Official Languages Committee on Oct. 6th, 2022

[Guillaume Rousseau, Full Professor, Faculty of Law, Université de Sherbrooke, As an Individual]

Good afternoon, and thank you for this invitation to come and speak to you about Bill C‑13.

I would particularly like to thank and say hello to Mr. Beaulieu, whom I have been fortunate to meet. I would also like to say hello to my member of Parliament, the MP for Sherbrooke, Élisabeth Brière.

I will start with a review of a fundamental principle in law and in language policy. There are two major models: the model based on territoriality, where there is one language within a territory, and the model based on personality, where there are multiple official languages and each person chooses the language in which they want to receive services from the state.

I have found in my work that the studies are extremely clear, not to say unanimous: only the territorial approach, based on the idea of one official language per territory, can save a vulnerable language. It is therefore extremely important that there be one official language in Quebec, as set out in the Charter of the French Language. The federal government must align its policy with that Quebec policy based on territoriality insofar as possible.

I will illustrate this with a very concrete example. In Switzerland, where the territoriality-based model was adopted, the percentage of francophones rose from 18.4 to 22.9 per cent between 1970 and 2017: the francophone population of Switzerland increased by 4.5 per cent. In Canada, on the other hand, the francophone population fell from 25 to 20 per cent in the same years, a decline of 5 per cent. Obviously, other factors are in play, but it appears plain that the language policy model is the determining factor.

These are the considerations in light of which I study Bill C‑13. In my opinion, the bill must do more to reflect territoriality, in order to provide more protection for French in Quebec, which does not prevent application of the model based on personality in the other provinces. The model based on territoriality is essential for a vulnerable language, and more must absolutely be done for French in Quebec.

However, when the majority language is not vulnerable, like English in the other provinces, and to a lesser extent in Quebec, the personality-based approach, such as when services in French are offered in the other provinces, is not a problem, because English does not need the territorial approach.

The other major principle we must understand is asymmetry. We have to stop putting the situation of francophones in the other provinces on equal footing with the situation of anglophones in Quebec. After the last census, we saw the point to which French had declined everywhere in Canada, including in Quebec, with no equivalent decline in English. We must therefore consider asymmetry. The bill contains passages that support asymmetry and other passages that support symmetry. Bill C‑13 therefore needs to be much better realigned toward asymmetry. An asymmetric approach is needed in order to do more for French in Quebec, but also in the other provinces.

For example, in the new section 41(6)(c) proposed by Bill C‑13, it talks about the importance to linguistic minorities of having strong postsecondary institutions. That provision puts the situation of English Canadians and French Canadians on equal footing, when the reality is quite different.

Anglophone postsecondary institutions and research in English in Quebec are overfunded, while research in French is accordingly underfunded, and this affects me considerably as an academic. When I read that in the bill, I said to myself that the federal government is going to continue overfunding research in English and underfunding research in French. That is something that Bill C‑14 should correct. Asymmetry and the territorial model really need to be given precedence.

It is worth noting that Bill C‑13 enacts the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act. That is a step toward territoriality, because the intention is to protect the right to work in French and obtain services in French in Quebec and in majority francophone regions, which are essentially located in the areas surrounding Quebec. That is a very attractive territorial approach that holds up, scientifically, and could even make it possible to save French.

However, what is less desirable in this bill is that the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act proposes weaker protection of French than is offered by the Charter of the French Language. If the idea is to substitute that federal law for Bill 101, it is a step backward for French in Quebec. However, if that federal law is applied outside Quebec, it is more attractive.

We must also not forget that in Quebec, expertise in respect of support for private enterprises in language matters is the responsibility of the Office québécois de la langue française. We should therefore allow the Office to continue to play its role in Quebec. In the other regions, it could allow federal agencies to take its place.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Rousseau.

We will now begin the first round of questions, in which the members from each party will have six minutes.

The first questions will be asked by the first vice-chair of the Standing Committee on Official Languages, Joël Godin.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for participating in this exercise, Mr. Rousseau.

