Official Languages Committee on March 24th, 2015

[Jamie Nicholls, NDP, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

In that report you jointly recommended that the federal government develop long-term tools and incentives for selecting francophone workers.

Do you have any idea of what those tools and incentives would be? Could you give the committee any idea of what they might be proposing?

[François Boileau]

The francophone significant benefit program we were discussing earlier is a good example of an incentive. The program clearly benefited employers. With the government's somewhat surprising decision to eliminate the program, we have one less tool in our arsenal.

Ontario, unlike other provinces, has very few tools that support immigrant selection. We would welcome any and all incentives. The francophone significant benefit program was one such incentive.

And since we are down an incentive, replacing it would probably be a good idea. That is more or less what we are saying in the joint recommendation. It's good to do something new, and the program's elimination may have been warranted, even though it came as a bit of a surprise. Francophone communities weren't consulted. But other incentives are needed in order to reach the proposed targets, in other words the 4% federal target and our 5% target in Ontario. I'd like to know what strategies and action plans are being put in place to meet those targets. The government has a responsibility to come up with some as well.

Also important is working with the communities, and we've made that very clear in the joint report. Communities have a very clear understanding of their region and their needs. We're talking about incentives, but it's important to engage people in the communities in order to figure out what will work. What will work in St. John's, Newfoundland, may not necessarily work in Labrador City. And the same goes for Ontario. I can assure you that the solution for Sudbury won't be the same as the one for London.

In this vast country of ours, understanding the distinct situation and needs of official language minority communities is essential. And that means involving them in the process. They need to be part of the solution.

[Jamie Nicholls, NDP, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

You recommended relying on francophone organizations to provide services to French-speaking immigrants. That was one of your recommendations.

I have a question for all of you. In DesRochers v. Canada (Industry), the Supreme Court established that services of equal quality had to be made available in minority language communities.

Do you think the federal government's current immigration policy and programs take into account the francophone perspective? A simple yes or no answer will do.

Mr. Boileau, you can go first.

[François Boileau]

It's hard for me, as the provincial commissioner, to give a straight yes or no answer about a federal issue.

But if you'd like to discuss the Desrochers decision, I'd be happy to do so, having been trained as a constitutional lawyer.

Right now, though, I'm going to let my colleagues answer your question.

[Anne Hébert]

If the answer is yes, that perspective is becoming increasingly difficult to make out.

[Gaël Corbineau]

We get the sense that there are two parallel systems: an anglophone system and a francophone one. From the get-go, francophone minority communities have a huge handicap, and we don't have many tools left to overcome that handicap.

[Peter Hominuk]

No.

[Ferdinand Kashama]

When we look at Quebec, we see that the province has an organized network in place, from start to finish. But that isn't the case in the rest of Canada.

[Gaël Corbineau]

I'd like to make a point that no one has mentioned, given that it doesn't concern our provinces directly.

I'm extremely worried about the outcome in the case brought by the Yukon's French-language school board against the Yukon government. The territorial government doesn't want to consider newcomers as rights holders in French-language schools. If the court agrees, it would be a disastrous blow to our communities. If ever there were an institution that allowed for a community to form and develop, it's a school. Without newcomers, it would be a disaster. This is a tremendous concern. Were awaiting the outcome.

[Jamie Nicholls, NDP, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Boileau, you recommended in your report that the federal government develop an action plan in cooperation with the provinces.

How should the federal government go about consulting the provinces? Should it consult with community organizations or the provincial ministries? How should that work?

[François Boileau]

Many provinces are much better equipped in terms of newcomer selection. In Ontario, we have very few tools in that regard, but we have to start somewhere. That is why we recommended that the Ontario government establish a group of experts that includes community representatives and CIC officials. We came up with that recommendation in cooperation with the Ontario government, so it comes as no surprise to the province. The group would bring together representatives from CIC and provincial ministries, francophone immigration stakeholders—Peter Hominuk talked about that earlier—university and college administrators or professionals, school board administrators or professionals, business and chamber of commerce leaders and municipal representatives.

