LANG Committee Meeting

STANDING JOINT COMMITTEE ON OFFICIAL LANGUAGES

COMITÉ MIXTE PERMANENT DES LANGUES OFFICIELLES

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Thursday, April 22, 199

• 1621

[Translation]

The Vice Joint Chairman (Mr. Denis Paradis (Brome—Missisquoi, Lib.)): Welcome to the Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages. It is our pleasure, this afternoon, to hear from Mr. Norman Moyer, the Assistant Deputy Minister to Canadian Identity at the Department of Canadian Heritage, and Mr. Hilaire Lemoine, the Director General of Official Languages Support Programs. This is a briefing session on the federal government's support for education, health and social services in minority language communities.

Mr. Moyer will start by making a presentation, and then we will move to questions by committee members.

Mr. Norman Moyer (Assistant Deputy Minister, Canadian Identity, Department of Canadian Heritage): Thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak to you about the programs we have to support Canada's official languages policy. I will go through my presentation quite quickly. You have copies of it in French and English, and I will be alternating between the two languages.

I will start by giving you an overview of the subjects I will be discussing. Today, I want to talk to you about Part VII of the Act—that is the basis of the Department's activities. Next I will talk about federal-provincial agreements on education and services. I would also like to tell you about our support to communities, and finally, our promotion activities.

Part VII of the Official Languages Act forms the basis of our activities. This part does not deal with services provided by the federal government—this appears rather in Part IV. Part VII deals mainly with the vitality of the communities. What can the federal government do to support this vitality? The Canadian Government can promote the full recognition of the two official languages and their use throughout the country.

The mandate of the Department of Canadian Heritage is set out in the Act and it is to coordinate the efforts of all other departments. This coordination includes points from the business plans, which I will be describing later, and requests the co- operation of the other departments, without, however, giving us any powers regarding the decisions of these departments.

The Act authorizes us to take the necessary steps to ensure that we are moving toward equality for Canada's two language groups. Part VII also requires that we submit a report on our activities to Parliament.

[English]

We have several sets of federal-provincial agreements that help us do our work. The longest-standing set of agreements is in the area of education. We have been working with the provinces for 30 years to help pay for the supplementary costs of providing education for official language minorities and the costs of providing second language education in those provinces. As you are all well aware, education is a responsibility of the provinces under the Canadian Constitution, and all of our activities in this area are done under the express agreements signed with the provinces.

• 1625

Since 1982 there has been a section in the charter that guarantees access to education for people in French and English language systems across Canada. Many of the measures I will talk to you about today have helped those provinces in implementing the impacts of the charter and charter decisions that have occurred in the period between 1982 and today, because there are still cases that are being brought forward to the Supreme Court under section 23 of the charter.

The structure of those federal-provincial agreements reflects the unique nature of the Canadian federation. The Council of Ministers of Education of Canada is a very important instrument for us in these agreements. We negotiate with the Council of Ministers of Education, with all of the provinces at the same time, an umbrella agreement about how we are going to work with the provinces in the area of education. Once we have done that, we negotiate bilateral implementation agreements with all of the provinces that govern exactly how we are going to operate within those provinces.

In the context of our agreements on education, there is funding that flows through the administration of the Council of Ministers of Education to support youth exchanges. Young Canadians who are either learning the second official language or who have advanced to the point where they can help as teachers of the second official language are supported through this program to travel to other parts of the country.

In recent years we have also entered into special agreements with the provinces, particularly in the area of school management, creating new school boards, French language school boards in the provinces where they did not exist, and post-secondary education for Canadians of official language minority groups.

Within these federal-provincial agreements, the bulk of the money goes in a fairly straightforward per capita transfer based on the number of students enrolled in the school system in those provinces. The money that flows through those parts of the agreement is done on the basis of a calculation of additional or supplementary costs. The rest of the money that flows into the agreements we call development funds. That flows in response to requests for specific funding of projects. That could be anything from the construction of a school to the development of new pedagogical materials, to the training of teachers in new ways, to research in the area. But here we're getting specific proposals from provinces and we cost share those activities on a 50-50 basis.

