Evidence of meeting #7 for Official Languages in the 41st Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was students.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Welcome to the Standing Committee on Official Languages. This is meeting number seven on Monday, December 2, 2013. Pursuant to Standing Order 108 and the motion adopted on Monday, November 18, 2013, we are here to study second official language immersion programs in Canada.
For the first hour we will be hearing from the Commissioner of Official Languages, Mr. Fraser, and Mr. Quell and Mr. Giguère.
Welcome to you all. You may begin.
Graham Fraser Commissioner of Official Languages, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
Mr. Chair, members of the committee, good afternoon.
I am delighted to appear before the committee today to discuss immersion education, an approach to learning that helps young Canadians develop a strong sense of our country's bilingual nature.
Right now across Canada immersion education programs continue to be an unparalleled success. Thanks to these programs, more than 300,000 young Canadians have the opportunity to learn their second official language in an educational setting on a daily basis. This is due largely to the efforts and dedication of parents and educators. They survive and even thrive because of the energy and support of school boards, principals, teachers, parents, and organizations like Canadian Parents for French.
Over the past four years, the federal government, for its part, has allocated an average of $86 million annually to the provinces for second language education. Investments in immersion programs across the country have resulted in a new generation of bilingual Canadians, many of whom are now in post-secondary institutions. The success of immersion graduates, including the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages, Shelly Glover, and her predecessor, the Honourable James Moore, demonstrate the value of the program.
A few years ago, I met the father of a minister of the Crown who proudly told me that he had stayed up all night with several members of the family, standing in line, so that his granddaughter could be enrolled in a French immersion program. I experienced conflicting emotions when I heard that story.
On the one hand, that Canada was sufficiently egalitarian that even a minister would not have any special access to immersion for a family member, and that a family would organize itself in shifts around the clock, waiting in line outside the school board office, was inspiring.
On the other hand, treating access to immersion like Rolling Stones tickets is an appalling way to distribute what should be a universal right to quality second language instruction.
The fact that this is still necessary, four decades after Dr. Wallace Lambert's widely successful immersion experiment in Quebec, is cause for concern.
Anecdotes like these offer a window into the realities and challenges of immersion, providing a sense of what immersion programs are, what is required to sustain them, and what the benefits can be to individuals, families, and entire communities.
What immersion is not, however, is a panacea, nor is it the only way to learn French. Neither should it drain resources away from core French instruction in Canada, as I sometimes fear it does, by attracting the best teachers and the most committed students and teachers.
Despite a high level of interest in immersion programs, some challenges do need to be tackled if we want to increase the level of proficiency of young Canadians in both official languages. I often worry that unilingual parents see French second language programs like immersion as a system that produces perfectly bilingual graduates, or as the one and only way to learn French. These expectations are both unrealistic and counterproductive.
In the global economy, learning other languages is in itself an advantage. It opens doors to a multitude of opportunities around the world.
Learning French can be a stepping stone not only to bilingualism, but also toward multilingualism. In fact, many young people working in the international field today got their start through exposure to their other official language. We become more adept at learning new languages when we learn a second language, so it's easier to learn a third one once you have learned two. I've always been impressed by young Canadians who started with our two official languages and learned a third language abroad.
In Canada, immersion offers students a structured program that involves taking all or a significant proportion of their courses in their second language, while benefiting from special second language learning supports and assistance. Immersion programs are, however, much less available in universities in Canada than they are at the elementary and high school levels.
It is disappointing to me that, year after year, many students who want to enrol in French immersion programs or courses at university are not always able to do so—often because of a lack of space in existing programs or because of funding problems that threaten the programs' survival. Many students have had to give up on the idea of perfecting the language skills they acquired in elementary and high school because very few post-secondary institutions give their students the opportunity to take courses within their field in the official language of their choice.
Some post-secondary institutions, such as the University of Ottawa, the Université Sainte-Anne and Glendon College at York University, offer immersion courses and programs. In fact, Glendon has recently developed a bilingual master's program in public and international affairs.
