Official Languages Committee on April 22nd, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Forgues.

Mr. Beaulieu will now have the floor for six minutes.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to the witnesses for being with us. The three presentations were very interesting.

I have a general question. When the Official Languages Act was introduced 52 years ago, didn't we start off on the wrong foot by determining that the Acadian community and the francophone communities outside Quebec were equivalent to Quebec's anglophone community?

In 1996, for example, a study by the Commission nationale des parents francophones revealed that school funding under the official languages program had benefited Quebec's anglophone schools far more than francophone schools outside Quebec. And yet anglophone schools were already overfunded relative to francophone schools.

That's what we're questioning now as we acknowledge that the French language has declined in Quebec and that the federal government is also responsible for protecting French in Quebec.

What do you think about that?

[Éric Forgues]

I don't know for whom your question's intended, but I'll take the liberty of answering it first.

We had an act that defined two official language minorities in a way that didn't correspond to the way we had imagined Canada's linguistic landscape. We saw that the Canadian francophonie rested on a more fragile and more delicate foundation across the country as a whole, but that's not what's set forth in the Official Languages Act. So what the government is proposing in its white paper gives me the impression that we'd be going back to a landscape more consistent with the way we perceive ourselves as francophones in this country.

Quebec's francophones, and even Quebec's anglophones, don't necessarily consider themselves a minority. Quebec anglophones have only very recently begun to view themselves as a minority group. That wasn't how they previously imagined themselves.

The imagined political landscape of the Official Languages Act was thus quite the opposite. I believe that the government, in its white paper, is attempting to return to an imagined political landscape that's more consistent with reality. The francophonie across the country must be viewed as being in a minority situation.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

I entirely agree.

This will be the first time the Standing Committee on Official Languages has undertaken a study on the situation of French in Quebec and on the impact of federal language policy on Quebec after 52 years.

This is all related to the fact that the federal government considered anglophones as the only minority in Quebec. Even the UN doesn't recognize Quebec anglophones as a minority because they're part of the English Canadian majority. The federal government also caused Bill 101 to be amended as a result of the Constitution Act, 1982.

I don't know whether Mr. Landry or Mr. Forgues would like to comment on this.

[Rodrigue Landry]

We wrote a book about a Canadian study on graduates of French-language schools and another about English-language schools. The analysis and all the data on ethnolinguistic vitality that we included in the study point to two possible scenarios. I'm not making any predictions here.

One of the potential scenarios is, on the francophone side, that, with government assistance in particular, progress can be made on plans for institutional completeness and linguistic legitimacy. That's the government's role. However, since we don't support the base, fewer and fewer people will attend French-language institutions and use the language.

On the anglophone side, our analysis points to a scenario in which people will have no problem using English because of the considerable attraction it exerts. However, as a result of the fact that Quebec strongly defends French with its Bill 101, it could lose some of the control it exercises over its own institutions and over the legitimacy of that language in Quebec.

These two scenarios are somewhat based on the strengths of each group.

[Mario Beaulieu, Bloc, La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC]

The concept of "institutional completeness" that you use is interesting. It's also used by Frédéric Lacroix. According to that principle, the stronger a linguistic community's institutions are, the greater its language's force of attraction will be.

English schools in Quebec admit more students than there are anglophones, nearly three times as many at the postsecondary level, in the CEGEPs. As a result of the positive measures the federal government has taken, approximately $50 million more is available for English-language primary and secondary schools. For the CEGEPs and universities, that's a lot of money.

What you think about that? Should we question that principle?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Pardon me, Mr. Beaulieu, but that's all the time we have. You'll have a chance to come back to the subject during the period of questions.

Mr. Boulerice, go ahead for six minutes.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I like to go back to the first presentation, which was made by the spokesperson or director of the Assemblée de la francophonie de l'Ontario, because a drama is playing out as a result of radical cuts to French-language programs at the Université Laurentienne. I still call it the Université Laurentienne, not Laurentian University.

Mr. Jolin, as my Conservative colleagues noted earlier, you frequently refer to the annihilation of bilingualism and the violation of a relationship of trust. That's tough language, but I can understand why you use it.

First of all, do you think all hope is lost for that institution, and is the relationship of trust actually broken?

Second, is there a genuine possibility that the University of Sudbury may acquire some independence by taking over French-language programs, particularly the midwifery program, which is unique outside Quebec?

[Carol Jolin]

Thank you for your question.

