;

LANG Committee Meeting

Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.

For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.

If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.

Previous day publication Next day publication

37th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION

Standing Committee on Official Languages

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Tuesday, April 1, 2003

0910

The Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier, Lib.))

Mr. John O'Neill (Board Member of the Arts and Heritage Foundation of St. Albert and Former Deputy Minister of Culture and Multiculturalism (Alberta), As Individual)

0915

0920

0925

The Chair

Mr. Ernest Chauvet (President, Alberta section of the "Association canadienne-française")

The Chair

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

0930

0935

The Chair

Mr. John Williams (St. Albert, Canadian Alliance)

0940

Mr. John O'Neill

0945

The Chair

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

0950

The Chair

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

The Chair

Ms. Yolande Thibeault (Saint-Lambert, Lib.)

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

Ms. Yolande Thibeault

Mr. John O'Neill

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

Mr. John O'Neill

0955

Ms. Yolande Thibeault

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

Ms. Yolande Thibeault

The Chair

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau (Repentigny, BQ)

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

1000

Mr. John O'Neill

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

1005

The Chair

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau

The Chair

Mr. John Williams

The Chair

Mr. Raymond Simard (Saint Boniface, Lib.)

Mr. John O'Neill

Mr. Raymond Simard

Mr. John O'Neill

Mr. Raymond Simard

Mr. John O'Neill

The Chair

Mr. Raymond Simard

Mr. John Williams

Mr. Raymond Simard

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

1010

Mr. Raymond Simard

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

Mr. Raymond Simard

The Chair

Mr. Yvon Godin (Acadie—Bathurst, NDP)

1015

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

Mr. John O'Neill

Mr. Yvon Godin

Mr. John O'Neill

Mr. Yvon Godin

The Chair

1020

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

Mr. John O'Neill

The Chair

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

The Chair

Mr. John O'Neill

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

The Chair

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

The Chair

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

The Chair

1025

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

The Chair

Mr. John O'Neill

The Chair

Mr. John Williams

Mr. John O'Neill

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

The Chair

Mr. John Williams

1030

Mr. John O'Neill

Mr. John Williams

Mr. John O'Neill

The Chair

Ms. Yolande Thibeault

The Chair

Mr. Yvon Godin

1035

The Chair

Mr. John Williams

Mr. John O'Neill

Mr. John Williams

1040

The Chair

Mr. John O'Neill

The Chair

Mr. Ernest Chauvet

The Chair

Mr. Yvon Godin

The Chair

Mr. Yvon Godin

The Chair

1045

Mr. Yvon Godin

The Chair

Mr. John Williams

The Chair

Mr. John Williams

The Chair

CANADA

Standing Committee on Official Languages

NUMBER 017

2nd SESSION

37th PARLIAMENT

EVIDENCE

Tuesday, April 1, 2003

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

¿ (0910)

[Translation]

The Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier, Lib.)): Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to this meeting of the Standing Committee on Official Languages. If you don't mind, I would like to make a couple of announcements to bring members up-to-date and then we will move on to presentations of our witnesses for this morning.

To begin, I would just like to indicate that tomorrow we will hear from the President of Canada Post, Mr. André Ouellet. We were supposed to hear from officials from the justice department next Tuesday, but with your leave, I would like to have that meeting after Easter in order to hold a business meeting, since there are several issues we have to settle. I'll go through them quickly.

Our report on immigration is not finished yet, but our researchers and our clerk have received the submissions from various people and everything will be ready for next Tuesday. In fact, it will be ready long before, but we will discuss the issue next Tuesday. We are also working on a draft health care work plan. That's the referral we received from the House. Committee members also received a notice of motion which could be discussed next Tuesday, and depending on what we will be hearing this morning, we may also produce another, fairly short, report on the issue of electoral boundary redistribution and language. So, we will really need to have an in-camera working meeting to adopt or make progress on those reports. The day after, that is, on Wednesday of next week, we will hear from the President of Treasury Board for an overview of current issues.

I would also like to mention two of the committee's achievements. Last night, as I was listening to the news on CBC, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that one of the conditions the government imposed on Air Canada in its aid package was that the airline had to respect the Official Languages Act. This was condition number four. I think congratulations are in order, because by hammering away at the issue for nearly a year, we got the government to include official languages as one of the conditions in its offer to help Air Canada, if need be.

Secondly, we received a report, which could be distributed, prepared by the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages. It was originally intended for the plaintiffs involved in the new proposed electoral riding of Acadie--Bathurst, and which comes down on the side of the plaintiffs. You may remember that the committee heard from representatives of the Société des Acadiens et Acadiennes du Nouveau Brunswick and a professor from Moncton University speak to that issue, and I am very pleased that the commissioner ruled in their favour.

This morning, we will hear from representatives from Alberta, Mr. O'Neill and Mr. Chauvet. Mr. Chauvet represents the Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta and Mr. O'Neill lives in the riding of St. Albert.

Today's meeting will basically deal with the same thing we discussed with regard to the riding of Acadie--Bathurst. So, without further ado, I would like to invite Mr. O'Neill and Mr. Chauvet to make their presentations. We will then move on to questions until we run out of questions or we run out of time. Who would like to begin?

Mr. O'Neill, you have the floor.

[English]

Mr. John O'Neill (Board Member of the Arts and Heritage Foundation of St. Albert and Former Deputy Minister of Culture and Multiculturalism (Alberta), As Individual): Distinguished members of Parliament, mesdames et messieurs, I wish to first read a letter from the mayor of St. Albert pertaining to this matter:

...St. Albert--the 5th largest City in Alberta. St. Albert abuts the northwestern boundaries of the City of Edmonton and makes up one of the 22 municipalities which constitutes the Alberta Capital Region. Our city is the largest population centre in the St. Albert riding.

St. Albert is the oldest non-fortified community in Alberta. It was founded by francophone Oblate missionaries in 1861 and established as a town by the North West Territorial Government in Regina shortly before Alberta became a province. It is not my intent to provide the Committee with a history of how St. Albert evolved from a settlement to a City. Rather, it is simply to point out that St. Albert is extremely proud of its French heritage and it is committed to ensuring that the francophone component of its diverse present-day population is allowed to grow and develop and flourish within a political, social and cultural environment which will be most conducive in allowing this segment of our community to achieve its desired ends and objectives. In short, we feel it is extremely important that maintenance of a strong community of francophone interest should have been of paramount importance when the new boundaries of the St. Albert constituency were re-drawn.

On page 1 of the City of St. Albert submission to the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Alberta held on October 10, 2002 at the MacDonald Hotel in Edmonton, City Council drew the maintenance of the community of interest of the francophone community in the St. Albert riding directly to the commission's attention.

“...The heritage of the region must be considered. There is a strong francophone corridor that runs from St. Albert to the north of the region. These are roots which have contributed to the sharing of ideas and the quality of life. St. Albert works closely with these communities to find common solutions to many interests....”

The main communities referred are the towns of Morinville and Legal, and other communities such as Villeneuve, Rivière-Qui-Barre and Calihoo as well as the farming and residential district surrounding the City of St. Albert proper.

It is my belief that if proper consideration is given to the francophone community of interest, that the boundaries of the proposed Edmonton-St. Albert riding would have to be re-drawn. ...

In conclusion, the proposed Electoral Boundaries Commission's radical re-design of the electoral boundaries in the Alberta Capital Region has ignored or not properly weighted the strong community of interest provision set out by Parliament when it drew the St. Albert boundary's ridings. Inadequate consideration was given to preserving the community of interest of the Francophone community in the riding.

It would be greatly appreciated if you would assist us in rectifying this oversight.

Sincerely, Richard H. Plain, Mayor.

I endorse Mayor Plain's message and I wish now to add my own comments. The purpose of my presentation this morning is to convince you that there is a strong community of interest in the present federal riding of St. Albert. Consequently, the boundaries of that constituency should remain unchanged if our parliamentarians are serious about the community of interest factor.

