:
It should be noted from the outset that the Conseil canadien de la coopération et de la mutualité is honestly unable to evaluate the impact of the current Roadmap as the cooperatives were unable to be partners in the Roadmap's implementation. We argued in favour of including a major economic development component in the current Roadmap, but our recommendation went unheeded.
Today we are back before you to propose that an economic development component be introduced in the next Roadmap. Our argument is simple: if the members of the francophone minority communities and Acadians cannot do business in their language, they are doomed to slow but certain assimilation.
It must be possible to discuss everything and to make every choice in French, whether it concerns family finances or the various necessary transactions of everyday life, in the areas of legal needs, medical care and tax payments. Otherwise, we quickly forget the terms associated with those notions in our mother tongue.
For more than 100 years, the cooperatives have been important players in maintaining, consolidating and developing the francophone and Acadian communities. They have played an essential role in ensuring their cohesion and integration into Canadian economic life.
Some of these experiences are well documented. We can cite the example of the Evangeline region in Prince Edward Island and that of the Lamèque and Miscou Islands in New Brunswick. In fact, the cooperative model has enabled those communities to live and work in their mother tongue through the introduction of measures to strengthen the use of their language in all areas of activity. It has enabled those communities to preserve and support their vitality, to organize and to live on the land they have chosen.
Cooperative development is a serious, effective, transparent and democratic business model. Unlike individual entrepreneurship, it is a collective business model that is largely unknown. It can be presented as an alternative to a possible entrepreneurial venture.
The strength of the cooperative model has been proven. An analysis of the survival rate of cooperatives conducted by the Quebec Ministry of Economic Development, Innovation and Export in 2008 showed that cooperatives have a much longer lifespan than private Quebec businesses. Four in 10 cooperatives have been in business for more than a decade, compared to two in 10 for all Quebec businesses.
However, cooperatives are not just another way to do business, but a specific, value-based business model that can be adapted to all sectors of activity and businesses of all sizes. At a time when a large part of the world's population is indignant, cooperatives can offer new sustainable economic development solutions and more consistent with communities' needs.
In addition, the Canadian government is currently making a significant effort to strengthen the Canadian economy and permit the creation of new businesses. In the circumstances, it could choose to cooperate closely with the cooperative movement to develop innovative and sustainable solutions.
Our commitment to cooperative development has been supported for a number of years by a program of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. It has also been supported by the efforts of existing cooperatives. You will find figures and actual results in the document that was distributed to you.
The Rural and Cooperatives Secretariat is the Government of Canada's entry point for all questions regarding the cooperative movement. The secretariat was recently invited to join the group of ministers working on the new Roadmap. We are pleased to support its efforts and hope the relationship will encourage recognition of the cooperative movement as an essential player in an economic development component that is included in the Roadmap.
Lastly, we support the implementation of an expanded pan-Canadian issue table involving the cooperative movement in order to develop a coherent national policy on economic and social development in which the cooperative movement would be invited to take part. We also believe the cooperative model must be recognized as an economic development tool, an essential business model for official language minority communities.
Thank you for your attention.
:
Mr. Chair, committee members and partners, on behalf of the board of directors of RDÉE Canada, the Réseau de développement économique et d'employabilité, my co-manager and member of the board, the Honourable Guy Le Blanc, and myself, I want to thank you for allowing us to appear before you today to tell you about the initiatives and remarkable results of RDÉE Canada and its network, which have been made possible through various federal government contributions.
Following our presentation, the committee will understand that the alliance between RDÉE Canada and its partners has made it possible to meet the Government of Canada's commitment under the Roadmap for Canada's Linguistic Duality by ensuring the continued existence of our francophone and Acadian communities, which has had the effect of promoting Canada's economic development.
Allow me to introduce our network. RDÉE Canada, the national office, works together with provincial and territorial agencies, the 12 RDÉEs across Canada, to support the economic vitality and development of the francophone minority and Acadian communities. The RDÉEs have more than 130 employees, including 100 development officers. As they are non-profit organizations, all those agencies are independent. Some are particularly active in employability development, while others also work in entrepreneurship. Based on the funding the RDÉEs receive, our network's mandate is to reinforce the communities' ability to establish and support a viable and sustainable local economy.
Consequently, community economic development enhances the communities' ability to react and adjust to economic changes. It also fosters the integration of both economic and social objectives in the strategic framework which we established at the outset more than 13 years ago now. That community economic development strategy serves as a backdrop to the implementation of our planning and is based on two themes: economic capacity development and human capacity development.
