Official Languages Committee on Sept. 26th, 2018

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Choquette, you have the floor.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank all of you for being here with us. Some of you are appearing before the committee for a second time.

I thank you for your proposals concerning the Official Languages Act and the action plan.

I have two articles here.

First, I will read an excerpt from an FFCB press release dated June 22, 2018:

What is even more worrisome according to the judge is that Part VII of the OLA does not impose any specific or particular obligations on federal institutions, because nothing in the language used is specific in any way. The federal government consequently has only to adopt measures that are not negative to meet its obligations under the OLA. These conclusions are the most recent evidence of gaps in the OLA, and of the fact that it needs to be modernized.

This decision you received was like being hit on the head with a hammer. It's enormous. It says that the positive measures don't mean anything, that this is an empty shell, and that basically Part VII, with regard to positive measures, imposes no requirements. This is extremely serious. It could have consequences at all levels, not only for you in British Columbia but for all of the official language communities everywhere in the country. Yes, I agree with you; all of the members of the committee must read that decision. This seems very grave to me.

Under the current government the Standing Committee on Official Languages barely has six months to act before the next election. In six months we can't do everything.

You have the action plan before you. I have another article, which I mentioned earlier, but I'll read the title anyway. It's an article published by #ONfr entitled “Francophone organizations still waiting for promised funds”. The funds promised in May have not yet been distributed.

We also spoke about education, where there has not been an increase since 2003, despite the crying needs. You mentioned this.

Mr. Rothon, what urgent priority would you like to share with the committee regarding Part VII? Could you explain this to us?

[Robert Rothon]

If you don't mind, first I'll answer your comment concerning the timing of the Action Plan funds.

Like most of my colleagues around this table, we have just received a letter from the Minister of Canadian Heritage assuring us that the additional funds will be sent to us soon. We are happy about that. We would certainly have liked those funds to come sooner, but now it seems they are on the way. All in all, we are rather satisfied.

As for Part VII, we consulted our partners, lawyers and other experts on the matter regarding the possibility of asking, for instance, that Part VII be updated even before the modernization of the entire Official Languages Act. They were strongly against this, simply because the act is so complex that even a small surgical intervention—I'm a little embarrassed to use that term in the presence of Dr. Conway—would not be realistic. We were told that we would risk causing unexpected results that could be more or less unfortunate, and that it was better to wait.

I think the federation would be happy if all of the parties, through a statement by the party leaders, simply expressed a commitment by saying that they do see the need to modernize the Official Languages Act, and want to ensure the survival, vitality and flourishing of the official language minority communities by strengthening the current Part VII. We would like to avoid—and here I am speaking simply as the representative of the community sector—that this recasting of the Official Languages Act become a purely electoral issue. This goes far beyond political partisanship for us. It's really fundamental, and essential for our communities. We would really like the political milieu to recognize that as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Mr. Choquette, you have the floor.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

I think Mr. Laberge wanted to speak.

[Yvon Laberge]

When the funds are sent is a very important issue. I'd like to discuss two components of the process that are complementary.

Bilateral agreements on education last five years and are renewable. We began the renewal process when the last agreement expired on March 31, 2018. We are now in September 2018 and we still have no news about that dossier. There are two components to the process. First, a national protocol is negotiated by all of the provinces and territories. Then, once the national protocol has been agreed upon, negotiations begin with every province and territory.

Six months down the road, the Collège Éducacentre has still not received any funds, and I think that Canadian Parents for French and the Fédération des parents francophones de Colombie-Britannique are in the same boat. And so we have to find funding from another source to support our activities. These funds will probably be reimbursed, but we aren't sure of that. When the previous agreement was renewed, we had to wait 14 months before the funds arrived. Our pockets are not deep enough to wait that long.

Luckily we had access to funds in the area of health and health training. Today we are in month six, and we are submitting our proposal to Health Canada. We don't expect an agreement to be negotiated for a few months, and we think we are going to be forced to spend our funds. Let me explain that. Public servants will divide our overall subsidy into five parts and tell us that we must spend this or that amount. In February, they will probably tell us that we have two months to spend what should have been spent throughout the year. Indeed, unless things have changed, we don't have the right to carry over the unspent funds from one fiscal year to the next. Personally, I don't think this is the best way to use the funds that are provided to us.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you very much.

We'll now hear from Mr. Samson.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Thank you very much for your presentation. It's so important to hear people from the field describe their successes, but also the challenges they have to meet. Since we are in the very midst of reviewing the Official Languages Act, this is a good time to talk about all of that.

Mr. Rothon, I think it was you who said that we should avoid political partisanship since the Official Languages Act is neutral. I agree with you. If the three political parties agree on a platform for the OLA, this will help the minority francophone communities. This will force debate and discussion. Exchanges on priorities can enrich the discussion.

Mr. Lewis, it's always a pleasure to see you again. You didn't agree with my solution to your small problem, because that isn't exactly what you wanted to do. Nevertheless, I fully agree with you. I was happy to see this school in downtown Whitehorse with its 500 immersion students. You gave a good explanation of the expansion of your facilities, and you expressed your opinion on the changes to be made to the Official Languages Act on bilingualism and access to education. There's no doubt that access to education in French is essential.

