Official Languages Committee on June 20th, 2022

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

I agree with you: this bill has to be passed very soon.

You mentioned that the bill was realistic. What are the current deficiencies that this bill would correct?

[Linda Cardinal]

All bills have deficiencies. I don't want to underscore the deficiencies; I want to emphasize what's good.

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

I meant existing deficiencies that this bill would help correct.

[Linda Cardinal]

Oh, I see.

I'm one of the many people who said that the objectives of the Official Languages Act of 1988 were excellent. The problem is in the implementation. In addition, the government has equipped itself with tools that don't correspond to the objects of the act. For example, we had to wait 13 years for the government to start implementing part VII of the act. Once it had started, it established action plans, but the action plans were subject to the ideologies of the political parties, as a result of which their directions constantly changed. It's very difficult in the circumstances to establish measurable objectives that reveal the impact of…

[Arielle Kayabaga, Liberal, London West, ON]

Ms. Cardinal, I have only a few seconds left. I'm going to let you complete your thought, but I wanted to thank you for understanding the importance of supporting and adopting this bill.

[Linda Cardinal]

Thank you, but I won't be expanding on the subject. I'm going to give others an opportunity to ask questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Ms. Cardinal.

Thank you, Ms. Kayabaga.

The second vice-chair of the committee, Mario Beaulieu, will be the next speaker.

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

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Cardinal, you've previously written that "the future of French in North America is being determined in Quebec because it is the only francophone state on the continent. Its survival will likely depend on either the creation of a sovereign francophone state or a redefinition of Canadian federalism in which the territorial principle plays a larger role."

Do you still think that?

[Linda Cardinal]

Yes, absolutely.

I know only a fool never changes his mind, and I know I can change mine, but I'm entirely comfortable with what I wrote. What's more, Mr. Beaulieu, since you quote the same passage every time I appear before this committee, I'm starting to be familiar with it.

I absolutely agree that the future of French is being determined in Quebec, particularly in Montreal. That's the first thing.

Second, I think that Canadian federalism has to be as flexible as possible because we know that, when federalism allows national minorities or minority nations a little flexibility, societies are more democratic. You can see that around the world.

Third, the territorial principle is definitely important. The 19th century theoreticians such as Otto Bauer and Karl Renner always said that it's the territory that's important for minorities. In our case, we have trouble with the territory, of course, but we also have the principle of institutional completeness. In francophone minority communities, we need institutions that are managed by and for francophones. That's what has to be reinforced. As regards positive measures and institutional completeness, the purpose of the bill is precisely to reinforce—

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

Thank you, Ms. Cardinal. I apologize for interrupting, but we don't have much time to ask our questions.

You say there's a broad understanding on the principle of territoriality in Quebec, but if that's the case, why did the Quebec government feel compelled to submit its demands last week? It previously released a document on its broader orientations, but, except for some superficial considerations, it contains nothing on the subject. This is what Quebec is trying to do, but the government of the Canadian majority is imposing its language law and instead promoting English as an official language in Quebec.

How can you think we need to pass this bill quickly, when it doesn't meet Quebec's demands and will do nothing to reverse the decline of French in Quebec?

[Linda Cardinal]

I don't know if I can really change your mind since you've previously said you'd vote against the bill.

I never said we were living in the best of all possible worlds. The Official Languages Act applies to the areas of federal government jurisdiction across the country. It guarantees the advancement of English and French. It should not be forgotten that the new bill acknowledges the fact that French is a vulnerable language across North America and in Canada. That includes Quebec. I think that acknowledgement constitutes major progress.

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

We acknowledge that principle, but what we requested was that only one of the two official languages be considered a minority language. However, that's not at all what's in Bill C‑13, which still employs the concept of an official language minority to define anglophones in Quebec. Consequently, all of the federal government's actions in Quebec are designed to reinforce English there. The positive measures for French-speaking Quebec are more negative because their sole aim is to reinforce English in Quebec. If that doesn't change, the federal government will continue to be a very prominent factor in the anglicization of Quebec.

[Linda Cardinal]

I don't know exactly how you want me to answer you.

First of all, this bill should be viewed as a compromise. It acknowledges that substantive equality is one of the principles that must guide the way language rights are interpreted. It recognizes the substantive equality of English and French based on the objective of the progressive equality of the two languages.

The bill could also have significant benefits for French as a scientific language in Quebec. Nothing in the bill would require the federal government to promote French as a scientific language in Quebec, quite the contrary: the federal government must promote French as a scientific language across the country.

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

With respect to scientific languages, we note that 40% of federal government research grants go to anglophones, but that's beyond the scope of the Official Languages Act.

My next question is for you, Ms. Chouinard.