RDÉE Canada receives most of its funding through the Enabling Fund for Official Language Minority Communities, a financial contribution granted through Human Resources and Skills Development Canada. That fund is one of the components of the strategy implemented by the Government of Canada to reinforce linguistic duality in Canadian society. For Canadians, that represents ongoing support for economic and labour market development in the minority communities. This is done through partnerships, development plans and capacity-building. On average, the Enabling Fund constitutes 54% of our network's total funding, which represents approximately $9 million a year. Other funding comes from WD, ACOA and other federal sources, as well as the RDÉEs themselves and certain provincial and territorial agencies.
Unfortunately, funding must be renewed from one year to the next. This means we have no guaranteed stability. The funding paid by our main funding agency unfortunately does not enable all our provincial and territorial RDÉEs to provide services and support to start-ups or even existing businesses for economic capacity development or to industries or economic sectors. Its objective is to build community capacity in the human resources development sector, in other words employability, which covers only part of the sectors we have to support.
This year at RDÉE Canada, we completed the 13th year of implementation of the MOU between the Government of Canada, represented by a number of ministers, and RDÉE Canada, which represents the francophone and Acadian communities. As you will therefore understand, our national committee is an instrument designed to bring the minority francophone communities and the Government of Canada closer together. Through that committee, RDÉE Canada aims to advise the ministers and departments on government policies, programs and services so that they more adequately meet our communities' economic development and employability needs. The committee should help us diversify our funding sources.
With time and effort, this national committee has enabled us to partly change the culture, strengthen the economic foundations of the francophone and Acadian communities, which is essential to their future, and achieve significant progress in all regions of the country.
It is important to note the role of RDÉE Canada. We are the leader in the economic development of minority francophone and Acadian communities. We offer our provincial and territorial RDÉEs a significant range of services, support and intervention to support their actions.
RDÉE Canada's strategic activities are: joint action, communications, research and analysis, professional excellence, funding and strategic alliance.
In recent years, we have been able to rely on other partners, such as Citizenship and Immigration Canada, which has supported us in the development of an economic immigration strategy.
Our network has therefore achieved considerable success in the francophone and Acadian communities across Canada. Our work is producing concrete and tangible economic development results for the country as a whole. It is also enabling us to show not only that it is possible to do business in French across the country, but also that our communities are economically dynamic.
Our network is working with the Government of Canada for the development and vitality of our francophone communities in Canada and influencing the direction of Canada's economy. You can be assured that we are making economic development a priority in our communities. We hope the recommendations of the Standing Committee on Official Languages will help recognize our network as a leader in community economic development.
Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your attention.
Mr. Le Blanc and I are prepared to answer your questions.
Good morning, everyone. I'm very pleased to be with you again. I won't do a word-for-word reading of the brief document that we have submitted and that was only in French. The beauty of Canada is that we have the right to homogenous institutions. In that sense, we are consistent with the philosophy.
I would like you to keep the following question in the back of your minds: are all the efforts and extraordinary gains that we have made over many years enough in view of the permanently ongoing erosion? We're winning and losing at the same time. You will see along the way that even New Brunswick, which is supposed to be a linguistic paradise, is not really so. We have our own problems, and they are disturbing.
I represent the Société de l'Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick, which represents some 30 Acadian organizations and approximately 20,000 individual members. I have been the organization's president for three and a half years, and my term will be ending next June. What we want to make is a kind of declaration of love. We love this country, our province, our community and our people. That is what has made us what we are today.
I live in Moncton, and I believe that city is a miniature New Brunswick. If we can manage to live in linguistic harmony in New Brunswick, which is a miniature version of Canada, I believe we have significant responsibilities. We view matters from that perspective. That hasn't yet been done, but we are working toward it, and we are making enormous progress.
With regard to the concept of the two founding peoples, the first nations must not be forgotten. I have always thought we should establish trilingualism and triculturalism. In fact, why not make it quadri or multi? Whatever the case may be, we very much embrace the concept of the two founding peoples. When I make statements like that, you have to consider that as a group. If French is being lost in Canada, we are all responsible. That will mean that we have not done our job and that we must agree to question the way we approach the issue.
There are gains, but there are also losses. Let's make sure this country doesn't become a second unilingual English United States. I think that having two official languages is an asset for this country and that we must continue making the necessary effort to ensure we move forward rather than backward. There are currently 2.5 million francophones and Acadians outside Quebec. Without federal support, we definitely would never have been able to get where we are today.
