Skip to main content
EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Wednesday, November 20, 1996

.1532

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): I will now call the meeting to order. Welcome everyone. Today we will continue our study of ways to promote both official languages in the National Capital region and throughout the country.

This afternoon we have the good fortune to have with us the Honourable Senator Jacques Hébert, who will be co-chairing the meeting with me and who is an ardent defender of this cause.

With us this afternoon as well is the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

[English]

So please welcome the Minister of Canadian Heritage, who can tell us how the plans of her department and the NCC will translate into language harmony in the national capital region and in the entire country.

Please introduce your officials. Thank you.

[Translation]

The Honourable Sheila Copps (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Canadian Heritage): Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm pleased to be here with two great workers in the area of language promotion in Canada, the Deputy Minister of Canadian Heritage, Ms Suzanne Hurtubise, and the person who did the groundwork, the Director General of Official Languages, Mr. Hilaire Lemoine.

First, I would like to start by thanking you for inviting me to present a report on what has been done about the right to education in the minority language since this was recognized in the Canadian Constitution in 1982.

I know that the majority of you have been at one time or another in a minority-language environment. As a woman, I sometimes feel like a minority in politics. So you have had the experience of being minorities as well. The member for the Bloc Québécois grew up in Penetanguishene as a Franco-Ontarian, and the member for Notre-Dame-de-Grâce grew up in Montreal as an anglophone. Thus, in addition to their keen interest in this fundamental question, they bring to the table a degree of practical human expertise, a firsthand perspective on this valuable dimension of our Canada.

.1535

I hope you are aware, as I am, that our linguistic duality lies at the very heart of what it means to be Canadian. It is not only part of our history, during which it was not always properly protected, but also part of our heritage, or reality.

It is also a precious international and economic development tool. This was proven beyond a doubt over the past few days when our Prime Minister succeeded in mobilizing, in a very short period of time, a multinational military intervention force for Zaire. Of course, the success of this initiative is thanks first and foremost to the absolutely remarkable work done by our Prime Minister, but also to the fact that our country has a firmly established tradition of promoting peace and of peacekeeping. Moreover, the reason why Canada stood apart as the ideal choice to lead this initiative is because we are a key player in the international Francophonie. We can just as easily talk directly with most of the world's leaders as we can with Zaire's local populations.

[English]

Worldwide, 800 million people claim English as their first language and 250 million people around the world speak French. There's no denying that Canada's knowledge of both languages gives us an incredible opportunity on the world stage.

Today I would like to discuss with you three aspects of the reality of Canada. I'd like to start by taking stock of where we're at. I want to identify the elements that will help us to promote our values and our linguistic aspirations.

[Translation]

Next, I would like to present to you my vision of our linguistic duality. I am convinced that if we examine closely the investment which we have made in bilingualism, we will see - to be sure - some major impacts at the national and community levels, but also a great deal of value added in terms of our competitive economy.

The third and final aspect I wish to discuss with you concerns new means and mechanisms which we can use to step up our efforts to fully develop Canada's linguistic duality.

Over the years, we have equipped ourselves with a series of dynamic tools, such as the Official Languages Act, the Canadian Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, enabling us to enrich this so uniquely Canadian bilingualism that has taken root in North-American soil.

I do not for one second claim that everything has always been rosy. On the contrary, powerful recollections of the opposition to bilingualism linger in all our memories. There have always been bigots: Mayor Jones and MPP Spina come to mind. But we mustn't let these small-minded people discourage us. If the City of Moncton were the reflection of its celebrated former mayor, it would not be enjoying today all the success and economic development which have come to be associated with it.

To get an accurate picture of bilingualism in Canada, we have to look at the other side of the coin as well: the gradual introduction of more and more bilingual services; the renewed energy of all our minority-language communities in their efforts to obtain education in their own language and control over their schools; and the incentives to promote active bilingualism and cultural products in both official languages. We must look at the progress we have made, particularly in terms of our educational institutions. This progress was made in the first place by parents who believed that their children should be able to develop in their own language.

In 1984 - just 12 years ago - French-speaking parents in Penetanguishene, the hometown of a member of the Bloc Québécois, had to take the school board to court to obtain suitable facilities at the École Le Caron. They weren't asking for the moon, just for facilities on a par with those of the English-language high school. It was a lengthy and hard-fought process, but Mr. Marchand won his case.

And the momentum has continued. It is true that the federal government has widely and consistently supported the development of well-established institutions, such as the Université de Moncton, the Université Sainte-Anne, the University of Ottawa, the Collège universitaire Saint-Boniface, the Faculté Saint-Jean and the community colleges of New Brunswick.

.1540

However, federal assistance has also lead to the creation of several new educational institutions in which we take pride, including the Collège Boréal, the Collège des Grands Lacs, the Cité collégiale, the Collège de l'Acadie and the law and engineering schools of the Université de Moncton.

That's where we are at, Mr. Chairman. It has taken time and it will take even more time. The rate of bilingualism among young English-speaking Canadians has doubled in ten years. In 1977, 38,000 students were enrolled in French immersion schools. This year, the figure is 313,000. What this means, Mr. Chairman, is that ten times as many students are enrolled in immersion classes today as there were 20 years ago.

At present, no fewer than 2.7 million young Canadians are enrolled in English or French second-language programs. These classes are having a tangible impact, since the number of people between 15 and 25 who are now bilingual has risen from 16% to 23% in just ten years.

[English]

Today's generation of young Canadians is the most bilingual in our country's history, and now is not the time to turn our backs. What's more, a recent survey by Environics showed that three out of four Canadians want their children to know Canada's two official languages.

[Translation]

It should come as no surprise then that our former colleague, David Crombie, recommends that the province of Ontario settle the question of the management system for its French-language schools. In his report, Mr. Crombie also makes some very serious suggestions about administrative duties, taxation and school governance in general. To be sure, we have come a long way since Penetanguishene.

Furthermore, I have noticed that francophone solidarity finds expression - and increasingly so - in the business world. We saw concrete proof of this at the National forum of francophone business people and municipal officials, which was held in the heart of the Beauce. For the first time francophone business people from all across Canada, including Quebec, decided to unite to ``do business'' together. Some 20 commercial agreements were signed. A number of municipalities decided to twin with one another. Truly, a wave of energy and creativity swept over the Beauce Summit.

This clearly shows that the Francophonie constitutes an added value for Canadian firms everywhere in the country. This is a positive trend which, far from being a flash in the pan, seems to take firmer root every year. The city of Moncton, which has received investments in the order of $100 million in one year, mainly because of its bilingual character, is a case in point.

[English]

Languages mean business.

[Translation]

In fact, we must attain a critical mass and an expertise that will enable us to begin to harvest the fruit of our collective investments in our two officials languages. In the era of the global village, a knowledge of two of the most widely spoken languages in the world confers an obvious competitive advantage.

[English]

On the eve of the 21st century, knowing two of the world's great languages gives us an incredible economic advantage.

[Translation]

Today, the location of a business is no longer of much importance. We see the proliferation of firms seeking a versatile labour force. Bilingual people are better able to respond to the need of the new global market place. Bilingual firms can target larger markets, give their clients better service and, usually, increase the profit.

[English]

Canada, as the only country that is a member of the Commonwealth and the Francophonie, is building on our linguistic duality to open up new markets in many regions of the globe. This, for example, is the case with our language courses, instructional material and educational software, all of which are world-beaters.

