Official Languages Committee on Nov. 8th, 2018

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Alupa Clarke]

This morning we are holding the meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages of Thursday, November 8, 2018.

Good morning, everyone.

This morning we have Alpha Barry from the Conseil scolaire fransaskois and Martin Théberge and Marie-Christine Morin from the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française.

We also have Ali Chaisson from the Société de l'Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick and Marie-France Lapierre and Marie-Pierre Lavoie from the Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique.

Good morning, everyone. Thank you very much for travelling and being here with us this morning to begin, with great fanfare, a study on the modernization of the Official Languages Act. It is with great pleasure, enthusiasm and honour, as Mr. Mulroney used to say, that we begin our study. We will conduct it slowly but surely.

I must confess that committee members wanted to begin this study several months ago, but we decided to complete several reports first. Now here we are at this turning point in the committee’s history, and we will try to do as much work as possible before the next election.

Here’s how the meeting will be conducted. First of all, representatives of a group or association will have 10 minutes to outline their vision and the points they would like to make to us.

Then we’ll go around the table once, even two or three times, since we'll have two hours at our disposal. Each round will be five to seven minutes long, depending on how we're set up. We will probably have a break in an hour. We'll be spending two hours together.

I’d like to tell you what we expect of you, and that is that you tell us the direction we should take in modernizing the act.

I ask you to bear in mind that we want our study to supplement the one currently under way in the Senate. The Senate study is being conducted by the counterpart to our committee. We would like to address aspects that the senators will not have the time to consider. I ask you please to bear that in mind.

Try not to be too exhaustive, but give us some interesting ideas that you think we should focus on between now and the summer, when we will have to issue our report.

Without further ado, I turn the floor over to Mr. Barry.

[Alpha Barry, Chair, Conseil des écoles fransaskoises]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. You’ll be proud of us because we're going to give you a solution.

Good morning, everyone. My name is Alpha Barry. I'm from Saskatchewan, and I’m excited to be with you today.

Honourable members, first allow me to convey to you the best wishes of the Fransaskois school community. Thank you sincerely for answering the letter from the Conseil des écoles fransaskoises, the CEF, asking you to study the modernization of the act. Thanks as well for this opportunity to testify on behalf of the CEF.

I am here today because I very much want to see the Official Languages Act modernized, particularly with respect to official language minority education. Like Mr. Théberge, the Commissioner of Official Languages, we want a modern, dynamic and robust act.

Mr. Chair, the CEF welcomes all the efforts that have been made to promote linguistic duality, such as the promise to modernize the Official Languages Act, the new Action Plan for Official Languages 2018-2023: Investing in Our Future, future amendments to the regulations on services and the new initiatives on francophone immigration outside Quebec, as announced yesterday.

However, your committee is familiar with the problems of the minority francophone and Acadian school boards and the deficiencies of the act, which, for a long time now, you have constantly asked the federal government to amend. The time has now come to talk about modernizing the act in order to recognize and consider those governing bodies, the minority school boards, that were established under the minority's constitutional right.

I am delighted to be here to tell you about the critical needs of our communities. There can be no doubt that those communities require protection under the act. Unfortunately, my presentation today is too similar in content to the one the CEF made when it testified before the committee in 2011, which means, as you can readily imagine, that not much has changed since then.

The CEF is the only francophone school board in the province that has a threefold mandate: academic, cultural and community-related. As a minority board, the CEF has a constitutional obligation under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is responsible for managing francophone schools on behalf of stakeholder parents for the greater benefit of the Fransaskois community. The CEF takes this responsibility very seriously.

The CEF manages six minority schools in urban areas and nine in rural areas. These schools face separate challenges, which result in significant costs to the CEF, and there are no economies of scale. Under its standardized funding formula, Saskatchewan's Ministry of Education struggles to adapt to the unique needs of the linguistic minority. The CEF is therefore vastly underfunded, a situation that undermines the education-related services provided in its schools.

The Department of Canadian Heritage and the Council of Ministers of Education, Canada have signed a five-year memorandum of understanding. That MOU defines the main parameters of cooperation between the two orders of government respecting funding for minority language education and second-language instruction. Allow me to emphasize that this framework for managing federal financial support for minority language education contravenes the purpose of section 23 of the charter.