There have been, as I mentioned before, special agreements now for school governance and post-secondary education as well. These agreements have been part of the basis of very considerable progress across the country in education for official language minorities. There are today over 160,000 children in the French language school systems outside of Quebec and 101,000 English language students in the school system in Quebec. We find many more children in both of those systems now finishing school, finishing high school, and going on to university than we did in the past.

We've also been part of the expansion of second language education. Second language education has expanded both in Quebec for francophones who are learning English and in the rest of Canada for anglophones or allophones who are learning to speak French. The whole history of French immersion has been heavily supported by our programs and has been amazingly successful.

In those exchange programs I mentioned before, there are 1,000 young Canadians who go out to work as teaching assistants under this program each year and 6,000 students in the summer who go to learn the second official language. We don't nearly meet the demand that exists in those programs. If we could help all of the young Canadians that would like to go out on these programs, we could nearly double those numbers.

• 1630

In seven provinces we assist in paying the incremental costs of school governance. The decision last year by Ontario to create a network of French language school boards has been one of the most important breakthroughs in the area we work with for a long time.

Probably our most recent area of activity, and certainly one where we are seeing the most expansion, is in requests for funding of post-secondary education institutions across the country, particularly for francophone communities in areas outside of Quebec, where for some years now we have been training people up to the high school level, but they have had to leave their own province to do post-secondary education. More and more that is no longer the case. More and more francophones across the country are able to go on to post-secondary education in their own home province.

Where are we going now? There was new funding announced for these programs in the budget. Madame Copps announced, when she went to Moncton several weeks after the budget, that there would be a $30-million increase in the funding for the official languages in education program and a further $18 million for special funding of projects in the education area. That special funding will go largely to post-secondary activities and an activity in the area of refrancization; that is, helping young francophones going back to school start on the same basis that others are starting off in school.

As we negotiate with provinces for these increases, we want, in response to what communities across the country have been asking for—and official language minority communities have been unanimous in saying what we need is a more open system. We'd like to have a system where we can sit down with a province and work out an open action plan, where the provinces tell us how they are going to be working to implement minority language education. Then the moneys flowing from the province and the federal government to support that are clearly identified in that plan. So we want to work on the basis of these action plans, with specific objectives, with the main activities, and with a clear accountability toward the people in the provinces. They're the ones who care about this, they're the ones who are complaining about it, they're the ones who want these action plans, and we want to work on that with them.

We're beginning that process of negotiation as soon as we can, and we hope to sign, first of all, a broad protocol through the Council of Ministers of Education in May or June and then move to the negotiation of individual bilateral agreements this fall.

[Translation]

In addition, we have agreements with some, but not all, of the provinces on services in the minority language. For example, in Newfoundland, Alberta and Quebec, minority language services are offered in co-operation with the Government of Canada and the provincial government to offset part of the cost. This allows the provinces to offer more services to people in education, health or social services.

The creation of this support network also brought the ministers responsible for the official language minority in their jurisdiction to hold an annual meeting. This forum of ministers plays a rather interesting role in Canada in supporting communities within particular jurisdictions and generally.

We have announced increases in this year's budget, and we have initiated a process of negotiations to increase to funding of each of the existing agreements.

In Part VII of the Act, which I mentioned at the beginning of my remarks, there is a reference to support in the form of services provided by all departments and agencies of the government of Canada to minority language communities. Our role is to coordinate this support and to act as leader for these departments as regards their involvement in this area.

• 1635

We do this in a number of ways, particularly through the plans prepared by the departments and sectoral agreements on culture or human resources. We are trying to coordinate the co-operation of all departments with an interest in this field so that their priorities match those identified by the communities, because the latter also do some planning work to identify their priorities.

For the past two years, we've been trying to strengthen this part of sections 41 and 42. An agreement was signed between the Department of Canadian Heritage and Treasury Board to improve the planning process. There was an announcement in the budget of funding for a partnership, which will allow the communities with ideas that could involve two, three or four federal government departments to express their ideas and needs to these departments. There is a little money available in this program to help them put their ideas forward.