[Translation]

It can therefore be said, without any hesitation, that in the new and highly competitive economy, bilingualism represents a significant added value. I also believe that the economic argument is more effective than the language police. It is precisely this reasonable, coherent and practical approach that I wish to use to ensure still greater progress for the cause of bilingualism in Canada.

.1545

Clearly, our linguistic duality is and always will be at the heart of our identity. It defines us as a people and makes the doors of the world wide open to us. That is why we must look energetically to the future and carefully analyze how we can give renewed impetus to our official languages at the dawn of the 21st century.

We must mobilize our young people around the values and the advantages of bilingualism. We must further consolidate our institutional progress, particularly in the field of education. We must develop new partnerships to extend the use and influence of our two official languages and we must recognize the contribution that our English-speaking and our French-speaking communities make to the social and economic life of each region of Canada.

And above all, we must promote to the entire population of Canada the real value that our linguistic duality confirms on our identity and the added value it gives us economically.

I rely on you, the members of this Joint Committee, to give us advice and suggestions as to how best to achieve these ends. Meanwhile, I would ask you to take a look at the effect of the official languages policy.

[English]

I'd like to take a moment and just walk us through the deck, because I think when you look at the future of official languages you have to look at our history.

The policy of official languages is a very young policy, just as Canada is a very young country. And what does the policy do?

[Translation]

The policy is a reflexion of our history, which has not always been attractive. The rights of minorities have gone through some difficult times in all provinces. The policy also reflects the rights that were enshrined in our Constitution in 1982.

The right of French-speaking parents to educate their children in their own language throughout the country has nothing to do with the goodwill of government. It is a right under the Constitution and one that francophones have had to demand, to all intents and purposes.

For the right reasons or the wrong reasons, we've reached the point that all provinces, except Ontario, have school management in French at the moment. This was unthinkable at the time of the battle in Penetanguishene fought by our friendly honourable member for Quebec-East.

The new official languages policy is a reflexion of our history based on two founding peoples, of the constitutional rights put forward in 1982 and of our identity.

The fact that some of my ancestors were Acadians, that I did not speak French until I was 13, that I nevertheless felt at home in French, are characteristics of my country.

The policy is particularly an investment in our youth and an economic asset.

[English]

I want to repeat that. It is an economic asset because I remember the arguments 20 years ago when people complained about putting two languages on a corn flakes box and what that was going to do to the cost of doing business. In fact the capacity to speak two official languages and many other languages of the globe has put us on the forefront of world trade into the 21st century.

Included in your packets is a study that was recently released earlier this month that looks upon the valeur ajoutée du bilinguisme pour le Canada, strengthening of the Canadian common market. Bilingualism is a winning bet for Canada's future.

[Translation]

Why is bilingualism a profitable investment? First, because bilingualism develops our human capital. Federal leadership allows young Canadians throughout the country to learn their second language wherever they may live.

[English]

I would have loved, when I was a kid growing up in elementary school, to have had the opportunity to learn the French language that is available to young people now.

[Translation]

I learned French because I really wanted to, but it was not easy to do. When I was at school, we started learning French in grade 9, with one hour of French a day, five days a week. The situation now for my daughter, who is studying French in high school, is very different. Personal bilingualism is an asset in the Canadian, North American and world market place. Knowledge of two or even three languages opens peoples' eyes to a much broader world than the one they see through just one language.

.1550

[English]

From 1981 to 1991, and this is where you have to look at the success story.... Yes, we have more work to do, and yes, we have to do it in the municipalities, at the provincial level, at the federal level. But if you look at where we were in 1981, from 1981 to 1991 the level of bilingualism in young people increased from 16% to 23% in a ten-year period. Our work is starting to bear fruit.

In 1995, 2,700,000 young Canadians were studying French or English as a second language in this country. That compares with a 10% increase over the last 25 years.

[Translation]

French immersion has increased 40% annually over the last 20 years, from 38,000 young people in 1978, to 313,000 to date. The proportion of elementary school students learning a second language has risen from 33% in 1971 to 55% in 1995.

[English]

There has been a 75% increase in elementary school students studying a second language in the last twenty years. That is a success story.

[Translation]

The bilingualism of Quebeckers sets them apart.

[English]

In Quebec 35% of the population is bilingual; 60% of anglophones are bilingual - what a value-added - and 32% of francophones.

[Translation]

Developing human capital is a profitable investment. There is access to education in the minority language in all provinces; it has just been approved in Newfoundland, good heavens. This year, they started providing education in French.

Senator Prud'homme (La Salle): We're making progress.

Ms Copps: Yes, we are making progress. School management for the minority communities exists in all provinces, except Ontario. Ontario has accepted the Crombie Report, and we want to work with that province to ensure full school management in French, including access to post-secondary education.

If you analyze the report published by the parents of francophones a few weeks ago, you will see that at the beginning of our Official Languages Program, for each dollar spent for francophones, two dollars were spent for anglophones. These figures came from our department, in fact. The report showed that at the very beginning of the Official Languages Program, services in the minority language, English, were well-established in Quebec. There were elementary and secondary schools, and universities, and the system provided grants on a per capita basis. We were spending $2 for each anglophone, and $1 for each francophone.

Over the years, we developed a better-established education system in French throughout the country. In the past five years, the figures have been reversed. Now, under the Official Languages policy, for each dollar spent on the minority anglophone community, we are spending two dollars on the minority francophone community. This reflects the development of French-language institutions across the country.

We also want to work with your committee on the refinancing of the five-year plan. Beginning next year, it will go much farther than grants per capita. This calculation method does not necessarily take into account the contributions made by the province. We will be preparing action plans that do take those contributions into account.

Schooling: In 1991, 96% of francophones outside Quebec had completed the ninth grade, as opposed to 69% in 1971.

Bilingualism is a profitable investment for developing our institutions: 158,000 jobs are created directly and indirectly in the language industries in Canada. These are translators and language teachers. Scores of educational institutions have just been recognized in the world education markets. The Canadian example is beneficial abroad.

Bilingualism is a profitable investment that builds our communities and our country.

After 30 years of effort outside Quebec, we now have 34 private or community radio stations in French. In 1978, there were only six such stations. Outside Quebec, there are 24 weeklies, and two dailies in all the provinces and territories, and there are 71 community cultural centres.

.1555

Bilingualism is a profitable investment for entrepreneurship, as francophone entrepreneurs found at our meeting in Saint-Georges-de-Beauce. The market is 1 million francophones outside Quebec. There are 348 francophone co-operatives outside Quebec. My daughter is a member of the Caisse populaire in Saint-Bonaventure, where she lives. Francophone co-operatives outside Quebec have 660,000 members, assets totalling $3.9 billion, and $327 million in investment. There are 20,000 minority francophone entrepreneurs. They are entrepreneurs and they do not give up. A first major meeting with Quebec entrepreneurs in the Beauce resulted in 30 partnerships throughout the country.

A tourism network is being formed with various festivals, for example. There were 430,000 French tourists last year. We want to give them a chance to discover Canada and the advantage of having two languages.

Three Canadians out of four want their children to speak both languages. Bilingual Canadians earn between 21 and 34% more than unilingual Canadians. Bilingualism attracts private enterprise. We have the example of Moncton where Federal Express, Camco, CP Express and others were attracted thanks to the promotion of a bilingual workforce.

The international character of Montreal, recognized in the document Quebec International, is intimately related to its bilingual and multicultural population. I quote:

This is taken from a Quebec government publication aimed at attracting business to Canada.

Large investment companies know that bilingualism is an asset. The Premier of Quebec also knows this and wants everyone else to know it.

