It's just one more part of his campaign, I think.
I was struck by Mr. Lévesque's comment.
What was it...?
It was that back in 1977 he said to the anglophones, when they were scared about Bill 101—and rightfully so—“Don't worry about it: your future is in the power of your loins.” That was his response. It was a public comment.
Moreover, Mr. Rodgers said that 50% of the anglophones were married to francophones.
So perhaps we have two road maps going on. There's the bureaucratic, governmental one that we're talking about, and then there's the fact of Canadians who really appreciate our bilingualism. My question is about the intersection of these two road maps.
My experience comes from British Columbia, where my kids have gone to a French immersion school. My family has embraced the notion of bilingualism. In fact, as we've discussed in this committee, bilingualism leads people to take on other languages and better prepares them to face the world in a more competent way. My kids have gone on to learn Chinese, and hopefully will continue. Bilingualism is very much in our bones. One might say that just the intermarriage—the power in the loins and the desire to learn the language—is ultimately going to be what drives us to be the nation on earth that epitomizes the importance of bilingualism.
Then we have the fact of the need to pay educators and administrators. The people who have taught my children, without my knowledge, I'm sure, were recipients of part of the $1.2 billion. In fact, I know that to be the fact. Most Canadians probably don't appreciate what's going on under the radar. I guess my question is this. How long in the future is it? Is it forever...? Do we need to continue investing this kind of money—as my colleague said, $1.2 billion—and is it something we will always do, do you think? Or do you think we will reach a point in Canadian history where we have become so much...? Somebody said it's like eating the poutine. What did you say? Was it
"autotism"?