Official Languages Committee on Oct. 18th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Welcome, everyone.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we are continuing our study on the roadmap and immigration in francophone minority communities.

This morning we are pleased to have Sylviane Lanthier, president of the Table nationale de concertation communautaire en immigration francophone.

Welcome, Mrs. Lanthier.

First, we will listen to what you have to say about the roadmap for about 10 minutes.That will be followed by a brief go-round for questions and comments. Then I will ask you to make another, shorter presentation on immigration, which will be followed by a second round of questions and comments. I hope that is fine with you.

Mrs. Lanthier, we are listening.

[Sylviane Lanthier, President, Table nationale de concertation communautaire en immigration francophone et Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada]

Mr. Chair and committee members, I want to thank you for inviting the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada to make this double presentation to you today.

Founded in 1975, the FCFA is the key representative organization of the 2.6 million francophones living in nine provinces and three territories across the country. The FCFA has 20 members: 12 provincial and territorial francophone representative associations and 8 national organizations representing various sectors of activity and clients. It also coordinates the Forum des leaders, an assembly of 42 organizations that are engaged in the development of francophone and Acadian communities.

In this first part, my remarks will focus on the next action plan for official languages. In the second part, following your questions, I will address the issue of francophone immigration.

Late this past summer, Graham Fraser, Commissioner of Official Languages, announced some excellent news. The results of a Nielsen poll revealed that an unprecedented 84% of Canadian across the country support bilingualism. Nearly the same percentage, 82%, feel that the 150^th anniversary of confederation in 2017 should be an opportunity to promote the official languages in Canada.

It appears from these results that the official languages issue is resolved in the minds of most Canadians; it is a fait accompli. A few months ago, the Hon. Mélanie Joly (Minister of Canadian Heritage) echoed that observation by declaring that the Official Languages Act was part of a social contract established many years ago.

However, we also know that, while there is a broad consensus in society on linguistic duality, in reality, that does not always translate into adequate services or full compliance with the Official Languages Act, particularly in the area of support for francophone minority communities.

Former Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau once said, "A country, after all, is not something you build as the pharaohs built the pyramids, and then leave standing there to defy eternity. A country is something that is built every day out of certain basic shared values." Those eloquent words, quoted by President Barack Obama during his visit to Parliament last June, aptly apply to Canada's linguistic duality. Like our country, like our collective identity, we must cultivate linguistic duality as the living tree it is.

In the throne speech and in the federal budget last March, the government reiterated its commitment to protecting our two official languages. That is a positive sign. However, when you consider linguistic duality as a living tree, decisive action, specific acts, and a bold plan are needed to promote French and make it flourish in all regions of the country.

Support for our two official languages must mean more than the mere delivery of bilingual services and communications by federal institutions. The advancement of linguistic duality must go beyond simply learning a second language. We can say there is genuine linguistic duality in Canada because there are communities living in French in every province and territory, and it is on that vitality that we must build.

It is because of that vitality that Canadians who learn French as a second language have opportunities to speak that language in a variety of situations in everyday life. It is because of our communities that francophone military personnel posted to places like Comox and Kingston enjoy social and cultural activities in their language and their children have access to French-language schools. Creators in our communities, the Gabrielle Roys, Damien Robitailles, Lisa LeBlancs, and Joseph Edgars, are helping to shape this unique Canadian identity that we will be celebrating next year. The entrepreneurs, organizations, and institutions in our communities are creating jobs in French and contributing to the economic development of their region and the country as a whole.

The francophone and Acadian communities are an anchor point for linguistic duality from sea to sea to sea. In recent years, however, they have often been forgotten in government and social discourse and action on linguistic duality and official languages.

Promoting the development of prosperous, inclusive francophone communities that are able to fend for themselves and to contribute fully to the development of their region and country: that is the issue that should be central to the next government plan for official languages.

The Government of Canada can effect a considerable change for our communities by investing in three key priorities: first, francophone immigration, early childhood, and mobility; second, the offer of services and activities for francophones in all areas of their everyday lives; and, third, capacity-building for organizations and institutions involved in the economic, cultural, and social development of our communities. That is the most important message that we are sending you today.

Consider the first priority. As the report published by the Commissioner of Official Languages two weeks ago shows, every time parents feel they have to register their children at an English-language day care centre, not by choice but because of a lack of space elsewhere, that decision has a devastating impact on the family, the children, and the community. Conversely, the availability of those services in French helps guarantee that our children will be francophone and that our families will be able to live in French. It guarantees the vitality of our communities.

As regards the second priority, the francophonie is strong when it is expressed through activities, events, and services that reach francophones and the population as a whole in everyday life. However, there are deficiencies in many areas—education, culture, access to justice, the media, and health—and French-language services and activities are too often offered using makeshift resources in inadequate facilities. However, there is a direct relationship between the quality of life in French and the choice of francophone migrants or immigrants, or even old-stock francophones, to associate with and contribute to the francophone community.