There is no question that the creation of immersion programs at Simon Fraser University and at the University of British Columbia is directly related to the growing number of students from the high school immersion programs being offered in that province. The Université de Saint-Boniface actively recruits from Manitoba's immersion high schools.
The Saint-Jean campus at the University of Alberta is another interesting example. Many students come from local immersion programs and choose to continue their education in French there. All of this did not come about by accident, nor is it solely the result of the exemplary work of the campus and its staff. This success stems from the efforts made by Edmonton public schools since 2000 to improve the immersion programs being offered and, on the strength of this success, other language programs. I was very pleased to learn that you will be hearing from representatives of the Edmonton Public School Board.
At the elementary and high school levels we are still far from achieving the vision in which all Canadians have access to the necessary resources to effectively learn English and French. Registration issues such as enrolment caps, overnight lineups and lotteries continue to hinder access to second language programs in many regions.
In the 1980s there was a study that suggested a trend showing there would be one million students in immersion by the year 2000. With funding caps in place enrolment has plateaued at about 300,000.
It's important that immigrants be encouraged to send their children to immersion, rather than discouraged. Immigrant students in immersion have told me that learning French made them feel more Canadian. Similarly many new arrivals have expressed a stronger sense of belonging to Canada simply through their children's learning of both official languages. I've also seen examples in which members of visible minority groups are actually more bilingual in English and French than are unilingual Canadians who have been in Canada for generations.
This is why school officials need to provide better support to allophone parents who are interested in these programs. I feel strongly that immersion education should be part of a continuum reinforced by summer programs and exchanges, and supported by strong incentives from universities that recognize the significance of student applicants who have persevered through a more challenging elementary and high school curriculum.
At the post-secondary level, some universities have increased their second language learning opportunities, while others have reduced their efforts in this area. The decision to reduce efforts is caused by various factors. For example, the Government of Canada is not expressing its need for bilingual workers loudly and clearly enough to prompt post-secondary education officials to pay more attention to the benefits of second language learning. There are students who are ready, willing and able to learn in their second official language. To achieve a true continuum of second language learning, the federal government must demonstrate its leadership by developing an overall strategy on this issue. There needs to be a continuum of second language learning from elementary school to the post-secondary level and then into the workplace. I believe this continuum is an important and integral part of preparing our young people to be productive employees and citizens who can invest themselves fully in the civic life of their country.
That is why, in my 2009 study of second-language learning in Canadian universities, I recommended that the Government of Canada provide financial assistance to universities so that they can develop and carry out new initiatives to improve students' second-language learning opportunities. I believe a priority should be placed on increasing the number of exchanges and real life opportunities for students to use their second official language and interact with people who speak that language.
The 2009 study will also serve as a tool for students and educators focusing on post-secondary institutions that offer programs in French, and also for exchanges, learning support, coordination between institutions and the organization of social activities. We decided to undertake this study because there was a need to identify the various options that exist for students. This study will also raise awareness amongst users within the various majority and minority communities throughout the country.
In my 2010-2011 annual report, I also recommended that the Prime Minister take the necessary measures to double the number of young Canadians who participate each year in short- and long-term language exchanges at the high school and post-secondary levels.
Regarding the state of bilingualism outside of Quebec, data from the 2011 census reveals a troubling decline. That is why in my recently tabled annual report I recommended that the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Official Languages establish clear objectives to raise the level of bilingualism among Canadians and reverse the decline in bilingualism among anglophones in particular.
Today I suggest that committee members develop and recommend a plan to the minister that could be rolled out in time for the 150th anniversary of Confederation in 2017. I would also like to reiterate my recommendation that the Government of Canada provide financial assistance to universities so they can develop and carry out new initiatives to improve students' second language learning opportunities. To achieve a full continuum of second language learning, the government must demonstrate its leadership by developing an overall strategy on this issue.
