by and for francophone parents, and it adopted the Education Act in 1995. On November 9, 1998, the CSF was established. So it took almost 15 years after the adoption of the Charter to be able to obtain this minimum recognition of our language rights. There are only about a dozen active francophone communities remaining from the 80 or so that existed at the beginning of the century. Geographically, the CSF must respond to the challenges arising from the fact that the French-language communities are widely scattered throughout the province.

I hope we will be able to come back to reconciliations for past wrongs during the question period.

In terms of enrollments, registrations from kindergarten to grade 12 have almost doubled since 1998. We had 1,565 students on September 30, 2011. The number of schools has grown from 8 to 16. We think that this number could quadruple if we had adequate facilities and resources, comparable to those of the majority schools.

Daycare centres, preschool and full-day kindergarten are indispensable tools for recruitment and the development of children's language capacity and their cultural identity as francophones. There is currently a waiting list of 250 children for daycare spaces.

As for the underfunding of the francophone school system in Saskatchewan, our brief provides examples showing that, since the CSF was established, it has not received the funding it requires to respond to the needs of the current and latent clientele, and that the effects are cumulative. The funding scales do not consider the real costs of the services that we must provide to fully assume our responsibility.

Despite the introduction of a francophone factor in 2002, many legal remedies—yes, Mr. Chair, we are still before the courts!—and a promise of an oft delayed funding formula, which is now expected for 2012, all these means still do not meet the needs of our school system. Unfortunately, it seems that legal recourse is still too often required to defend our rights. But this is really costly for the board and for francophones. This energy could be invested elsewhere, which would benefit our children.

Giving you all the details of the list of services that are underfunded or have no funding would take too long. Our brief provides a list and a few examples of the main areas that justify our claims. We can tell you that, according to our calculations, we are still short about $13 million to make up the difference and meet the needs of our school system, whether it is school transportation, specialized services, technological equipment, training capability or other areas. The funding formula is deficient and is based on the needs of the majority. It is also important to understand our situation, in that we are spread out and isolated, the fact that it is impossible for us to generate economies of scale and much much more.

We submitted 10 recommendations in our brief. I'll summarize them simply by saying that it is imperative to get more involvement from the federal government to support the responsibilities of francophone school boards operating in minority situations. Whether it's in early childhood, specialized services or any other area, the situation requires increased means. Particular attention must also be paid to implementing compensation measures to remedy past wrongs.

Since the recognition in the Constitution of the right to instruction in the minority language and the establishment of our Conseil scolaire fransaskois, a great deal of progress has been made. We must be allowed to continue to build on that in order to enjoy our right fully.

Will we at some point be able to recover from the enormous losses of the past?

The fact that the French education directorate in Saskatchewan's Ministry of Education was recently abolished is certainly not the most positive and encouraging example. Everyone recognizes that provincial governments have exclusive jurisdiction over education. However, we must also recognize that minority-language education is a special case that is protected by our constitutional rights and, by extension, by the federal government's role in protecting official language minorities. The issues are different and the means to develop must be at least equivalent to those available to the majority, while being tailored to suit the realities of the minority communities.

Furthermore, it is imperative—and this goes beyond the provinces' exclusive jurisdiction—that the federal government ensure that favourable conditions are created and that the necessary tools are available to ensure the full development and vitality of minority language communities.

Thank you for listening. We are ready to take your questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Lebel.

We now have 45 minutes for questions and comments.

Mr. Godin, you have the floor.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Lebel and Mr. Roy. I'm pleased that you are here. It's unfortunate that we couldn't do it when you were in town. It would have cost our taxpayers much less. However, the government decided to cancel the meeting. We could have done it, it would have been done.

Before asking you some questions, I need to talk about something else. Here in Ottawa, it's a real free for all during in camera meetings. Since we aren't in camera, I will take a minute of my time to publicly read two motions I intend to present. I'm taking advantage of the fact that we are not in camera and that it's my time to speak.