As I said, in each department there is someone responsible for drawing up the action plan. It deals with things that will actually be done, but also serves as a basis for consultation. The Department must make its action plan known, so that the communities can examine, criticize and subsequently use it. So the plans are a basis for the consultation and a commitment to action.

We carried out a survey in the communities to find out how useful they found the action plans. As we state in our text, 63% of respondents found them useful, 67% had consulted them, and so on.

The interdepartmental partnership already exists. The budget provided us with funding that I mentioned earlier, and this will enable us to increase the motivation that results from a budget for partnership. Everyone knows that when there are some dollars put into the equation, then we can go much further, much faster, and in more directions.

We are now in the process of defining, with the departments, how to use these funds. Some points are already clear. The projects to be funded under this program must have the support of at least one community group. Two departments could not get together on the basis of a good idea for a minority language group and proceed with the project. There has to be support from the communities themselves. They will therefore have the right to veto what we do.

We will be establishing a delivery process and a consultation process. Once all the good projects have been identified, decisions will be made about certain regional projects, with a regional delegation, and, in the case of larger projects, there will be a national panel established to approve the decision. We also provide direct support to communities. Many of them are involved in some very important associations, which are not very well funded. In almost every case, the federal government provides operating funds for these organizations. There are 350 such groups that represent their communities very well and are very active. They are located throughout Canada and here as well. They were particularly active in the fall and their work helped the government properly target its budget increases.

These groups want to play a more and more important role. With the new budget, we will be able to provide more funding for these community groups than we ever had in the past. The amount available will increase to almost $32 million, not counting the $5 million interdepartmental fund I mentioned earlier, which will be available only if it is supported by a community group. These groups will have access to far more resources to carry out what they want to do for their members.

• 1640

As far as our agreements go, we have not yet started negotiating the details of these increases. Of course, the devil always lies in the detail. We are not naive, even though the increase announced in the budget is attractive, expectations are very high. This was clear to us after we told each group how much of an increase it might get. However, there will definitely be negotiations regarding funding and the activities these groups wish to undertake.

Our objective is to increase the independence of these groups. They are already quite independent, but they could be even more. We also want to give them some responsibilities and help them get better organized in some provinces where they have had difficulty and have had to lay off some key employees. They can do better. We hope to help them get some specialists in working with municipal, provincial and federal governments, to facilitate work with them. And wherever possible, we want to foster rationalization. With 350 groups, it might be a good idea to coordinate the work better.

I would now like to tell you about our promotion activities.

[English]

It's very important in this country to continue to draw to people's attention the immense importance and richness we draw from the fact that there are two official language communities flourishing across the country. We do that in many ways. We do that in the research activities we undertake that demonstrate that. We do that through the promotional activities we produce and the community groups that care about this. Many other Canadians are involved in this process. We hope the materials we produce are not directly used, but they are useful to people, including people like you in the room who are very often called upon to comment upon the basic richness to Canadian society that comes from that and the specific advantages that come from the way in which we choose to do it.

We support activities of promotion that go in terms of intensity from individual groups. We support

[Translation]

Rendez-vous with our French Canadian Heritage

[English]

each spring. We have been very vigorous in supporting the birth of the Canadian language industries.

Canada has one of the strongest capacities around the world in the teaching of second languages. This is true in both the teaching of French and English. It's true in every province in Canada. We work actively with those groups when they participate in Team Canada export tours. More and more we are seeing people coming to Canada to learn a second language, either French or English.

So Canada, having invested for years and years in bilingualism, now has an industry that is of great interest to the world, and we're effectively selling our ability to help people learn. We also sell translation services. We also sell editorial services through our language industries.

We produce publications that we think are important. The New Canadian Perspectives series provides information based on our research activities. They tend to be read mostly by people who are professional or academics in the field, by community groups, and again, we hope by you or your researchers.

As I mentioned before, we produce an annual report designed for Parliament and for use by parliamentarians. As we get into our discussion, I certainly invite you to make comments on or ask me questions about or propose improvements to the report you get each year. We have made improvements recently following comments we've had from members of Parliament and senators, but we're always ready for more comments.

