Evidence of meeting #141 for Official Languages in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was university.
A recording is available from Parliament.
12:35 p.m.
Conservative
Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île dOrléans—Charlevoix, QC
It is for everyone. I want to hear your comments. We need something that unites us, not divides us in our own separate sectors.
In your view, what is the strong message that needs to be delivered in the context of modernization?
12:40 p.m.
General Director, Association des collèges et universités de la francophonie canadienne
I would recommend that we stick to what is at the heart of the act, which is the vitality and development of communities. Then, we move on to demographics and so on. I think that if we all work in that direction, we can achieve great things. It will also be a matter of ensuring that the new modernized legislation is upheld, understood and implemented. I truly believe that we should focus on the vitality and development of communities.
12:40 p.m.
Conservative
Sylvie Boucher Conservative Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île dOrléans—Charlevoix, QC
Thank you, Ms. Brouillette.
Do you all agree with Ms. Brouillette?
12:40 p.m.
Director and Associate Dean, University of Ottawa, Official Languages and Bilingualism Institute
I had just circled the word “vitality”. Yes, education will support and nurture the vitality. So will demographics. Young people—for example, those who study in immersion—who study both languages or who are multilingual are part of the generation of the present act. However, they sometimes have difficulty identifying with the act in its current form because it has quite separate categories. If all those factors can be included, the vitality of French and francophone communities will certainly be strengthened.
12:40 p.m.
Roger Farley Executive in Residence, University of Ottawa, Official Languages and Bilingualism Institute
Here's what I think. When we look at the demographic reality, as Mr. Bisson mentioned, Canada has clearly changed a lot since the first Official Languages Act. Promoting bilingualism, Canada's linguistic duality, is important because it was not part of the first act or subsequent amendments.
If we want everyone—not just minority communities or bilingual people—to be part of the linguistic duality, we will have to invest in education, as mentioned earlier, from early childhood to post-secondary education and adult education. In the labour market, many people who provide services to the public would like to be able to provide them in both official languages, but they do not have the opportunity to do so. So it's a matter of investing in education.
12:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Denis Paradis
I'm going to have to limit the time to four minutes each, including the answers. I see that, if we want to end the meeting at 1 p.m., as planned, we will have to be more rigorous in terms of speaking time.
Colleagues, you will therefore have four minutes to speak, which will include the answers of our guests.
Mr. Rioux, the floor is yours.
12:40 p.m.
Liberal
Jean Rioux Liberal Saint-Jean, QC
Thank you for joining us.
Mr. Bisson, I'm sure you've read the book Boom Bust and Echo when you tell us about the importance of demographics. In telling us about all the immigrants who arrive, you are still giving us a message of hope. We have to integrate them.
Ms. Brouillette, you said that the vitality of bilingualism is a matter of federal jurisdiction. In fact, I think we will have to exercise it. I was struck when I heard that only one in five francophone children could go to an early childhood centre in Vancouver. We are talking about demographics, and I think we must ensure that those people have access. Earlier, we also talked about this with respect to the Université de l'Ontario français in Toronto. It is vital.
My question is for you, Mr. Séror. I liked what you said about the need to ensure that the act is modern and to have a different perspective. What does that mean to you?
12:40 p.m.
Director and Associate Dean, University of Ottawa, Official Languages and Bilingualism Institute
Much like my colleagues, we have given a lot of thought to what we could say that you have not heard before.
In my field of applied linguistics, I remember how interesting it was to see the evolution of what it means to “learn a language”. For a long time, we have thought in terms of separate categories. For example, if I am a French-language learner, I only speak French in the French-language classroom. Similarly, when I am in the English-language classroom, I only speak English. Learners' identities are therefore often exclusive: I am an “English as a second language learner”.
As we are increasingly seeing in the literature, in Europe and in language policies, the problem with this vision is that it does not reflect the reality of individuals in society. In the French-language classroom, these individuals are not just French-language learners, but they also bring all their linguistic knowledge. In society, they are not just people who want to learn the dominant language, which could come from another country. In Canada, for example, a person can decide to learn both official languages at the same time.
Why should they not be able to come into a room and say that they want to learn both languages at the same time? The classic divisions will return when they write an assignment, which they will often have to do in the imposed language. Yet, at home, these students often write in both languages, taking advantage of their linguistic duality or multilingualism.
This richness has often been ignored or neglected. However, there is once again the danger of a gap between what young people feel—I am talking about young people because they are the future—and what they see in society or in the way those things are presented.
In her work, Sylvie Roy presents the classic case of immersion students who, at some point, tell themselves that they love French and decide to continue their immersion education. If they are lucky, they will have access to a post-secondary school where they can study in French, a language in which they will eventually reach a good level. However, they will get caught up in the categories when asked whether they are anglophone or francophone. They will say that they are sort of both. However, if the traditional definition of the word “bilingual” is that you must express yourself perfectly in both languages, almost no one will raise their hand.
Until we modernize the definition, we will continue to deal with those old categories and the students in my example will have to call themselves anglophones. That is unfortunate, because we are losing the richness of bilingualism in the process. In reality, we feel it, we see it and people make comments. But this richness is not sufficiently valued.