The third priority is the development of prosperous communities that are good places to live. In the francophone minority communities, institutions and organizations created by and for the community ensure that development. Those organizations and institutions operate on financial resources that, in the vast majority of cases, have not increased in more than a decade. Over the years, they have found innovative solutions that have helped them manage at lower cost. However, with purchasing power declining every year as the cost of living increases, they now have no financial leeway.

It is essential that we increase the capacity of organizations in our communities if we want them to continue to champion the advancement of French as they currently do. We must be able to modernize or improve our infrastructure to meet the growing demand. Our media must be able to make the digital shift. Our organizations and institutions must be able to meet emerging needs.

None of what I have just said means that the next action plan for official languages must be the alpha and omega of the Canadian government's commitment to the development of our communities. In fact, full compliance with the Official Languages Act instead requires that the government use different support levers through various federal institutions, in addition to that plan. Consider, for example, the major investments in infrastructure, early childhood, and youth employment announced in the 2016 budget. The government would be taking tangible action in favour of the francophone community if it set aside a portion of those investments to respond directly and expressly to the needs of our communities for social, educational, and cultural infrastructure, day care centres, and jobs for youth in our communities. We hope your committee will adopt that recommendation as its own.

So there you have a ready-made plan to make francophone communities, as living expressions of Canada's linguistic duality, the central focus of government support measures for our two official languages. The action that should be taken is clear and obvious. The challenges were eloquently underscored during the consultations held across the country this past summer. The urgent need for action is now apparent.

Thank you. I am prepared to answer your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you very much, Mrs. Lanthier.

Now we will proceed with a six-minute round of questions.

We will begin with Mrs. Boucher, whom I also congratulate on her nomination as her party's official languages critic.

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

Good morning, Mrs. Lanthier. Welcome to the committee. I believe we have met several times over the past few years.

Everyone recognizes that linguistic duality is very important. All committee members acknowledge that fact. This is 2016, and it is increasingly important that everyone be able to speak English and French and especially that we be able to make ourselves understood and to obtain services in either language.

You have benefited from certain programs under the roadmap over the years. What program has benefited you most during that time? Have you enjoyed great successes as a result of those programs? What should be changed in order to make things, not perfect, but better?

[Sylviane Lanthier]

Thank you for your question.

There have been examples of success from the time the first plan went into effect until the current roadmap. For example, I am thinking of what has been done in health services since the first action plans. We in the francophone communities were poorly equipped to address health needs at the time of the first action plan. The plan helped establish circumstances that enabled us to do that.

The first versions of the plan and roadmap provided financial assistance for early childhood. We note that the termination of that assistance is being strongly felt in our communities.

The roadmap and the action plan have helped give the francophone communities a boost in immigration. However, the government's approach here is not enough. That is why we say that the current challenge for the communities is to focus their energies on developing and building our infrastructure.

In recent years, we have noticed a kind of unravelling in the way the roadmap is administered. Authorities have forgotten to make our community organizations and institutions the central focus of government action. Life in French in our communities is developed through those organizations and institutions, and one of the things we are saying is that government action must be re-centred so that our community organizations, which drive the development of life in French, are central to the next roadmap.

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

Do the community organizations also receive assistance from the provincial governments?

We often hear about the federal government in this connection. Are any provincial programs for francophone communities outside Quebec being developed in cooperation with the federal government? Do you have any provincial agreements?

Earlier you mentioned the mobility of francophones across the country. I know that we in Quebec go and work in Alberta and elsewhere. Are there any interprovincial agreements designed to help the Canadian francophonie develop in cooperation with Quebec? Do you have any such agreements with Quebec? Is Quebec there to support francophones outside Quebec?

[Sylviane Lanthier]

That is quite a broad question.

First, I must say that the main reason we are here before you now is to talk to you about the federal government's responsibilities.

Second, to my knowledge, the Quebec government invests approximately $2 million a year in aid of all kinds in all francophone communities outside Quebec. Furthermore, all the provincial and territorial governments are working with their communities. However, I cannot give you any more details on that because I do not know what amounts are being allocated in each of the provinces.

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

So you get a little assistance from Quebec. That is what I wanted to know.

We often hear that francophones in Quebec are unaware of francophones outside Quebec. I hope that is not the case. People in Quebec think they are the only ones who speak French in Canada. When you sit on a committee such as the official languages committee, you realize that many francophones outside Quebec struggle every day to retain their language.

My personal issue with regard to the roadmap is French-language health services. Over the course of this committee's meetings, I have often asked where we stand on French-language health services and whether any improvements can be made. Friends in Vancouver have told me horror stories. It is all well and good to be bilingual, but when you are sick, you are sick in your mother tongue. I want to ensure that everyone can obtain care in his or her language.