We produce a particular bulletin on the activities we engage in under sections 41 and 42 of the law. That is where we work with other departments.

[Translation]

Finally, I would like to put in a plug for the Year of La Francophonie in Canada. This great year got underway on March 20, and we are going to be celebrating our francophone community, and celebrating it right. We're doing that, because we think it is a very important part of the fabric of Canada, but also because this year there is an international Sommet de la Francophonie in Canada. We want to take advantage of this year of activities and of the Sommet de la Francophonie to establish better ties among Canada's francophones and between francophones and anglophones. We also want people to recognize the importance of our involvement in the international Francophonie.

• 1645

We will have some short and long-term projects, and we hope they will have an impact not only during the year, but also afterwards.

That ends my presentation. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Vice Joint Chairman (Mr. Denis Paradis): Thank you, Mr. Moyer.

We will begin our first round of questioning immediately. Mr. Plamondon.

Mr. Louis Plamondon (Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, BQ): You have suggested a slogan for the Year of La Francophonie which in French is: Célébrons la francophonie canadienne and in English is "Celebrate our Country's French Canadian Heritage". Don't you think the meaning is much more positive in French, because we are celebrating the existence of Canadian francophones, whereas the English seems to refer more to the past? The translation does not match the original.

Mr. Norman Moyer: We may not see the meaning the same way.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Why is the slogan not "Celebrate the French francophonie"?

Mr. Norman Moyer: We submitted a series of possible slogans for the year to francophone and anglophone groups.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I don't have a problem with the slogan—I like it—but I do have a problem with the translation.

Mr. Norman Moyer: It is not a translation; that is what I'm trying to tell you. This is the message that summarizes what we are trying to say—to gain recognition for the importance of francophone heritage for anglophones. The message we are trying to convey is that the heritage that results from the presence of francophones in Canada is important for Canadians. That is why the slogan in English—

Mr. Louis Plamondon: —refers to the past, while the French refers to the present.

[English]

Mr. Norman Moyer: You have to understand that in my department, the past is very present.

[Translation]

Mr. Louis Plamondon: We could ask you many question about the text you distributed. On page 6, which discuses the accomplishments in minority language education, we read that there are 160,000 students in nearly 700 French-language schools, and 101,000 students in the English-language school system in Quebec. I think the proportions are higher for the anglophone minority in Quebec, which totals 500,000 or 600,000 people. In Ontario alone, there is a francophone minority of 500,000 or 600,000, and there are also francophone minorities in New Brunswick and other provinces. I think the proportional number of francophone students is low, given that there are one million francophones in all.

Mr. Norman Moyer: I have no analysis available that would allow me to answer your question directly, however, I am prepared to review your point and come back to it. I don't think the difference is huge, but there may be some difference. I see your point. If someone could help me...

Mr. Hilaire Lemoine (Director General, Official Languages Support Programs, Department of Canadian Heritage): We have to remember that in the case of French-language schools outside Quebec, the number of francophone students eligible to attend French-language schools, under section 23, is much greater than the number who actually do. This accounts for what looks to be a higher proportion, as you were saying, Mr. Plamondon.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: You seem to be very proud of all this material you're presenting, the Official Languages Support Programs and all the other programs you've spoken about.

• 1650

How do you explain that, despite all these programs, the assimilation rate is dramatically high among francophones outside Quebec? According to Statistics Canada, the rate was 72% over the last five years in British Columbia, and there may even be fewer francophones in New Brunswick. Only in Quebec does the percentage of francophones remain constant, while the anglophone minority is doing very well and has actually progressed in Quebec.

Based on this fact, should the money and the efforts not focus on the minority experiencing difficulty, without neglecting the English minority, which has its rights and must continue to progress? In light of this situation, should we not, for a few years, make some extra effort and provide the funding to the minority that is in danger of disappearing?

Mr. Norman Moyer: There are a number of points in your question. The existing assimilation rate is acknowledged in our policy analysis and is reflected in the way funding is provided to many of our programs. We are already making an effort along these lines, and we will continue to make it to recognize all the needs of the most threatened communities. We have been doing that for quite some time now. For example, the percentage of funding for the francophones of Saskatchewan is greater than the per capita contribution for all programs for francophones in New Brunswick or anglophones in Quebec.

