Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you very much, Mr. Corbeil, for being with us this evening.
You know how statistics can be weapons in the hands of politicians. The situation is such that it has become an extremely sensitive and complex issue. On the one hand, some people say that everything's going badly, that it's awful and a catastrophe. On the other, people say that everything's fine and that there's nothing to worry about.
My view is that the situation lies somewhere between the two. As you were saying, the subject is complex. From one region, one group or one age segment to another, the realities are varied and different. I'm particularly interested in what you said about the indicators, to the effect that those for the private sphere may not be the most important and that those for the public sphere may be more revealing in view of the demographic changes owing to immigration and other factors. I don't think that the issue of mother tongue should enter into it at all. It even runs counter to the spirit of Quebec's Bill 101, which wanted immigrant children to go to French schools. The second and third generations may not have had French as their mother tongue, but they were able to speak French.
You mention public space indicators. According to you, what are the most revealing indicators here? Is it language of work, the language spoken in stores and restaurants, or the language for cultural activities?