The government action has demonstrated that linguistic duality is an important element of our identity, an asset for Canada and a guarantee of success.

Francophones outside Quebec are increasingly claiming their rightful place in Canadian society. The catch-up in education has begun. Their institutions contribute to Canadian prosperity and the anglophone community of Quebec plays a determining role in the economy and development of the province and of Canada.

Official languages policy, challenges for the future: We must pursue promotion and publicize the advantages of Canadian linguistic duality. Yes, we can have regulations, and yes, we must work unceasingly to consolidate our achievements so far. But instead of focusing exclusively on regulation, we should talk about the political and economic advantages of our bilingualism policy.

We are coordinating the participation of federal institutions in the development of minority communities: you have received our response to Bill C-41 and C-42 where we've started to involve the Treasury Board as the central agency responsible for ensuring that we adopt official language policies.

Federal-provincial co-operation: the maintenance and development of Canadian expertise, the promotion of the wealth and advantages and the development of quality teaching at all levels for the official language community.

[English]

I've probably given you more figures than you can swallow. I will just say on a personal note - I made reference to this earlier on - that when I was a kid growing up in Hamilton we didn't speak a lot of French. My father grew up in northern Ontario and he spoke fluent French. He was an Irish kid who learned it on the street. About three years before Expo I took a family vacation. I had never heard a word of French spoken, because we didn't speak it at home. My mother was Hamilton born. Even though her ancestry was Acadian, she had lost it.

.1600

When I went to Montreal we stayed in a tourist home and in a motel. In the tourist home my father sat down. We're sitting in a little tourist home near Peel Street - this was in 1963 or 1964 - and they were playing checkers outside. So my father

[Translation]

started playing with them and chatting in French. I thought that was fantastic. What's he saying? What's happening?

[English]

I was a very curious person and I didn't know what was going on. So I decided then and there that I would do my damnedest to learn to speak this very strange and new language.

My sister, on the other hand, was two years older than I and she was a little shyer. She had been studying French in school for a year. We stopped at a motel and we decided we were going to go for a swim. My sister

[Translation]

had studied French. But in those days we didn't really learn to have a conversation, we studied Beaudelaire, Molière and other great authors. She wanted to talk to a boy and came up with a whole sentence: Do you like diving in the swimming pool? She discussed it with me and was quite flustered about asking our question when she finally put it to the boy: ``Do you like diving in the swimming pool?'' And the he came out with this answer: ``I'm sorry, I don't speak English''.

Some honourable members: Oh, oh!

Ms Copps: My sister was devastated. She never made an attempt to speak French again because of the effect this had on her. But I decided I was going to do it.

I can't understand the people who are against bilingualism and who think that it is too...

[English]

Whatever your language, I could never understand people who spoke out and fought against bilingualism, because one of the things learning a second language does - and Dan can speak from his own experience - is it opens the world to you in ways you can never see in one language.

[Translation]

When I have the opportunity to read L'Actualité, it gives me quite a different vision of my country from Maclean's. It really does open up one's mind. One thing I wish for my daughter, whatever the official language policies may be at the federal or provincial level, I want her to learn two, three, four or five world languages. We have this possibility in Canada.

[English]

recognizing we've had only thirty years of experience in recognizing this officially.... Many people in this room - and I know there are people who were refused admission into clubs - were treated as

[Translation]

``white niggers of America''. That is a deplorable part of our past. But instead of concentrating on it, we can take into account the experience we have had in the past 25 years and build a country that is a model of open-mindedness. I'm not afraid of opening up to the world because the more I know about it, the greater freedom I have to think and that is what I want for my daughter. That is why I think school is very important.

It is also very important for entrepreneurship. If you're able to go to school in French in Saint-Boniface, but then there are no jobs in French in Manitoba, what good does it do you? You're forced to move away. So that is why we want to extend the advantages of bilingualism.

[English]

So we can go to Red Deer and point to the fact that in this country three out of four Canadians want their kids to learn to speak a second language, because they see it as a plus.

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Thank you, Madam Minister. Thank you for sharing your personal experience with us to emphasize the importance of speaking both languages. As you know, we'll have to go vote. So we'll begin our questioning, if the committee wishes. Mr. Marchand, you have ten minutes.

Mr. Marchand (Quebec-Est): Welcome to the committee, Ms Copps.

You've talked for 30 minutes about the virtues of bilingualism, Ms Copps. No one here is casting doubt on the value of bilingualism. Nor is there anyone casting doubt on the importance of learning French in Canada or the importance of immersion courses. That is not the problem. If you as minister are not aware of the nature of the problem, I wonder what you are doing as minister.

The problem in Canada is that there are many francophones who are not provided proper service by the federal government, even in the capital of Canada. The problem is that those with French as their mother tongue are being assimilated, something that you yourself have often denied. When the minister is not even able to recognize the nature of the problem, we cannot expect her or even the government to be able to correct this problem.

.1605

You underline the importance of bilingualism and at the same time you cut back on assistance programs to francophone communities throughout Canada. Grants to Saskatchewan have been cut back almost 50%. Grants to Ontario have been cut back by 30%. Overall you've cut back more than $20 million for the francophone communities in Canada. This amount of $20 million has been turned over to an agency known as the CIO, and the purpose of this agency is not even known.

This does not demonstrate that you have a proper understanding of your priorities, Madam Minister. I do have doubts about your desire and your sincerity in your approach because this is not the first time you have made mistakes in your public statements.

Even today, for example, you said that there was only one province in Canada that does not respect section 23 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms concerning the management of schools. There is not only Ontario, Ms Copps, there are four provinces in Canada, British Columbia, Newfoundland, Ontario and even New Brunswick, that do not respect the Canadian Charter. There is not just one. But this is not the first time you've made this statement.

As a matter of fact, you have stated in the House and even in an article published in Le Droit on October 5, that 99% of Canadian francophones have access to education in French. That is not true, Ms Copps. Ninety-nine percent of francophones do not have access to education in French in Canada, except if we include Quebec. Curiously enough, your article deals with francophones outside Quebec.

So why are these statements being made? Are they an attempt to mislead? It's as if you didn't know the facts. It's as if you didn't really want to correct the problem or were unwilling to recognize what the real problem is.

For example, you mentioned part VII of the Official Languages Act before. We've beaten around the bush for two years on this. The Prime Minister made a solemn affirmation to the Acadians in 1994. We've had two, three, four or five generations' worth of business plans and we're still going around in circles.

Even if this week's press release does actually confirm that Treasury Board might perhaps be involved and play a role...

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Mr. Marchand, the clock is running.

Mr. Marchand: The question is coming up. Don't worry. I have ten minutes.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Time is flying by. You can use up your ten minutes.

Mr. Marchand: It's because we don't often have an opportunity to see the minister. It seems to me we should get back to the central point, the keystone that the federal government never ceases denying. It's the problem of assimilation, the word the Commissioner of Official Languages,Mr. Goldbloom does not even dare use in his 1995 annual report. I have data from Statistics Canada here, Ms Copps, which, even though you have denied there was any assimilation in Canada and even though you are saying that in fact the first-language francophone population is on the increase, show that assimilation is a serious problem.

The FCFA is forever bringing it up. For years, they've been saying it's an urgent problem and that assimilation is increasing. I'm having the statistical data distributed and they will prove without question that assimilation has increased at a furious rate in only 20 years.

Despite that fact, we can see that despite all its beautiful intentions concerning bilingualism, the value of French in Canada, its value for trade and so on, the federal government is reneging on its commitments and slashing on its subsidies to the communities.

