Official Languages Committee on April 27th, 2021

[Alain Dupuis]

This is absolutely essential. For the first time, we will have a complete picture of all those whose children are entitled to attend a French-language school. It also means that there will be some pretty significant changes in terms of the government investments needed to support the infrastructure of our schools and the spaces in those schools.

In the west and in the north, there has often been a tug of war over numbers. I think this will be a game changer, but not in adversity.

All governments will now have the data required to meet the needs of francophones, and that is a very good thing. However, this commitment must not be for one census, but for all future censuses.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Dupuis.

I am enormously grateful for your responses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Lefebvre.

Thank you, Mr. Dupuis.

Mr. Beaulieu has the floor for the next six minutes.

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

I would like to thank all our guests.

I will address the FCFA representatives.

In your paper on the federal government's new perspective, you say that “French is the official language that needs support to achieve substantive equality.” This is consistent with the Quebec government's request to recognize French as the minority language across Canada. This is a good thing.

You also talked about uniting the Canadian francophonie. Would you agree that, in this new perspective, groups defending the French language in Quebec should be invited to activities aimed at bringing together the entire Canadian francophonie?

This is the first time the Standing Committee on Official Languages has studied the situation of French in Quebec. At other meetings, only anglophones were invited to represent Quebec.

Wouldn't it strengthen solidarity if Quebec's French advocacy groups were also invited?

[Alain Dupuis]

The Canadian francophonie wants to work more with Quebec civil society, whether it is francophone or anglophone. We want to work with francophones, of course. In order to promote our common language, French, it is important to work together, but also to have the means to do so.

I don't know if these particular groups want this funding; I assume they do. For my part, the collaboration of Quebec and francophone civil societies is important.

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

You also said that we should prioritize anything done by and for francophones, in all respects.

Do you agree that we should try to do the same thing for post-secondary education?

Should we make sure that the University of Sudbury is francophone? The Université de l'Ontario français and the Université de Hearst could also go in that direction.

With respect to immersion schools at the elementary and secondary levels, they are not run by or for francophones. School boards often say this creates assimilation of francophones.

Wouldn't it be a good thing if immersion schools were managed by francophone and Acadian communities?

Also, rather than investing heavily in immersion schools, why not ensure that schools for and run by francophones get enough funding in the first place?

[Alain Dupuis]

With respect to the immersion issue, French school boards should be asked whether they want to run these programs. They are French-language programs, but in English-language schools. It would take some pretty major reforms to turn over the governance of immersion programs to francophones.

I don't want to get too far ahead of myself on that.

Certainly, we need to ask what the impact of immersion programs in Canada is and we need to ask what percentage of graduates are able to speak both languages at graduation. I think it is very important to strengthen both our schools and French immersion. They are two different but legitimate needs. We also need to guarantee the results so that more Canadians speak our two official languages.

I've forgotten your first question, I'm sorry.

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

I'm not sure I remember it.

[Alain Dupuis]

I believe it was about post-secondary institutions for and run by francophones.

First, institutional funding must take into account the additional costs of French-language post-secondary schools. The federal government funds provincial and territorial French school boards to justify the fact that there are additional costs to having smaller schools with smaller numbers.

This is exactly the same logic in the case of post-secondary institutions. A French program in a minority setting costs more. That's not a problem, it's just the reality of the smaller numbers.

I think that funding needs to be tailored to these additional costs.

Secondly—and this is more of a community issue—we need to have our institutions managed by francophones and have the power not only to create new programs, but to manage an administration. I think this is the logical continuation of institutional completeness. We have had French-language schools, school boards and colleagues. Now we need independent, minority-run French-language universities.

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

Absolutely. It would be interesting to do a comparison, because almost 40% of federal funding for Quebec universities goes to English universities, and I think it's not at all the same proportion for French universities outside Quebec. So there is an imbalance between funding in Quebec and funding outside Quebec.

My next question is for Ms. Mariève Forest.

You talked about a restorative perspective. Were you referring to the fact that, for a very long time, the teaching of French was prohibited in schools in francophone and Acadian communities outside Quebec? That led to a very significant assimilation.

Even in Ontario, the first French-language public high schools did not appear until 1968.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

I would ask Ms. Forest to respond in 20 seconds.

[Mariève Forest]

I wasn't going back that far in that regard.

As French-language post-secondary institutions have grown in recent years, one cannot think that the strength of an institution that has been around for 20 years is the same as that of one that has been around for 100 or 150 years. Even though French-language institutions existed a long time ago, there has been more development on that front recently.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Ms. Forest.

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu.

Ms. Ashton, you now have the floor for the next six minutes.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My first question is for Ms. Forest.

You mentioned it in your statement, but I would like to know your thoughts on the situation of Laurentian University in Sudbury. In order to retain francophone students and workers and to have a vibrant francophone community, we need French-language educational institutions and universities like Laurentian University.

Why should it be a priority to provide French-language post-secondary education to French-language minority communities, particularly in Alberta, Ontario and New Brunswick?

[Mariève Forest]

Post-secondary institutions play an important role in identity construction. Other studies that have been conducted before ours have shown this as well. When they acquire this sense of linguistic security and competence, students are able to communicate easily in French, offer solutions in French, and develop partnerships when they enter the workforce. French-language post-secondary institutions contribute to this.

It is important to secure spaces within post-secondary institutions where French is fluent, where communications are in French. It is important that bilingual institutions, which operate in bilingual environments, have the opportunity to create those environments.