For the purposes of this presentation, the CEF has identified four deficiencies in that management framework that could be corrected by amending the act. First, the needs of the Fransaskois community as reflected in the MOU are determined by Saskatchewan, not the CEF. Second, the MOU does not require that Saskatchewan's Ministry of Education consult the CEF. Third, the MOU does not provide for adequate accountability mechanisms. Fourth, the MOU permits funding dedicated to education from kindergarten to grade 12 to be used to fund the essential costs of that education and not genuine additional costs.

As you may readily imagine, the underfunding of the CEF has extensively affected the quality of instruction and the development and vitality of the Fransaskois community. All the deficiencies identified today stem from an absence of any framework under the act for federal government intervention in minority language education.

The CEF did not exist in 1988, the year in which the act was last amended. Let us not make the mistake of adopting a new act that fails to consider the CEF and minority French-langage school boards.

The solution the CEF is proposing in order to remedy these observed deficiencies is to add a section to the act providing for and governing the federal government's role in minority language education. The first draft of this proposal appears on pages 17 and 18 of our brief. I do not propose to read it to you today, but I respectfully urge you to consider our proposed legislative amendment.

The CEF thanks you for the opportunity to present its concerns and solutions as part of your study on the modernization of the Official Languages Act.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Alupa Clarke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Barry.

Now we will hear from the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française.

Mr. Théberge, the floor is yours.

[Martin Théberge, President, Fédération culturelle canadienne-française]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, everyone. Thank you for this invitation.

My name is Martin Théberge, and I am president of the Fédération culturelle canadienne-française, the FCCF. I am accompanied by our executive director, Marie-Christine Morin.

Thank you for inviting us to appear before you today to discuss the modernization of the Official Languages Act. We are at a historic crossroads.

The FCCF represents 22 organizations: 7 national organizations devoted to artistic practices and the cultural industry, 13 provincial and territorial organizations, the Alliance des radios communautaires du Canada and an alliance of three Canadian French-language performing arts broadcasting networks.

When we appear before you, we do so on behalf of a total of more than 3,125 professional artists and 150 community organizations in 180 communities across the country.

This morning, let's strive for success.

Imagine that another revision of the act in 20 years is an opportunity to celebrate our pride in the quality of the work we have done. We are here to appear before you and to express our great joy that assimilation has been stopped, that our populations are stable and that they are also increasing as a result of immigration.

Imagine, this morning, that the public service has fully accepted its horizontal responsibility for official languages and has established an automatic lens containing information on the situation and needs of the francophone and Acadian communities.

Imagine that the gradual shirking of responsibility and the laxism have been replaced by a proactive attitude that has fully embraced a spirit of cooperation.

Imagine that the government has undertaken a rigorous environmental scan in the francophone and Acadian communities and has committed from the outset to working with us to find innovative solutions and practices to put in place. In addition to the "by and for" concept that we have promoted, the notion of "with" is now deeply embedded in current practices to ensure future results.

This is clearly a pivotal time: let's commit to a popular, modern vision.

Consequently, today we will look at three scenarios that we think should be central to the process we are undertaking together to modernize the act.

In scenario 1, arts and culture are catalysts in reinforcing our Canadian identity. Remember that the official language minority communities are, first and foremost, a cultural project. Consequently, the act must underscore the capital importance of a vital and developing arts and culture sector.

It must be acknowledged that arts and culture drive the development and vitality of francophone minority communities. The francophone identity is thus strengthened by the empowering image it has of itself. The reflection of our reality reinforces our attachment and stirs our pride. That, moreover, is why William Burton reminds us, in his "cry from the heart" concerning the program Tout le monde en parle, that we need to be seen and heard.

The FCCF has celebrated the express recognition of its arts and culture sector in the new Action Plan for Official Languages 2018-2023: Investing in Our Future. In it, arts and culture are described as one of the essential pillars of the government's strategy. We believe this should be stated loudly and clearly in the preamble to the Official Languages Act, and even in part VII, which concerns the development and vitality of our communities. The FCCF and its network of members across the country intend to mobilize for that purpose.

Thus, we want to add to the act a preamble that is in the spirit of part VII of the present act, one based on a clear recognition of the essential role that arts and culture play in driving the vitality of the official language minority communities and as a catalyst in reinforcing their identity.

[Marie-Christine Morin, Executive Director, Fédération culturelle canadienne-française]

I'm going to tell you about scenario 2.

It must be understood that the official languages situation has evolved, despite persistent challenges, and that Canadian opinion is more in favour of official languages than ever.

Things have changed. We must fully consider the progress that has been made in the past 50 years and form a common understanding of the major challenges that remain on the ground and in the government's administration of the act.