We are already trying to take this fact into account, but there are limits to what we can do. It would be difficult for us to transfer the huge amounts of money you are advocating. Our approach isn't at all revolutionary.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: In an article published last week entitled: "Two solitudes still exist, bilingualism expert says: Canada's language laws a big failure, charges man who calls bilingualism claim a "myth"". We see that Neil Morrison, who was the secretary of the anglophone side of the Commission, now states that bilingualism in Canada is a failure and a myth.

I'm reading from your statistics and the Minister's statements. Have we not changed the spirit of the Official Languages Act, which was designed to allow Canadians throughout the country, to be served, to work, to live, to be educated and to obtain social services in either of our two languages? That was the great objective of this Act. I think that for about ten years now, the Act has been changed into an anthem to bilingualism. Every time the Minister or the officials talk to us, they quote statistics—the number of students in immersion, the number of bilingual people in a particular region, and so on—but the purpose of the Act was not to make people bilingual. So much the better if they are, and if they speak three or four languages, but that was not the objective of the Act.

We often see advertisements like the one I saw last week for a supervisor's position in the National Capital Region. Candidates were required to be unilingual anglophone or bilingual. There's never any mention of unilingual francophones.

• 1655

As far as the National Capital Region goes, where there are a tremendous number of jobs that are not yet bilingual, I'm wondering whether we should not call everything into question and start over again, or whether we should continue and make a significant investment here. To all intents and purposes, we are being told that in 15 years, French will be in danger, even in Quebec; so we can imagine what the situation will be like in the other provinces. I am asking you for almost a political comment, even though you are officials, but perhaps there are some solutions that occur to you sometimes. I would humbly request a comment.

Mr. Norman Moyer: I can try to respond to that. First of all, everything that we can show about bilingualism in Canada is a legitimate source of pride. I think that you said that yourself. In my presentation today, I talked about the investments being made. Most of these investments are devoted to increasing services to Canadians in minority language situations. It is in that area that we have spent and that we are continuing to spend most of the money. I identified the areas where there has been the greatest increase in expenditures, in particular post-secondary education for francophones outside Quebec. There has been enormous progress made. Thirty years ago, most francophones did not have the opportunity to study in French in their own province, from kindergarten to the end of university. Today they can do that, and that represents substantial progress.

The agreements being set up for services in the minority language enable those provinces to offer services to their minority groups, something that we could not even have hoped for ten years ago. If you talked to francophones in Newfoundland about their situation, they will not tell you that it is wonderful, but compared with the way things used to be, they at least have services available now. They can call an office where people will speak to them in French and tell them what the Newfoundland government can do for them. The changes are complex in view of modern life, but in terms of services offered to these communities, we are making progress and we are continuing to invest.

The Vice Joint Chairman (Mr. Denis Paradis): Thank you, Mr. Moyer. The next speaker will be Senator Rivest.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest (Stadacona, PC): I would appreciate it if someone could give us an idea sometime of the amounts spent in Quebec and in the rest of Canada, not only for language learning and skills, but also for the community life of minority groups.

Of course, the problem of Canada's linguistic and cultural duality exists and is expressed in Quebec in ways that we are aware of. The government is there to support initiatives. In my opinion, with all due respect for the often legitimate demands of the anglophone community in Quebec, I think that the problem of maintaining and developing the minority official language exists mainly outside Quebec, and that is where most of the effort must be made.

In Quebec, obviously, in the areas of health, social services and education, a well-established network already exists for both francophones and anglophones, or rather protestants and catholics. The school system is well established across the province, and this document makes that quite clear. In terms of providing assistance for health services and social services, Quebec apparently provides access to these services in English. In Ontario, a health services network reportedly exists in Ottawa; they are available on a much more local level. In Alberta, these services are said to be available in Rivière de la Paix.