We have not further explored existing safeguards. However, given the current situation, I suspect that we could have identified gaps in this regard within Laurentian University.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

My next question is for Alain Dupuis of the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada.

Would you like to highlight any elements that the government should consider in modernizing the Official Languages Act?

[Alain Dupuis]

Yes, certainly.

Our response to the reform document that was introduced this winter was very positive. As I said, it addresses many of our concerns.

That said, there are a few things that we're following closely. Obviously, part VII of the Official Languages Act, which affects the development of English and French minority communities, needs to be strengthened and clarified. Currently, when we work with the federal government and the various departments, we do not have a clear definition of what constitutes a positive measure to support our development.

We need to define the concept of “positive measure” and we also need to define what it means to “consult with communities” when developing programs. In the past, some governments have been less likely to consult with communities, and unfortunately this has resulted in programs being created that are parachuted in and do not meet the needs of those communities.

Then I would say that it is very important for the federal government to support the “by” and “for” that I was mentioning, which is the ability of communities to do their own development. Sometimes this is done through transfers to the provinces and territories, but often it can also be done through direct investments in institutions that will manage funds on behalf of the federal government. This is in keeping with the idea that communities are development partners of the federal government, not just groups to be funded. From this perspective, federal assistance to communities should be used to strengthen community ownership.

I have talked about transfers to the provinces and territories. The federal government transfers a great deal of money for health, education and infrastructure to the provinces and territories. However, we often can't follow that money and we can't demonstrate that it has any impact on our communities. We could transfer billions of dollars in infrastructure to the provinces by including a language clause that would require the provinces to consult the minority to find out their infrastructure needs. This would ensure that the provinces and territories take our needs into account when setting their priorities, which directly impact our communities.

One final element of part VII is very important to us, and that is the issue of francophone immigration. In 2003, the federal government set a target of 4% for francophone immigration and this target has never been reached. The demographic weight of francophones continues to fall year after year, and the target of 4.4% for 2023 is therefore no longer sufficient. A new catch-up and repair target must be established to ensure that the demographic weight of our communities will increase in the future, rather than stay the same or decline.

I will stop here. These ideas for supporting community development stand out to us.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Thank you.

Ms. Forest, how do you see the modernization of the Official Languages Act? What are your thoughts on this project?

[Mariève Forest]

If you look at the different dynamics that exist in post-secondary institutions, this modernization perspective is quite interesting. This is also true for immigration.

There is also the idea of approaching the French issue in a different way, which was promoted in the white paper. We did studies on English-language post-secondary institutions in Quebec. When we looked at the numbers for post-secondary institutions, we found that treating English-speaking minorities in Quebec and French-speaking minorities outside of Quebec equally was a problem.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, MB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Ms. Ashton.

Thank you, Ms. Forest.

We'll start another round that will last five minutes this time.

Mr. Godin and Mr. Williamson will have the next five minutes.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

If I have any time left, I'll gladly give it to my colleague, Mr. Williamson. However, when you're passionate, sometimes you don't see the time go by. I hope that I'll be able to give him the floor.

I have a few questions, but I'll start by thanking the representatives of three organizations who came to speak today.

I'll start by asking Mr. Dupuis a question.

Mr. Lefebvre referred earlier to the previous Conservative government for political purposes. I, for one, am very proud of what the Conservatives did for the francophonie. I'll ask you a very simple question, Mr. Dupuis.

A budget was tabled last week. Since the start of this meeting, you have referred more than once to the importance of creating opportunities to use French in everyday life. Of course, these opportunities must be available in post-secondary institutions, but you also talked about the pre-school years.

Have you suggested to the current government that, as part of the child care program, the provinces be required to open French-language daycares in provinces with French-speaking minorities?

Has this been proposed to the government?

[Alain Dupuis]

Absolutely. We spoke about this with Minister Mélanie Joly last week.

We'll also be submitting arguments to Minister Ahmed Hussen to make sure that a very clear language provision will ensure that the provinces consider the French-speaking minority when setting up these child care programs.

There's a shortage of 5,000 spaces in French-language daycares outside Quebec. There's work to be done. Before money is transferred, this will need to become a federal obligation.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

This is a great opportunity to support these minorities, Mr. Dupuis.

However, in the budget, I didn't see any mention of support for francophone minorities outside Quebec.

My next question is for Ms. Forest.

Ms. Forest, you identified a recurring issue that gets carried forward from year to year. You spoke about tuition fees, which are playing an increasingly significant role in the management of the operating budgets of institutions. This is one issue, but not the only one. We're seeing this in the case of Laurentian University. It's perfectly legitimate for institutions to try to remain competitive and make ends meet. However, at some point, they stray from their objectives and values.

How can we find a solution to prevent this decline? Being what it is, money is needed to run an institution such as a university.

[Mariève Forest]

That's a big question.

In 2018-19, 46% of the revenue for post-secondary institutions came from governments. The federal government's share was around 10%, and just over 25% came from tuition. Those are the main revenues for post-secondary institutions.

If we want institutions to become less dependent on tuition fees, more government investment is needed. In my view, this option is the priority. In addition, it's important to understand the following dynamic. Institutions have been able to increase tuition revenues largely because of international students, which is another issue. This issue goes well beyond official languages. However, it's more difficult to develop strategies to recruit international students. Also, the western academic units have had many financial issues in this area.