Okay.
The subamendments are intended to give us more time to hear from witnesses. Initially, according to what was proposed, we were not going to hear any more witnesses. Mr. Godin's proposal was interesting because it gave us a little more time to hear from witnesses, but I think we still need more time. That's why we want to move the date to December 6, since there are a number of witnesses we haven't heard from.
Francophone and Acadian communities are not a monolithic group. Some communities have told us that the bill has to be significantly strengthened. There are also many diverse views that we did not hear. Some stakeholders confirmed that immersion schools, for example, promoted the assimilation of francophones and therefore it would be important to make amendments to the bill to enhance funding for schools where the students' first language is French. Alternatively, immersion schools should, at the very least, be run by and for francophones. I think everyone would like that. In short, francophone and Acadian communities are not a monolithic group, where everyone thinks alike. There are diverse views.
It's true that the situation in British Columbia is far from easy, as Mr. Vis was saying. We heard from Mr. Lepage. He is not from British Columbia, but he also had opinions that differed a bit from those of the other groups we heard. He talked about a right to redress, and I think francophones outside Quebec do have a right to redress, because of the ban on French-language education that was imposed for several generations.
Other witnesses were expected to bring forward important points of view. I'm thinking of all the groups that are funded under the Official Languages Act—