Madam Minister, are you ready to recognize that mother-tongue francophones in Canada have an assimilation problem?

Ms Copps: Of course, the number of years spent in school by francophones outside Quebec has considerably increased during the last 20 years, since you left Penetanguishene.

Presently, 97% of francophones who wish to do so go to French schools. How many schools are there in the Ottawa area which you say is so ill-served? Do you know how many schools there are in all?

.1610

Mr. Marchand: The number of schools closing...

Ms Copps: You know we have schools...

Mr. Marchand: Ms Copps, in downtown Ottawa there are five francophone schools that shut down.

Ms Copps: Yes, the same as in downtown Quebec City. In all downtown city cores there are schools that have closed. I have one in Hamilton. I'm talking about schools as such. How many francophone schools are there in Ottawa, in the Ottawa-Hull area?

Mr. Marchand: Well, I'll tell you...

Ms Copps: There are 62 francophone schools in the Ottawa area, okay? Twenty years ago, how many were there? I can tell you that as there was no constitutional right to French schools before 1982, there were a lot fewer.

When I talked about the provinces that are doing something in the area of school management, I said that it wasn't thanks to the charity of the provinces that school management was now possible. For example, you know that British Columbia did not appeal against the request for French schools because that was one of the tools in the 1982 Canadian Constitution. The Canadian Constitution which guarantees the right to schooling in the minority language has been in existence 15 years. That's a right that didn't exist before. That's why now, you have a greater number of young bilingual people all across Canada including in the ranks of the francophones. You have ten times more than in 1971. So I can't believe...

Mr. Marchand: You are really pushing it with that one, Madam Minister, because there are no...

Ms Copps: I'm sorry, but one thing that I...

Mr. Marchand: There are not ten times more francophones today, Ms Copps. When we talk about minority language...

Ms Copps: Fine. I'm happy to hear that we're in agreement on the importance of bilingualism. That is one step forward at least and I appreciate that very much. I think that what we must do after the schooling, is to set up two other tools that are important for the survival and flowering of francophones and minority languages.

First, there's the use of French as early as kindergarten and within the family; we need cultural centres, community centres and all those tools. What is also needed is a level of French-speaking entrepreneurship all across the country for young francophones outside of Quebec of whom 54% now have post-secondary education. The post-secondary education rate of francophones outside Quebec is presently 54%...

Mr. Marchand: But you're not answering my questions, Ms Copps.

Ms Copps: ...which is higher than for Quebec anglophones or francophones. That means that the francophones outside Quebec are succeeding and we should give them the tools they need to work in their own language across the country.

Mr. Marchand: But you're not answering my questions. Could I ask you, Ms Copps, what the assimilation rate in Ottawa is?

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Mr. Marchand, that will be your last question because we have to go and vote.

Mr. Marchand: Yes, I know. For example, you have just said...

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): I'll give the minister a minute to answer you and then we will suspend the meeting and come back after the vote.

Mr. Marchand: Can I ask one question?

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Yes, quickly.

Mr. Marchand: You've said a lot of things. Amongst other things, you talked about Ottawa. Do you know what the assimilation rate is in Ottawa, the capital? It's about 35%. Are you ready to admit that the assimilation rate in Ottawa, Canada's capital, is 35, 36 or 37%? Are you ready to admit that the City of Ottawa, the capital of Ottawa, essentially functions in English? Are you ready to admit that only...

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Put your question.

Mr. Marchand: I'm putting my question. Give me enough time to put my question because she said a lot of things. Are you ready to admit that only 50% of mother-tongue francophones have access to schools outside of Quebec? Only 50% and not 99%?

Ms Copps: No, it's 97%.

Mr. Marchand: Ms Copps, can't you admit there's assimilation in Canada?

Ms Copps: Let me explain.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): If the minister wishes, you can start over...

Ms Copps: I'm giving you the figures from Statistics Canada. This generation of our youth is the most bilingual in all our history. Even the Premier of Quebec, I think, said it was important for the young people to learn both languages of Canada. I think his own children speak them. Okay?

What is important is making available the tools necessary for education. That started...

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): With that answer from the minister, we'll suspend this meeting.

.1615

[English]

Mr. Allmand (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce): Madam Chair, I have a point of order. When members ask questions - and this includes Mr. Marchand - I wish they would have the courtesy to allow the minister to answer those questions.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): It would be helpful to hear what the minister has to say.

Mr. Allmand: You spend a lot of time asking questions, let her answer the damned questions! You keep interrupting her! Let her answer the questions!

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Order, order.

Ms Copps: I only point out, Madam Chair, the fact that we have more bilingual young Canadians today then we've ever had in the history of our country. I have pointed out the experience. There are 700 francophone schools outside Quebec, and there are 62 francophone schools in Ottawa.

I appreciate very much the battle that the member carried out for a school in downtown Ottawa. I happen to have sat on a parents' committee in Ottawa, and we merged two schools. We had the same problems in inner-city communities across the country. But to suggest that they are problems of assimilation is simply false.

The number of children who want to go to school in their language across this country is higher than it has ever been, and the reason it is higher is that we changed the Constitution in 1982. Why do you think we now have the road paved toward French-language school boards in British Columbia? It's not because the provincial government wanted to be magnanimous. It's because the Constitution of Canada gave francophones the right to take control over their schools and their school boards, and that's what they're doing.

In every single province, with the exception of Ontario, there is a process now in place for French-language control of French-language school boards - and that includes the province of Newfoundland. There was a resolution passed there earlier this year to that effect. Now that is the reality of

[Translation]

education. It's not perfect when you live in a world surrounded by English, when there are 800 million English speakers all around the world. The more we work together, francophones and anglophones, by knowing our country's second language, the better we feel.

I didn't have the opportunity to learn French at school when I was young and I don't want the same thing to happen to my daughter. I learned it through a lot of personal effort because I wanted to and I now want to give that opportunity to all our young people. That is happening but it takes time.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): With that answer, we'll return for further questioning after the vote. Thank you.

.1617

.1650

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): As everyone knows, we unfortunately have to leave here at 5:15 p.m. This is going to be our last round of questions, so I'm going to ask everybody to be very polite and to keep to the time constraints. If people are short with their questions, they'll have answers.

The next individual on our list of speakers is Senator Rivest.

[Translation]

Senator Rivest (Stadacona): Madam Minister, I listened to your presentation very carefully. As you pointed out, quite rightly so, since the Official Languages Act was passed, especially since one of the positive aspects of the 1982 legislation concerning education rights, and what the Canadian government has done since, the cause of bilingualism, and more particularly, that of the French language in Canada in the federal public administration certainly have considerably improved.

I think that is indisputable. Even more so because that legislation and that mindset we have always had in Canada when thinking francophone first when the matter of bilingualism has arisen, have had rather exceptional results as you indicated in your presentation on those English-speaking Canadians who have become bilingual, especially the young people who are the harbingers of our future.

But you did make one statement that I absolutely cannot support and that I absolutely disagree with - I don't know if it's really what you said - to the effect that there is no problem of assimilation for francophones outside Quebec in Canada.

Despite all the efforts made, I think there is a phenomenon of assimilation which is of course not due to any kind of ill will. It is clear that at the beginning of the century, when the francophone communities lived in a more or less self-sufficient rural setting, the risks of assimilation were far fewer than in the urbanized setting we now have.

I think that for the purposes of our discussion and the work of our committee, it would be important to recognize that despite the considerable progress that has been made, there actually is a problem of francophone assimilation. I would ask you to recognize it, first of all. I would also like to ask you what specific measures the Canadian government might consider in the short or medium term to counter this phenomenon.