I am not convinced we have gone as far as we should, but we have nevertheless made notable, even obvious progress. The University of Moncton could never have come into existence without Canadian bilingual federalism and so on. We are extremely grateful for all that. The Roadmap has enabled us to fight battles in the health field. Sometimes we are forced to institute legal proceedings, although we are reluctant to do so. Among other things, we have also conducted a major debate in recent years in an attempt to regain our right to Acadian governance in health. We have managed to do that without having to conduct a full-fledged battle in the courts.
It is sad to always be forced to fight, but we will clearly have to fight as long as we want to live in French in North America,. We have to acknowledge that fact. However, if someone could make that fight easier for us, that would definitely be very much appreciated.
With regard to community management, we have managed to convince our government to allow the new board of directors to consist of eight elected members and seven appointees. We would have preferred to have nine elected members and six appointees, so as to have a stronger majority, but our minister has reserved the right, in the event of resignations, to appoint replacements for those members who have resigned, even if they are elected members. It is therefore entirely possible that, within six months, we may wind up with a new board of directors consisting of a majority of political appointees. We believe that could be done in the form of a consultation. All that to say that this is part of our everyday lives.
The Roadmap has also enabled us to achieve something else. New Brunswick may be the kingdom of community radio. In 1989, I had the good fortune to be the founding president of CJSE, in Shediac. The federal government was very useful in that matter. I would like this tool to become widespread. In the southeast region, when Radio Canada was the only broadcaster of French language programming, only 5% of francophones listened to French-language radio, but now 70% of Acadians do. These are extremely important tools for Acadia and they must continue. The community radio stations enable the population to hear themselves, to dream, to make plans and to witness their successes. It has been extraordinary from an artistic creation standpoint.
With respect to immigration, through the efforts of former premier Bernard Lord four years ago, we have received special funding of $10 million over five years for francophone immigration. Unfortunately, New Brunswick is not a province that is taking people in. Instead it is a province that is losing people to our friends in Ontario and Alberta. We find it difficult to retain people. Of course, even though that was included in the Roadmap, we will not have completed the work in two years. Consequently, we hope the program is extended.
The only problem is that, since 2001, that is in the past 10 years, the core funding for the Société de l'Acadie du Nouveau-Brunswick has remained the same. Furthermore, considering inflation, which averages 2.2% annually, we've wound up with 30% less revenue. Consequently, our organization does not even have a research officer or communications officer. Since my executive director and I are former journalists, we can offset that deficiency. However, it is not normal for an organization of people such as ours not to have a communications officer or a research officer. For that reason, more money is necessary.
Although people say New Brunswick is a linguistic paradise, I see this morning that 1,650 francophone children in southern New Brunswick—650 in Saint John, 500 in Fredericton and 500 in Moncton—all rights holders, don't have access to French-language schools. I think it's incredible that, in 2011, 1,650 children who are rights holders don't have access to French-language schools. There is currently no more room in the schools and community centres; they are overflowing. That's even the case in Fredericton the capital, and in Moncton, where there are 500 children. The situation is becoming urgent for us. That is why we can only hope the federal government will continue to encourage the provincial governments to deal with education. We know that education is a provincial jurisdiction, but the fact remains that it is the basis of everything. Without education, you don't move forward.
There is another problem in New Brunswick. Unfortunately, I have to be pessimistic; you have to tell the truth. For the first time in New Brunswick, the number of families for which French is the first language spoke in the home has just fallen below 30%. This troubles us. For the first time, the assimilation rate is now in two figures, having risen from 9% to 11%.
That is why I'm saying we must make a collective consciousness-raising effort together. We have responsibilities. This all shows that we are not doing our job. It is not so much the others. Let's look at ourselves. As president of the SANB, I am sorry and destabilized. MPs, ministers, premiers, senior officials, commissioners of official languages have been telling us for 10 years that, for linguistic duality to be established in this country, they themselves must be champions of linguistic duality in Canada. They have to wear that pride.
I could talk about literacy rates. I thought I had original proposals. However, I hope they aren't original. I hope that my ideas are shared and that they have previously been thought. I thought I had an original proposal, but it seems we've already discussed it, and I'm proud of that.
I believe that, in this country, we have to have bilingualization programs for Canadian university graduates, and the Roadmap should include that. Let's not wait until they arrive in Ottawa to see whether they are bilingual, like our friend Michael Ferguson, who is nevertheless married to an Acadian. It is clearly he who wears the pants in that family since he hasn't learned our language, which is unfortunate. I prefer Mark Carney, or Mr. Paulson, who has just been appointed RCMP commissioner. There are some marvellous anglophones who are perfectly bilingual. There are also marvellous francophones. That's why I propose that we start early. Let's not wait until they arrive in Ottawa and take up important positions, particularly if they intend to work in the public services, such as that of New Brunswick, for example. Consequently, early childhood is important for us.