The group of experts would do three things: develop a holistic strategy for promoting, recruiting, welcoming, training, integrating and retaining francophone immigrants; develop a government-wide strategic plan, with a specific timetable, for achieving the 5% target; and, of course, establish annual evaluation and accountability mechanisms that are transparent and accessible to the public. That's a very important element. In many cases, there is little understanding around what the accountability mechanisms are.

Earlier, your colleague Ms. Day mentioned a motion. It looks a bit like one of the recommendations we, the commissioners, put forward. Our fifth recommendation was that the federal government

report, by April 30, 2015, on the actual or anticipated impact of the changes to Canada's immigration system, including Express Entry, on immigration to francophone communities.

Basically, accountability is hugely important.

Obviously, as the provincial and federal commissioners—and I'm speaking on behalf of my federal counterpart since we did write the report together—we have a responsibility to make sure that obligations are met and that measures are implemented by the prescribed deadlines. Given that we are dealing with accountability, the process has to be transparent, and that means involving the communities. It's perfectly normal for governments to make the decisions. We just want to understand them. It's important to know the explanation and justification behind those decisions, which need to be rooted in achieving the objectives of both the federal Official Languages Act and the province's French-Language Services Act.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Boileau and Mr. Nicholls.

Mr. Leung, you may go ahead.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll probably be the last speaker.

It appears to me that there is either a disconnect or a mismatch between policy direction and allocation.

I come from countries where people do speak multiple languages. In Canada, of course, I recognize the fact that this is a bilingual country and that I have to learn two languages. The reality is that language itself should be economically driven.

If government policy is to allocate resources to driving a bilingual culture, then there should be an effort across the board here to develop the economy first in those multiple languages. Also, because we live in a much smaller world today, the language of commerce, as we saw, is going to be English, Chinese, Hindi, or even, in the Middle East, Arabic, and so on. The strength of an economy driven in the French language is mostly in francophone Africa and the Caribbean, as in Haiti, or France. Yes, in Canada we also have a centre of a francophone economy.

My question for the panel is, if you wish to make a recommendation to federal politicians, what should the weighting be? To me, it doesn't make sense to just pour a lot of resources into the French language when for people that we bring in either as immigrants or that we educate, that will not offer a job opportunity.

Having worked in Australia and Southeast Asia, I increasingly see that even in Australia, they're saying that they need to be a bilingual country, whether in English and Chinese, or English and Japanese, or English and Korean.

I'd like to hear some of your comments, please, Mr. Boileau.

[François Boileau]

If I may, I would stress the importance of understanding the facts as they relate to the bigger picture.

French is the fifth most spoken language in the world and the second most learned language globally. Currently, there are 270 million French speakers around the world, and by 2050, that number will rise to 850 million, if I'm not mistaken. And 80% of those French speakers will be in Africa, a continent that is experiencing incredible population growth and bursting with economic potential and partnership opportunities.

In order to achieve a long-term vision for the future, Canada has to put the economy first. I completely agree with you, and I am well aware of how important the economy is. That's why we need to craft a long-term vision that takes into account the fact that the world is shrinking, the fact that an amazing array of untapped opportunities is sitting on our doorstep, and we can't miss out on that. It would be foolish to ignore the the African continent, which holds incredible potential.

I'd like to give you a very quick example, if I may. If we look at what two Ontario colleges are doing, we see that, right now, Collège Boréal, in northern Ontario, is working with countries in Africa to help build courses and training programs around mining. Clearly, mining is, first and foremost, an economic undertaking.

Similarly, La Cité collégiale is working with people in the Ivory Coast to help develop a police academy. This is an incredible asset. We've built ties with people in Africa—ties, which, as of right now, are enriching our francophone community while, of course, helping those African nations.