I also want to thank our two students, Arielle Warten and Houston Rifai. It is nice to see young people getting involved to defend their convictions. I can tell you that this is very much appreciated. These young people will always be welcome in the political arena.

In your presentation, Mr. Rousseau, you made a comment concerning the overfunding of anglophone postsecondary institutions in Quebec in connection with Bill C‑13. Could you explain what overfunding means, in concrete terms?

[Guillaume Rousseau]

Thank you for your question, Mr. Godin. When you welcome involvement by young people, I count myself in, too.

It is the new section 41(6)(c), as proposed by the bill, that deals with this aspect. This is the problem with the bill, which puts the anglophone minority in Quebec on equal footing with the francophone minorities in the other provinces. However, the federal government obviously must do much more for francophones in the other provinces. The principle of symmetry being applied is therefore problematic.

In concrete terms, when it comes to funding research, different criteria can be used. If we compare the demographic weight of our anglophone fellow Canadians in Quebec to the weight of the anglophone universities in that province, the postsecondary funding there is very much greater than what we might expect. That is an initial indicator of this overfunding.

Another indicator is research funding. When we compare the number of students in anglophone and francophone universities, we see that the major granting agencies like the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council grant much more money to the anglophone universities McGill, Concordia and, to a lesser extent, Bishop's, and this is unusual.

Research influences the language of work in universities, which train the elites and researchers of tomorrow. We already know the extent to which science is being developed much more in English and the extent to which English is increasingly demanded everywhere on the planet. If governments do not make efforts to have science done in other languages as well, this will be a step backward for French. Even when it comes to diversity of approaches in science, it is important to have more than one scientific language. At present, the federal government tends to give more funding to research in English in Quebec, and that is not ideal.

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

I am going to state a very personal opinion. We are talking about overfunding of anglophone postsecondary institutions in Quebec, but I might say that the question is much more one of underfunding of francophone postsecondary institutions elsewhere in Canada.

So are we going to solve that problem by cutting the anglophone funding in Quebec or by increasing francophone funding outside Quebec?

[Guillaume Rousseau]

In fact, I think we should, above all, increase research funding in French in Quebec.

I want to come back to the territorial approach. Certainly, we can fund research in French in the other provinces, and in fact Acfas is doing extraordinary work to promote research in French. However, studies show that what works is to help the language in the place where it is in the majority, where there is a big enough pool of students to organize conferences and invite colleagues from various institutions. There has to be a critical mass to fund research and there has to be a territorial approach to provide more funding for research in French in Quebec.

In the other provinces, the personality-based approach, which would let each researcher choose their language, can be used. Researchers who speak French or another language who want to do research in French in the other provinces would have to have that opportunity.

The studies are clear: the priority is to defend French in Quebec, and this calls for increasing research funding. If research funding is increased in Quebec without affecting the funding provided for research in English, the balance will be restored since, all proportions remaining the same, there will be less overfunding for research in English and more funding for research in French.

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

I am going to ask you a very simple question and I would appreciate a brief answer.

What are the necessary tools that you believe we should incorporate into Bill C‑13 in order to stop the decline of French in Canada starting the day after the new act comes into force?

[Guillaume Rousseau]

That is a big challenge.

A language policy consists of more than a bill, but a lot of things could be done.

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

As you say, it's very far-reaching.

Can you name three tools that could be put in place, as priorities, to stop the decline of French, the day after Bill C‑13 is put in place?

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

You have 40 seconds left.

[Guillaume Rousseau]

First, the whole question of the policy on francophone immigration is very important, both in Quebec and in the other provinces. Ideally, the Government of Quebec should have more power when it comes to immigration in order to have a coherent policy on immigration and integration. In addition, there should also be a federal policy on francophone immigration for the other provinces.

Second, in Quebec, Bill 101, or the Charter of the French Language, has to apply to private enterprises, given the expertise and experience of the Office québécois de la langue française. Private enterprises under federal jurisdiction in the francophone regions need to be brought under legislation on the use of French. That legislation has to be an expanded version of Bill C‑13 that is modeled more on the Charter of the French Language.