I don't know whether the other proposal is original. Earlier I told you that, in 10 years, we had lost 30% of our revenue based on the inflation rate. We fought for multi-year funding in the 1990s. We thank the federal government for granting our request. However, we forgot to negotiate to ensure that funding was indexed to the cost of living, which would have prevented us from winding up 10 years later with 30% less revenue. We therefore very much hope to see the Roadmap extended and to see it include a clause providing that funding will be indexed to the cost of living so that it reflects the actual situation. Otherwise we will ultimately be in a losing position.
According to my information, another original idea is also working its way through the federal government. That idea is to help our community improve its self-funding capacity by establishing a trust fund. I very much encourage you to reread the report that the late Senator Jean-Marie Simard wrote in the late 1990s. He advocated the creation of trust funds for minority organizations, which would give them greater independence and more money, and a more permanent way of advancing their issues. It appears that idea is circulating in Ottawa.
However, if it comes this far and the federal government decides to invest one dollar for every one-dollar contribution we make, that must not become a government pretext to encourage self-funding or, at the same time, to shirk its responsibilities and start cutting core funding. We are quite prepared to do our share to provide better funding for our organizations, but the government must not make us bear the cost of resulting cuts.
All that to say that we love living in this country as Canadians, as francophones and, especially, as Acadians, don't we, Guy? I think that being Acadian is the best way for us to contribute to this country's cultural mosaic. We want to continue living as Acadians for a long time, but in French.
Thank you for your attention to my brief presentation.
Welcome, each of you, to our Standing Committee on Official Languages, whose meeting concerns the study of the Roadmap.
As you know, the Roadmap has been in existence for a number of years and was extended. The purpose of this study is to determine whether there will be a Roadmap in 2014. We want to know whether you recommend that there be a Roadmap in 2014. These are the questions we have to ask ourselves.
I won't perhaps speak to each group, since some of my colleagues will be putting questions to various groups.
Let's talk about government leadership. Mr. Nadeau, you talked about that, which leads me to talk about it as well because it's a hot topic here in Ottawa. We have a government that has appointed a unilingual individual to a position. However, of the 33 million inhabitants of Canada, there surely isn't just one accountant. With all due respect for the former auditor general, I told her it wasn't the auditor who operated the calculator. They say we need an accountant and that we can't find anyone else but Mr. Ferguson. And yet, an auditor has to take care of the entire machinery. How will an auditor who is incapable of speaking one of the two official languages, who is incapable of speaking to francophones, deliver a report on his findings? Once the Office of the Auditor General has done its job and found the problems and recommendations that should be made, how can the auditor speak to the public?
Mr. Nadeau, you say that the two languages should be learned in the postsecondary institutions and that people should learn them before coming to Ottawa. However, isn't the government, which continues to appoint unilingual individuals to these positions, sending professionals who want to work in the public service the message that they don't need to learn both official languages? The government isn't requiring it. Don't you think the government should show some leadership and show that, in this country, where there are two founding peoples—in addition to the aboriginal peoples, let's not forget—and two official languages, English and French, certain positions simply cannot be filled with unilingual people?
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for being here this morning.
The world recently experienced the Occupy movement which, I think, is a reflection of a considerable uneasiness about developments in our societies. All the statistics, even Canadian statistics, show that the rich are becoming richer and the gap between rich and poor is growing. This morning, after hearing the representatives of the cooperative movement and RDÉE, I want to make a wish. I'm going to ask you to cooperate because I believe the cooperative movement is a long-term solution to that uneasiness.
Yesterday, unfortunately, Parliament abolished a major cooperative in western Canada. The Conservative majority decided to put an end to the Canadian Wheat Board, which was a major blow. In the greater Canadian francophone community, I hope your two organizations can work together. Although this is something I haven't seen in the past, I am nevertheless going to make that wish.
I only have a little speaking time because I only have one opportunity to speak. This morning, I have to settle some administrative matters. Mr. Nadeau raised the topic of immigration. At the committee's last meeting, I said I intended to introduce two motions, which I have done.
The first resolution calls for the committee to adopt again its report on immigration that was prepared during the last Parliament and for which you played a considerable role regarding the situation in New Brunswick. I introduced that motion.