The strong francophone and Métis cultures in St. Albert and the region north of it should not be weakened but rather encouraged to flourish. Arriving in St. Albert 25 years ago, I found a city with a proud history and culture. It all began around 1860 when the Oblate fathers and Grey nuns of Montreal travelled here and became part of the community of Métis settlers.

¿ (0915)

Leading the way was an outstanding man from Saint-Sulpice, Quebec, Father Albert Lacombe. He and the Métis set about plowing the rich soil on their river lots and building sturdy homesteads. For a time, St. Albert was the agricultural centre of Alberta.

Other missionaries came from Quebec, bringing with them friends and family members who settled in St. Albert and in the region north, which became the towns of Morinville, Legal, Riviere Qui Barre, Villeneuve, and so on.

In 1861, Margaret d'Youville's Sisters of Charity, the Grey Nuns, arrived from Montreal and established schools, orphanages, and hospitals wherever they found a group of people who needed them. Just a year ago, there was a great community celebration organized by area residents to thank the Grey Nuns for their presence and their service to the people of northern Alberta, including the reserves of our first nations people.

A walk in St. Albert reminds us at almost every turn of our francophone roots: a log cabin chapel, the first church in Alberta; the long-term care home established by the Grey Nuns; the recently restored grain elevators; and the site of a proposed Métis interpretive centre.

North of St. Albert, the town of Legal boasts the most important collection of francophone historic murals in Canada. These were recently viewed and admired by Her Excellency, the Honourable Adrienne Clarkson.

Allow me to inject a bit of folklore. Father Lacombe assisted the Canadian Pacific Railway in negotiations for railroad passage through native territories. For this, Van Horne made Father Lacombe president of the CPR for a day. Not to be outdone, Father Lacombe made Van Horne parish priest for a day.

Again, Father Lacombe and his friends built the first bridge west of the Great Lakes--a toll bridge, five cents to cross. But for those who helped build it, and for those who were on their way to church, it was free.

Recently I obtained a publication entitled Le corridor historique francophone de l'Alberta. Beginning in St. Albert and moving north to Morinville, Legal, and beyond, the magazine described a vital French and Métis presence in a flourishing agricultural area. Interspersed throughout the corridor are descendants of the original settlers: the Morissettes, the Perons, Savoies, Cunninghams, Caillioux, Lemieux, Chauvets, Thibaults, Ménards, and so on. These families, and the links they have with one another from one settlement to the next, weave a rich linguistic and cultural connection along the entire francophone corridor. This is our strength and our pride. This is a community of interest.

I am a member of the Tourism and Cultural Committee in St. Albert. Currently we are developing and marketing tourism through the corridor. This will be an historical and educational experience, which promises beneficial economic spinoffs.

The Faculté Saint-Jean, a French college within the University of Alberta, has as its purpose the preservation of the French language and culture, especially in Alberta. As a member of Saint-Jean's Conseil consultatif, I know there is a constant focus on le corridor historique francophone.

As well, the jurisdiction of the local Catholic public school board embraces schools in Morinville and Legal. The entire constituency is renowned for its immersion programs. A regional francophone school board is growing rapidly. At present, they are constructing a new francophone school in St. Albert.

The city of St. Albert and the surrounding towns offer citizens a good quality of life, largely due, I believe, to their history. Because of this, and because of our economic opportunities, many non-francophones have taken up residence here during the past 25 years.

What is happening here and in the rest of Canada with the arrival of immigrants from all over the world is that our French language and culture, as well as our aboriginal language and culture, are being challenged, overlooked, and even assimilated. Even when we have a government that champions bilingualism and multiculturalism, every community must do what it can to keep its language and culture.

¿ (0920)

In determining electoral boundaries, parliamentarians, if they are to remain true to their own statements, must take into account a “community of interest”. I believe this phrase means that men, women, children, and families who are bound together by a common history, a common language, a common culture, with common institutions and organizations, should remain intact and unified.

Surely the community within the present federal electoral boundaries of the riding of St. Albert is that. I believe this community of interest is better nurtured when the people of that community are represented by one member of Parliament. The francophone corridor, if split up in any way, is weakened. The community will no longer speak with one strong voice to a member of Parliament, nor will Parliament hear from one MP representing the total francophone community in the area.

To align St. Albert with Edmonton, to separate St. Albert from the rest of the francophone corridor, is to flagrantly disregard what is perhaps the strongest community of interest in Canada. I am confident, however, that our enlightened parliamentarians will keep intact the present boundaries of the St. Albert constituency.

[Translation]

It is necessary and the smart thing to do.

Thank you.

¿ (0925)

[English]

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. O'Neill.

Mr. O'Neill was a little humble. He's a member of the board of the Arts and Heritage Foundation of St. Albert and a former Deputy Minister of Culture and Multiculturalism for Alberta.

Thank you very much, Mr. O'Neill.

[Translation]

We will now ask Mr. Chauvet, who is the President of the ACFA, the Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta, to make his presentation.

Mr. Chauvet, you may begin.

Mr. Ernest Chauvet (President, Alberta section of the "Association canadienne-française"): Mr. Chairman and committee members, I am pleased to be here. I would like to thank Mr. Williams for his invitation. I have had many opportunities to work with him in the last five years. I have tried to get him to join the Liberal Party, but I have failed until now.

The Chair: We're working on it!

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: I must admit that I have not tried to convince him to join the Bloc Québécois, because it would be too much of a challenge.

First of all, I would like to introduce myself and give you some background. I was born in Legal. My father was born in Legal. My family has been Franco-Albertan for several generations. For a number of years, I was president of the Centralta region, which encompasses Legal, Morinville and St. Albert, and I am currently President of the Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta.

For starters, I simply want to say that I am touched by the presentation made by Mr. O'Neill, from St. Albert, and I think that once I have explained a little bit about myself, you will understand why. As a Franco-Albertan, my father, who completed his B.A. and obtained a university degree, had to take correspondence courses for grade 9 through grade 12, because there were no schools where teaching in French was available. We all know how difficult that is. I would never have been disciplined enough to take four years of courses, from grade 9 through 12, by correspondence to complete my high school studies. That is quite a feat.

Later, when the issue of schools arose, with the attitude that existed in Alberta at the time, some felt that French was a barrier to learning and that to be truly educated a student could only have one language. And at the time, it was English. My father, because he mastered both written and spoken French and was more educated than the people around him, always defended the francophone aspect while respecting the anglophone aspect. He really was a great federalist. He loved the country very much. He always supported French without belittling English.

It was a difficult battle. As a community, we were able to separate from the greater Sturgeon region and set up our own district of Legal, to keep our language and also religion, which was an issue at the time. There was a lot of debate and conviction. So I am very touched by what Mr. O'Neill has said this morning.

As President of the Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta, I have a mantra: May the francophonie be appreciated by all Canadians.

We are a country with two rich cultures. We are a world-wide model of a place where two cultures have worked together to make Canada the best country in which to live. Throughout the world, when we see two cultures side-by-side, there is squabbles, war, and animosity. Regardless of our historical squabbles in Canada, we have been able to work together as two peoples, as two cultures, and to become a model. My dream would be to see this cultural and linguistic duality respected throughout the country.

Mr. O'Neill gave you a bit of the history of the district. In the few minutes you have given me, I would like to prove to you that the partnership that has existed in the St. Albert, Morinville and Legal francophone corridor is not new and that it was on that basis that the committee was set up. I'm going to cover some historical facts, update you on them, and talk about partnerships that have existed, and in closing, I would like to present some conclusions that I already touched on in my introduction.

Mr. O'Neill talked about a francophone corridor based on tourism that was created about five years ago, when I was regional president. It was done in St. Albert, where we represent the francophone aspect. St. Albert is the main agricultural city in Alberta that is really of any size, and it is the core of the francophonie.