You yourself raised one indication, amongst others, which of course is to implement part VII of the Official Languages Act as seriously as the rest of the Act was implemented when it was passed. This would give francophones living in situations of assimilation in urban settings a community base, a set of institutions in Canada's large and medium cities.

.1655

These institutions, supported by the efforts made in education, would decrease or slow down this phenomenon of assimilation.

I understand that this will have to be done in a certain budgetary context. I hope the work of the committee will allow everyone, including yourself as the Minister responsible for Heritage, as well as your colleagues in Cabinet, to recognize that the problem of assimilation does exist. I also hope there will be a clear and committed government intent to take specific steps other than those already taken, which are still necessary, which are still difficult to implement and that encourage the promotion of duality.

There is an assimilation problem and I'd like to hear you comment what I have just said.

Ms Copps: The member for Quebec-Est is the one who talked about assimilation. I said that the total number of bilingual Canadians is higher than ever. Families also wish, and this did not exist 20 years ago, that their children will be able to progress in French or in English whatever their mother tongue may be.

The figure given by the member for Quebec-Est shows that the gross number of francophones outside Quebec who have French as their mother tongue has increased. These are the figures given by the member for Quebec-Est, in other words a gross number of about 50,000 people.

That said, in comparing this with the 1971 to 1981 period, in the area of the use of French in our daily lives, there is a problem of a shift towards English all across Canada. This isn't simply a problem outside Quebec. It would be misleading to say that this problem exists only in one part of Canada.

It's the problem of the Americanisation of our culture. Both francophone as well as anglophone children spend all their time in front of TV sets. In 1996, they don't spend their time the way we did. When we were children, we only had a few stations and they were local ones at that. With globalization, we of course enjoy the possibilities offered by globalization but we also have to deal with the risks that go with it.

Now, what tools can we offer besides education? Education is the important tool because when we see that the francophones... Let's take the example of the francophones.

[English]

or you could use the same example of anglophones whose language has survived in certain parts of Quebec. Until the beginning of official languages in 1971, and until the constitutional protections of 1982, the only thing that kept the family language alive was la volonté des parents. That's what kept the French language alive against all odds for 300 years. You had laws in legislatures that made it illegal to speak French. You had a real anti-French sentiment that not only existed in the people, but also existed in the law.

[Translation]

What is most affecting about the new figures is that Canadian parents, in 1996, find bilingualism to be an advantage and this was perhaps not perceived when the Official Languages Act was implemented. It was terrible in 1971.

So we have education. It's important that school management be taken up by the parents, but further than that a more solid francization policy should be set up. That's why we spent over one billion dollars set aside for education, as we saw in the parents committees' report.

We also set aside a special fund for francization projects totalling $112 million over a five-year period. That was the first stage of a francization budget which was not the same as the education budget and on a per capita calculation basis. Next year, when we have a new five-year budget for official languages projects, we'll have to set up the tools to defend and develop education but also to set up cultural centres.

.1700

[English]

I want to say this in English. I was in Sault Ste. Marie two months ago. Can you imagine that in the same city that became notorious for what would be considered an anti-French sentiment, there is a fairly general support for the establishment of a francophone cultural centre that would permit not only the kids, but the parents to come together in a place where they can share their language and culture? And it's also amazing that Sault Ste. Marie also happens to represent one of the longest, most continuous francophone communities in Canada - close to 400 years since the arrival of

[Translation]

the explorers, after the Huron. It seems to me we should do more and that's why we want to implement the action plans the member for Quebec East mentioned. There was never any action plan for the official languages five-year plan. We had a per capita policy. In other words, you got a certain amount of money depending on the number of students you had in the school. So you understand why we always got more money for English establishments in Quebec than for the French establishments outside of Quebec. It's simply because in Quebec we had more young people studying in English in an already well-established system. Now that the situation is reversed, we'll have to set up action plans.

Are you going to set up post-secondary centres? Are you going to have colleges and universities? You have to understand that the figures given out before show that the francophone outside Quebec is better educated than all other Canadians today. Why? First of all, because I'm convinced that a francophone outside Quebec who keeps his or her language does it through personal choice and not because it's forced on him because of policy or governments. It's extraordinary. It's quite the reverse of what was happening in 1975. In those days, young francophones from the north of Ontario were less educated and paid less than their English counterparts. Now, it's the reverse. Young francophones outside Quebec are better educated and are getting along better economically.

So I maintain that we must put the emphasis on the French language and have a funding policy for cultural projects with a view to creating links between communities and in particular the francophone community. I'm the one who got the idea of holding the Economic Summit in Beauce. That was decided after a meeting of ministers for the Francophonie, in Saint-Boniface. We figured it was all well and good to have schools, but if there was no work in that language after that, there was no other choice than to go to Winnipeg and work in English.

Based on the Beauce experience, how can we help and improve the development of communities of these origins in the framework of bilingualism? The same question can be asked for New Brunswick.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): I'd like to beg the indulgence of the committee. We have twenty minutes remaining and I have a lengthy list of speakers here. I would like to accommodate everyone. If I can have the cooperation of all committee members, we'll try to get in as many questions and answers as possible.

Mr. Breitkreuz, are you willing to have five minutes, or do you need a full ten?

Mr. Breitkreuz (Yellowhead): Is that for me, apart from the comments by the minister and Deputy Prime Minister?

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): We're trying to restrict it. Maybe you can shoot out your questions, the minister can answer, and then we can proceed with other questions.

Mr. Breitkreuz: It's not that easy to shoot them out. I have to have a preamble first.

Ms Copps: That's right, we have gun control, so you can't shoot them out.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Do your best then, Mr. Breitkreuz.

Mr. Breitkreuz: Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, I appreciate your impassioned presentation, but I don't agree with too much of it. I do agree with the Bloc member, however, that in spite of the fact of all the policies and regulations that governments make, and in spite of all the money that's being spent, assimilation goes on for both the anglophones in Quebec and the francophones outside Quebec.

An hon. member: How many anglophones are left?

Mr. Breitkreuz: I'll get back to that in a moment.

.1705

I want to ask you a question about Parks Canada, and more specifically Jasper National Park and the town there. The people want to know the total specific costs because of all the restructuring going on and the changes being made - both capital and operating costs incurred by the town site during the past several fiscal years, and of course the amount of revenue generated by parks within that area. The pat answer thus far has been that all revenues go into the general fund, so there is no way of identifying specific revenues or expenditures.

I have a list of questions from the residents of Jasper. Of course, Minister, I don't expect you to have all the answers at your fingertips, so I will leave questions with you and hope you can answer them in due course.

On this whole bilingual business, the supposed goal and purpose of the Official Languages Act - and this goes back to 1969, or at least the late 1960s - was to bring linguistic justice - I suppose it was all part of this ``just society'' era - and foster national unity in the country. I ask, where is linguistic justice? In fact, language justice has been abandoned whenever the two goals clashed.

We all know efforts by successive Liberal and Tory governments on national unity have been one dismal failure after another. We have seen the federal ship of state drift incrementally into supporting, though disproportionately, the French-speaking minority outside Quebec and the English-speaking minority inside the province, while in its interactions with Quebec governments it has been trapped into silently and surreptitiously aiding an enforced French unilingualism - only unilingualism. That's the case.

