Thank you.
Hello everyone.
Reliable, complete data on French speakers outside Quebec are necessary to uphold at least two constitutional rights: first, the right to minority language instruction guaranteed under section 23 of the charter, which applies where numbers warrant; and secondly, the right to federal services in the official languages of one's choice, which is guaranteed by paragraph 20(1) of the charter and depends on significant demand.
In the case of both of these rights, communities and governments must be able to identify the number of individuals who could potentially exercise these rights and their geographic distribution. In both cases, census data are used to evaluate and justify the demand for services. The census provides the evidence that the data are accurate. If the numbers are not backed up by solid evidence, it is much more difficult and at times impossible to demonstrate that the numerical criteria have been met, which means that francophone minority communities lose their rights.
In the recent case about French-language schools in British Columbia, for instance, my colleagues and I had to demonstrate that the numbers in various communities were sufficient. The Supreme Court of British Columbia handed down a ruling last September, which demonstrates the serious consequences of a lack of complete, reliable data on the members of the francophone community and their children. In the decision, the court recognized that the census underestimated the number of children with at least one parent holding rights under section 23 of the charter. The court refused, however, to infer the number of those children based on evidence other than census data. This had a very adverse effect on rights in a number of communities. The court recognized that the census data omitted rights holders and their children, and in fact omitted whole categories of rights holders, but its analysis of what the numbers warrant was based on census data. This was exclusively data about parents with French as a first language, as reported in the census.
The evidence included testimony from a number of parents with rights under section 23, whose children attend French-language schools, but who are not identified as rights holders by the census. Among these witnesses, there were individuals whose mother tongue was French and English, but who indicated English only on the census form, thinking they had to choose one. There were also parents, or spouses, whose first language was French or English, but who just put “English” for the household when filling out the form for the whole family because it was the dominant language or the commonly spoken language in the home.
The witnesses also included parents who held rights based on their education, whether at a French-language school in Quebec or a French-language minority school outside Quebec, and other parents who held rights based on their children's education.
The lesson is clear: the census alone can enumerate rights holders and their children. It is therefore essential that it be improved to be more effective. This lack of data does not of course only impact cases that end up before the courts. Many government decisions are based on census data, including decisions to grant capital funding for schools or not, and decisions about where government services must be offered in the minority language.
It is important to collect data on linguistic minorities from 100% of the population. The actual number of members of these communities must be counted, which means that the questions that yield this data must be included in the short form census, which is distributed to 75% of the population. All the questions on the short form census are also in the long form. As a result, 100% of the population answers these questions.
So the question on mother tongue is asked to 100% of the population. That should not change. The questions on education, which should be added, should also be put to 100% of the population. That would make it possible to get a complete count of those individuals and not simply infer their number from a sample of 25% of the population.
Moreover, past experience has shown that the data on linguistic minorities, which are estimated solely on the basis of the long form census data, are not reliable, especially for smaller regions. Mr. Paul also mentioned a school catchment area. At that level, it is simply not reliable.
Finally, under part VII of the Official Languages Act, it is incumbent on the federal government to take positive measures to enhance the vitality of official language minority communities.
It is difficult to imagine a more positive measure for these communities than to modify the census questionnaire so their members can be identified in a complete, reliable way. That would make it possible to uphold the right to education and to services in the minority language, while equipping governments and in turn community organizations to support and assist the development and enhance the vitality of those communities.
We will be pleased to answer your questions.
Thank you.