In my opinion, this is therefore the advantage of a modernized and more complex vision for those who use several languages or promote multilingualism in society.
12:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Denis Paradis
Thank you, Mr. Séror.
Mr. Choquette, you have the floor for four minutes.
12:45 p.m.
NDP
François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ladies and gentlemen, I very much appreciated the relevance of your remarks on education, immigration and the meaning and clarity of part VII of the act and its concepts.
I would like to come back to one point that came up in all your three speeches and that seems to me to be just as important: the enumeration of rights holders. In recent years, we have discussed this at great length in committee, but unfortunately we have not yet gotten to the bottom of it. We also have no idea whether the next survey will include a good definition of what a rights holder is. Is this important to you? Of course, you talked about revising the definition of “francophone”, since this label provides the right to study in French. How important is this to you and how does it correspond to your priorities?
Mr. Bisson, you can start.
12:45 p.m.
Director, Justice, Association des collèges et universités de la francophonie canadienne
Here's what I have to say, Mr. Choquette.
Yes, the enumeration is necessary. As I look back on 50 years of the act, let me ask you: how come we don't have it?
I would like to make another recommendation. Your committee has a reputation for telling it like it is, which is to your credit. In your report on the modernization of the act, I therefore recommend that you choose strong words, action words. If the lawmakers use soft or ambiguous words, we will have to fight endlessly on the ground for every little change we want.
Let me give you an example, which sort of deals with the issue of enumeration. We have school boards today because a judge in Ontario discovered the preposition “de” in the French version of section 23 of the Charter, which deals with minority language facilities. This “de” allows for school boards, which we would not have if the preposition had not been there. It is unthinkable to see that the evolution of a country may depend on the presence or absence of a preposition.
That's my answer to you. Don't be afraid to use strong words.
Thank you.
12:45 p.m.
NDP
12:45 p.m.
General Director, Association des collèges et universités de la francophonie canadienne
Yes.
We would like to see section 23 as a floor, not a ceiling. The enumeration can be done, but there are many other people who would like to study in a first or second language. That is why we recommend aiming higher than what is currently in place. Section 23 should not be seen as a ceiling, but as a floor.
12:45 p.m.
Director and Associate Dean, University of Ottawa, Official Languages and Bilingualism Institute
I agree. The definition must be generous so that all those who want to be part of the Canadian francophone community can have access to this type of education.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Denis Paradis
Unfortunately, your time is up, Mr. Choquette.
There are still four speakers who have requested the floor. We will have to limit their remarks to two minutes.
Mr. Arseneault, you have the floor.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Thank you, Mrs. Fortier.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Bisson, thank you for talking about the real priority. This will help us prepare our report. It is true that, with no demographic balance, things are not going well.
Mr. Séror, I come from New Brunswick. In our part of the country, linguistic duality in education, as you advocated earlier, is a given. When we talk about duality in Ottawa, I realize that people do not interpret that concept in the same way as I do, as a francophone from New Brunswick.
When you talk about duality in education, are you referring to the same duality as we have in New Brunswick?
12:50 p.m.
Director and Associate Dean, University of Ottawa, Official Languages and Bilingualism Institute
I am talking about duality in education in the sense of the ability to achieve a high level of bilingualism. If I am anglophone, I must have access to all the tools I need to improve my French, and the same goes for francophones who want to improve their English.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
In New Brunswick, linguistic duality is ingrained in the province. Education is a provincial responsibility. So there are two school systems and two governing bodies. Francophones have their own programs, just like anglophones. The schools were separated not so long ago. I experienced linguistic duality in education, and it was great.
According to your definition of duality, anglophones can learn French if they want to, and francophones can learn English. How will we be able to overcome this pesky and age-old obstacle of respecting provincial jurisdictions over federal ones?
I want some solutions, as do all of us here.
12:50 p.m.
Director and Associate Dean, University of Ottawa, Official Languages and Bilingualism Institute
In my view, that's the Gordian knot of the matter.
In terms of transfers to the provinces, the objectives and expectations must be clearly defined in the act. This will then enable us to hold you accountable. It is not enough to encourage initiatives, we need clearly defined and specific objectives so that we can determine how you enforce them.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Have you seriously studied this approach, which is to hold the provinces accountable for federal transfers so that we know whether they have taken care of their linguistic minorities, both in Quebec and in English Canada?
12:50 p.m.
Director and Associate Dean, University of Ottawa, Official Languages and Bilingualism Institute
I am not a lawyer, so I do not have that expertise.
It is certainly important, because it helps us find out what has been done and where we are heading. If we are not aware of those details, we can't make adjustments.
12:50 p.m.
Liberal
René Arseneault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB
Ms. Brouillette, you come here often. You must have certainly thought about that before.
12:50 p.m.
General Director, Association des collèges et universités de la francophonie canadienne
The provinces must ensure the vitality and development of linguistic communities, but the federal government also has a responsibility. That's how the federal government can help to improve things in the event of a crisis or erosion in language, as we have seen recently. It has an obligation to ensure the vitality and development of the communities. It can take action and support communities in a meaningful way.