I want to read, Madam Chair, a few paragraphs from the only academic and thoroughly researched piece of work on official languages in this country. It's from page 12; and I don't imagine too many of you have read that far, because the truth hurts, so you just put it away and hide. I quote:

So perverse is the present mismatched set of language laws governing Canada that:

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): May we have the question, please?

Mr. Breitkreuz: It's coming.

I'm going to ask the question, and then I'll read a motion, if I may, Madam Chair.

So we have, over the years, built up an industry not only in unity but also in official languages.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Mr. Breitkreuz -

Mr. Breitkreuz: I'm asking it right now.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): I'm just mentioning that if we can deal with motions at the next meeting.... Because time is very short. We want to take advantage of having the minister here to answer questions. If you can get on with your question, we can get the minister's answer to your question.

Mr. Breitkreuz: I was just going to ask the question when you interrupted, Madam Chair; but thank you very much.

So I ask the minister, the Deputy Prime Minister -

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Mr. Prud'homme.

Senator Prud'homme: I think that the honourable member can continue. For my part, I think it's a good thing to be acquainted with the Reform Party philosophy on bilingualism.

.1710

But I wonder if we could ask the minister to get back to what I think is the problem that interests us all.

[English]

I want to listen to what the gentleman has to say but I would also like the minister to be treated fairly - and us, those of us who are interested in this matter, some for 35 years. If the minister was consenting, I have no objection if you take the rest of the day if she were to come back.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): I understand that Ms Copps -

[Translation]

Ms Copps: I'm all ears.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): - has been very eager to appear before us, and she has been very available. But I'd like to give her a chance to answer your question.

Mr. Breitkreuz: I didn't ask the question yet. I was interrupted.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): I'm sure she has already sized up a few questions.

Mr. Breitkreuz: I ask the minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, with the building up of these industries, how long is this charade and this hypocrisy going to be allowed to continue?

Ms Copps: First of all, the question was asked about parks. I'm sure the member will be happy to know that a disproportion of the budget for parks from the Government of Canada is spent in the province of Alberta. It is the single largest recipient of funding for parks in Canada.

Mr. Breitkreuz: Why?

Ms Copps: I only point that out because if the member's claim through his questions on Jasper is to somehow show that the federal government.... I don't know what the claim of the question is, but the fact is, the reason that the greatest proportion of the federal budget is spent on parks in Alberta is obviously because we have some fantastic national parks there that we respect and support as a nation.

In the same way, Madame Chair, I would suggest that if the member wants to do an analysis of the rights of linguistic minorities, he could start with his own province. If you are a person who is sick, who wants to get services in your language and you happen to be a francophone minority living in certain parts of Alberta, you do not have access to those services at the moment, you did not have them in the past, and I don't notice them raised in Lament for a Nation.

Mr. Breitkreuz: Nobody's clamouring for them either.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): There are three minutes left.

Ms Copps: Mr. Breitkreuz was suggesting that somehow the federal government policies don't work because certain other jurisdictions put limitations on the capacity to have access to services.

The point I'm trying to make, which I hope is a point supported by the members of the committee, is that in fact the work we've done in guaranteeing schooling in a minority language across the country has not solved the problem but is a step in the right direction.

We stepped into a situation in 1971 where there was virtually no protection for minorities across the country and there was an incredible risk of language loss.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): I don't want to interrupt you from making your point, but I've just been informed that we were misinformed at the beginning. We have to be back in the House at 5:15 p.m.

Ms Copps: So we have to go.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): That's the latest intelligence we have, so please make your point.

Ms Copps: It's only to say that if you want to look at discriminatory language laws, you can start with provinces that made it against the law to speak French in the legislature.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Unfortunately -

An hon. member: What about the law in Quebec?

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Order! On that note, unfortunately I understand that the minister will not be able to come back.

Ms Copps: I can come back, but I can only say, Madame Chair -

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): You will come back?

Ms Copps: - that I fight that narrowness on all sides. That's what we're here for, to try to open eyes to the positive benefits that come from embracing both languages.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Thank you. On that note -

Mr. Allmand: On a point of order, Madame Chair, it has been a tradition in this committee that we start with the Bloc Québécois in the questioning, then we go to the government side, and then we go to the opposition. We've had three opposition members in a row - Bloc Québécois, Conservative and the Reform Party - with no questions at all from the government side, either senators or Liberal -

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Mr. Allmand, I'm going to exert my prerogative as chair because we have to be in the House.

Mr. Allmand: I know, but I am not very happy with the situation.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): The minister has agreed to come back and you will have -

[Translation]

Mr. Allmand: It's a question of circumstances.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Order. The minister has agreed to come back, and we will resume when we come back.

.1714

.1755

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): We're into overtime.

Our next questioner will be Mr. Allmand. I'm going to recognize Mr. Allmand, followed by Mr. McTeague, Senator Beaudoin and Senator Prud'homme. That will end this session. I'm going to beg everyone to be short to give the minister time to answer the questions since she's been gracious enough to stay extra. I think we can all thank the minister for her indulgence today.

Mr. Allmand, you have the floor.

Mr. Allmand: Thank you, Madam Chair. I will be very brief today out of respect for you and the witness. In future, I will insist on at least the same time as each opposition member, but I won't get into that.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Mr. Allmand, you realize that we had the votes, otherwise the meeting would have proceeded as usual. We've never had complaints to date.

Mr. Allmand: I'm going to be complaining soon. As I said earlier, we had three opposition members, and none from the government. I'll take that up at another time.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Please do.

Mr. Allmand: Minister, last spring this committee spent considerable time examining the progress of the government in implementing part VII of the Official Languages Act. We put out a report on June 19. Part VII, as you know, speaks of the Government of Canada being committed to enhancing the vitality of the English and French linguistic minority communities in Canada and assisting their development.

In article 43, it says the Secretary of State - you're the successor to the Secretary of State - has a large number of types of actions that can be taken to advance the English and French-speaking minorities of this country.

We found by the way in our study that some of the action plans of the various departments were excellent, and they were doing a good job. But some of them were deplorable. They were not doing anything they were supposed to do under part VII. We felt that one of the reasons was that there was no minister with the power to go in and say to an agency or department that they were not doing their job on part VII, and that they should please do it. We recommended that this should be done by the Privy Council Office.

I see that you issued a press release two days ago, November 18, and you sent a letter to the joint chairs. In that you say:

What I want to ask you is this. Rather than have the Privy Council Office do this, am I led to believe by this press release that now the Treasury Board Secretariat will take a more activist role in approaching other departments and agencies to see that in fact they live up to their responsibilities under part VII? Is that what we can expect?

Ms Copps: Yes. We felt that in reviewing the recommendations of the committee, first of all, we agreed with the reasoning that when you're not a central agency sometimes you can use all the moral suasion you want, but if you don't control the information flow and the pocketbook, sometimes moral suasion isn't enough.

So we agreed with the recommendations, but we also felt that it would be better situated in the Treasury Board in the context of the business plans. So when departments present business plans for which they -

Mr. Allmand: Under part VII?

Ms Copps: Yes. What we're working on now was actually passed by cabinet about two weeks ago. What we're working on with Treasury Board is actually a formalized memorandum of understanding of exactly what responsibilities they will have. The intention would be to have them bring in the business plan of departments in writing at the same time as they bring in the linguistic action plan. That would form part of the review of Treasury Board for each department.

.1800

Mr. Allmand: Thank you. Just one more question. Under article 43, part VII, as the Minister of Canadian Heritage, one of your responsibilities is to encourage and assist organizations and institutions to project the bilingual character of Canada and their activities in Canada and elsewhere, and one of those institutions is the CBC or Radio-Canada.