I would like to see the numbers, but where Heritage Canada's overall spending is concerned, I have the impression, or I am concerned that Quebec—I am going to say something taboo, but in any case—receives more than it needs in terms of support, since this money also goes to the government, in comparison with what francophone communities outside Quebec receive, if only because of inertia. For example, Bill 142, which deals with health services and social services, applies everywhere in Quebec; it is Quebec's policy for the whole province. I have the impression that the Government of Quebec gets more out of the programs and standards than a francophone community in Alberta or elsewhere can get.

• 1700

I would like figures on what Quebec gets from the money spent for minority language support, the minority language being English, compared with the situation in the rest of Canada, keeping in mind that there is no assimilation problem in Quebec, as was mentioned by our colleague from the House of Commons. There are not many anglophones who have lost their language in Quebec; they have had many hassles, but people have not lost their language, whereas the assimilation is serious elsewhere. Would it be possible to have that information?

Mr. Norman Moyer: Yes, the breakdown of funding by province is available and we can provide that to you.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: For all of Heritage Canada's programs?

Mr. Norman Moyer: For all programs. Figures are available on spending by the Government of Canada through Heritage Canada.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: Will you be sending us that information?

Mr. Norman Moyer: Yes, certainly.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: The Quebec Government, over the past 20 to 30 years, has probable not always assumed its responsibility regarding francophones outside Quebec, and I think that everyone recognizes that fact. The Canadian Government has a responsibility toward francophones in minority situations outside Quebec, but Quebec does as well, being the anchor or, as Mr. Dion might put it, the mainstay of French culture in Canada. And francophones outside Quebec have often taken the same approach; they have not always been listened to.

I recently heard statements by the Quebec Government to the effect that there would in fact be money or support programs and assistance for francophone culture outside Quebec. I don't know if you have heard about that or if they are going to go ahead, but I started to have some doubts when they boycotted the Francophonie in such a strange way, but that is another story.

I hope that the Quebec government will assume its responsibilities and do a lot more than it has done in the past to assist and support minority communities, in line with the philosophy in Part 7 of the federal legislation. The only thing I am asking for—you do not have to answer this but you can pass it along to your minister—is for the Quebec and federal ministers to talk to each other so that Quebec's initiatives are not just for show and to avoid each side trying to be the first to plant its flag in a francophone cultural centre. We must avoid that sort of thing. I am exaggerating, but you know what I mean.

Would it be possible, given that Premier Bouchard has expressed quite clear and interesting intentions in this regard, to ensure better coordination with Heritage Canada of current and especially future activities?

The Vice joint Chairman (Mr. Denis Paradis): Mr. Moyer.

Mr. Norman Moyer: Quebec has been providing assistance to these groups for quite a while, but in small amounts and on an ad hoc basis. Given the realities of the situation, it is surely up to the minority groups to ensure proper coordination for the amounts that they are able to obtain from the Quebec and federal governments. I would love to live in the world that you are talking about, but sometimes we have to do the best we can with the one we do live in.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: What does that mean? Does that mean that I am dreaming? We keep on dreaming for a long time, until the age of 75.

The Vice joint Chairman (Mr. Denis Paradis): Senator Rivest, do you have another question?

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: I find all this worrisome because there is a tremendous need for French-language support outside Quebec. Even though there are two governments involved, it is the same taxpayers. I know that the Canadian Government will always do much more than Quebec, but with the extra money and the resources available for francophone culture in Canada, we could try to put politics aside to some extent and make sure that things work properly while this is going on. That is what you seem to want to see, but you are very skeptical. Is your Minister as skeptical as you are?

Mr. Norman Moyer: Our skepticism is not the issue. We are trying to do as much as possible. I would say that the challenge that we share is not defined by political borders.

• 1705

There are 7 million francophones in North America. All governments that can contribute to the development of these groups should do so, to the extent that they are able, because this cultural richness benefits us all. We are doing as much as we can and we will continue to do so. That is the aim of our programs and that is why we have the Year of the Francophonie. We see these 7 million people as an essential part of our heritage and a boon for the future.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: To finish with my question, I will give you an example. I would like to know what kind of co-operation is possible for immersion classes in Saskatoon, if they exist. The Canadian Government has money and can hire teachers to teach French to young anglophones; so it takes this money and spends it. To meet those same needs, and if the community so requests, knowing that the Canadian Government can do this and no doubt does in many cases, would it be possible to let Quebec take responsibility for a particular city or school if it has extra French-speaking teachers, and have the federal government continue with its program? I would like to see some coordination of the two governments' activities. If the federal government does it in one place and Quebec wants to do it in another place... Do you understand what I mean? Would it be possible to have coordination on the institutions?