As the representative of the Conseil scolaire francophone said, I think that if we can begin to recruit immersion students, even before they finish high school, if we can get them interested in studying to become French teachers, that will lead to the creation of the needed programs. There is a shortage of teachers. One of the best ways of ensuring that there will be another generation of teachers would probably to be to encourage students who are nearing graduation to opt for the teaching profession by giving them bursaries, for instance. The irony of the teacher shortage is that it will disappear in 10 years because everyone will get into this profession once the job offers are posted in the media. That might be a strategy to adopt. I wonder if you ever did anything like that before.

[Glyn Lewis]

Yes.

I have a letter I'm going to give the clerk.

One of the recommendations is to target graduates of French immersion programs and French as a first language programs. We know anecdotally that the people we train in our education system—the people who come through our education system and then go into post-secondary—are much more likely to stay as a teacher in the long term. It's partly because they're familiar with the curriculum and partly because they were born in and grew up in those communities. We have lower attrition for teachers when we train them that way.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Yes. A product of the community, someone who comes back to his or her community, will stay. That's very important.

Mr. Laberge, you raised the fact that direct investment in post-secondary studies or French-language public schools had not been increased. That is a very important issue and I understand that problem well.

You spoke about the training program for immigrants.

Could you explain the nature of that program? What is its concrete objective, on the ground?

[Yvon Laberge]

Thank you very much for the question.

What we've done at the Collège Éducacentre—and we are going to talk about it this afternoon—is put in place a global, integrated model. We noticed that a large part of our clientele was made up of newcomers. We realized it was important to make sure we could support immigrants as soon as they arrived. We have a good program to receive, support and integrate immigrants.

Most of the time, what they are looking for is a job and a place to live, and those are their priorities. When we talk about employment, we start to realize that they may be facing obstacles or have specific needs to better integrate the workplace, and very often what's needed is training, either one-time training or long-term training.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Thank you.

And that leads me to my interest in your area, Mr. Cyr. Mr. Laberge referred to jobs for immigrants.

In the economic sector, what tools does the anglophone majority have to which you do not have access, that could help you better accomplish your mission?

It's a question I could put to any of you, but it's addressed to you, Mr. Cyr, for the moment. I know that in Nova Scotia, it's a problem in some places.

Can you describe the ideal situation? What is present on the anglophone side that you do not have, and that would allow you to reach your goals? Are you consulted or not?

Explain to us what we as a government could do to help you in your work.

[Donald Cyr]

Anglophones have credibility and are recognized because they are everywhere. Francophones here represent 1.4% of the population, and that population is distributed evenly across the province.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

What can we do to help you? What do you need?

[Donald Cyr]

What I need, and what the Société de développement économique de la Colombie-Britannique needs, is simple. We would like our economic contribution to be recognized. The people I work with don't want bilingualism to be seen as a right or an obligation. When I talk to them about bilingualism, I'm talking about an investment. I want people to see us as a way of investing.

I'll give you an example. We have been a major catalyst when it comes to tourism between France and Canada. Tourism increased by 33% in one year, from Paris to Vancouver and from Vancouver to Paris. This yielded economic spinoffs of $12 million in one single year.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Do you have discussions with anglophones?

Often, we aren't consulted. Decisions are made by the majority.

[Donald Cyr]

That's right.

We do talk, but the value of our contribution isn't recognized. The Vancouver Airport and the Vancouver Economic Commission know us, and they want to work with us because they see the results and the the economic benefits our work generates. I'm an economist, and I have figures for you. For every dollar we receive, we generate five dollars in economic spinoffs. That does not include the direct contributions of Air France and Air Canada.

If our economic contribution were recognized, it would make a difference. We need to be seen as a business opportunity rather than an obligatory tool.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you very much, Mr. Samson.

Mr. Rioux, you have the floor.

[Jean Rioux]

I thank the witnesses very much for their presence here.

Mr. Cyr, I will continue in the same vein.

If I understand correctly, your organization is comparable to organizations that help businesses, like the CFDCs. Do you face the same problems, which is that you receive renewable operating funds, but as for invested capital, you haven't received anything in 30 years?

[Donald Cyr]

That is correct.

We do get more operating funds for projects, but we have the same staff as we had ten years ago.

We are also asked to work in the regions, but we can't, because we have the same staff as we had 10 years ago.

[Jean Rioux]

You head up an organization in a minority environment. Does Canada Economic Development recognize the fact that you are a francophone organization in an anglophone environment, since most of your funding comes from that department?

[Donald Cyr]

We made a presentation a few months ago to the Assistant Deputy Minister of Western Economic Diversification Canada, or WD. I was joined by my colleagues from three other western provinces.

It was interesting to see the deputy minister's reactions. She said that she did not know we were doing all this.

[Jean Rioux]

You say that you are facilitating the economic integration of workers. Will those who are integrated be able to work in a francophone environment? When you start up businesses, are they francophone or is the objective simply economic development?

[Donald Cyr]

The vast majority of them are anglophone businesses.

[Jean Rioux]

Those you are creating?