Official Languages Committee on June 10th, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Bussières.

We now go to Mr. Lefebvre for six minutes.

Go ahead, Mr. Lefebvre. You can share your time, if you like.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I will indeed be sharing my time with Ms. Lalonde.

Good afternoon, Mr. Bussières.

As you probably know, I hail from Kapuskasing. My mother graduated from Université de Hearst and Laurentian University; she was a social worker. We are very proud of that in my family. She was able to work from home. I fully understand how important small universities are in small communities, and Hearst is known as the Gallic village of Ontario.

I'd like you to talk about your small university and its resilience.

How did you make it through the difficult years?

In its 2020‑21 budget, the federal government announced an additional $121 million in support over the next two and a half years. What would that funding mean to you?

How would that investment help you?

[Luc Bussières]

Thank you for your question, Mr. Lefebvre.

There is something I often say about the institution's resilience. The fact that Université de Hearst is still around nearly 70 years after its founding is attributable, first and foremost, to the strong momentum created by its founders. Second, its resilience is the mark of all those teams of people who came afterwards. Third, it is the product of our ability to innovate and bounce back. That, too, is resilience. We had to be extremely imaginative to get where we are, to say nothing of our stubbornness and determination.

The potential of receiving additional federal support for official languages is very encouraging. I said that, in the past 11 years, we had run seven budget deficits. Aside from working tirelessly, what we have frequently done is turn to the provincial government or elsewhere for one-off grants, which do not help with core operating requirements. That's where the additional burden comes in. The money gives us the ability to enhance certain aspects of the university, but it does not help with core operations. That is where we need the extra help; that would be the best possible support we could receive.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

I think the committee members need to hear a bit about your reality and your budget shortfall vis‑à‑vis your provincial and federal funding. You said you had a budget of $8 million. Would $9 million give you more peace of mind?

How can you grow your university and help it thrive?

Tell us about your resources and the things you could accomplish if you had more.

[Luc Bussières]

If I go by the numbers from the board of governors, I would put our structural deficit at somewhere between $600,000 and $1 million.

With that money, we could do things properly and grow the university. We just received our charter, and people will, of course, be expecting us to expand the programming and services we offer. We can't do that, however, with our current resources. Year after year, we still struggle to survive.

[Paul Lefebvre, Liberal, Sudbury, ON]

Thank you, again, and congratulations on your charter. I know you were waiting for that. It makes me very proud. Keep up the great work.

I will now give Ms. Lalonde the rest of my time.

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Lefebvre.

My question is for Ms. Brouillette.

As we've heard, the provinces and territories submit action plans to the federal government, and those plans set out the priority areas for the funding of official language minority communities.

Where do the consultations between minority communities and provincial and territorial governments stand? Could you also talk about French-language school board groups at the elementary and secondary level? I'm interested in the post-secondary dimension as well.

Do you know whether the consultation process is the same in the francophone community?

[Lynn Brouillette]

That's a good question, but association members like Mr. Bussières may be better people to ask about the consultations with provinces.

We have 22 institutions among our membership, so it's important to understand that the challenges they face are many and extensive, as well as widely varying. Our job is to find solutions, and we are hoping for federal support for our network of institutions.

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

I think that this was brought up earlier. My colleague spoke about the budget, the $121 million for post‑secondary education. The document on the reform of the Official Languages Act talks about the education continuum.

Ms. Brouillette, a number of witnesses emphasized the need for asymmetrical funding for the benefit of official language minority communities. The argument was made that the anglophone and francophone systems shouldn't be funded in the same way.

Other than an increase in federal funding, what changes does this mean for the provincial and territorial post‑secondary education system?

[Lynn Brouillette]

Could you quickly repeat the question, please?

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

Mr. Chair, may I?

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Yes, you may, Mrs. Lalonde.

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

The argument was made for asymmetrical funding for the benefit of official language minority communities.

Other than an increase in federal funding, what changes does this mean for the provincial and territorial post‑secondary education system?

[Lynn Brouillette]

I can't necessarily comment on what this might mean for the provinces, because we deal with the federal government. That's our area of expertise, so to speak.

As I said in my remarks, the important thing will be to review the administrative mechanisms. The political will is there, of course. We've seen that. There's also the further $121 million in the 2018‑23 action plan for official languages. The amounts are significant. However, the administrative mechanisms must be implemented.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Ms. Brouillette.

Mr. Beaulieu, you have the floor for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I also want to thank all our witnesses for joining us.

My first question is for Mr. Poirier.

Mr. Poirier, you dared to identify a phenomenon that's rather taboo, a bit like the elephant in the room. That phenomenon is francophobia. Yet the entire history of Canada has been marked by anti‑French legislation. Even today, French is constantly being pushed aside. French‑language post‑secondary institutions are underfunded.

Could you provide more examples and explain what you mean by “francophobia”?

[Jean Poirier]

I've noticed that francophobia appears mainly in the English‑speaking media. Like all of you, I read the articles published. Some of the readers' comments are appallingly francophobic. I don't understand why English‑speaking society allows these types of comments.