I gave a notice of motion. So I wanted:

That all of the Committee’s activities be open to the public except where the Committee has the consent of at least one (1) Opposition member to hold an in camera session. This would prevent the government from dictating in camera sessions. I think that it affects my rights as a parliamentarian, and that it prevents me from working for Canadians.

In the event that we would sit in camera forever and no longer be able to discuss anything before the general public, I propose this motion. So at least the public will know that we do not want to work in camera and that we want to be transparent.

The second motion I'm giving notice about sets out:

That the Committee invite the president and CEO of CBC/Radio-Canada, Hubert T. Lacroix, to a public, televised two-hour meeting on February 15, 2012, given the importance of the CBC/Radio-Canada to the vitality of official language minority communities.

Mr. Chair, the government always boasts about wanting to keep the CBC and about being strong defenders of our public radio. Mr. Menegakis always speaks highly of the CBC, but Mr. Dean Del Mastro, the Prime Minister's parliamentary secretary, said to one committee:

...it's time that the Canadian government looks at it and says maybe it's time we get out of the broadcasting business and get into investing more money into content? We invest over a billion government dollars, as you know, into a stage, when in fact the private sector would not only make use of that stage....

Given the direction the government is taking, people from the CBC must be brought in and we need to get explanations.

I'm sorry for taking your time. Now, we will go directly to the questions I have for you.

To your knowledge, is the Government of Saskatchewan doing a poor job of managing the financial contribution of the Government of Canada? Are there irregularities or negligence? If so, what are they?

[Yvan Lebel]

We don't have all the figures we could have. But, one of the recommendations is that the money provided by the provincial government be matched by the federal government.

When we ask questions about this matching request with the province, the answer is fairly simple. We're told that we are given enough money and that it is included in the overall envelope.

I'd like to give you a clearer answer.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

I want to fully understand.

You were told that you have enough money and that you should work with that budget. That's what they say.

[Yvan Lebel]

That's right.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

However, the federal government has a responsibility under Part VII of the Official Languages Act. It's in sections 41, 42 and 43, I think.

[Yvan Lebel]

It's sections 41 and 42.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

The government must send the money to help you. It was out of those obligations, I think, that it was recognized that you had the right to francophone schools in Saskatchewan.

As a school board, are you able to know what money is coming from the federal government, specifically for that? Do you know if the money is really spent for that? Is it simply that you don't know? There's money, trust us.

[Yvan Lebel]

I sense that Mr. Roy wants to answer this question. There are things to say about it. I'll let him speak.

[Bernard Roy, Director, Conseil des écoles fransaskoises]

I will try to answer as best I can.

Initially, when the board was set up, we received $1.9 million for special measures intended for early childhood education or even francization and facilitation. We are currently receiving $2.2 million from the federal government. The actual value of this amount that we receive, despite the cost of living index, doesn't allow us to do much.

However, I know that the provincial government receives $2.6 million for languages, specifically for first-language education. From $300,000 to $400,000, more or less, is distributed to Fransaskois organizations that support education in French through various means.

We know very well that, in the most recent agreement, amounts of money paid by the federal government for immersion programs went from $900,000 to $4 million. As for us, the increase has not really followed the real needs, and no study has been done to find out what the needs would be and what mechanisms for restitution and solutions would be used.

[Yvon Godin, NDP, Acadie—Bathurst, NB]

Do you think the francophone communities receive the federal government's contribution to Saskatchewan and that it's not enough, or do you think that it is possible that the money is being spent elsewhere? We'll recall that there are provinces that denounced that, even some ministers said so clearly. In fact, we clearly told the Commissioner of Official Languages that we are deciding where the money is really being assigned. We cannot say that the money is really being sent there.

As for us, are you sure that the amounts that are sent by the federal government to Saskatchewan are really assigned to French education, or could it be that the amounts are being marked for English education?

[Yvan Lebel]

I'd like to be able to give you an answer about the figures. We are doing research and haven't been able to get the answers we wanted.