The analysis of the linguistic environment that formed the foundation on which the act was created in 1969 is no longer valid. Consequently, we must base the exercise of modernizing the act on a new analysis and on the current state of Canadian society.

In other words, modernizing the Official Languages Act calls for a broad and popular democratic exercise in order to grasp the scope of the challenges, retake the country's pulse and reconnect to the reality of our communities. It is up to the government to renew its vision based on present circumstances and to exercise strong leadership in initiating this project.

The FCCF believes that the exercise of modernizing the act must be as broadly based as possible. We must engage all stakeholders in a genuine national conversation. Taking part in the discussion means engaging and feeling responsible for success. Actions will then follow words.

The development work done in cooperation with the first nations in order to introduce an act to protect aboriginal languages is a model of the way we want to be engaged. Let's draw inspiration from the model the government has advanced on that issue.

In scenario 3, the spirit of part VII of the Official Languages Act must take precedence. In our view, the notion that the intention to support and assist the development of the official language minority communities and to enhance their vitality is in fact the overall intent of the act is a promising and visionary idea. We must therefore do more and better in delivering on the promise to advance the official languages and promote the francophone and Acadian communities.

We believe that a promotion, awareness and public education campaign would have a positive impact on our entire ecosystem. Canadian public opinion on official languages is more positive than it has ever been.

Our citizens view official languages as a fundamental value and an asset that distinguishes us in the eyes of the world. We are eager to see a brilliant, jointly led campaign to promote it.

The act must increase the power of the Department of Canadian Heritage as the department responsible for implementing part VII. The department's horizontal capacity was severely tested by the implementation of interdepartmental approaches. It's hard for a department to be compelled to act as both judge and party.

Perhaps this reaffirmed role could be reinforced by a systematic whole-of-government official languages lens, somewhat like gender-based analysis plus.

Imagine us, for a moment, systematically examining how federal initiatives affect various official language minority communities. Then we would really be starting to get equipped. We would truly be acting based on a knowledge of and sensitivity to the official language minority communities.

[Martin Théberge]

We are going to join forces with the entire Canadian francophonie in all its diversity.

Beyond creating a declaratory quasi-constitutional statute, we must increase the enforceability of the Official Languages Act. Let's tighten up the system to improve its actual implementation. This corrective action means imposing disciplinary or corrective measures, but also proposing and naming incentives.

To increase government motivation for official languages success, particularly in the area of positive measures, incentives could be offered for performance management and the promotion of excellence. Those incentives could be both symbolic and financial. The modernized act should help guarantee from the outset that actions follow words.

In closing, we call for strong and clear political leadership on the importance of linguistic duality, which must be valued as an intrinsic part of the unique Canadian character and given the impetus this vision deserves.

The future of our official languages depends on our collective ability to innovate and to work in close cooperation for the welfare of all Canadians. In our view, any review or revision of the act should take into consideration the contribution of the arts, culture and cultural industries sector in achieving its cultural and identity objectives. The arts, culture and cultural industries sector is inspired, motivated and ready for action.

We thank you for your invitation and especially for listening.

We conclude with the words of the late Fernand Dorais, professor of literature in the Department of French Studies at Laurentian University in Sudbury:A culture is first and foremost a history, a shared language, a societal style, the choosing of values, a desire for the future.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Alupa Clarke]

Very well, thank you for that.

Now we will hear from Mr. Chaisson from the Société de l'Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick.

Mr. Chaisson, you have the floor.

[Ali Chaisson, Executive Director, Société de l'Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick]

Mr. Chair, members, ladies and gentlemen, good morning. My name is Ali Chaisson, and I am the executive director of the Société de l'Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick, the SANB.

The SANB, which was founded in 1973, is the political voice for the Acadian nation of New Brunswick. It is dedicated to defending and promoting the rights an interests of that province’s Acadian nation.

I thank you sincerely for inviting me to testify as part of your proceedings on the modernization of the act. This is important since Parliament appears to have forgotten New Brunswick in the last revision of the Official Languages Act, in 1988. The SANB is here to ensure that doesn't happen again.

First, the SANB unreservedly supports this modernization process. The deficiencies noted by the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne, the FCFA, and others are felt in Acadie and New Brunswick. For example, we hardly need recall that the Supreme Court of Canada informed the SANB in 1986 that the right to speak the official language of one's choice before New Brunswick's courts did not include the right to be understood in that language. And yet that right is guaranteed by subsection 19(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. New Brunswick is also an interesting case study for your committee in determining who should be responsible for implementing the Official Languages Act.