¿ (0930)

The first bridge ever built in Alberta was in St. Albert—I don't want to repeat Mr. O'Neill's speech—and here we have messages from the mayors of Legal, Morinville and St. Albert. As we can see, all three cities have worked together to highlight the area's francophone heritage. It's evident in museums and murals, as well as in the processes undertaken to achieve them.

Some of our murals illustrate the challenges we faced as francophones in Alberta. Some of you may not know that Legal is the Canadian capital of murals painted by francophones. There are about 25 murals on our buildings, and we are very proud of them.

The mural on the CHFA radio station, which was launched in 1949, is a good illustration of the kinds of challenges we face. At the time when the event was debated at the Alberta Legislature, we encountered many obstacles just to get our own radio station. Times may have changed, but at that time, setting up a French-language radio station in Alberta was, to Albertans, tantamount to an attempt by a foreign government to seize power in the country.

Minister Maynard, who is from the region—now we call it the North, but at the time the area included St. Albert—said in the Legislature at that time that many countries in the British empire had more than one official language, and that Alberta should not be striving to be more English than the British themselves. He invited members of the Legislature to open their hearts to linguistic duality in Canada. The story, which is depicted in our murals, illustrates the nature of our country.

Another mural illustrates the case of Mr. Lavoie, a resident of western Canada. When he wanted to sign up to fight in World War II, he tried to register in French, as was permitted by law. However, documents were only available in English. Throughout the region—which is now a tourist corridor—he tried to find French-language forms. Just a few days before he was arrested for not having filled out his questionnaire—he was found in Vimy—he was fined $7500 because he had not registered, because he did not have the forms in French. The case went right up to the Alberta Court of Appeal, where Mr. Lavoie finally won. His case was a step forward for many issues relating to the publication of federal documents in both official languages. Other cases often cited are Bugnet or Mahé, which were on minority rights in the country.

So along the mural route, we can see St. Albert—how it was formed and how it grew—as well as other aspects of Morinville.

There are also tourists attractions in the Centralta region. Once again, we can see how the three communities work together to preserve French-language history in the region. St. Albert, Morinville and Legal are also working to establish another tourism feature—the day trips. For the first time in a region like St. Albert, Morinville and Legal, the French-language presence is being clearly highlighted in a tourism context. We can see that in this document.

That said, I should point out that the three communities have been strong partners for the past five or six years. It takes a great deal of time to forge such links and become open to bilingualism and francophone history. Every month for the past three years, I have met with mayors and representatives of the three municipalities to build up our relationship and assert our presence. We have made progress.

However, electoral boundaries are now being changed, and I find that very disappointing. We recognize that there is a process in place; however, I am here to explain our point of view.

¿ (0935)

Efforts have been made in the past, and I have pointed them out.

Another interesting thing has happened in Alberta. After the success of the Centralta touristic corridor, other francophone regions in Alberta have been able to assert their presence. Because of the region's visibility, they have been able to work together in recent times. Even the mayor of Edmonton is now talking about developing a francophone quarter in that city. A great deal of progress has been made, but we need a strong core to influence surrounding communities.

So it is with great conviction that I ask you to review this decision and try to keep these municipalities together. There is a great deal at stake.

Thank you. Many will agree that there are areas in the country where francophone communities are concentrated, and those communities should not be separated. This will weaken them. At the provincial level, we faced that challenge up to recently when francophones in Legal were transferred to the English' language health system. We contacted Minister Mar for assistance, and can now obtain services in French. This is a constant challenge.

Committee members, we invite you to make every effort to ensure that the three municipalities and the French corridor we are discussing today can remain together.

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Chauvet. You will of course understand that this is not the committee's decision. We are doing our best to ensure that all government organizations, including Elections Canada, comply with the Official Languages Act. That is the committee mandate, and that is the spirit in which we have tackled the Acadie—Bathurst issue. That is what any recommendations and reports will reflect.

[English]

Mr. Williams, would you lead us off, please? You have seven minutes.

Mr. John Williams (St. Albert, Canadian Alliance): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

First I would like to thank you, on behalf of the citizens of the St. Albert constituency, for bringing the witnesses here this morning. It demonstrates that the Parliament of Canada, while 1,500 miles away from the constituency of St. Albert, actually is a local institution and does care about the citizens of St. Albert, and, of course, all other citizens across the country. The very fact that you're having this hearing here this morning brings Parliament to the people. I thank you and congratulate you for that.

I'd also like to congratulate our witnesses for coming this morning to demonstrate the duality and the strong francophone roots we have in the riding of St. Albert. I've known Mr. Chauvet and Mr. O'Neill for quite some number of years.

I certainly enjoy it when I have the opportunity to go to Legal on a Sunday morning, where at the Club 60 Roses they have breakfast once a month. I meet so many people there, so many good friends of mine. Right there, on a Sunday morning in the small town of Legal, the normal language is French. And it's refreshing. When you walk down the streets in Alberta, you're more likely to hear French spoken in the town of Legal than English. I think it's a wonderful heritage.

Being an immigrant to this country, I appreciate more than some perhaps the importance of keeping the heritage together. And the francophone heritage of that particular area, I think, is vitally important.

When I moved to the Edmonton area in 1970, I think St. Albert was a small town of around 3,000 or 4,000. When I moved to St. Albert in 1978, it was about 27,000. Today, the city of St. Albert is around 56,000 people. It is a suburb of Edmonton and growing rapidly. Of course, people from all different backgrounds from all across the country and around the world are settling in St. Albert, and that historical francophone community is getting smaller and smaller as a percentage of the society.

Morinville and Legal have very strong francophone roots. In fact, just a few years ago, the bank signs were in French. La Banque Royale du Canada was the name on the bank. It wasn't The Royal Bank of Canada; it was the francophone equivalent. I thought that was just wonderful. In the city of St. Albert, the museum is called Musée Héritage Museum to recognize that the francophone culture is paramount and is the original culture of that particular area.

As Mr. O'Neill pointed out, St. Albert was founded by Father Albert Lacombe in 1861. I believe in 1865 or thereabouts it was the largest community between Winnipeg and Vancouver on the prairies. It was a francophone community, and the only language spoken back in those days was French.

Morinville and Legal are also home to a large number of our military personnel who are at the Edmonton garrison base, with I think 7,000 people working there. They're from all across the country, including many from Quebec, and of course there's an opportunity for them to settle in a community where their language and their heritage is assured.

I, myself, live in the great metropolis of Rivière Qui Barre. It's a small town of about 30 houses. I live in the suburbs, which are about three miles outside the small town of Rivière Qui Barre. As its name says, it's very much a francophone community. My friends in that area are descendants, grandchildren and great grandchildren, of the original settlers. The still live on the same homesteads that were settled around 1880. Because it's a farming community I live in, it has just been wonderful to get to know these people in the last 15, 20 years that I've lived there.

I also want to point out, Mr. Chairman--and I think it perhaps is unique in the prairies--that we have a Catholic public school board, not a Catholic separate school board, representing St. Albert, Morinville, and Legal, the francophone corridor that stretches about 25 miles north to south, wholly contained within the St. Albert constituency as it's currently configured.

¿ (0940)

I would just like to ask our two guests this morning, Mr. Chairman, if I may, with St. Albert growing so rapidly, and of course Morinville and Legal are also growing rapidly as bedroom communities of the city of St. Albert, what do you think is going to happen to the francophone culture? Is it going to get watered down? Would that be exacerbated if you draw that line between St. Albert and Morinville and Legal and the riding of Westlock--St. Paul--St. Albert being meshed in with Edmonton--St. Albert? Would that make bigger problems for the francophone community to maintain its roots and to be able to develop? What do you think about the Parliament of Canada, whose responsibility it is to maintain and represent the constituents and the communities of interest, as you said? Is that going to affect a member of Parliament's ability to represent the francophone community if you end up having two members of Parliament representing a small piece?

Mr. John O'Neill: I suspect you perhaps know better than I do the effect it will have on our community if the proposed change takes place.