I intended to bring forward those two resolutions, as I said at the public meeting. What was to happen has happened, that is to say that the Conservative majority requested an in camera session. I made that statement during my speaking time. I'm doing the same thing this morning; I am repeating what I said at that time. As the committee meeting continued in camera, I cannot tell you what happened, but I can tell you the result of that in camera meeting: two resolutions were negatived, but I cannot tell you which ones.
Lastly, I would like to request some information from our researcher.
On a number of occasions, we've heard comments to the effect that the Roadmap had increased the budget by 40%. In one sense, that's probably true, but in another sense, that may be misinforming people. I would like us to prepare a document for everyone on the Action Plan for Official Languages and its funding, but on an annual basis. From memory, I believe that the action plan's funding increased from year to year and that funding amounted to more than $200 million in the last year of the action plan. If, for example, we added to that RDÉE, which was attached to it at that point, and others, the funding largely exceeded $200 million. I believe it was $230 million, but we would have to check. So if you take $230 million and multiply it by five, that equals $1.1 billion. So we could argue that there has been no increase, as Mr. Nadeau said.
I would also like to know, based on the documents we have received thus far from Canadian Heritage, how much money has not been spent every year since the Roadmap was put in place. That would let us know what the actual figures are. If it were possible to have that document for all committee members and the public, I believe that would be very useful, Mr. Chair.
Lastly, I would like to tell you about a concern. I don't know how we will manage to get this information, but the president of the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne, the FCFA, made quite a disturbing comment last week. She said that the federation suspects—this isn't an accusation—that existing programs have been eliminated or cut because the Roadmap now covers 15 departments and that some of those departments receiving Roadmap money have withdrawn money from existing programs.
How will we be able to determine legitimately whether that is true?
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm sorry, I'm probably the only anglophone here. Although in Canada I'm not considered bilingual, I speak five other languages. So I apologize for that.
In my opinion, the preservation, protection, fostering, and continuation of a second language should really be driven by commerce and not so much by political necessity and desire.
I'll give you an example. About 20 years ago, I went to Grand Manan and I wanted to buy dulse, but because only French was spoken there, I made an attempt to use whatever little French I had. What it brought to me is that I've done business all around the world—in the Middle East, in Asia, and so on—and everywhere I go, I attempt to use.... If I'm in the Middle East, I learn Arabic, and if I'm in Asia, I speak three other Asian languages.
One of the directions we need to face in a pluralistic society like Canada is to foster not just the French and English sides, because then you're limiting yourself to doing business with anglophones. There's a big market available to you in Asia, especially for all the natural resources that New Brunswick has to offer.
It's my opinion that we should take a further direction and start conducting business in the other languages that matter to your market. Commerce really should be your driving factor and not a political decision to do this.
Do you wish to comment on that? Perhaps it's time for the Acadians to learn Chinese and Japanese and so on.
:
The next step is in Arabic it would be...? I would like to know.
[Translation]
The promotion of bilingualism shouldn't be based solely on commercial needs in Canada. If this issue depends solely on commercial requirements, we'll become a unilingual English country faster than we think, like the United States. We have to watch out for that.
However, it's not because they are engaged in commerce that business people are gods. When Staples advertises on television in Quebec, it's under the banner of Bureau en gros. Back home, since they don't know it's affiliated with Staples, that company loses money. When Pharmaprix advertises on Radio-Canada's national French-language television network, in particular, that company loses money in Acadia, because it's Shoppers Drug Mart back home.
If there is one thing this committee can do, it is to make people a little more aware. Anglophone business people are losing money from 2.5 million people. It would be surprising if they could lose 2.5 million consumers, including Manitoba and Saskatchewan, and for that to have no impact on their sales. If they want to reach people, they have to speak to them in their language. The rest of Canada is too often considered as though it were a homogenous anglophone population. I believe that a committee such as this has a responsibility with regard to public education.
Currently back home, there is the signage issue, for example. Some people say signage isn't important. However, if your language isn't displayed in the street, if your language is just good enough for your bedroom and bathroom, how can you develop any pride or reinforced identity. There too, I believe we should have a Canadian strategy that could simply say that bilingualism is good. Bilingualism brings in money and there are also ways to make money in French.
I am drifting away from my presentation, but we've also tried to create a mission in Quebec and to go and meet Quebec businesses like Cora, which is also called Cora back home. When Cora set up in Moncton as a unilingual English concern, it was completely abnormal. People have to be educated, and I believe a committee such as this one has a collective responsibility to create interaction between francophones and anglophones in Canada.
Let's at least capitalize on these two languages, and there won't be any problems. I speak nearly four languages, though perhaps not as well as Mr. Lueng, who speaks five. Whatever the case may be, I believe we have to avoid setting a bad example.