Official Languages Committee on June 10th, 2021

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

This is reflected in the budget and in the previous action plan, which allocated $500 million to community organizations for exactly that purpose.

Thank you very much, Mrs. Cardinal.

Mr. Hastir, I really appreciated Marie‑Pierre's story. It certainly touches me greatly. We talk a lot about Laurentian University and what is happening in the north.

What do you, as young people, think are the major problems in francophone post‑secondary institutions?

If I can ask you again, do you feel that young people are sufficiently represented at the decision‑making table on the boards and senates of francophone and bilingual universities?

[François Hastir]

With respect to the first question, we have to distinguish the problems in francophone institutions from those in bilingual institutions, because they are quite different.

In the bilingual institutions, the glaring problems are related to the issue of assimilation, even if the courses are provided in French. Because student life is predominantly lived in English, students who arrive at the post‑secondary level will very often develop a network that is mostly English‑speaking, be it their circle of friends, the network of professors or the university network. It will also follow them.

At the same time, what we often see and hear from students is that programs are not always offered in French in those institutions, and that it depends on the program. At the University of Ottawa, programs are offered in French when there is a critical mass of students, but in other programs, if the university considers that it does not have the critical mass, the students will have to take certain courses in English. If they want to do their studies in French, it will take them five or six years instead of four. These issues are significant for students, and taking courses in English contributes to the assimilation once again.

In francophone institutions, the problem is a little different. We were talking about it earlier, in terms of the funding disparity. Funding is often based on the number of students enrolled and the number of courses and programs offered. But francophone institutions are often in small, rural and remote communities. This must be taken into consideration.

Clearly, the other aspect that must be taken into consideration is the reputation of the universities. Francophone universities, such as the Université de l'Ontario français, which was created from scratch, or even the Université de Sudbury, which exists but is less well known because it comes under the umbrella of Laurentian University, will not have the same reputation, nationally and internationally, as institutions such as York University and Queen's University.

Finally, when we talk about funding, it must also be for research. I'm sure Mrs. Cardinal will be able to speak to that as well, because our problem is that professors are often encouraged to publish in English because more can be published as a result and more money goes to the university. This is the case in bilingual institutions. It means that there are fewer teaching materials in French.

As for the question of whether students should play a greater role in the universities, we think that is obvious. It would allow for greater accountability. It would also allow for more dialogue and collaboration on decisions. In bilingual institutions, it would allow for separate anglophone and francophone representation, rather than having one common body that sometimes speaks more for the majority than for the minority.

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

Thank you, Mr. Hastir.

Mr. Chair, if I have a few seconds left, I would ask Mrs. Cardinal to comment on what Mr. Hastir said.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

You have 15 seconds, Mrs. Cardinal.

[Linda Cardinal]

We are talking about the institutions whose governance is by and for francophones. When I say that universities in minority communities are the new community centres, it is precisely because they have become levers for the economic, social, cultural and artistic development of the communities. Traditional cultural centres have played an important role. Some have become performance venues, for example. However, in terms of development, the universities make it happen. That is why we need to put these universities back in charge.

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

Are the OLMCs consulted—

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Mrs. Lalonde, your time is up.

Thank you, Mrs. Cardinal.

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

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

Thank you.

My first question is for Mr. Hastir.

Mr. Hastir, I find your comments really interesting.

I have often been told that primary and secondary immersion schools lead to the assimilation of francophones. I have heard this less about post‑secondary education. Mrs. Cardinal seems to be of the same opinion.

Can you tell us a little more about that?

Do you think that federal assistance should really support post‑secondary institutions by and for francophones?

[François Hastir]

I can speak briefly about that. We receive complaints every year. We have annual conferences where students are present, and these discussions come up every time.

One example is that students have not received their services in French. They have access to the course in French, but all the course materials are in English, so they have to adapt. Some courses are not offered because there are only seven or eight francophone students. So they are transferred to a class where there might be four or five anglophones. We hear these stories often and they keep coming up.

Unfortunately, it's very difficult to get statistics on that because the province doesn't collect them now, and we, as an organization, don't get the funds to collect them. That is a problem. Even though we have the complaint forms and so on, with all the other tasks that are not funded, it is much more difficult to gather the data.

That's why I was saying earlier that it is important to have a budget allocation for community education organizations to collect and compile all the data for educational institutions.

To answer your second question, namely how the federal government can assist other than financially, I can tell you that education falls under provincial jurisdiction. So the federal government can hardly come in tomorrow morning and say it wants to create institutions by and for francophones.

However, if we really define the obligations attached to the funding from the OLEP or other programs intended for OLMCs, there is at least one way to ensure that the money is not used for other purposes. Right now, the federal government transfers the money to the provinces, which then use it in a variety of ways.