I can't help but feel that taking St. Albert and putting it with the city of Edmonton and cutting it off from that other region is definitely going to hinder the growth and the possibility of the growth of the francophone corridor. It definitely will interfere with it. I can see where a member of Parliament for St. Albert--Edmonton will be very concerned and distracted by what is happening in the Edmonton part of it rather than in the other part of it, because I believe, from my experience in living in St. Albert, that the two are very distinct in their characters and in their identities. The addition to be made in the proposal has a different character and a different group of people living there than does the city of St. Albert, so something will have gone, definitely, from the unified constituency that it is at present.

The advantage, as I think I mentioned in my presentation, is that the people now in the French corridor have one person with whom they can come together, united, to present a strong case for whatever the issue is at that time. As it is, what will happen in the future, of course, is they will be divided. Part of that corridor will go to another area, to another member of Parliament, and not to the current member of Parliament. Maybe not in the short run, but certainly in the long run it will make a big difference.

As I pointed out, one of the great reasons for my living in St. Albert...I'm a former Montrealer. I go back to Montreal periodically, but I'm happy to get back to St. Albert because it has an identity that makes me think a lot about Montreal. But it also has that other area, the agricultural area, that takes in Legal and that whole area, which is currently in the constituency. In a sense, if I have to think at times and read stuff in the paper about our new constituency that leaves all that aside, I will have lost something. I will have lost some attachment, I think, to St. Albert.

I also find there is a strengthening in some ways of the corridor, maybe because we see that it's being challenged, or it began to strengthen before the challenge of the proposed change came in.

Mr. Chauvet has mentioned the various activities that are taking place that are uniting the three areas. Somehow or other, that is all going to be lost. Right now I see it strengthened, and I'd hate to see that strengthening force diminish.

¿ (0945)

[Translation]

The Chair: Mr. Chauvet.

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: Your question is multidimensional, Mr. Williams.

When we look at how the francophone presence in the region has grown, we can see that a number of factors are involved, including immigration, government policy, schools, and so on. These are all contributing factors.

The answer to your question it this: it is people's attitude that will make the difference. In order for francophone culture to flourish, we have to establish a climate in which the English-speaking majority welcomes us, and sees us as an added value, as it were. They have to see the wealth we have to offer. On our side, we have to be sensitive to this approach. So when we make progress, as we have done with three communities who work together and recognize us—that explains why I am touched by Mr. O'Neill's remarks—and the federal government comes and dissolves these partnerships which were so difficult to forge, sometimes in hostile situations where people had to be assuaged, we find ourselves deeply disappointed. We do not know what to say. We have invested too much energy in this to be divided now, with no consideration for demographics.

I do not know what to say, except perhaps that we have work very hard to build up partnerships, and that we are very disappointed when the federal government comes and dissolve them.I will tell you quite frankly that some members of the francophone community asked me why I was going to appear before Parliament, when it was a member of the Canadian Alliance who proposed that we remain in the constituency.

¿ (0950)

The Chair: Allow me to interrupt you for a moment. Here, we try to work in a non-partisan fashion, and generally we do succeed quite well. So I don't want partisanship to blur the issues.

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: Of course.

But this is not partisan issue, Mr. Chairman. In my part of the country, we have seen a number of parties over the years, the Liberal Party, the Progressive-Conservative Party, and the Canadian Alliance. I did not mention that for partisan reasons, I said it because we are convinced that we must continue working together. I had absolutely no partisan intent. Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you.

Ms. Thibeault.

Ms. Yolande Thibeault (Saint-Lambert, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon, gentlemen.

First of all, I would like to thank Mr. Williams for bringing you here this morning. I don't know why, but I am not surprised that Mr. Williams has done such a thing.

Let's talk about electoral boundaries. We know that Elections Canada wants the population of every riding to be as close as possible to what is known as the electoral quota. My research shows that for Alberta the electoral quota is 106,000. I see that, in 1996, the population of St. Albert was 105,000. So what is the problem? Why was a decision made to change all that, since to my mind you are within the quota? Do you think it might be to balance out neighbouring ridings?

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: I really cannot answer that. All I can say is that we want to remain united as francophones. That is all I want.

Ms. Yolande Thibeault: If I say that, it is because the changes will obviously affect the boundaries of neighbouring constituencies. Perhaps you are working with those people to defend your case, as other communities have done in New Brunswick, for example. So you are not doing that.

I was also surprised to see that 93,000 of the 105,000 constituents in St. Albert are francophone. Oh, sorry, I read that upside down. I see there are 3,700 francophones. That is still a high percentage.

You talked about school boards in your corridor. How many schools do those boards cover? Are they public schools?

[English]

Mr. John O'Neill: Interestingly enough, in St. Albert--and I think it's only in St. Albert in the whole of Canada--the Catholic schools are considered the public schools, because when the school boards were originally set up, the only public were French Canadians and they were Catholics. They don't necessarily go together, but they certainly did at that time. That's the reason why they're public schools. As a matter of fact, the Catholic schools have offered to the Protestant school board that the Protestant school board become public and allow the Catholics to remain separate. But for some reason or another they didn't want to do that.

Did you ask how many schools there are? Mr. Chauvet knows that better than I do.

[Translation]

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: I apologize, but I cannot simply answer that off the cuff. I do know that, in the francophone system—which in our case consists of Catholic public school boards—the municipalities of St. Albert, Morinville and Legal are in the same group.

With regard to the number of separate protestant schools, Legal and Morinville are part of the St. Albert Catholic system. I cannot tell you how many schools there are, however. I do know that this area has the highest concentration of immersion students in Alberta, something that reflects the English-speaking communities' attitude. I do not have the numbers, however.

[English]

Mr. John O'Neill: I would say there are about eight Catholic schools in those areas, and that includes Legal and Morinville. There's one totally French school being built now. It had a smaller building to work out of, but that is presently being built. I believe there's one in Legal, totally French as well, with their own French school board. The non-Catholic schools in St. Albert--I'm not familiar with the other parts of the area. I would say there are maybe five non-Catholic schools.

¿ (0955)

Ms. Yolande Thibeault: That's very interesting.

[Translation]

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: There are approximately 1,500 students in immersion programs, if I remember correctly. There are two French-language schools: one is in St. Albert, and one is in Legal.

Ms. Yolande Thibeault: Thank you. I will let someone else have a turn, but I will come back on another round if I can.

The Chair: Mr. Sauvageau.

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau (Repentigny, BQ): Welcome, gentlemen, and thank you for being with us today. I would like to join with Ms. Thibeault in mentioning the initiative undertaken by my colleague and friend from St. Albert, Mr. Williams, who, like some people in other regions, is concerned about whether the new electoral boundaries take into account the French fact.

Thank you, Mr. O'Neill, for informing me that Father Lacombe was from Saint-Sulpice. Under the new electoral boundaries in Quebec, Saint-Sulpice will be part of my riding, if I am re-elected, of course. I should not be too presumptuous here. So that is a further bond between us.

I would like to ask you a few questions. First of all, I would like to know what was done to respect the francophone corridor and the constituency of St. Albert. Ms. Thibeault raised this issue earlier, but I would like to go into a little more detail.

When your community saw the map of your riding, did the Association canadienne-française de l'Alberta submit a brief? I know that Mr. Arès of the FCFA is from Alberta. Did you table a brief with the FCFA? Was Edmonton receptive to the inclusion of St. Albert? I do not want to get into partisan politics, but I am wondering whether the fact that this area is more Liberal would be helpful to someone or if the fact that the area is more for the Alliance would be helpful to someone else? Is there a link of this kind? What was done before today's meeting? That is my first question.

I come now to my second question. Mr. O'Neill, you said that when the residents of the francophone corridor faced the threat of being cut off, they joined forces more to demonstrate their solidarity. I would like to know how this solidarity was demonstrated in other respects. I have just returned from Mr. Simard's constituency, where the francophones have established a tremendously dynamic economic development agency. It is a model that should be followed. Are there any factors other than tourism that unite the francophone community in this corridor and how does the francophone community make its presence felt there?