In New Brunswick, the premier of the province is responsible for administering the act. In actual fact, however, that responsibility is often delegated to the minister responsible for official languages, which is an affront to the spirit of New Brunswick's Official Languages Act. The SANB largely supports the demand by FCFA du Canada, which, for years now, has been calling for a thorough reconstruction of the administration of the Official Languages Act. This would require that the Treasury Board be given responsibility for its administration. The Privy Council Office cannot perform that role.

Now I will address the specificity of New Brunswick's linguistic regime. Did you know that more than 10% of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is devoted to New Brunswick? All the provisions here shaded in blue in the charter pertain specifically to New Brunswick. I invite you to consult Annex A and see for yourself. The parts shaded in blue specifically concern the situation of New Brunswick. Ours is the only province that is expressly named in the charter. Subsections 16(2) and 19(2) enshrine parliamentary, legislative and judicial bilingualism across the province. Subsection 20(2) provides as follows:20(2) Any member of the public in New Brunswick has the right to communicate with, and to receive available services from, any office of an institution of the legislature or government of New Brunswick in English or French.

In 1993, the charter was amended by the addition of section 16.1, which entrenched the equality of New Brunswick's English and French linguistic communities, "including the right to distinct educational institutions and such distinct cultural institutions as are necessary for the preservation and promotion of those communities." That was the only resolution that survived the failures of the Meech Lake and Charlottetown accords. It is also the only provision in the entire Constitution that recognizes the rights of linguistic communities in Canada.

The relationship between New Brunswick’s two official language communities must therefore be seen through the prism of equality between the Acadian nation and the anglophone community. And yet New Brunswick's constitutional specificity is nowhere reflected in the Official Languages Act. Consequently, that act should be modernized for two reasons: first, because Parliament appears to have forgotten subsections (2) of sections 16 to 20 of the charter when it adopted the new Official Languages Act in 1988; and, second, so that the act reflects the addition of section 16.1 to the charter, which dates back to 1993.

The SANB asks you to recommend four specific amendments to the Official Languages Act that would help recognize the constitutional specificity of New Brunswick.

First, the SANB requests that Parliament acknowledge the specificity of New Brunswick's language regime in the preamble in an interpretation clause of the Official Languages Act. That will create a "New Brunswick lens" through which the act must be interpreted and will thus ensure that this specificity is systematically taken into consideration in administering the act. A draft of the addition we propose is provided in paragraphs 41 and 42 of our brief.

Second, the SANB requests that the federal government be required to communicate with the public and to offer services in both official languages across New Brunswick rather than only where it deems that demand is significant or adequate.

In New Brunswick, the public have a right to use English or French to communicate with all offices of the institutions of New Brunswick and to receive services in the official language of their choice across the province. There is no notion of significant demand in subsection 20(2) of the charter. Why then is the federal government not required to do at least as much as the Province of New Brunswick? In the SANB's view, this is nonsense. To change this situation, the government need only add a brief second subsection to section 22 of the act. Proposed wording for that subsection is provided in paragraph 52 of our brief.

Third, the SANB asks that the Official Languages Act be modernized to require the federal government to consider New Brunswick's linguistic balance in its immigration policies. Immigration is a particularly important area of intervention for the Acadian nation.

It goes without saying that federal immigration policies cannot promote the vitality of francophone minorities without considering the specific linguistic composition of the provinces. With francophones representing more than 32% of its total population, New Brunswick needs permanent federal immigration support tailored to ensure the preservation and development of that population.

This is because, whenever the percentage of new francophone immigrants is lower than the percentage of francophones living in the province, New Brunswick’s unique linguistic balance is disrupted. Isn’t that the likely consequence of the federal government’s target of 4.4% for French-speaking immigrants outside Quebec. Applied to New Brunswick, that rate of francophone immigration would in reality constitute an assimilative rate.

Regardless of the government in power, New Brunswick’s unique linguistic character must inform federal immigration policies and their implementation. To that end, the SANB is proposing the addition of a section to part VII of the federal OLA to specifically frame the federal government’s role in francophone immigration. The draft wording of that section also appears in paragraph 59 of our brief.

Fourth, for section 16.1 of the charter to be actually implemented in the Official Languages Act, the SANB asks that the government commit to promoting the exercise of the rights it guarantees, notably the right of the Acadian and anglophone communities of New Brunswick to distinct educational institutions and such distinct cultural institutions as are necessary for the preservation and promotion of those communities.