As a result of the cuts, we see that a lot of English-speaking stations of CBC in Québec, such as those in the Gaspé and Lac Saint-Jean areas, feel threatened. They worry that they won't be able to have their English-language service in those remote areas of Quebec. By the same token, French-speaking stations of the CBC in parts of Canada feel that they will not be able to give that service.

I'm wondering how you can reconcile your obligation to enhance the vitality of the English and French-speaking minority communities of this very vital service by the CBC and Radio-Canada to remote parts of the country where those services are needed. How can it be done without the support it requires?

Ms Copps: It's an interesting challenge, because as you know, as minister responsible for the CBC, I also have an arm's-length relationship with the CBC and their decisions on budgets. When they inherit a budget, they basically have to make their decisions as to how they will implement that. Despite the fact that I'm the minister responsible for the CBC, I obviously cannot - nor would I want to - dictate the programming terms and conditions for either CBC or Radio-Canada.

That being said, there have been official complaints forwarded to me from the Commissioner of Official Languages, who is concerned about it. I've had meetings with the FCFAC, in particular, on the situation of French-language minorities outside Quebec. I have had correspondence from some of the anglophone minorities in Gaspé and others. Actually, there were representations made by the member for Bonaventure - Îles-de-la-Madeleine on that issue. I did organize a meeting through the deputy with some of these organizations.

We also encouraged a meeting of the board of directors of the CBC with the groups involved. This is partially because the other complaint that has been levelled, particularly in the case of the FCFAC, is that the reality of the francophone community is not currently reflected in the CBC. There's the fact that 20% of francophones living outside Québec don't feel that their story is always told. Whether or not the cuts are there, they feel they're kind of isolated.

This is a problem that they presented to the CBC, and they're actually working on an action plan to solve this. I think somebody may even be here from the FCFAC. They're going to work on an action plan.

We want to see what we can do also in the context of the Department of Canadian Heritage for the creative sector. For example, with the introduction of the new television programming fund, I think it's important for that fund to be there to tell Canadian stories to each other. I don't underestimate the challenges they're facing, but I think you should take a look at some of the really innovative TV that's coming out now in some fairly low-budget operations.

I don't know how many of you have had a chance to see TFO, for example, which is Télévision française de l'Ontario. They have a very small budget. They have done some incredibly good stuff with children's programming and others. TFO has actually signed an agreement now. They're getting into cablôdistribution in certain parts of Nouveau-Brunswick.

It's not just the dollars and cents; it's also an issue of imagination, and I think we've got to continue working on it. I am conscious of it.

When I was in Saskatchewan recently, I did meet with some of the members of the Saskatchewan francophone community who are precisely concerned about their voice being cut off. I believe that there is going to be a meeting of the board of directors of the CBC along with the francophone community when they have their next board meeting, which is scheduled for the end of this month or the beginning of next month here in Ottawa.

I've been trying to make a bridge between the two parties even in the current context of tightening budgets to find some ways to keep the voices alive on all sides. I think it can be done, but I think it also needs to be a little more creative.

.1805

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Mr. McTeague, you have the floor.

[Translation]

Mr. McTeague (Ontario): Thank you, Madam Chair. I can assure you that this won't take long.

Madam Minister, I take a great interest in bilingualism. In the figures that you provided us with earlier, I see individual testimony, such as my own. I'm now a member of Parliament, and I must say that the efforts of the commission and of the government starting in 1963 were decisive.

Ms Copps: You're younger than I am.

Mr. McTeague: Back home, where the growth rate is much higher than in other ridings, we have a small francophone community and quite a large bilingual community, which means that people are able to cross linguistic barriers, be it for cultural or business reasons.

When I worked for Toyota, I received a bilingual bonus. That's what goes on in the private sector, and I know that the Reformers have trouble understanding the reason behind that bilingual bonus.

It is my understanding that members of the Bloc Québécois are worried about the situation of francophones outside Quebec. They think that this has something to do with the grants and contributions given to help maintain these communities. Are you thinking of introducing any other methods to defend the interests of francophone communities and of francophones who are bilingual, like us? Do you have any recommendations to make, instead than simply saying that as usual, it's a matter of money?

Ms Copps: But money is also important. You can't deny that fact. It is true that cuts have been made, and although they've been fewer in the minority sectors, they have had relatively grave consequences everywhere, even in the departments and in provincial transfer payments.

For example, let's take the restoration of the Court Challenges Program. This is a program that gives small groups a means to contest non-compliance with the rights that were granted to them under the Constitution Act. This program was abolished and then reinstated when we came back to power. The budget for this program is $2.5 million and its goal is to guarantee French schooling in certain provinces that aren't really interested in providing that. It's therefore a way of protecting the rights of minorities without any specific funding.

With regard to funding, I said earlier that a French language program had been established last year with a budget of $112 million. This is a new program to give Sault-Sainte-Marie a new francophone community centre, so that the residents can develop in French. It must be admitted that their way of life is increasingly Anglicized, and I would even go so far as to say it is being Americanized.

Mr. McTeague: Earlier, you touched on the issue of French language school boards in Ontario. Is it possible to encourage the government to pursue this route, as was done in Durham, where we have six schools, to ensure that these school boards continue to exist and therefore promote bilingualism in our province?

Ms Copps: The government of Ontario is appointing Mr. David Crombie, whom you all know since he was a minister in the former Conservative government. Last week, he tabled a report on school management which contains several recommendations. We've already established contacts to try to accelerate this issue in Ontario and we are optimistic.

Mr. McTeague: Thank you.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Thank you. Mr. Beaudoin, you have the floor.

.1810

Senator Beaudoin (Rigaud): I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you for having reinstated the Court Challenges Program. Personally, I was always a believer in that program. Unfortunately, in order to have certain constitutional rights respected in this country, we are forced to go before the courts to obtain the rulings. And when you can go all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, that's a good thing because then at least, things progress.

My question is also about part VII. There is no doubt that Ottawa, the capital of Canada, should be much more bilingual than it is right now. I'm preaching to the converted since everyone agrees with that. At least I hope everyone agrees with that. To my mind, part VII is essential in the Act. People say that all of this is only wishful thinking and means nothing. But I don't agree with that. I don't think the Constitution is meaningless and I think that the Official Languages Act is a quasi-constitutional piece of legislation. Therefore, this means that the courts can follow up on this.

You've answered my question in part. The current government has plans and programs, but I think we have to remedy the current difficulties using part VII, because we can't do otherwise. Yesterday, we heard the National Capital Commission. It must be pointed out that the National Capital Commission has jurisdiction over both sides of the Ottawa river, whereas the capital, from a strictly legal standpoint, is Ottawa. So we must find a way to make this capital more bilingual. We have to help the francophone element in this city because that is a mirror, a reflection of the Canadian people.

My question is in two parts. Do you feel that this is truly a moral obligation? Secondly, do you have any kind of specific plan to comply with sections 41, 42 and 43?

Ms Copps: First of all, I think it's important for Canada that the National Capital Region, Ottawa-Hull, be a true reflexion of our country, that is, bilingual, both in signs and in the workplace. I think there was a comment by Mr. Beaudry regarding signage. It is important to follow up on the contract we signed. If someone signs a contract that stipulates signage in both languages, that has to be respected. A lease is a lease and a contract is a contract. I think the same should be true concerning contracts let by the Department of Public Works throughout the country. It shouldn't be applied only in Ottawa.