Mr. Williams spoke earlier about highway signs and advertising. I would like you to talk about that. Actually, my question has two parts. What has been done to preserve this constituency and what has been done to encourage the development of links within this community located in the francophone corridor?

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: I will start by adding to what Mr. O'Neill said earlier. There can be no partisan political consideration regarding this district. There have been changes in the party that held the seat over the years, both federally and provincially. I do not think that there should be any efforts made along those lines. That is not how I see the situation. As far as I am concerned, all that matters is that we stay together.

With respect to the federal approach regarding Edmonton, Mr. O'Neill is more familiar with the situation then I am. At the municipal level, I think that the towns in the surrounding areas that want to amalgamate would perhaps be in favour of this, because it would be one step in the process of merging a surrounding community into the larger centre. That may be the case. It is not a question of partisan politics, but this could be part of the direction in which the city wants to head, something we have discussed in recent years.

As regards the francophone community, as the president of the association, I did not want to get involved in these issues unless I was invited to do so by the regions. I will not defend a region at the provincial level unless I am asked to do so. In this case, as a result of Mr. Williams' invitation, I checked and saw that this was in the interest of the mayors of the municipalities and of the local French-Canadian association. I came to defend them, because it is in their interest. But that is not what we focus on first. It is not something we spend a great deal of time on at the provincial level.

However, everything depends on the situation. At the moment, the new regional president is very aware of political considerations. The former president from this region was not. These are simply things that happen in a volunteer association such as ours.

Therefore, historically, we did not present briefs and we did not focus on the issue because of the process and because of the individuals who were in place at the time.

I believe that answers your very important question. At the provincial level, we were involved in various groups, particularly on health, and that was harmful to us.

À (1000)

[English]

Mr. John O'Neill: I think Edmonton would feel quite happy about this new arrangement because they would like to include everything within 100 miles around the city of Edmonton, something like Toronto. I think Montreal also has the metropolitan area now.

On signage, we have French signs around St. Albert as well as English street signs, and that kind of thing. We even have Métis signs in some of the streets in St. Albert. I shouldn't say “we even have”, as they were there first and put up the first Métis signs.

How are we working together? I know the economic development officer in St. Albert works with the economic developers in the other towns to see how there can be cooperation in all of those areas.

There is a leisure centre currently being discussed that will be built by the three groups together, so there will be a community hall that will really embrace the people in the corridor. Hopefully that will transpire in the near future.

That's basically my report.

[Translation]

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: We have the linguistic profile of the constituency in a document prepared by the parliamentary research service. You spoke about a population boom in the St. Albert region. If the status quo is maintained, as you request, would you comply with the electoral coefficient for each riding? In other words, is your proposal actually acceptable?

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: If I understand correctly, you are referring to the number of francophones, the percentage of...

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: No. I'm not familiar with St. Albert, but in light of its population boom, if the current boundaries of Mr. Williams' riding are maintained, would there be 148,000 voters in the riding? If so, the proposal will go nowhere, because there would be too many voters in the riding. If the status quo is accepted, will the conditions regarding electoral boundaries be met?

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: I think Mr. Williams would be in a better position to answer this question. I am unable to do so myself.

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: I think the Electoral Boundaries Commission can agree to give additional time or to accept an explanation such as yours. However, even if we want to support a proposal like yours to take into account the French fact in this corridor of Alberta, the proposal must meet the criteria. I think we both understand that. In other words, if the number of voters is exceeded, even if we support this proposal because of the French fact, it will automatically be disqualified. That is a question I would like you to answer.

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: I think the most important factor has to do with the community of Legal. There must be 2,000 inhabitants. What is the impact of that on the situation as a whole? I do not know. The greatest impact will be felt in the town of St. Albert. However, as far as we are concerned, the important issue is the 2,000 residents. We must ensure that this number is added to the rest.

I am not answering your question fully, but I am explaining the significance of the 2,000 residents in the overall situation.

À (1005)

The Chair: This is your final question, Mr. Sauvageau.

Mr. Benoît Sauvageau: If I understand correctly, you are asking us to support the status quo, that is to keep the current riding boundaries. Is that correct? I see. We will check later whether the proposal complies with the conditions regarding number of voters and so on.

The Chair: Before giving the floor to Mr. Simard,

[English]

I'd like to ask Mr. Williams if perhaps he could help the committee a bit here. Could you give us an approximate idea of the population of Legal, Morinville, and Rivière Qui Barre? It might help in our considerations.

Mr. John Williams: The population of the town of Legal is about 1,200 people, the population of Morinville is about 8,000 people, and the population of St. Albert is about 56,000 or 58,000 people. Morinville and Legal are located in the county of Sturgeon, whose current boundaries, I believe, were shown in the brief that was presented by the Library of Parliament and which is largely a francophone area. It includes the small hamlet of Rivière Qui Barre, which may have a population of 100 or 150; the town of Villeneuve, which may have a population of 200 or 300 people; and the farming area, which is populated by aboriginal settlers and their families. The county of Sturgeon would have a population, I'd guess, of around 15,000. So there are 15,000 in the county of Sturgeon and 8,000 or 9,000 in Legal, which brings it to, say, 25,000 people in Sturgeon, Morinville, and Legal--approximately 25,000 people.

[Translation]

The Chair: Thank you very much.

Mr. Simard.

Mr. Raymond Simard (Saint Boniface, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, gentlemen.

I would like to have a little more context here. Have you already asked the commission why it proceeded in this way, and have you asked whether it could change its mind?

[English]

Mr. John O'Neill: The only thing I could answer to that is that I have this letter from the mayor in which he makes reference to a meeting they had with the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission in October 2002, where they did stress the importance of the community of interest and hoped the commission would decide in its favour.

I would like to just go back for one minute to what was being said before. I might be a little naive, but I think the community of interest is an awful lot more than numbers. If you're getting rid of a community of interest simply because of numbers, especially when a margin may not be too great, I think it's a big mistake. Excuse me for throwing that in.

[Translation]

Mr. Raymond Simard: The meeting with the mayor was held before the changes were put forward, was it not?

Mr. John O'Neill: Yes.

Mr. Raymond Simard: Did you have a meeting after the changes were announced, in order to appeal the decision?

Mr. John O'Neill: I don't think so. Do you know, Mr. Williams?

[English]

Did the mayor meet with--

The Chair: I'll start drafting him, Mr. O'Neill.

[Translation]

Would you repeat your question, Mr. Simard?

Mr. Raymond Simard: Perhaps Mr. Williams can answer that. I would want to know whether the people from the community or Mr. Williams went to the commission to appeal the decision.

[English]

Mr. John Williams: Yes, Mr. Chair, I did speak. I made a presentation at the public hearing last October 10, I believe it was, and I specifically pointed out the francophone corridor and the community of interest right there and asked that they take that into consideration. That was rejected in the report that was tabled by the Speaker in the House of Commons. I therefore enlisted the support of the francophone community to make further representations.

[Translation]

Mr. Raymond Simard: I come now to my second question.

If I do understand the proposed new boundaries, the towns of Morinville and Legal would be included with St. Paul. Is that correct? Yes?

One of my nieces works as a lawyer in St. Paul. She works in French a great deal. Since St. Albert is growing at a rather incredible rate and most of the new residents are not francophone, have you considered being included with St. Paul?

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: I thought about that even before accepting Mr. Williams' request. I am quite familiar with the demographic situation, and I did look at this issue.

Where am I at? In order for the francophone community to be appreciated by all Canadians, and, in Alberta, by all Albertans, it is sometimes necessary to establish some influence over the cities. St. Paul will not have any influence on Edmonton or St. Albert, because these cities are too far away. It is not that they do not appreciate the community. In the case of Legal, Morinville and St. Albert, three communities are coming together to get their identity recognized. That had an impact on the capital and even on the legislature, from what I have seen recently.