That's absolutely correct: the community has completely lost trust in Laurentian University's administration. Matters were already not going very well. As I mentioned, very little effort has been made to improve French-language programming in the past 20 years. We were also told that the marketing work done to recruit francophone students was not up to snuff.

I don't know whether I discussed this earlier, but the university hired someone in 2002 to recruit anglophone students internationally. As a result, the university has regularly admitted 350 to 450 foreign anglophone students every year. It wasn't until two years ago that it hired someone to recruit foreign francophone students. That initial attempt attracted slightly fewer than 100 students. We've learned that this position was recently eliminated as part of the university's budget cuts.

As for the second part of your question, the University of Sudbury's board of regents decided on March 11 last that the University of Sudbury would become a university governed by, with and for francophones. We firmly believe that the university, which now has its charter, has a chance to continue French-language programming in the mid-north; that's essential. Otherwise there will be fewer options for students in the region, province or even other provinces who would like to come and study in French in Sudbury.

The number of options available to students in the region who want to study French has been cut. Research has been conducted on this subject, and we know that a minority of those students will go to Ottawa, Hearst or Toronto, where the Université de l'Ontario français is offering new programs. [Technical difficulty—Editor] as far as possible, and they'll have to turn to the English-language universities in order to do so. I still call that the "assimilation highway."

The University of Sudbury is well equipped to offer French-language programs to students in the mid-north. It's also well positioned to work together as part of a network with the Université de l'Ontario français in Toronto and with the University of Hearst, which is now independent because it received its own institutional charter last week.

We're also able to provide better service to students who will be completing their secondary studies and who want to study in French. The business community urgently needs young people who can speak both official languages to provide services.

As…

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Pardon me for interrupting. You're enthusiastic, and I understand why. However, I'd like to ask another question. I only have six minutes, and time is flying by.

We discussed the obligation to have strong institutions, particularly in education and culture, in order to ensure the vitality of francophone communities. I think this is a good example of that.

What role do you think the federal government should play in this transition to stronger French-language universities in Sudbury and Hearst?

[Carol Jolin]

We've had several discussions on the subject with the provincial government, which has shown some interest in it. Minister Mulroney discussed an interesting project, and Minister Romano has set some reasonable conditions to make it happen.

In the federal government,Ms. Joly said she was encouraged and prepared to contribute to the creation of an entirely independent university by and for francophones in Sudbury.

I think the stars are clearly aligned. Work remains to be done between the two levels of government, somewhat as was done for the Université de l'Ontario français. Ms. Joly and Ms. Mulroney have worked well together to advance the file, and we're hoping the same will happen for the University of Sudbury.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

We hope so.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Boulerice.

Mr. Dalton, go ahead for five minutes.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Thanks to the witnesses. Their comments are very interesting.

The government's white paper refers to a committee of experts that will have a mandate to develop criteria for recognizing regions with a strong francophone presence outside Quebec.

I come from the west, from British Columbia to be more precise, and we too have regions where francophone communities live. They aren't really grouped together geographically as they used to be. Those populations are more dispersed. In the Vancouver area, for example, the francophone community was previously concentrated in Maillardville, where francophones still live, but now they're more or less scattered around the region.

Should the committee address this question? What criteria do you think should be used to designate regions with a strong francophone presence outside Quebec?

My question is for Mr. Forgues or Mr. Landry.

[Éric Forgues]

I'll begin, and Mr. Landry can supplement my answer.

An amendment has already been made to the regulations, the exact name of which I forget, the purpose of which is to determine the regions where there's adequate demand for services in the minority language.

The definition of those regions is far more inclusive now. I can't remember it all, but I understand that we still want to work to that end and that we want an approach that's very inclusive from the standpoint of active offer of service in both official languages. I think we should expand active offer as much as possible. We've already mentioned this, but the underlying thrust of this act is that it must allow for a catching up, a righting of past wrongs.

Services must also be provided to help reverse assimilation trends. The regulations must therefore be as generous as possible and as inclusive as possible when it comes to defining the regions where there is deemed to be significant demand for services in both official languages.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Thank you.

Mr. Landry, would you like to add a comment?

[Rodrigue Landry]

Yes, thank you.

I'm going to discuss a concept that I use in my research, the concept of socializing proximity. I have a very good understanding of the situation in British Columbia, where communities are small and dispersed. In those kinds of situations, it's very difficult for parents, for example, to try to live in French because none of their neighbours or the people they know around them speak French. Consequently, it's aware and engaged people who make the effort to send their children to French schools because what's normal for children is to attend English schools.