You've written at length about the Laurendeau-Dunton Commission, which was something of a missed opportunity. I think André Laurendeau wanted special status for Quebec. That's consistent with the position of the Quebec government, which demands that Quebec alone be responsible for language planning within its borders.

Aren't we be headed for another missed opportunity under Bill C‑13?

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

You have 20 seconds in which to answer.

[Stéphanie Chouinard]

Mr. Beaulieu, I think you've mistaken me for someone else. You're probably talking about Valérie Lapointe-Gagnon, who is a historian on the Campus Saint-Jean and who has written an excellent book on the Laurendeau-Dunton Commission.

I'll stop there since I only had 20 seconds.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Ms. Chouinard.

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu.

I now give the floor to Ms. Ashton from Manitoba for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to the witnesses for being with us today.

My first question is for Ms. Chouinard.

The Association des collèges et universités de la francophonie canadienne criticized the official languages in education program in its presentation to the committee. That program doesn't fund institutions based on their mission, but rather by project, and does so with mandatory matching contributions from the provinces.

Mr. Normand noted that it would be constitutional to enter into agreements directly with the educational institutions in order to provide them with better funding because that would meet the federal government's mandate under part VII of the Official Languages Act.

Ms. Chouinard, you appeared before the committee a little more than a year ago to tell us about the deficiencies in funding for post-secondary educational institutions. You explained that post-secondary education in francophone communities across Canada was in crisis and that the federal government needed to step in to resolve it. We agree with what you told the committee. We think the government could play that role by including language clauses in its agreements with the provinces or by defending French and francophones' rights, as the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne du Canada proposes.

What do you think of the FCFA's proposal to add language clauses to the bill and to define the federal government's responsibilities in its agreements with the provinces?

[Stéphanie Chouinard]

Thank you for that question.

Yes, I alluded to that appearance in my statement.

Language clauses would definitely help solve the problem and enable the federal government to make foundational investments in post-secondary education while ensuring that the provinces don't disengage and that they continue to invest as much as they should in the institutions within their own borders. The federal government could provide additional assistance to help those institutions meet the special challenges they face in minority communities.

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

Thank you, Ms. Chouinard.

My next question is for Ms. Cardinal.

Similarly, you told the committee last year that part VII of the Official Languages Act would enable the federal government to use its spending power to ensure that francophone minority communities have access to funding. The Action Plan for Official Languages 2018–2023, for example, is based on that.

Would it be consistent with the federal government's mission if it entered into agreements with institutions that provide services to minority language communities?

[Linda Cardinal]

Thank you very much for that question, Ms. Ashton. In many respects, it's related to the one you asked Ms. Chouinard.

Part VII is clear. The term "positive measures" is clear and means any measure that can enhance the vitality of the linguistic minorities. Part VII must also be viewed in light of an objective to assist the minority communities, particularly those in the Canadian francophonie. The aim is to establish institutions and services that are managed by and for francophones. I think that's the measure that must be used to determine precisely whether the objective is achieved. So if you entered into agreements with institutions, universities and communities to provide services managed by and for francophones, that would really be very good.

Regulations will have to be made once the bill passes. As regards language clauses, I think that the ministers who negotiate agreements with the provinces should be instructed to ensure that they contain those clauses. Very specific instructions will have to come from the Office of the Prime Minister.

As for the action plan, support for the development of community institutions is one element that clearly emerged from the consultations. I've taken part in some consultations, and there will be more of them. The communities have a very clear idea of what they want in the way of services by and for the communities, and they must be trusted.

We've discussed student mobility scholarship programs, national student scholarship programs, international student scholarship programs and so on. The list is very long and the needs are enormous. It will be possible to take the next step once the bill is passed.

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

Thank you.

My next question is for Ms. Chouinard.

You said that the immigration policy outlined in the bill was incomplete. Do you think we should use stronger language to set restorative targets for francophone communities?

In addition, if the policies fail, it will be because their implementation failed. If the bill goes further, the government will be forced to ensure that its policies are consistent with the act, hence the importance of using strong language.

[Stéphanie Chouinard]

Thank you, Ms. Ashton.

I absolutely agree with you. What we want to add to part VII regarding immigration will tend in the right direction. However, the bill must contain stronger language given the obvious lack of action on immigration in the past 20 years. It will also have to be followed by policies that must be implemented. Consequently, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada will have to monitor francophone immigration much more closely.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Ms. Ashton.

Thank you very much, Ms. Chouinard and Ms. Cardinal. This isn't the first time we've had you here, and you've shared your knowledge with us with passion, as you do every time.

As I said at the outset, our meeting will be shortened as result of voting in the House of Comments. Should you have any information that you were unable to give us and that you consider relevant, please send it to the clerk, who will then forward it to us.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

Contrary to what we've done in previous meetings, we haven't discussed whether we're continuing our meeting until 6:00 p.m.