Finally, I recommend that the government refer to the protocol for agreements for minority language education and second language instruction that will strengthen and support the initiatives and investments outlined in “The Roadmap for Canada's Official Languages 2013-2018”, so that any Canadians wanting to learn their second official language will have the tools to do so.
On this point, Mr. Chair, I will conclude my remarks. I thank you for your attention and will be pleased to answer any questions you or your colleagues may have.
Thank you very much.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Thank you very much, Mr. Fraser.
We will have 45 minutes of questions and comments from members of the committee, beginning with Mr. Godin.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to welcome the commissioner, Mr. Graham Fraser, and the two individuals accompanying him today.
In your annual report, you state that "the federal government does not seem to place a high enough priority on linguistic duality as a Canadian value", and that "when it comes to promoting linguistic duality, the federal government seems to be trailing behind the public instead of leading the way".
In your opinion, what concrete changes does the government have to make in order to adequately promote linguistic duality in this country with immersion programs? Does there need to be more money, more transparency, or more leadership?
Commissioner of Official Languages, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
All three are important. First, the federal government and all its institutions have to send the following message to universities: the federal government, the biggest employer in Canada, needs bilingual employees and it is their responsibility to provide learning opportunities to students. The engineering or architecture firms also have to clearly tell engineering and architecture faculties that they need employees who have received certain kinds of training.
It is also important that deputy ministers, who are, in a way, the main headhunters for their institutions, go to job fairs or send individuals. They have to send a clear message that it is the responsibility of universities to provide that learning. To that end, universities have to send high school students the message that they prefer students who would have taken second-language programs and more demanding programs.
Immersion students told me that their teachers had suggested that they not do the immersion exam but rather the core French exam because it was much easier. They would get better marks. They said that marks were the only thing that universities took into account.
The situation is getting better. The universities that I mentioned are now very aware that immersion students form a pool of high-quality students who have demonstrated their perseverance by undertaking their studies in a second language. I think that those qualities have to be acknowledged by both universities and the federal government.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
In your 2012-2013 annual report, the fourth recommendation calls upon the Department of Canadian Heritage and the Department of Official Languages to take the necessary measures in order to increase the rate of bilingualism—I am referring to French and English—amongst Canadians by 2017.
How do you explain the decline in bilingualism that became apparent in the latest census data on language? What measures need to be taken to turn that decline around, especially for anglophones outside Quebec?
Commissioner of Official Languages, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
That is a very important question and I do not have an easy answer. It is always difficult to find the reason why people don't do something. That said, I think it is important that the government invest in promoting linguistic duality and that this be a part, as I said in my remarks, of all celebrations and all anniversaries.
Support also has to be increased, not only for language training in classrooms, but also for programs that provide students with summer jobs, internships, and opportunities to learn the other official language outside the classroom. It is perfectly doable for the government to organize these kinds of programs, whether they be exchange programs or summer jobs. We need to specifically figure out how those jobs can be an opportunity for students to learn the other official language.
I am very sensitive to this because that is how I learned French.
NDP
Yvon Godin NDP Acadie—Bathurst, NB
This is not the first year you have held this position; you have held it for five years. Your mandate was extended by three years. Yet, none of your reports appear to have noted any improvements. As a matter of fact, it looks like the opposite. There are examples. Some were provided last week when you appeared here.
You said yourself that the current government, the Conservative government, could be involved in more promotion. Do you know why it has not done that?
During your testimony, you said that immigrants who come to Canada want to learn both languages but those who have been here for generations don't want to. Why is that? Is there not a lack of leadership on the part of the government? Is it really because people don't want to? Is it because they do not accept the Official Languages Act and the equality of both languages?
There are currently people experiencing problems with translation. It is scary to see that in departments, people are being asked to write their reports in English. It is like that everywhere. It came out in the news, for example in this article in Le Devoir entitled “Federal public service - Cuts at the expense of French”.
These are all indicators that we are not heading in the right direction. You are responsible for being the official languages watchdog. It is all very well to publish reports, Mr. Fraser, but action is needed. You are not the problem. You do have the ability to take the government to court or to ensure follow-up.