In fact, I have been trying to find statistics on how much Laurentian University receives from the OLEP funding. It's hard to get those numbers because most institutions don't want to disclose them. Even the province doesn't want to disclose it. Once transferred, that money can be used in a variety of ways.

In the case of Laurentian University, we saw that the money was used for purposes not directly related to the OLEP. So it's really important to use it properly.

I think there have to be legal obligations attached to the money that comes from the reform of the Official Languages Act. We need to tell the institutions that are receiving federal money for official languages programs that they have obligations with respect to the services they provide.

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

Thank you.

Earlier, Ms. Brouillette, from the Association des collèges et universités de la francophonie canadienne, said—I'm paraphrasing her—that communities can only be strong if their institutions are strong as well. This refers somewhat to the concept of institutional completeness. In Quebec, Frédéric Lacroix has spoken at length about this.

We know that, in Quebec, anglophone universities receive 30% of the provincial budget allocated to post‑secondary institutions, and over 38% of federal research grants. In Ontario, francophones make up 4.7% of the population but receive only 3% of the envelope, much of which is scattered among bilingual universities.

Mrs. Cardinal, how do you explain this imbalance? What do you think about the concept of the double majority? We know that the Official Languages Act is based on that, assuming that there is an anglophone majority outside Quebec and a francophone majority in Quebec. Sociologically, the vitality of the English language is the main concern in Quebec.

[Linda Cardinal]

In fact, Mr. Beaulieu, I think we should refer to Ms. Joly's document entitled “English and French: Towards a Substantive Equality of Official Languages in Canada,” because the concept of substantive equality is a game‑changer.

We are no longer talking about the double majority and so on. It is recognized that French is a vulnerable language in Canada and that it needs to be strengthened. Without it being strengthened, the equal progression of French and English is in question. The formal equality is being called into question.

In that sense, Ms. Joly's report provides relevant avenues for furthering the federal government's role in promoting substantive equality, particularly in promoting French, including outside Quebec.

It is also interesting to note that Ms. Joly's report refers to the importance of institutions managed by and for francophones. It talks about institutional completeness and post‑secondary educational institutions.

In my opinion, this report has everything it needs for firm action.

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

I will examine the report more closely.

However, I saw nothing in terms of action. I saw no intention to change or to recognize that Quebec should be the master of its own language planning. I saw nothing in terms of tangible action that leads to this recognition that French is the minority language everywhere.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Your time is up.

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

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My thanks to all our guests for joining us today.

Professor Cardinal, at the end of your presentation, you were very keen to explain your proposal for a policy in support of part VII of the act. The policy would have three components: vision, policy instruments and target audiences.

Can you tell us about that proposal?

[Linda Cardinal]

Thank you very much for the question, Mr. Boulerice.

A public policy is indeed based on those three components.

First, there is the vision. We have repeatedly asked the provincial governments to recognize that there are specific needs in terms of higher education in French in a minority setting. We expect this recognition from the provinces.

As I said earlier, the federal government should recognize that post‑secondary institutions do not just train people, but that they also play a key role in their communities and contribute to institutional completeness. That is why I am referring to part VII of the act.

If we accept this vision, which somewhat reframes the thinking on the support provided to higher education institutions, we will then have funding instruments. We could then consider creating a core funding program to stabilize the situation of institutions.

We could also develop a support program for research, because the federal government is very involved in this area. The Association francophone pour le savoir (Acfas) has just proposed a support program for researchers in the Canadian francophonie, the Service d'aide à la recherche en français (SARF). The Association will try to have Canadian Heritage fund this service.

Centres of excellence in research could also be created in all francophone institutions in minority settings in Canada. These centres of excellence would enable the small institutions to conduct research that would be beneficial for the institution. This is what the Université de l'Ontario français wants to do. Some researchers at the Université de Moncton are actually doing it. In my opinion, this is part of a vision for the future of francophone universities.

I also mentioned the funding of one‑time projects, such as our current ones. Such funding instruments will help make federal action in higher education more consistent, and embellish that action with the acknowledgement that higher education institutions play a key role in the development of their community.

The third component of the proposed policy support is the target audiences of universities, which are changing. Traditionally, the target audiences have been students and faculty. However, in terms of the new role of universities, all universities want to play a social role, but small universities do so in a particular way, because they have to deal with the vitality. The target audiences for small universities are employers, community groups, cultural groups, artists and creators. In a word, the target is the community as a whole.

The target audiences therefore become new stakeholders in the higher education community. Using the example of the Université de l'Ontario français, which represents a hub for all groups, we have seen that universities can play a unifying role in bringing a community together. Teaching and research will go hand in hand, and students will work with community groups to develop projects to serve those same groups.