The SANB also asks that this commitment be accompanied by the obligation for the federal government to consider, when exercising its spending power, the distinct institutions guaranteed by section 16.1 of the charter. For example, the Official Languages Act should require the federal government to consult the Government of New Brunswick and the interested representatives of that province's English and French linguistic communities in negotiating with them the adoption of a five-year federal-provincial agreement on the support to be provided to those communities' distinct educational institutions and such distinct cultural institutions as are necessary for the preservation and promotion of those communities.

What key Canadian values does the Official Languages Act represent on the eve of its fiftieth anniversary? In my humble opinion, those values must be apparent in an absolute recognition of the past and potential contribution of our country's francophones. From that recognition, a very specific policy must emerge on the development of the francophone and Acadian communities and an implementation characterized by a concerted approach by all departments and agencies.

The demands of our communities stem from a vision of the country in which the two official languages are equal.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Alupa Clarke]

You have 30 seconds left, please.

[Ali Chaisson]

All right.

They stem from the aspirations of the people who speak one of those two official languages: French. They stem from the willingness of people to do millions of hours of volunteer work to improve the situation of their communities and to help reinforce French in their respective provinces. They stem from a desire to take part in the transformation of a Canadian society in which the two official languages can peacefully coexist. Minority francophones do not want to live outside the majority, quite to the contrary.

Will the Parliament of Canada, urged on you, have the political courage to do a reset to celebrate 50 years of bilingualism? Can we hope to see actions that go beyond the concept of a roadmap? Will the official language communities be part that celebration? How can we prevent 2019 from being a testament to an unfinished policy? Let's aim for a reset, a modernization of the wording of these acts together with monitoring mechanisms and real measures of success.

Thank you for your attention, and I'll be happy to take your questions.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Alupa Clarke]

Thank you, Mr. Chaisson. Your remarks were strongly felt.

Now we'll turn the floor over to Ms. Lapierre and Ms. Lavoie, the representatives of the Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique.

Ms. Lavoie, on behalf of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, I would like to congratulate you for your recent election to the board.

Please go ahead. We're listening.

[Marie-Pierre Lavoie, School Counsellor, Southern Vancouver Island, Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My name is Marie-Pierre Lavoie. As you said, last night, I was elected president of the Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique. So I'm very happy to be here this morning.

I am accompanied by the outgoing chair, Ms. Lapierre. I have some big boots to fill.

Dear members, good morning. I want to thank you sincerely for this opportunity to address you on behalf of the Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique, the CSF.

Your committee is aware of the problems of the CSF and the francophone and Acadian minority school boards as well as the deficiencies of the act. Many stakeholders have long been asking that the government amend it.

The CSF is essentially asking that the Official Languages Act be amended so that it: requires that federal institutions consult minority school boards before they dispose of any immovable or real property; provides a clear framework for the government's financial support of minority-language elementary and secondary education, more particularly of capital assets and in the early childhood field; and requires Statistics Canada to enumerate all rights-holders under section 23 of the charter.

We propose amendments to the act for each of these items. Those proposals are set out in our brief.

[Marie-France Lapierre, Outgoing Chair, Conseil scolaire francophone de la Colombie-Britannique]

First, the CSF asks that the act be amended to require that federal institutions consult minority language school boards before disposing of real property.

As you know, it is very difficult for the francophone community of British Columbia to determine what properties are available for the construction of schools.

The courts have found that what stands in the way of the implementation of section 23 of the charter is a lack of political will and not a shortage of sites, even in Vancouver.

The federal government owns a large number of properties, many of which have been deemed or will be deemed surplus to needs. Despite that fact, the act does not impose any specific obligations regarding the disposal of land.

The CSF has tried to obtain small portions of three sites but has been unsuccessful to date.

The federal Directive on the Sale or Transfer of Surplus Real Property, which is in place, requires that federal departments, agent Crown corporations and provincial and municipal governments be consulted. The fact that the directive does not require consultations with school boards is unacceptable.

[Marie-Pierre Lavoie]

Second, the CSF requests that the committee recommend that the act be amended to provide a clear framework for federal funding of minority language elementary and secondary education, as well as early childhood.

As you know, the state of infrastructure in our communities has a pronounced impact on students' pride and sense of belonging. This undermines communities' ability to attract and retain CSF's students and has a negative impact on its ability to reverse the effects of assimilation.