Something is not working somewhere.
Commissioner of Official Languages, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
In answer to your question about the decline of bilingualism amongst anglophones outside Quebec, as I stated, it is always difficult to explain why some things are not done. My role is to take note. I observe, I undertake investigations into complaints and I do monitoring. However, it is often difficult to provide answers on causes.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Michael Chong
Good.
Thank you, Mr. Fraser and Mr. Godin.
Mr. Gourde now has the floor.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Fraser, thank you for coming here today.
You stated at the beginning of your opening remarks that the government had invested $86 million into second-language learning. There are also minority official language programs for Canadians. These are two distinct categories of programs.
Could you provide us with more details on these two programs? Could you also tell us how much money has been allocated to the minority official languages program?
Commissioner of Official Languages, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
I don't have the numbers with me. They are in the appendix of the Canadian Heritage annual report. The department publishes those numbers annually.
My colleague is just showing me the numbers. For minority languages, the total is $148,371,130, and for second languages, the total is $86,188,065, as I stated in my remarks.
Conservative
Commissioner of Official Languages, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
This is in the document entitled “2009-2010 to 2012-2013 Protocol for Agreements for Minority-Language Education and Second-Language Instruction Between the Government of Canada and the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada”.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
Commissioner, are those two amounts...
Commissioner of Official Languages, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
This is the three-year budget, that is from 2009-2010 to 2012-2013.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
Commissioner, why did you not refer to those two amounts in your remarks? You only referred to the $86 million. If you add up both amounts, that is equal to $235 million per year.
Commissioner of Official Languages, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
I thought your study was on immersion programs. Minority language instruction programs are not immersion programs. An immersion program is specifically designed for anglophone children studying in French. There is no equivalent in English in Quebec nor is there in minority official language communities. These programs were implemented for anglophones in Quebec who wanted to learn French. They do not exist for francophone children except in some private English institutions.
Minority language education is entirely distinct from immersion. If you would like to undertake a study on education in minority official language communities, I would be happy to answer your questions. The Supreme Court ruling stated that these programs are not managed by the school boards. Schools in minority official language communities are managed by the school boards in those communities, which is not the case for immersion programs.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
If I am not mistaken, minority language instruction allows anglophones in Quebec to learn French or francophones to learn English.
Commissioner of Official Languages, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
Minority language instruction is supported. In Quebec, federal contributions for minority language instruction are for the English system.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
English school boards, for their part, provide courses exclusively in English to those majority language francophones who are eligible. In Quebec, not all families are allowed to enrol their children in an English school board. If your parents are not anglophone, you cannot access these services.
Commissioner of Official Languages, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
Approximately half the classes in the English system are immersion classes. Access to English schools is restricted under section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, in other words one parent of the child has to have been educated in English. This means that in some English schools in Quebec...
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
Commissioner, what is the difference between the children of a francophone family being able to go to school in English in order to learn both official languages, and the children of an anglophone family in another province being able to go to a French immersion school? The ultimate goal is to learn both official languages. I do not understand why you make the distinction between Quebec and the other provinces when the ultimate purpose is for the majority of Canadians to learn both languages.
Commissioner of Official Languages, Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
I am not the one making that distinction; section 23 of the charter does.
The immersion system was invented for anglophones. For specific historical reasons in Quebec, an English immersion system was not created for francophone students. You are probably more familiar with those historical reasons than I am. When one refers to the immersion system in Canada, one is referring to an immersion system for anglophones. There is no equivalent for francophone students in Quebec.
Parents who exercise their right to send their children to an English school in Quebec must have a specific connection with education in English. That restriction, those criteria were determined under Bill 101 in 1977. Section 23 was subsequently drafted, but with a Canada provision, in order to take into account Bill 101's criteria.
Conservative
Jacques Gourde Conservative Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC
Commissioner, this act has been in existence for almost 40 years. If you look at the rest of Canada, is there not an injustice being done to those Quebeckers who want to learn the other official language?