So I did look at this possibility, and it was on that basis that I accepted Mr. Williams' request. That was the reason. The idea is to raise awareness. How are we to go about that? I think we are doing a poor job of gaining respect for the francophone community with this method.

À (1010)

Mr. Raymond Simard: Normally or often, cities and towns have something in common. For example, does St. Paul have anything in common with Morinville, Legal and St. Albert, or are these towns further away and more independent?

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: They are more independent. We do have some things in common: we have common roots, and we have had exchanges between families over the years. People in the francophone community in Alberta, particularly those born in the province, know each other well. It is a question of impact, Mr. Simard.

I have been a teacher, and a principal at a school in Plamondon, which is part of the new district. I went to school in St. Paul for four years. I am very aware of the issue and I thought carefully about the presentation I would be making to you today.

Mr. Raymond Simard: Recently, we had a concrete example of how important it is for communities of interest to be represented by a member of Parliament. I have been representing Saint-Boniface for 10 months, but I was born in Ste. Anne, which is in the riding of Provencher. This is a riding in which minority groups were never able to get 50 per cent of the votes. This was frustrating for the people in our community, because their votes never counted. However, we did have a great deal of influence as a minority community.

Last week, the representative of this riding voted against his party and for a motion that may favour francophones. That is a concrete example of the important role that can be played by one's representative.

I appreciate your position very much and I think that as happened in Provencher, you have some influence with Mr. Williams. Clearly, he respects the francophone community, and that is very important.

Thank you for being here today.

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Simard.

Mr. Godin.

Mr. Yvon Godin (Acadie—Bathurst, NDP): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am pleased to see you today at the Committee on Official Languages and I am pleased that you agreed to come and meet with us.

I am from a francophone community of Canada. The federal government has just published the Dion plan and says that it will be spending $750 million or $850 million to better represent minority communities. Words fail me, but I fully understand the situation in your region.

While you were making your presentation, Mr. Chauvet, I saw that you take this matter very seriously, and I do understand that. Personally, I am from the Acadian Peninsula, and I represent the Acadian population. What happens in your area happens in ours as well.

If you have not already done so, I would recommend that you file a complaint with the Commissioner of Official Languages. I have here a copy of the report of the Commissioner of Official Languages on the riding of Acadie--Bathurst. I will pass it on to you. She says in her report that our complaint is valid and that the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission has a responsibility under part VII and section 41 of the Official Languages Act and must take the community of interest into account.

As you said in your remarks, the people in the community sometimes need some time in order to adapt. I can say that in our region, the francophones in the Acadian Peninsula and the people in Bathurst learned to work together. Now that they have learned to do that, they're being disturbed and the idea is to separate them. I think this is horrible, unacceptable and monstrous, and I am choosing my words carefully.

I see this is a new expulsion of the Acadians. They're trying to deport the Acadians legally. As in your case, francophones have learned to work with anglophones, and the two communities can work together to gain greater recognition. The commission is trying to divide them by using numbers rather than human considerations. Decisions are made based on numbers, which have nothing to do with what people feel.

When people want to get together to go to see their federal member of Parliament, they will have to go to meet with two members. They may even be from two different parties that do not agree at all. How we will be able to work on issues when all sorts of political considerations come into play? I think it is monstrous and unacceptable for francophone regions. I am choosing my words very carefully, and I am not ashamed to use them as a representative of a francophone region.

You have heard me state my views clearly, and I would like know whether you see things the same way I do.

Thank you.

À (1015)

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: I would like to tell you that the new regional president is a fellow from La Broquerie, in the Saint-Boniface region. Knowing him, I am expecting that he will take action and that he will do so at the provincial level as well. It is important for the community.

In addition, tomorrow I will be seeing the departmental official languages champions in Legal. I will be seeing them at my office. I am sure that I will have an opportunity to tell these people about our situation.

Thank you for your comments. You were shaken up in the Acadian Peninsula. You have had your share.

[English]

Mr. John O'Neill: Well, Monsieur, I wish I could have expressed myself as clearly and as strongly as you did on this subject.

Mr. Yvon Godin: I'd like to ask you a straight question. You are working in the communauté, working for the patrimoine, the heritage, and you know that because you are working in that communauté, you have work to do to try to get programs from the federal government. My question is straight: is it not better to work with one member of Parliament than to work with two members of Parliament, where there is a danger...? Well, there's a danger. This is a democracy; we have to live with democracy, and I believe in democracy, but if you happen to have two members of Parliament not from the same party in the democracy of our country, it will be harder to take a project you are working on, get it through to the minister, and get the okay from the government.

Mr. John O'Neill: I am convinced of that, yes.

Mr. Yvon Godin: Thank you.

[Translation]

The Chair: Thank you. Let me put a few questions.

First, let me explain, for the benefit of the people who are listening to us or who do not know, who the champions are that Mr. Chauvet just mentioned. The Canadian government created a position of official languages champion in each department and agency. The champion is a fairly high-ranking official; usually an assistant deputy minister. This person is responsible for ensuring the enforcement of the Official Languages Act. For the past two years, I believe, these people have regularly met twice a year in various regions of the country. If I am not mistaken, this is the group that will meet in Legal. It would be a great opportunity to make these people aware of the situation we are discussing this morning, Mr. Chauvet.

Now let me explore with you, Mr. Chauvet and Mr. O'Neill, this notion of the francophone corridor of St. Albert, Morinville and Legal, which was mentioned several times.

I understand that there is one school board for these three communities. Does the school board also include other communities?

À (1020)

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: For the francophone side, it is the same school board. On the public side, there is the Greater St. Albert Catholic Schools.

[English]

Mr. John O'Neill: Yes.

[Translation]

The Chair: So there is already some unity at the school board level.

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: Yes.

The Chair: I would like to know if I understood correctly.

[English]

I'm not sure if it was in Mr. Williams' presentation or Mr. O'Neill's that there is also either already built or there is a project to build a community cultural centre serving this corridor. Could anyone elaborate on that?

Mr. John O'Neill: This is a proposal that has been brewing for some time. It's a very costly leisure centre with soccer fields, perhaps a hockey rink inside, and any number of other facilities for sports and leisure.

The community of St. Albert feels that it cannot build it alone. The other communities, the surrounding areas such as Rivière Qui Barre, which is not mentioned too often, and the Indian reserves would like to have this as well. There have been parties working together to see how they can arrange the finances of putting up a leisure centre. As a matter of fact, as it appears now, it's going to be outside the boundaries of St. Albert, in the boundaries of the neighbouring county, which is included in the francophone corridor. There is that collaboration, and I don't think one entity will build it alone without the other partners being involved.

[Translation]

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: With your permission, Mr. Chairman, let me add that during the past years, the four municipalities, including the municipality of Sturgeon, have agreed to give the region names in both languages. So they came up with the name Les Plaines Manawan /Manawan Plains. I must regretfully admit that after the last municipal elections, this idea had lost some ground due to the changes in St. Albert's city hall. Sometimes there are some setbacks, but it is not over yet. It is only over if we give up because of a setback. This is not what our Acadian brothers taught us. We don't give up whenever there is a setback. But at the municipal level, a partnership developed over the past years.

The Chair: Thank you.

I have another question about this corridor. For some time, on a national level, efforts have been made to create anglophone tourism corridors in Quebec and francophone tourism corridors outside of Quebec. Are you talking about something related to this notion of broad tourism corridors, Mr. Chauvet? This is based on the francophone population in the area, isn't it?

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: Yes, and this also involves timing. A francophone tourism corridor was developed, similar to what was done in the Saint-Boniface area. In Alberta, there is a bigger corridor, reaching from St. Paul to Bonnyville, Plamondon and other towns.