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

Mr. Rousseau, in fact, it is not a choice, it is an obligation, to use French in those enterprises.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

Thank you, Mr. Godin.

You will have a chance to come back to this subject later.

Mr. Rousseau, you will be able to add to your thoughts in your answers to the next questions.

Ms. Lattanzio, the floor is yours for six minutes.

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Thank you, Mr. President.

I first want to thank the witnesses for being with us today.

I'd like to begin by congratulating both Ms. Warten and Mr. Rifai for delivering their opening speech not only in English, but in French. I want to congratulate you on your bilingualism, as I believe that being bilingual in the province of Quebec, which is where I'm from, and in this country is an atout, as they say. It's a strength. Welcome.

I'm going to address my questions to both of you. Feel free to jump in, either one or both at the same time.

Members of this committee—and I can vouch for myself—are very concerned with the vitality of the English and French linguistic minority communities in Canada and the role our government can play in enhancing their vitality. For each of you, what are the challenges faced by the English-speaking community in Quebec?

[Arielle Warten]

First, let me say that we understand the importance of protecting and promoting French, and we also deeply care about our land's indigenous languages, many of which, unlike French, are in danger of extinction. However, community vitality as a concept is about more than language. It is about the health of a community and what it needs to survive.

English-speaking Quebeckers live in the only province where the use of language is restricted by provincial law. This has consequences, and we don't feel welcome in our own province.

Unemployment and economic security are major concerns for English-speaking Quebeckers. There are so many opportunities for bilingual people outside of Quebec, but we ask the federal government to provide programs that help English speakers, bilingual or not, find meaningful careers in Quebec, because we would like to work in the province we call home.

I would also like to mention that we know our language is not threatened. The vitality of our community, however, is dwindling because of the focus Ottawa places on language preservation as the principal marker of vitality.

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

I'm sorry, Ms. Warten, but can I ask you to slow it down a bit?

[Arielle Warten]

Yes. I'm sorry.

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

I'm taking notes and I want to make sure the interpreters get the right information.

I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. I hope you're not going to penalize me in my time. I just felt it was necessary for me to jump in.

[The Chair, Liberal, René Arseneault]

I stopped the clock. I was just about to ask Ms. Warten to slow down a bit.

Go ahead, Ms. Warten.

[Arielle Warten]

I'm sorry. Thank you for letting me know.

I would also like to mention that we know our language is not threatened. The vitality of our community, however, is dwindling because of the focus Ottawa places on language preservation as the principal marker of vitality.

To live in Quebec as an English speaker is to experience a political environment where we are told our existence is a threat to society. No matter what we do and no matter how bilingual or bicultural we are, we always feel like we are the “other”. We are the Anglos.

That being said, I would like to invite Houston to answer, if he has anything else to add.

[Houston Rifai]

My colleague covered it very well, but there was mention of the schooling system in Quebec, for example, where there are quite a few English universities. What is left out is that most students who are trained in these schools leave the province.

One of the big things I see in our community is that a lot of my colleagues and a lot of my friends, frankly, need to leave. They have to leave. I find myself being pulled to leave Quebec as well. This is left out of the conversation. Yes, the schooling system has a lot of students, but it creates a giant skills gap where the province pays to train us and we leave.

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

In essence, you're saying there's a brain drain going on in Quebec.

[Houston Rifai]

That would be correct.

[Patricia Lattanzio, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Okay.

I'm going to take you back to some of the statements that were made, like that Bill C-13 proposes to create new language rights for francophones only with respect to their communications with federally regulated businesses. As young English-speaking Quebeckers, you're saying you're feeling abandoned by the federal government in this proposal.

What changes or amendments would you like to see proposed for Bill C-13 to address this concern?

[Houston Rifai]

I think our statement was very specific to the factor of mentioning the French language act here in Quebec. We don't believe there should be any connection on this front because, frankly, the language act exists notwithstanding the Charter of Rights. Making reference to it sends the wrong message, for one thing. For another thing, it leaves the door open for future legislation that would limit our language rights here in Quebec.