I've been experiencing this for 50 years. Even at Queen's Park, I felt like an alien. I look like Colonel Sanders, the developer of the Kentucky Fried Chicken chain. However, I still felt like an alien. We keep hearing rude questions and comments.

What do the French want? You don't speak real French.

I've heard things from all parties, at all levels, that I couldn't repeat. They forgot about the francophone activist in the room. It's always the same thing, and it's still happening. It's as if, in English Canada, all phobias, except for francophobia, are absolutely terrible. Attacks against francophones are tolerated and supported. What I saw at Queen's Park really threw me. I thought that I would find support. However, I spent my time trying to explain the francophonie outside Quebec and the francophonie in Quebec, and how they're different and how they have their own characteristics. I realized that there are two kinds of blind people in the world. I have tremendous respect for the blind people with the white canes. Yet there are willfully blind people who don't want to see or accept that our needs are different.

As Mr. Godin said, French‑language educational institutions must be as attractive as English‑language institutions. If we were to list the programs available in French outside Quebec and in English outside Quebec, you would see quite a disparity. This discourages many francophones.

I'll go back to francophobia. I don't accept that it's tolerated today. No phobia should be tolerated, whether it's against francophones, Muslims or Black people. It must be strongly condemned.

Most people don't want to understand that our needs are different, so you'll need to help us make them understand. We're in catch‑up mode. Smaller universities such as Hearst need special assistance to launch many diverse and quality programs. When it comes time for young people to choose a university, they must think that it's worthwhile to study at a francophone university.

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

What do you think about the fact that English‑language universities and CEGEPs in Quebec are overfunded? English‑language universities received 38.4% of federal grants from 2010 to 2017.

What do you mean by asymmetry?

[Jean Poirier]

I'm talking about that issue, among other things.

I read the report that one of the witnesses submitted last week and I saw the statistics. These amounts are the stuff of dreams for francophones outside Quebec. I would love to get my hands on these types of amounts. With all due respect to English‑language universities, the imbalance is obvious. That's why I hope to see an asymmetrical approach to help francophones achieve this equality or this reality that everyone is talking and bragging about.

This must be put into practice. If that means taking some money from large educational institutions that have long‑standing networks, let's do it. They've been around for a long time. They have large networks that fund or help fund their institutions. We don't have those networks. Our institutions are recently established and new. We're starting from scratch, in some cases.

When I saw these figures, my head was spinning. I wondered what I was seeing. It was like a winning lottery ticket.

The difference between the amount given to anglophones in Quebec and the amount given to francophones outside Quebec is enormous. This must be reviewed. I urge you to review this.

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

Thank you, Mr. Poirier.

I have a question for Mr. Bussières.

I gather that the Université de Hearst wants to become a university by and for francophones. It's a bit like the Université de Sudbury.

Can you talk about the importance of post‑secondary institutions by and for francophone and Acadian communities?

[Luc Bussières]

Thank you for the question.

First, our part of Ontario is the Far North. Sudbury is in the Mid‑North. Several witnesses have referred to this.

If the question were asked here, in the Far North, we would say that, obviously, it has made a difference. In the consultations regarding the creation of the Université de l'Ontario français, which took place starting in 2017, we were asked what we thought about it. At that time, we responded that, if we didn't have this type of educational institution in the Far North, we would have strongly argued for the right to have something of that nature. We would certainly support the creation of an equivalent entity for central southwestern Ontario, which really didn't have many services. Those are two examples. Now we're wondering about this matter in Sudbury because of what happened with Laurentian University. That could be a third example.

Francophones have the reflex and the right to make requests, to do things their way and to ensure that their needs are met.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Bussières.

Mr. Boulerice, you have the floor for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Bussières, last Tuesday, we asked some of your colleagues at the Campus Saint‑Jean of the Université de Moncton point blank if what happened at Laurentian University could also happen to them in the short or medium term. They painted a rather bleak picture of the situation.

In the case of your own university, do you share their views?

[Luc Bussières]

Thank you for the question.

In 2017, when the Conservatives came to power in Ontario, there was obviously an ambition to look at the situation in all sectors and all departments. At that time, Premier Ford's office called a meeting that focused on our university and its sustainability, given our financial challenges. As I said earlier, a few too many years of deficits had accumulated. At one stage, we had money, but at that point, we didn't have any.

Since then, we've been able to turn things around. However, as I said earlier, we've done so mainly as a result of two temporary solutions: the race for one‑time grants to get through the year and a major international recruitment effort.

In 2013, we didn't have any international students. Now, international students make up 60% of our student population. It took a tremendous amount of effort to reach this point. We had to put together a bunch of new services and show a new level of awareness. We're very pleased and very proud of what we've done. However, we've somewhat reached the limits of our ability to respond.

The situation here has always been a concern, as I said, and it remains one. It's fragile. If you add something like the COVID‑19 pandemic or any other unpredictable situation of that nature, it becomes even more of a concern.

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

In your presentation, you spoke about the need for more federal government support. You also talked about the need for new permanent programs. I just want to make sure that I fully understand this.

You're talking about support programs from the federal government, not training programs at your university, right?

One may be linked to the other. One can lead to the other. Isn't that right?