Official Languages Committee on May 28th, 2013

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

That is a nice idea, but do people actually do that? They say they do, but you have pointed out that you cannot keep track of it.

[Robert Rothon]

We cannot keep track as much as we would like to.

[Hubert Lussier]

Clearly, it must be understood that we obtain reports that are validated by the provincial authorities and that follow their own accounting rules.

We have a co-operative relationship and we must have faith in what the provinces are telling us. Sometimes, these questions open the door to doubts. Without wanting to open a Pandora's box and uncover a scoop, I think the Commissioner of Official Languages—it is no secret—has looked into the issue on occasion. He won't hold it against me if I say that he is looking into this issue right now. He would certainly be happy to answer your questions if you invite him to speak to the issue.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

The table on page 4 indicates an amount of $258 million in annual federal contributions and it is all combined.

Are second-language learning and community schools two separate envelopes or one? In Manitoba, you received $5,540,451. We are counting on you to prepare a report for us indicating how the money has been used.

[Yvan Déry]

There is an agreement, two envelopes and six outcome domains per envelope. For each of the six outcome domains, the provinces present initiatives that they want to take, indicators and targets. Of all our agreements, 700 initiatives come from the provinces. There are about 250 indicators and therefore targets as well. Under the action plan, the provinces can make transfers as part of the same language objective. If we see that the creation of new programs for minorities requires less money than anticipated, we can use those funds for something else in the program for minorities.

To make a transfer for the second language or vice versa, we need to be informed and to approve the request. The protocol has defined those transfers. So there is one agreement, but two envelopes being tracked. Financial reports are not prepared for each of the initiatives. The people from Canadian Parents for French would like to find their school board and school. We don't have that type of detailed information, but we have some quite specific numbers on the types of initiatives being funded, according to the language component and the outcome domain. In those categories, the provinces must demonstrate that they are using our money and that they are also investing their own money.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

Many of the groups we hear from do not agree. They say—and it is a clear—that you fund French-language training, but that the provinces are grouping French, Spanish and so on in the same building and that the money from the French-language envelope is actually used for the teaching of several languages. Those are the types of things we hear.

In short, if this committee wants to see things in their proper perspective, which departmental report would make it possible to track the money?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Dion.

Mr. Lussier, go ahead.

[Hubert Lussier]

The reports prepared by the provinces for us are the ones that best fit what the hon. member is looking for.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Could the committee have a copy?

[Hubert Lussier]

They could be available if a request is made.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay.

We are making that request.

If you give them to the clerk, we'll have them distributed to members of the committee.

[Stéphane Dion, Liberal, Saint-Laurent—Cartierville, QC]

Are we talking about all the reports?

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

We'll now go to Monsieur Trottier.

[Bernard Trottier, Conservative, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank the witnesses for being here today.

I really enjoyed your presentations. I think you gave some very good examples of the variety of challenges, problems, issues and priorities in each province. Every province is unique and, of course, so is their linguistic situation. The provincial partners all have their own approach, which is consistent with the requests and needs of their own citizens.

You said that you are implementing agreements between the federal government and the provinces. However, there has to be some freedom with respect to their innovations and their own programs. The envelope must be fairly fixed. How are the negotiations going?

[Jean-Pierre Gauthier]

Once the protocol for agreements is signed, which is imminent, discussions will start by asking the provinces to give us an action plan for the five-year agreement period. We will see the initiatives they are proposing by outcome domain.

Discussions are currently under way on whether we are satisfied with the proposed initiatives, whether they are clear and whether we are in a position to monitor them. We will ensure that the proposed targets are relevant, adequate and measurable, and a discussion will follow from that. We will also be able to voice our preferences. They are on the last page. I went over it, but some of the federal government's preferences are listed on page 11, and we would like to invite the provinces to pay attention to those subjects. One province may not want to review all the initiatives it is proposing for one outcome domain, while another might consider the area of early childhood, for example, or pay greater attention to the post-secondary sector. That is what is discussed with the provinces.