So I'm perfectly at ease discussing the economy. Our economic concerns aren't any different. Being francophone doesn't make us foolish. We, too, want to make money and ensure that our children can prosper in a francophone environment.

[Gaël Corbineau]

I'd like to build on what Mr. Boileau said.

We're seeing more and more articles being written about the population explosion happening right now in French-speaking Africa. By 2050, or thereabouts, French will be the most spoken language in the world. That's not that far off.

[Peter Hominuk]

I'd like to draw your attention to the findings of a study that the Conference Board of Canada did within the past two years. The study showed that bilingualism in New Brunswick and Quebec resulted in billions of dollars in additional economic benefits. In Ontario, we'd like to see what those figures would be if the province were to ever decide to become officially bilingual. Clearly a francophone economy exists, and it may be larger than we think.

I'd also like to point out that Canada's French fact isn't limited to Canada's francophones. In Ontario, enrolment in French-language schools recently hit 100,000 students. I'll give you a statistic. Ontario has twice as many anglophones in immersion schools, as compared with French-language schools. As we speak, more than 300,000 students in Ontario are in an immersion school. Our friends at Canadian Parents for French, whom we work with a lot, often tell us that the school boards can't even keep up with the demand for immersion programs.

There's still a lot of room for improvement when it comes to the status of French in Canada and global competitiveness. We need to ask ourselves what kind of country we want. If we truly want a bilingual country, we need to give every Canadian the opportunity to benefit from both official languages.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

Ms. Hébert, go ahead.

[Anne Hébert]

Because of our history and the challenges we faced around bilingualism in the old days, we tend to view bilingualism as an expense and a burden, and we overlook its economic potential. As a country, we really need to see the economic potential that bilingualism holds. And the same goes for our province, which is also bilingual. It could be considered a mini Canada.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

Do you have another question?

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Yes, I have a final question.

In the entire policy, are we able to attract in the province of Quebec, let's say, the cross-cultural/cross-language training of Canadians from other provinces who are unilingual English—for example, Ontario right across to British Columbia? Do we have that?

I met a lot of French-speaking students out in B.C. and in other provinces, but when I do work in Quebec, in Chibougamau and so on, I don't usually see English-speaking students coming in, or English-speaking workers coming in as often. There are a few places in northern New Brunswick, for example Bathurst, where I've worked, and Chibougamau.

Why do you find that type of cross-education is not as popular? Are there any comments on that?

[François Boileau]

You're looking at me, but I prefer not to answer. That would be a good question for my federal counterpart, the Commissioner of Official Languages. He is the best person to answer that kind of question. I can't really comment on what goes on in Quebec, as I don't have the slightest clue.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

Thank you all. Your input will be of great benefit to us as we study francophone immigration.

We're going to take a five-minute break, after which we'll discuss Ms. Day's motion.

We'll suspend for five minutes and then come back.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

We are now resuming the 42nd meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages.

Ms. Day, you have the floor.

Would you mind reading your motion first and then explaining it?

[Anne-Marie Day, NDP, Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My motion reads as follows:

That the Standing Committee on Official Languages ask the Department of Citizenship and Immigration to provide it with statistical data on the new "Express Entry" application management system, which began operating in January 2015, particularly regarding the number of people currently in the Express Entry pool, the number of people who have come to Canada since the system was implemented, their country of origin, their languages spoken, including their proficiency in one official language or both, and their education level, before the appearance of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration.

Mr. Chair, I am introducing this motion because we have the impression that the new Express Entry program will bring a larger number of people who do not speak French into the country and may cause an imbalance in provinces where a certain proportion of linguistic duality must be maintained.

We know that 80% of immigrants to Canada are allophones and that they end up choosing English as their preferred official language. And given that a two-track system is being put in place, with Express Entry, we are concerned that it will cause an imbalance between anglophone and francophone communities, particularly in communities with a francophone minority.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you.

Mr. Gourde, you may go ahead.