Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for your testimony.
It may have looked like I wasn't listening earlier, but while I was taking in what was being said, I was doing research. I am mostly concerned about the statistical aspect Mr. Dion talked about.
We are meeting in committee to assess the immersion situation and the quality of the work done in immersion schools. At the same time, we need to look at how the federal funding from the Roadmap is being used to support English as a second language teaching.
I was looking at the Statistics Canada data. In Manitoba, in 2006, there were 75,545 students taking French as a second language courses. In 2011, there were 70,000 of them, or 5,000 fewer students. Meanwhile, between 2006 and 2011, there was an increase of 1,500 students in immersion. Effectively, 3,500 fewer students are being exposed to French. So youth bilingualism in Canada is either stagnating or declining altogether.
As legislators, we will soon face a dilemma. Should we continue to invest in support for immersion programs? When it comes to bilingualism, does our society benefit from investing in immersion programs, or should we redirect that money toward support for general French as a second language teaching programs? I am convinced that students who come out of immersion programs are individually more bilingual than the majority of those who take French as a second language courses at the primary or secondary level.
That being said, overall, youth bilingualism is declining, and fewer and fewer young people are exposed to French. What should we invest in? That is the key question we need to answer.