Large universities dream of doing this, but have difficulty making the shift because of their size. The Université du Québec network is a really important case in point in this area, because each of its universities contributes to regional development. This has been recognized.

The federal government could also play a really worthwhile role through a policy that would attune its action, that would give it greater consistency and that would no longer pit it against the provinces. There's a whole area of federal‑provincial relations. The subject of higher education in French should be a permanent item on the agenda of the Ministerial Conference on the Canadian Francophonie. Earlier, we heard from Ms. Brouillette from the ACUFC, which will be holding a summit on higher education in French. Perhaps this will lead to an action plan.

The various types of actions must be coordinated to ensure that they are consistent. We must also ensure that, if English and French have meaning in Canada and if we recognize the role of universities for the majority, we must also do so for universities for the minority.

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

You also touched on the role that colleges and universities can play with respect to immigration.

[Linda Cardinal]

Yes, even small institutions are trying to attract international students. The example of Université de Hearst is fascinating in this regard.

International students are a major source of funding for all universities. That is why, during the pandemic, all universities decried the loss of international students. It may be less the case in Quebec, but in a minority setting, the loss of international students creates deficits.

That said, universities cannot be thought of solely in terms of customers and the market. In minority communities, not only do universities welcome professors and students from immigrant backgrounds, but they are also places that allow immigrants to feel included, particularly through welcoming activities. At the moment, we are recruiting teachers because there is a lack of francophone teachers in communities outside Quebec. We would like to see more immigration, because we want people from immigrant backgrounds to fill the shortage of teachers.

What I would like to see is a major international program for French instructors and French‑language teachers, to recruit teachers who are ready to come and work anywhere in francophone Canada, including Quebec. Immigration is so important for the future of francophone communities, and universities are key to this recruitment.

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

Thank you for your passion for the subject.

[The Chair, Liberal, Emmanuel Dubourg]

Yes, Mrs. Cardinal is well known for that.

Thank you, Mr. Boulerice.

We will start another round of questions, but the comments will be shorter, because I'll have a comment to make at the end of the session. So Mr. Godin and Mr. Lefebvre will have four minutes, and then Mr. Beaulieu and Mr. Boulerice will have two minutes.

Mr. Godin, you have the floor for four minutes.

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

Thank you for giving me the floor, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank the three witnesses. I may not have time to address each of them, because I only have four minutes.

Mrs. Cardinal, I find your comments to my colleague Mr. Boulerice very interesting. I listened carefully to your presentation. Throughout the study that we have conducted on this topic, I have been making observations. I don't want to get into the political dimension, but today I have come to the unfortunate conclusion that the federal government and the provincial governments across the country do not have the motivation, commitment and will to promote linguistic communities and give them the tools to improve access to services and to increase their visibility. I am talking about French in particular. I am from Quebec, but this is a major problem in the rest of Canada.

In their testimonies, witnesses have confirmed that students want to study in French. The clients are there, but the services are not. They are not given access to a variety of programs, which is unfortunate. I would like to hear what you have to say. You spoke earlier about target audiences. I think we're getting ahead of ourselves. As you said, the first part of a supportive policy is to establish a basis and a vision.

Do us a favour and explain how we can ensure that the priority for elected officials, both at the provincial and federal levels, is to promote and support both official languages in Canada.

[Linda Cardinal]

Listen, I would love to prepare the programs for all the political parties.

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

I don't want to get into the political realm, Mrs. Cardinal.

[Linda Cardinal]

You should all have the same concern.

The tools we have right now are Ms. Joly's report and the modernization of the Official Languages Act. All the provinces also have laws. So there is no lack of tools.

Some of my legal colleagues would like to see more pressure to include higher education in French in section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That said, section 16 of the charter guides the federal government's actions. In short, we have many instruments in Canada. It's the political will—

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

The problem is that it is not working. We make cuts, then we try to rebuild. Yes, there are policies at the federal and provincial levels, but give us a way to get results. Right now we are not getting results.

Laurentian University is a problem, but soon it will be Campus Saint‑Jean, or Université de Moncton. It's time to react. We have to stop being comfortable with programs and laws. Give us the tool that will enable us to be effective.

[Linda Cardinal]

My policy would be a good tool. Action needs to be consistent. Perhaps consistency is what is missing.

How did we actually arrive at a crisis like the ones affecting Campus Saint-Jean, the Université de Sudbury or the Université de l'Ontario français in Toronto? There is always the political context. As a political scientist, I can't help but talk about politics. That said, it's always a question of political context. The next time there's a speech about fiscal restraint, we may have a hard time making our concerns known. We will have to—