The Chair: I once had the opportunity of taking part in the Alberta francophone festival. Unfortunately, it was so cold that year that people were discouraged. But if I understand correctly, it takes place every summer, and often in this area. Am I right about this?

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: Yes. In the course of the past four years, two festivals were held: one in St. Albert and the other one at Morinville-Legal.

The Chair: All right. If I have understood the witnesses we heard this morning correctly, the francophone nature of this corridor has an influence on immersion, because that is where we find the highest immersion rate per capita in Alberta.

À (1025)

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: Yes.

The Chair: In the report of the Electoral Boundaries Commission for Alberta, tabled in the House several days ago, there is a rather striking passage that I wish to quote. It relates to Edmonton and is in part III.

The Commission has two reasons for rejecting the narrow use of ethnic identity in establishing electoral boundaries for constituencies.

The Commission is opposed in principle to the idea of setting limits based on ethnic or class distinctions. Elected representatives are expected to represent and serve all Canadians living in their constituency.

I know that I am taking this quote out of context but it seems to go categorically against the idea of a community of interest. That is why the committee readily accepted the request from Mr. Williams to hear you this morning in order to give some consideration to this matter. Reference is made here to two constituencies but there may be others in the country where it is quite clear that the commissions have not taken into account this aspect of community of interests.

I personally am convinced that the federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Alberta should go back to the drawing board and give due consideration to the advice of the Chief Electoral Officer and the Commissioner of Official Languages.

I'd like to thank you for your presentation this morning. There are other colleagues who would like to ask questions but I think that your message is quite clear and has been understood.

[English]

Mr. O'Neill, I'm done with my questions here, but I want to thank you very much for your participation this morning--for me, anyhow.

I can't speak on behalf of everyone until we've had a chance to analyze and synthesize and perhaps present the report, but for me, I'm convinced that the commission in Alberta has failed to take into account the community of interest in this case.

Thank you.

Mr. John O'Neill: If I can add something, Mr. Chairman, I know that the member of the Legislative Assembly of Alberta representing the city of St. Albert is very much in favour of the corridor, certainly very much in favour of what is taking place here today, and certainly in favour of the presentation I have made.

The Chair: Thank you, sir.

We'll go for a second round. Mr. Williams.

Mr. John Williams: Merci beaucoup.

Section 41 of the Official Languages Act commits the federal government to:

enhancing the vitality of the English and French linguistic minority communities in Canada and supporting and assisting their development; and...fostering the full recognition and use of both English and French in Canadian society.

Do you think the Electoral Boundaries Commission, by splitting off St. Albert in one direction and Morinville-Legal in the opposite direction, is fulfilling that mandate of the Official Languages Act?

Mr. John O'Neill: I don't think they are meeting that objective, and if they were meeting it, I wouldn't be here today. It's because I think they've failed to meet this objective that I've made my presentation here today.

[Translation]

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: I don't think that people were acting out of any malicious intent. I think that in this particular case they were simply lacking information. The fact that Mr. Williams' request was accepted is a sign of good will. People sometimes set out on a course of action without all the information. So we are giving you this information. My response is that it does not respect certain provisions of the Official Languages Act. I do not think it was intentional and I believe that the government can rectify the situation.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Williams.

[English]

Mr. John Williams: Subparagraph 15(1)(b)(i) of the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act--and this of course is the act that the Electoral Boundaries Commission was working under--stipulates that the commission must take into consideration the following elements: “The community of interest or community of identity in or the historical pattern of an electoral district”.

Let me repeat, it must take into consideration “the community of interest or community of identity in or of the historical pattern of an electoral district”. Subparagraph 15(1)(b)(ii) adds the criterion of manageable geographic size for the district in sparsely populated areas, but we're not talking about sparsely populated areas here.

Do you feel the Electoral Boundaries Commission has been following its own directive under the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, or do you feel they've ignored the act when they have split St. Albert and Morinville-Legal into two and ignored the community of interest?

À (1030)

Mr. John O'Neill: Maybe not ignored it, but I certainly think they have forgotten about it. That is why I made my point--I think they were more interested in numbers than they were in that phrase. I don't think the numbers balance off any damage being done by this proposal. I just think the numbers are not as important as the community of interest.

Mr. John Williams: All right.

This is an interesting point, Mr. Chairman. When we come to electoral boundaries, the province of Alberta is one of the larger provinces in Canada geographically--254,000 square miles, I believe. Calgary is 180 miles away from Edmonton and they have evolved differently. Calgary really does not have suburbs to speak of, whereas Edmonton has 22 regional communities--St. Albert, Morinville, Legal, Stony Plains, Spruce Grove, and so on and so forth.

I'm referring here to the Electoral Boundaries Commission's report for Alberta. It states that the city of Calgary has grown rapidly within its municipal boundaries. The commission recommended that one of the new seats in Alberta go to Calgary, which would bring that city up to eight seats. The city of Edmonton's population has also grown, but the surrounding urban population has increased even more, and here it is recognizing the communities mentioned previously.

The commission proposed that in order to adequately reflect the urban population in Edmonton and its environs, the region be rearranged into eight electoral districts. The commission believed that the recommended changes would not only meet the representational needs of Calgary and the Edmonton region, but also restore--and this is the point--the historical equality of representation between the two. Calgary gets eight; Edmonton gets eight.

My question to the witnesses is, do you feel it's more important that Calgary and Edmonton each have this historical equality, or again that the community of interest required under the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act be recognized?

Mr. John O'Neill: I don't know why they insist upon having equality between these two cities. They are separated by 200 miles. They're different personalities and the numbers are different. I think it's playing a bit of a weak political game to keep talking about matching the two in every way. I certainly don't think it's a strong enough argument to do away with the community of interest consideration.

[Translation]

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Williams.

Ms. Thibault.

Ms. Yolande Thibeault: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I'd just like to make a comment. I'd like to wish Mr. Chauvet good luck since, as you said, now is not the time to give up. Even if there isn't much that we can do here as a committee, as our chair noted, we can certainly give you our moral support. I know that in New Brunswick, Mr. Godin made representations. He had some degree of success, even though he was not too pleased.

In my own constituency in Quebec, there is a small municipality of approximately 16,000 inhabitants that they wanted to split in two. It is largely an English-speaking community. The local residents made representations and were successful.

You are defending a good cause. Keep it up.

The Chair: Mr. Godin.

Mr. Yvon Godin: Thank you.

I always get along with my colleague Ms. Thibeault. We are not only a committee responsible for morals; in my view, we should also make recommendations to the commission. I think it is important for us to be able to recommend to the commission that it comply with the Official Languages Act of Canada, as well as the spirit of the act and the Charter. That is our responsibility as a committee and I can assure you that I will support you in your efforts. I think that this committee will be making a recommendation. We don't bring in people from Alberta simply to listen to them and tell them that we will support them but to work with them and to understand them.

I am very disappointed, Mr. Chairman, with the Alberta report. When the commissioners say, in their report, that the commission is opposed in principle to the idea of establishing limits on the basis of ethnic or class distinctions, they are going against the position of Elections Canada. A commission cannot decide on new laws for Canada and say that it is too bad for Canadians. The act is clear. It says that there is a 25 per cent margin. It is not up to them to say that the margin should now be 5 or 2 per cent. They must respect the spirit of the act. As you so rightly pointed out, Mr. O'Neill, we are dealing with humans and not with figures.

Having said that, I would like to thank you. I can assure you that the Alberta report is similar to the report that we have seen for the other provinces. That is why I have always been against Elections Canada providing a mandate to the commissions. They wanted to be close to zero or 5 per cent. Well that isn't how it works. They deliver the merchandise, but it goes against the act where it was established that there would be a margin for communities of interest. If they are not willing to take into account communities of interest, then it goes against the legislation.

À (1035)

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Godin.

[English]

Mr. Williams, time for your last intervention.

Mr. John Williams: Merci beaucoup.

