Good afternoon, ministers. Welcome to our independent official languages committee.
Thank you for providing the report to us. That said, since you got it to us only an hour ago, we haven't had a chance to read it, which is unfortunate. We would've liked to receive it a bit earlier so we could familiarize ourselves with it. I mention it because we normally get documents like these ahead of time.
Many questions are swirling around in my mind, but first, let me say how taken aback I was by one of your comments, Ms. Joly. You spoke of 10 years of inaction. This is a televised meeting, and I want to say that I reject that statement. I was on the Standing Committee on Official Languages 10 years ago, and although our government may have done things differently, it cannot be accused of inaction. I simply wanted to set the record straight.
Now that that's out of the way, I looked at the new action plan you're proposing. The first area of focus is individual bilingualism. Today, in 2017, that is very important, especially when you work on Parliament Hill. That's a positive stance, and I commend you for it.
The second area of focus is the vitality of francophone and anglophone communities. I think that's also a positive area to focus on. In fact, a motion calling on the Prime Minister to meet with those very communities was proposed here, in the committee, but the members across the way did not support it. I wanted to make that clear because it's important to meet with those representatives. We get phone calls from people every day, and even though we are members of the opposition, we strive to work in a positive and non-partisan way.
With respect to the action plan's third area, you say you will focus on “being a government that leads by example and shows a clear path forward for official languages.”
That principle should have been followed during Ms. Meilleur's nomination process. It may have led to greater co-operation on our part.
People working in the immigration sector who appeared before the committee told us that communities faced structural challenges. Either before or after the holidays, we heard that, in some francophone communities, the funding was going to the anglophone community even though the francophone community already had the necessary infrastructure in place to welcome immigrants.
Could you tell us more about that?