Official Languages Committee on Nov. 24th, 2016

[Jean Viel]

In fact, if there were none in the department for francophone immigration, Destination Canada would not exist. That program does not exist outside the francophone sphere.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

If that is the case for Destination Canada, so be it, but what about other decisions made within your department?

I am not just talking about your unit, Mr. Viel, but about the department in general.

When decisions are made, the reality of LGBTQ individuals and women is taken into account, but is the actual situation of minority francophones also considered?

[Jennifer Irish]

No group has that specific responsibility since that is the objective of many programs.

For example, there is a part of the department that deals with Destination Canada in the international region. The different selection programs are each situated in different directors general. For example, we talked about Express Entry and Mobilité francophone. There are student programs through International Experience Canada. The department drives the objective, targets that the minister has committed to through these different vehicles. Our secretariat must then make sure that's a coherent response.

Remember, this is about promotion and selection. A key part of this is also retention. That's where the secretariat works with communities and also with provinces, which, to come back to the question, choose their own objectives. The extent to which that's immigration francophone is really up to those who are there to—

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

I have one final question, Mr. Chair.

If you no longer use the mother tongue variable, what variable do you use to enumerate francophone immigrants?

[Jean Viel]

The spoken language.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

I see.

An inclusive definition of the "francophonie" was also developed in Ontario in 2009.

Should the federal government, the provinces, and the territories have a harmonized definition of that term?

[Jean Viel]

I suppose that might be one of the elements that could be discussed at the federal-provincial/territorial forum that will be held in Moncton next March.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Ontario has an inclusive definition, but not all provinces have the same definition.

[Jean Viel]

That is up to them.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

So there is a very different system across the country.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you very much.

This brings our meeting with the witnesses to an end.

Now we will take a few minutes to discuss committee business. I know all of you have organized your schedules in anticipation of the meeting adjourning at 10:15.

Ms. Irish and Mr. Viel, thank you very much for appearing before the committee and answering our questions.

The meeting is still public.

I would like to offer a brief reminder about our schedule. On Tuesday, November 29, we will hear from representatives of the Department of Canadian Heritage on accountability. On December 1, we will begin consideration of the report. On Tuesday, December 6, we will theoretically hear from Minister Judy Foote over one hour and will then continue drafting the report. On December 8, the meeting will also focus on the drafting of the report. At that point, it should be coming to an end.

We will therefore take an hour to hear from Minister Foote. Are we all agreed? I see that is the case. We suggested that date to the minister, and I am waiting for confirmation that she will be here, but I think that should work.

Mrs. Boucher, you have the floor.

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

As the committee has done an exhaustive job on immigration, I want to ensure the report is perfect. With all the work we have done, we have no right to do otherwise. I personally do not want us to add witnesses and dates without first seeing the report. We have a deadline and we are not the ones who set it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

I agree. I think we have to meet that deadline, Mrs. Boucher. We also agreed to meet with Ms. Foote before Christmas, particularly in view of the notice of motion that Mr. Choquette tabled. I said we would take an hour to hear from Ms. Foote. From what I can see, we will have enough time to prepare a very good report.

Mr. Généreux, you have the floor.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I have a question for the analysts. Were the answers we received today and the questions we put to the witnesses satisfactory?

[Lucie Lecomte, Committee Researcher]

I would say that, for the purpose of fleshing out the entire report, the answers contrast with the testimony from the representatives of the official language minority communities. Obviously, the first version you receive will not reflect today's meeting. That testimony, which is very important, will have to be integrated.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I see.

Mr. Chair, with your permission, I would like to congratulate Mr. Arseneault for his interesting proposal concerning duality and the clarification that he provided on what is going on in New Brunswick. The situation in that province could also be applied to the other Canadian provinces. It would be interesting to explore his duality proposal further.

[The Chair, Liberal, Denis Paradis]

Thank you, Mr. Généreux.

We will see you next Tuesday.

The meeting is adjourned.