Again, I quote from the report of the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission for Alberta. It observed that there has been growing recognition that although the Edmonton region encompasses several distinct and historically unique communities, there are many points of common interest and cooperation concerning the coordination of infrastructure, transportation, health care, and services. These include the Capital Region Wastewater Commission; the Alberta Capital Region Alliance, which focuses on transportation; the Edmonton Regional Airport Authority; and the Capital Health Authority.

It goes on to say that “in terms of geography and community of interest, the populations of the metropolitan Edmonton area have more in common with Edmonton than with the rural communities beyond them”.

While we may have community water boards and waste water disposal as common interests, do you think the community of interest represented by people is more important, when we're talking about federal jurisdiction, than following the water board's lines of demarcation, which have more to do with the slope of the land than anything else?

Mr. John O'Neill: The land is for the people; I don't know what that comment actually means. Sure, we share the common earth, but the cultures of people aren't the same. Different cultures can share things like the waterways and roadways and those kinds of things in common.

Mr. John Williams: Also, Mr. Chairman, again quoting from the report, just as you pointed out, philosophically, the commission disagreed that boundaries should be drawn to reflect ethnicity or class; rather, elected representatives must represent and accommodate all Canadians who live within the electoral district.

But their own act, the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act, specifically gives them direct instruction to recognize the cultural duality and historical development of this country, and they have rejected that.

They are an appointed commission, Mr. Chair. I flatly reject their assumption and attitude. They feel they are the final word on how all Canadians are represented. We may be multicultural, but we have a history as well.

I have a couple of final points, Mr. Chair. Again with reference to the commission's report, in terms of the surrounding communities' connections with rural Alberta, it said that while no one disputed this structural, economic, cultural, recreational, and services connection with Edmonton and the surrounding municipalities, it was asserted that for St. Albert and Leduc the historical trading patterns and cultural connections were to the surrounding rural areas. That was a point I had made.

At the hearings, however, the commission says they heard persuasive opinion in support of the view stated in its proposals that the suburban communities are more closely linked to the metropolitan area than to agricultural areas beyond.

Again, I ask our witnesses, do you agree with the commission's statement that Edmonton--this amorphous group of people--is just a group of people, or do people actually have communities within the metropolitan area of Edmonton?

It's for the record, Mr. Chair. We had to get it on the record.

À (1040)

The Chair: Absolutely.

Mr. O'Neill.

Mr. John O'Neill: I had a thought, but it has escaped me. I tire out about ten o'clock in the morning.

I would say that a number of people in St. Albert go into Edmonton to work. I can tell you this. I did that for 25 years, and I would say that I am very happy to come back to St. Albert because of the quality of life it has. I think that is built largely upon its history and the people there who are the descendants of the early settlers. You couldn't find them if they were scattered around the city of Edmonton.

That's the point I want to make.

[Translation]

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Chauvet.

Mr. Ernest Chauvet: I agree. The people of St. Albert don't relate to people living in Edmonton. They feel they form their own community. They are much closer to the neighbouring communities of Morinville and Legal than to Edmonton. More partnerships have developed between St. Albert, Morinville, Legal and Sturgeon than between St. Albert and Edmonton.

Of course, the fact that they are close to Edmonton means they have had to have some interaction with the city, but they don't relate to it; they identify more with the rural communities.

The Chair: Thank you very much, Mr. Chauvet.

[English]

Thank you very much, Mr. O'Neill.

There has been repeated thanks to the chair of the committee for having caused this meeting to occur. I think that's a little misguided. The thanks are owed first to Mr. Williams for having brought this matter to our attention, and second, to the members of the committee for having readily and rapidly agreed to deal with the matter.

I think you have among this group around this table a number of parliamentarians who take to heart the mandate they've received from the House of Commons of Canada and follow up quickly and rapidly.

This brings me to Mr. Godin's comment that we should be looking at a report. I would like to see if there's a consensus. I seem to sense one around the table. We will start working on a report.

[Translation]

I will ask our researcher to take note of what has been said this morning and would ask committee members to get in touch with our researcher this week so we can draft a report fairly quickly.

I would also like to tell our researcher that the last time we discussed this matter, with regard to the riding of Acadie--Bathurst, I had quoted a fairly important passage from the Lortie Commission report, which, among other things, had studied the issue of communities of interests. So I would like us to come back to it.

That marks the end of today's meeting. I would ask committee members to pass along their proposed recommendations to our researcher by Thursday, so that we can study the report next Tuesday.

We will have an in-camera meeting next Tuesday to study several reports in order to table them in the House before Christmas.

Tomorrow, we will be hearing from the President of Canada Post, the Honourable André Ouellet.

Mr. Godin.

Mr. Yvon Godin: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to make another suggestion. I think we have to produce a report as soon as possible because time is flying by. Time is a fact of life and no one has ever been able to stop the clock.

The Chair: Is next Tuesday good for you?

Mr. Yvon Godin: I would like us to send this report not only to the various commissions involved in this issue, but also to the Sub-Committee of the Committee on Procedure and House Affairs. It is important that the Sub-Committee of the Committee on Procedure and House Affairs be apprised of the recommendations made by the Official Languages Committee, because it has shed light on an entirely different part of the process.

The Chair: Mr. Godin, that's not a problem. As soon as the report is tabled in the House, because that's where we have to table it first, we can certainly ensure that it next be sent to the committee in question, as well as to every electoral boundaries commission and, of course, to Elections Canada. That's not a problem, but we have to go through the House first, as you know.

À (1045)

Mr. Yvon Godin: And to the Sub-Committee of the Committee on Procedure and House Affairs.

The Chair: Fine. Mr. Williams.

[English]

Mr. John Williams: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to put on the record, since we've been talking about community of interest, that the current riding of St. Albert is basically in two halves. In the northern half, there's a small row of hills called the Glory Hills that kind of run east and west and divide the constituency into two halves. The northern half is the francophone community we've been talking about today.The southern half is primarily of Austrian and German cultural origins and is also very much a community of interest within the County of Parkland, the city of Spruce Grove, and the town of Stony Plain.

They have the tri-municipal agreements as a tri-municipality, as they call themselves. They hosted the Alberta Summer Games. They have already developed a tri-municipal leisure centre, which Mr. O'Neill and Mr. Chauvet were talking about. The northern half of the constituency is not talking about putting one in for Sturgeon, St. Albert, Morinville, and Legal. If this committee is making a report, I would ask...well, I want to put on the record that perhaps there are two communities of interest that should be preserved in the constituency.

As Madam Thibeault pointed out, the constituency has a population that's right on the numbers, and I would ask that this committee think about saying the riding of St. Albert should remain as is.

Thank you.

The Chair: Mr. Williams, your comments will be welcome, and you'll get to see the draft report before it is approved.

Perhaps you may also wish to extend an invitation to some members of this committee to visit this great riding.

Mr. John Williams: I certainly do, Mr. Chairman.

The Chair: When?

Mr. John Williams: Very, very soon. I believe we've extended an invitation to all members of the committee, and whoever can come, to St. Albert, Morinville, and Legal. Hopefully, April 24 is the day we're talking about, the 24th and 25th. I've talked to the mayor of St. Albert and he will be glad to host. There's a breakfast for the committee, or the members who can travel, on the morning of the 24th. We're talking to the school board about putting on some cultural event for the committee.

We'd like to visit the chapel on the hill. The chapel on the hill is the oldest building in the province of Alberta. It's a wonderful little chapel built by Father Albert Lacombe in about 1863 and it is the heart of the city of St. Albert. We'll travel up to Morinville and Legal, and I think we'd also want to hear from other members of the community who haven't had the opportunity to travel here this morning, Mr. Chair.

I can assure you we would offer a warm welcome to anyone who wants to come to--

The Chair: I'm certainly one who looks forward to accepting that invitation.

Monsieur O'Neill, Monsieur Chauvet, have a safe journey home. Thank you very much for your time here this morning.

[Translation]

We'll see you tomorrow.

The meeting is adjourned.