It is clear that, with respect to the province, the education plans submitted to us or the education system are part of the provincial education plan as a whole. Stemming from that, the province has a certain number of constraints and, obviously, a certain number of objectives in its area of jurisdiction for the entire population. They are also part of a larger framework. That is what we discuss.

[Bernard Trottier, Conservative, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

But, when all is said and done, the Department of Canadian Heritage does not impose its plan on the provinces.

[Jean-Pierre Gauthier]

No, ultimately, it is a provincial area of jurisdiction. These agreements are reached through mutual discussion.

[Bernard Trottier, Conservative, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

This question is for Canadian Parents for French.

If we look at the federal priorities on page 11, intensive learning is listed. A lot of witnesses spoke about the importance of assessing language proficiency. In my opinion, authentic experience is very important, and it goes beyond education, meaning when early childhood partnerships between the school and the community and post-secondary education are involved. Mr. Rothon, do these priorities correspond to your needs and the needs of Canadian Parents for French?

[Robert Rothon]

Since I don't have the document in front of me, it is a little hard for me to respond. However, I would say that, in general, we are living with the agreements, the OLEPs, as we have called them for several years. So we have a good understanding of them. That's sort of our frame of reference. Generally, within our network of parents, no one really questions the priorities. In other words, they appear to be managed. There are things we would like to see, but perhaps there hasn't been as much progress as hoped. For example, I'm thinking of

linguistic proficiency outcomes

or things like that. It is important to point out that every Canadian parent likes the idea of having national standards.

Sub rosa, that's what you want, or that's what you need.

Otherwise, how are you going to evaluate your child's progress? How will you know whether your child has really learned French, what level the child is at and what the child's competency is? Canada's education system does not provide a very easy answer to this.

We are looking for greater stability and greater consistency through OLEPs, while recognizing that some provinces and territories may have other ideas. However, to answer your question, I would say that these priorities are ours as well.

[Bernard Trottier, Conservative, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Are the priorities of the provincial members of Canadian Parents for French different? I don't know, but I imagine that the representatives of Canadian Parents for French from British Columbia send a few requests that are different from those of New Brunswick, for example.

[Robert Rothon]

It all depends, of course, on the consultation process put in place by the province during negotiations with the federal government. However, I must say in passing that every provincial member of Canadian Parents for French wants to be part of the consultation process. We like being identified as partners and as stakeholders that must be consulted by the province during those negotiations or the negotiation process with the province.

[Bernard Trottier, Conservative, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Trottier.

Mr. Galipeau and Ms. Bateman are next.

Mr. Galipeau, you have the floor.

[Royal Galipeau, Conservative, Ottawa—Orléans, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank the witnesses for being here today and congratulate Mr. Lussier on his promotion. The last time we spoke, he wasn't assistant deputy minister. Congratulations.

I don't think you took Mr. Dion's comments seriously. The problem with the federal government's involvement in second-language learning across Canada, through the provinces, has been around for over 40 years. I remember horror stories from that time. The provinces were very happy to receive federal money, but used it to pave roads, especially during provincial election time.

I'm not aware of similar things now. However, organizations that promote linguistic duality across Canada still have some doubts. They wonder whether federal money, given blithely to the provinces for second-language education, is really being used for its intended purpose.

You also said that the 10 provinces have made reports and that, if we had not seen them, it was because we were not serious enough about looking at them. Did you do a report on those reports? Does an analysis of all the reports exist? If not, do you expect the official languages czar, Mr. Fraser, to do it? Mr. Fraser is not responsible for the money, but you are.

[Hubert Lussier]

Mr. Fraser will draft his report based on the information he will get from us, and which the committee can also use to get informed.

As you said, the issue has been around for some time. It is important to keep in mind that, for each dollar the federal government invests through the programs we are talking about today, the provinces invest more. The difficulty is monitoring the path the federal dollar takes. It goes from the ministry of education to the school board to the school and sometimes right to the class, where the investment ends up so that a child can learn the second language. There is a series of steps that ensures that there is a considerable potential for problems in tracking the dollar.