[Sylviane Lanthier]

I was in Alberta for the FCFA's annual meeting last weekend. One person who works in Calgary told me that one of his personal causes these days was to establish the equivalent of a French-language health or health services centre in a building in Calgary. That has not yet been done.

Some communities definitely have French-language health care needs. If you talk to the Société Santé en français, the organization that spearheads this entire file, it will tell you there are still French-language health care needs, in mental health, for example. The struggle for French-language services provided by professionals, that is to say physicians, nurses, or other professionals, is definitely not over. There are still deficiencies virtually everywhere.

We have made progress in this area over the past 10 to 15 years, but that does not mean the problem is completely solved.

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

So that is a good subject for study.

[Sylviane Lanthier]

Definitely.

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

Thank you, madam.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you, Mrs. Boucher.

Mr. Lefebvre, you have the floor.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mrs. Lanthier, thank you very much for your presentation, which offers specific measures and suggestions, and thank you for coming to discuss the vitality of our communities with us.

The roadmap is a very important document, and you have raised a number of aspects of it, including early childhood. Can you tell me very briefly how the roadmap is currently providing support for early childhood across Canada?

[Sylviane Lanthier]

Early childhood is not included in the present roadmap.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you.

Now I will turn to the challenges associated with French-language child care.

I personally experienced a situation in Sudbury in which I had to put my children on a waiting list a year before they entered a francophone day care centre. Otherwise they probably would not have gotten spaces. My sister-in-law was unable to get a space for my godson.

There is also the matter of supply and demand. The demand is there, but the supply is tight. There are often not enough trained people to provide early childhood day care services.

How could the roadmap support your vision and suggestions? Day care spaces have to be created, but people also have to be trained.

[Sylviane Lanthier]

Yes.

Training programs are provided in our communities. They are there, and I think more students would take them if there were more job opportunities. For example, current needs are so great that I know some untrained people who are working in day care centres and being trained on the job. As a result, the universities and colleges have adopted various models over the years to meet the needs of this clientele. However, we definitely need more day care spaces in French so that we can ensure that our children are raised in French and that we are supporting families who want to live in French. A crisis occurs whenever we fail to do that.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

I agree with you.

With regard to demand, is it possible to gauge interest in French-language early childhood services across Canada? Can we estimate the demand?

[Sylviane Lanthier]

I do not have any figures for you, but you need only look at the registration in certain French-language schools, for example. The fact that francophone schools are expanding suggests that, if day care services were available, more children would come and feed into those schools.

You cited your own case. I personally know a lot of people around me, in my community, who put their children in an anglophone day care centre because there is no francophone centre. We are losing a lot of children right now.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

You also mentioned the cultural and community infrastructure in the communities. How is the roadmap currently supporting infrastructure in the francophone communities across the country?

[Sylviane Lanthier]

I do not believe the roadmap specifically supports infrastructure.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you.

Based on your vision and the suggestions you are making, how could the roadmap do that? There is a clear lack of infrastructure.

[Sylviane Lanthier]

The roadmap could support infrastructure, and certain other departments could as well.

On this point, it is also important to realize that the action plan for official languages is an important factor in mobilizing departments that have specific responsibilities or that will be making targeted investments. However, it does not necessarily stop at that, and that should also not be an excuse for the other departments to do nothing.

With respect to infrastructure, some programs therefore may not necessarily be part of the roadmap but may have francophone aspects and could be used as a way to invest more. They must be given a format to which francophone organizations can have access, with conditions that enable them to access infrastructure programs.

For example, it will probably be somewhat difficult if a community organization wants to build or establish a day care centre, has to raise 50% of the funding in the private sector, and has only four weeks to file a funding application. So I think the reality of the communities also has to be considered in the way the programs are structured so that francophones can also get this money and so it is fairer.

Should that be in the action plan or not? That is a good question. However, the federal government also has to look into the matter. If we do not have adequate, well-equipped infrastructure in our communities, and if we look like second-class citizens, then at some point people will go elsewhere. They do not want infrastructure that looks like rundown community centres from the 1930s, when the centre next door has just been renovated and everything there is done in English. Those are important aspects too.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

You also mentioned francophone mobility. Can you give us more details on the challenges involved in francophone mobility on a national scale?

[Sylviane Lanthier]

A study was recently done on youth mobility to determine, in particular, why young people move from province to province. Mobility is also an issue for newcomers.

How can we effectively promote our communities to people from other countries or provinces who come here? How can we introduce them to our organizations and the services they provide? How can we inform those francophones about where they can go and how they can live their lives in French? That is a greater concern for us.

Many organizations work to promote employment services, schools and so on. There is infrastructure, but, if people do not know about it because it has not been promoted or if the general message about linguistic duality is not strong enough, actual francophones may not know they are arriving in a community where people speak French. I meet them every day.