Senator Beaudoin: I must say that I once again gave some thought to section 25. It may be a very good idea to try to broaden the application of the legislation through contracts, but I'd like to have a legal opinion on that because I'm not sure we can extend the law on that point in a contractual manner. I have a few doubts, but if it is possible, so much the better.

However, one thing is true. Under sections 41, 42 and 43, the federal authority certainly has a very strong and broad legal basis to intervene. You may say that there are financial limits and I understand that. But perhaps that's a part of the Official Languages Act that should be applied in greater depth, and more thoroughly.

.1815

Ms Copps: That's one of the reasons why I insisted that Treasury Board be involved as an integral part of the analysis of our responsibilities. In fact, and you've identified this as a committee, when responsibility for applying the Official Languages Act falls on one department rather than central agencies, no matter how much they insist and push, they don't have the same financial tools available.

Treasury Board's new responsibility, which consists in analyzing how the departments are fulfilling their mandates, is improving, to some extent, the level of involvement of the entire government apparatus, which would not have been the case with the Department of Canadian Heritage. This is why I have really insisted on this. I must say that I have had a great deal of support from my colleagues in the Cabinet.

Senator Beaudoin: Great! I believe that part VII of the Act means something.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Thank you. Senator Prud'homme, the minister has agreed to allow you to ask the final questions.

Senator Prud'homme: Thank you.

First of all, I would like to congratulate you sincerely on your relentless support of this cause which we hold so close to our hearts. I say this without any reservation. I give you full support for your courage, determination and conviction. Indeed, when you believe in something, you have to be able to defend the idea passionately against those who, as we saw this afternoon, are not so convinced about it.

[English]

I regret that the honourable member - I usually have a practice of not speaking in the absence of those who spoke, but it's the same meeting - is absent, because I would tell him very kindly but very clearly and very bluntly that having travelled across Canada for the last 33 years, I think 288 times in western Canada, we have no lesson to receive as to the treatment of the minority in Quebec.

[Translation]

As I grow older, I am starting to get quite upset by these people who are always pointing the figure at us. At one point, I thought that the book quoting us had been written by Diane Francis, Barbara Amiel or Galganov, these new messiahs of a great and wonderful Canada in their image.

[English]

God help me and God save Canada.

[Translation]

I would like to state clearly that the minister has my whole-hearted support. You have this power of conviction and it is reflected very well in the actions you take. You must not be afraid when you talk about human beings. People say that they are so passionate, so emotional. We are not dealing with robots. We are dealing with passions, whether they involve religion or language.

One thing that has always struck me is what goes on here in the National Capital. I'm not going to repeat what my colleague Mr. Beaudoin said, but this is where the image speaks. Right from the Prime Minister and through you obviously, we need to have people everywhere who are determined to make Ottawa our real national capital, and we will probably become a country like Switzerland.

Canada could develop in a way where greater emphasis will be put on two languages in certain regions of the country, on one language in other areas and on the other language in other regions, but certainly not in the National Capital. I do not like to fight, but I get quite mean in the various stores that I go into in Ottawa, on Laurier Street.

[English]

By the way, I wish you would have a look at Laurier House. I won't raise it more.

[Translation]

Ms Copps: I know the house.

Senator Prud'homme: Yes, I do as well. It is called Laurier House. It's enough to make Sir Wilfrid Laurier turn in his grave. Laurier Street will be our first project. I will turn it over to you.

.1820

Ms Copps: I accept.

Senator Prud'homme: And I will be with you, because we both attended the inauguration with John Turner, my sadly missed friend.

Ms Copps, I have no further questions for you. I would simply implore you to continue. I do not agree with my friend from the Bloc, and I'm sorry, but Mr. Trudeau began this campaign determined to make people understand how rich these two languages are. This is a message that we must repeat everyday with conviction. Today, hundreds of thousands of young people learn both languages.

I will be very clear. I do not understand why, especially in Quebec, young people do not speak two and even three languages. For once, I agree completely with Mr. Parizeau who said, upon learning that young people were refusing to learn English, that he would give them a kick in the...himself, in this case. But we're not learning English, we're learning American.

Ms Copps: That he would kick them in the ass?

Senator Prud'homme: That's it. You always have the right word.

Ms Copps: I can say it in French, but not in English.

Senator Prud'homme: How can someone refuse to learn a second and even a third language? I have been a member for 30 years, and it has always been my greatest joy to bring young people from my riding here, who, at ten years of age, speak three languages: Armenian, French and English, and an impeccable French. They're coming out of the Quebec school system. Consequently, neither Ontario nor anybody else in Quebec is entitled to teach us a thing. I'm fed up with these people.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): Mr. Prud'homme, would it be logical to shut down...?

Senator Prud'homme: No. We have great schools that produce people that speak three languages. All that I'm asking, Ms Copps, is to perhaps seek out these young people and use them as an example. There are schools in Montreal where three languages are taught, and if you could have a program as inexpensive...

[English]

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): I'm going to give you the last word here.

Senator Prud'homme: There's no word....

[Translation]

Ms Copps: I would like to say that Senator Prud'homme is quite right, because in Europe, it is often common to speak two, three or four languages. But the problem we are experiencing in America, is that we have become Americanized.

[English]

I want to say this in English because I think Marcel has certainly hit on a point that over the years has bothered me in both official languages, which is that some of the people who point the biggest fingers at their counterparts in other provinces about their laws don't know very much about their own laws. If you take a look at

[Translation]

Bill 101 in Quebec, and in Ontario there is the same law that applies to students. In Ontario, if you want your child to attend a French school, one of the two parents must have gone to French school in Ontario. This is part of the law. This is because parents don't want their system to turn into an immersion system, because this would diminish the learning of a language.

[English]

When you see a columnist - and I want to put this on the record because I wrote a letter to Diane Francis after an absolutely scandalous column she wrote that contained three factual errors on les Jeux de la Francophonie.

She wrote a column that could only be characterized as racist against the French-speaking community of Canada in which she said at the francophone games ``anglophones need not apply.'' That was her opening statement. As minister responsible for sports, I wrote back and said by the way, the anglophones who need not apply won the gold medal at the last francophone games, because one of the winners at the supposed francophone-only games was actually Donovan Bailey.

She stated three falsehoods in this article, and I wrote back and pointed out falsehood number one, falsehood number two, and falsehood number three. I don't think my letter has ever been published, and she continues to spew out what can only be described as a diatribe that is checkered with misstatements.

.1825

I say that because it cuts both ways. Part of what I think we can do, as parliamentarians, is help open people's eyes to the benefits on both sides. That's why, Marcel, you travelling to western Canada, as you have over the years, is really important, because many of the people who have the strongest aversion to bilingualism and many of the people who have the strongest aversion to the problems of the French language are people who have never experienced or spoken or really have not had the kind of exposure that would open their eyes. It cuts both ways. That's why I'm also a great believer in programs of exchange. Because when you set politics and language discussions aside and people come together and spend time together, they learn to understand and respect each other. It's about mutual respect.

So I agree. I was given a note by a gentleman - I don't know if he's still here - who basically accused me of being a traitor. He accused me of being a quisling - Canada's female quisling. I didn't have a chance to engage him in the discussion, but fortunately that view of Canada, thank God, is in the minority. Hopefully, if you continue and we continue the work, it will continue to be an ever-smaller minority.

The Joint Chair (Ms Guarnieri): On that note, I'd like to thank the minister for bringing a productive perspective on official languages. I'm sure we'll invest her comments wisely in our deliberations. Thank you.

[Translation]

The meeting is adjourned.

Return to Committee Home Page

;