The more concentrated the francophone population, the easier it is for its members to live in French. They have to make the effort. Very little research has been done on the subject, but what research does exist shows that the closer the schools are to the community, the more people tend to gather around them. The same demographic changes occur when parents group together near schools. These kinds of situations are possible, but they're nevertheless a very tough challenge to overcome from a demographic standpoint.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

I'd like to ask another question now as my time is limited.

We've heard about another problem, which was specifically raised by the francophone community of British Columbia. It arises when the federal government decides to contract with third parties to implement agreements respecting a strictly federal jurisdiction. Where it does so, the measures necessary to comply with the act must be taken, but that's not always the case.

In a few seconds, do you have any comments on that subject? Do you have any suggestions as to the best way to remedy this kind of problem?

[Rodrigue Landry]

That's a question that should be put to a lawyer. When you hire a third party, that party has the same obligations as the federal entity. There's not much you can do if they aren't complied with.

[Marc Dalton, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Landry.

Mr. Lefebvre, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon to everyone.

I'm very pleased to be back with the committee. I' m speaking to you from Sudbury. I am less than a kilometre away from Université Laurentienne, which I could also call, as Mr. Jolin did, Laurentian University. I will not go on at great length, as my good friend Darrell Samson used to do. He was in the habit of giving a long preamble and allowing only 50 seconds for the witness to answer his question. He was a past master at this. That being said, I really do want to get to the heart of the matter.

Mr. Jolin, you spoke about accountability. But after two years away from the committee, I can see that the problem persists. It's really a big challenge. As you know, the federal government transfers funds to the provinces, which do not want to be accountable to them at all. You also mentioned that provinces transfer funds to institutions. We might well ask about the institutions' accountability to the province.

Although I completely agree with you, I am wondering what option you might suggest to us. What I'm thinking about here are the recommendations we would have to make as part of this study. It's about the decline of French across Canada. I will of course speak to you about Laurentian University when I return, but for the time being, I'd like to know what option you would like to put forward with respect to accountability.

[Carol Jolin]

I believe that both levels of government need to discuss the issue of French in minority language communities and to make sure that the money really gets to where it is supposed to go. In this regard, I believe that the case of Laurentian University is rather clear.

Among other things, we're asking the two levels of government to send the funds initially earmarked for Laurentian University to the University of Sudbury. We're talking about approximately $12 million to enable the University of Sudbury to restore governance by and for francophones, for francophone and francophile students who wish to come and study in the Sudbury region.

From the francophone standpoint, this accountability is even more important. Indeed, we're still asking ourselves whether we're getting what we're entitled to receive. At the moment, these questions are especially significant in Sudbury, with a university having been placed under the protection of the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

That's a very good point. You spoke earlier about recruiting foreign students. My good friend Benoît Clément, who administered international recruitment, was dismissed. The position had existed for two years. I would like to tell my new colleagues on the committee that everything that happened at Laurentian University affected me deeply. I taught a course there[technical difficulty]. My wife teaches in the School of Medicine. As I'm very close to what has been happening there, I'm wondering whether I might not be in a conflict of interest situation.

It's a very important institution, but as Mr. Jolin said, what happened on April 12 led to a breach of trust. We are now wondering what to do to move things forward. Mr. Jolin and the AFO have suggested a number of options. They have the support of a community movement, a group that has been working with the University of Sudbury.

I'd like to comment briefly on the enumeration of rights holders. We worked hard on that when I was on the committee two years ago. We are talking about the decline of French, but it's also essential to factor in the positive measures that have been taken since 2015 to try and address the issue.

Mr. Jolin, what positive impact might a Statistics Canada enumeration have? I'm convinced that it would have a positive effect, but I'd like to know what the community thinks about it.

[Carol Jolin]

First of all, it would give us real numbers. Up until now, all we've had were estimates. In many instances, we didn't think they were truly representative of the francophone community. The figure mentioned was 744,000 franco-Ontarians, but I think there are more of us than that. Now, a proper enumeration of people who can express themselves in French will paint a much more reliable picture in my view. The number of people who can express themselves in French in Ontario is estimated at 1.4 million or 1.5 million. I suppose that there might be even more, because the way the census was conducted earlier failed to count some people.

I'm keen to see the numbers that will be published. They will allow us to better plan the services we want to offer and the projects, like the University of Sudbury project, that we want to focus on.