Having read the submissions of our colleagues from Saskatchewan, the CSF unreservedly supports their federal funding proposals.

[Marie-France Lapierre]

Third, the CSF calls on the committee to recommend amendments to the act expressly requiring Statistics Canada to enumerate all rights-holders under section 23 of the charter.Furthermore, that should be done by means of the short-form census questionnaire, which is sent out to 100% of the population.

The problem is unfortunately very simple. The CSF—as well as the province, which has written a letter in support of our request—cannot adequately plan capital investments because it doesn't have access to reliable and relevant data on the number of potential students for its schools. It is not enough to know how many eligible students reside in each municipality; we also need to know where children live in each catchment area. That would give us the total number of our students and the where our schools should be located.

In our court action against the Government of British Columbia, the CSF suffered the consequences of Statistics Canada's inability to enumerate all the children eligible to attend the board's schools. The judge was unable to decide between the two expert witnesses regarding statistics. She therefore decided to use the results of the 2011 census to determine the potential demand for a French-language school. However, that census had enumerated only children who had one parent whose first language learned and still understood was French. Those figures were obviously far lower than the actual number of francophone students.

This deficiency in the census is particularly problematic in British Columbia due to the trend toward exogamy, as a result of which the language spoken in the home is generally the language spoken by everyone, English.

I am an example of this. I believe my French is quite good, as is that of my colleague. Our spouses, on the other hand, are anglophone, and we therefore speak English at home unless the children don't want their fathers to understand. Consequently, in view of the lack of action on this issue to date, it is important, indeed essential, that Statistics Canada be asked to amend the census form in order to represent all our rights-holders.

[Marie-Pierre Lavoie]

We are very grateful for the hard work your committee is doing to honour the rights of the Franco-Colombian community. This study and the resulting recommendations will help ensure the vitality of present and future students in our schools and the minority francophonie across Canada.

We are here to support you in your discussions and to answer your questions.

Thank you for your attention.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Alupa Clarke]

Thanks to all of you for your excellent testimony.

Without further ado, we will begin the period of questions.

Mrs. Boucher, you have the floor.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Good morning, everyone. I'm very happy to see you around this table. I'm especially happy that you've told us about your vision and solutions respecting the Official Languages Act, which I think must be revised as soon as possible.

We are experiencing somewhat the same thing as francophones even here in Ottawa. I went to the cafeteria this morning, and no one spoke French. So I asked to be served in French. And yet there are a lot of francophones here, and we should be entitled to be served in our language.

I'm pleased to hear your concerns. I'm going to say this because I really think it, and I make no bones about it: the Official Languages Act must not become politicized. It must reflect who we are as francophones, from Quebec or elsewhere, and, above all, reflect our modern reality, which is clearly set down in the Constitution. I think the two official languages should be equal.

My question is for you, Ms. Lavoie. What do you think would be the best way for the act to reflect the evolution that has occurred over the past 50 years, since it's almost 2019? I know the discussion can become political at times, which is normal, since we are all politicians. However, what major changes do you really think it's important to make to this act that we're preparing to revise?

[Marie-Pierre Lavoie]

We named the three areas for you.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Yes.

[Marie-Pierre Lavoie]

The census is extremely important. For our community to flourish, we must be able to recruit students where they live. However, before welcoming them to our schools, we have to know how many of them there are. As Ms. Lapierre noted, the judge clearly explained to us that we couldn't have the maximum number of students using the current census method. So this issue is very important for us.

We also wanted to be consulted on the disposal of real property. We tried to buy properties, and we tried to talk to people, but they didn't want to respond to us. Nothing in the act requires federal institutions to consult the school boards. This issue is extremely important as well.

That's also true of the federal funding framework and the need for spending accountability.

Those are the three points we raised in our brief, and we feel they are our school board's priorities.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

I see.

Some aspects of your demands may be difficult, but not impossible, to achieve. If I take accountability, for example, some provinces that are granted funding reject the idea they should have to tell us how they spend it. Do you think there is what I might call an elegant way to require the provinces to provide that kind of information?

When we revise the Official Languages Act, we may need your help in finding the right words because they may be very important, and a comma can change everything in a bill.

[Marie-Pierre Lavoie]

We've already made proposals in our brief.

Ms. Lapierre, would you like to speak?

[Marie-France Lapierre]

I actually wear another hat as well. I sit on the Conseil culturel et artistique francophone de la Colombie-Britannique, and so I really support culture.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Yes, that's important too.