Debates of Nov. 25th, 2020

Status of the French Language in Montreal

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Madam Chair, I commend my colleague for his passion for the French language.

I also commend my colleague from Acadia who reminded us that René Lévesque was born in his neck of the woods.

Before I ask my question, I want to tell my colleague and the people watching us that I am pleased that this work is being done. There was a debate this evening, but the Standing Committee on Official Languages will focus on the decline of French in Quebec and across the country starting next week. I am pleased to have worked with the hon. member from the Bloc Québécois on this initiative. We will continue to work to advance linguistic duality in Canada.

The hon. member talked about the decline of French's appeal in Montreal. I would like him to explain to me how French can be made more attractive in order to maintain this duality at the heart of Canada's francophone engine.

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

Madam Chair, the Government of Quebec has been promising for quite some time to strengthen Bill 101. That could help.

I want to point out to my colleague from Mount Royal that Bill 101 seeks to make French the common language. We did not want to do what English Canada did to francophones when it banned French institutions and education. We maintained English institutions for the historic anglophone community. However, those should be exceptions. Other than that, services should be offered everywhere in French. As a result, newcomers will need to learn French and integrate.

I found it very surprising that a unionist like the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie is saying that incentives are required but not legislative measures, such as requiring a knowledge of French. If newcomers do not think it is essential to speak French, then they will not be interested in French language training initiatives.

It takes both of these things. As with health and safety at work, if there is no incentive, almost nothing happens.

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

Madam Chair, I thank my colleague.

He just set the stage for my question. First, I would like to correct certain facts. The federal court challenges program was originally used by francophone minorities throughout the federation to uphold their rights. I think it is very important to remind members of that.

I think it is too bad to hear my Bloc Québécois colleague say that immigrants are not interested in learning French. I am shocked by the statement he just made.

Both the Government of Quebec and the federal government have made it hard for new immigrants, especially those who do not yet have permanent status, to access free French classes. I believe that instead of imposing restrictive or punitive measures, especially towards refugees whom we need to take in because they are fleeing war zones and prejudice, we must do the opposite and improve access to French classes.

It is unbelievable coming from the Bloc Québécois.

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

Madam Chair, my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie is distorting what I said. The federal court challenges program has helped francophones outside Quebec. We have nothing against it. In Quebec, however, it was used to challenge Bill 101.

Some immigrants are interested in French classes, but several teachers who give these classes have noted that, for many, it is not as important because they believe it is more important to learn English to find a job in Montreal.

I fail to see anything coercive about this. Does my colleague believe that imposing the requirement to learn English is coercive? Right now, someone can come to Quebec, take their citizenship test in English only and obtain citizenship in Quebec. It is consistent with what is happening. Just because we are doing a good job, does not mean that we cannot do better.

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Immigration]

Madam Chair, like my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, I am also rather surprised by what the member for La Pointe-de-l'Île said.

I would like to quote the 2016 Samson report, which states that the decrease in French integration in Quebec is not attributable to a lack of interest in the French language on the part of immigrants or a lack of dedication on the part of those helping immigrants to learn French but to a lack of resources for French integration.

The Canada-Quebec accord gives Quebec a lot of authority over French integration and the selection of immigrants, especially in the economic stream.

What does the member think about the Canada-Quebec accord, which gives Quebec a lot of authority over immigration?

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

Madam Chair, the accord does not give Quebec a lot of authority.

Quebec has a certain amount of power to select economic immigrants, but it does not have any authority when it comes to refugees or people who immigrate under the family reunification program.

Furthermore, the federal government is currently putting most of its budget toward teaching English as a second language. There is a lot less money going to teaching French as a second language.

I think it is about 4%. I will check the exact numbers in the study that was just done.

[The Deputy Chair, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I would like to remind the parliamentary secretary that if she wants to ask more questions, she needs to rise so that I can give her the floor.

The hon. member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Madam Chair, I would like my colleague to clarify something for me.

I was surprised to hear in my esteemed colleague's speech that the official languages budget envelope was used exclusively by English-language organizations like the Quebec Community Groups Network, for example.

What impact does this have on the subject of this debate, namely the status of the French language in Montreal?

Should there not be a balance?

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

Madam Chair, absolutely. As we know, the Official Languages Act was intended to strengthen English in Quebec and French outside Quebec. It was not enough, but at least some funding was allocated to that end. All the funding to promote institutional bilingualism, when Bill 101 was being established—not against individual bilingualism, but against institutional bilingualism—undermines the application of Bill 101. Frédéric Lacroix spoke of the federal government's undermining of Bill 101. If the government will not recognize this, if it will not recognize that the very principle of the Official Languages Act goes against Bill 101, we will not get very far.

We would definitely like to see concrete measures. The ones we are proposing are rather minor. It is not a good sign that the government does not support them. It gives the impression that the Liberals are making their statements out of political expediency. I hope it is more than that.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

To be honest, Madam Chair, I am a little disappointed in the Bloc's narrative this evening.

It is too bad the Bloc Québécois leader contributed nothing substantive even though this is an extremely important debate. The member just said that newcomers to Quebec do not want to learn French, which is patently false. I have lived in Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean, in the Eastern Townships, in Montreal and in the Outaouais, and I have never met a newcomer to Quebec who did not want to learn French. The problem is a shortage of resources, courses and training. To top it off, the Government of Quebec recently cut access to French classes for refugees.

Can the member comment on the unavailability of French classes for newcomers to Quebec, a problem resulting, unfortunately, from decisions made by the Government of Quebec?

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

Madam Chair, firstly, I did not say that all immigrants do not want to learn French. Many immigrants want to learn French, but there are also those who see that English is much more significant. They are in Canada, and they would rather learn English. The federal government mainly funds English as a second language teaching.

If there is one thing that should be changed, that is it. We have to stop—

[The Deputy Chair, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I am sorry, I allowed a bit more time and it is now 10:32 p.m.

It being 10:32 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 53.1, the committee will rise.

(Government Business No. 2 reported)

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at , pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 10:32 p.m.)