In any case, we don't have enough money to solve these problems. If a little money comes from Quebec City and a lot from Ottawa, I would like to see the spending added together and not duplicated.

Mr. Norman Moyer: I talked about how federalism works according to the Canadian model, and I would like to point to an organization called the Canadian Council of Ministers of Education, which provides for exactly the kind of co-operation you are talking about. That organization sometimes works very well. We would like to see it work better sometimes, but there is generally very good co-operation on our issues. It is that organization that supports these programs involving exchanges of young monitors. There are young Quebeckers trained by the Quebec government who become French teachers and go to teach in Saskatchewan, with financial help from the Canadian Government. We are able to do that thanks to the work of this organization that does not involve the Canadian Government; it includes only provincial education ministers.

The Vice Joint Chairman (Mr. Denis Paradis): Thank you, Mr. Moyer.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: One last comment. I agree with what you said about the council. If Mr. Chrétien had gone through the Council of Ministers of Education for the millennium scholarships, there would be a lot fewer problems in Quebec.

The Vice Joint Chairman (Mr. Denis Paradis): Thank you, Senator Rivest.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier, Lib.): Mr. Chairman, someone once said that every society needs a pessimist and an optimist, one to invent the airplane and the other the parachute. Maybe we have had a good dose of pessimism and we should look at the other side for a balanced view.

I would like to ask a few questions. When we talked about positions in the public service, an example was given, but out of context. The example given would seem to be one of the four positions offered, with the other three calling for a bilingual person.

Would it be possible to give an overview of how the two language groups have been represented in the public service since the Official Languages Act was brought in 30 years ago? Without going into details, can you tell me whether there has been any improvement?

Mr. Norman Moyer: In the public service?

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: In the Canadian federal public service.

Mr. Norman Moyer: Definitely, but you are leading me somewhat into the territory of my Treasury Board colleagues, who are responsible for that aspect of Part 4 of the Act. You would have to ask them for exact numbers; the numbers exist and they reflect very well the changes that have taken place. You do not have to look very far to find stories of what it was like to be a francophone in the public service 30 years ago, compared to what it is like today. The situation has improved significantly.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: It might be useful at some point to consider providing an overview of the public service from that point of view.

• 1710

By the way, I had an opportunity to meet one of the teachers whose positions have resulted from that co-operation among the departments. Two summers ago, in Bellevue, Saskatchewan, I spoke to the people in the community, who are used to that type of co- operation because it is ongoing. There was a rotation every two years; it seemed to be working very well there, and in other places too.

Co-operation is possible when people want it to happen, but the will has to be there and it takes both sides to make it happen. It is not always the case in the situations we are aware of.

The Senator asked an interesting question earlier, and I would like to know whether, when discussions are underway to renew agreements with the Quebec Government, any attempts have been made to take the money requested by Quebec, and even offers by the Government of Quebec, and direct them elsewhere.

I remember a report that was made public a few years ago by a national commission that severely criticized the Canadian Government because the lion's share of funding for training was going to Quebec. Could someone explain to me how that situation has evolved and whether it has changed?

Mr. Norman Moyer: One aspect of our agreements is controlled by a per capita allocation formula. When people point out that Quebec is receiving a lot of money, it is because there is a large anglophone population in the school system, and that is why substantial amounts are invested. The investment is proportional to the money spent for francophones outside Quebec. If one looks at all the other programs that have greater flexibility, it is clear that there is a lot of sensitivity to places that have the greatest need.

Along with that explanation, I should tell you how I feel when I am faced with some anglophone groups from remote areas of Quebec. They put forward very strong arguments. They say that being an anglophone in the Gaspé region today is just like being a francophone in Saskatchewan. They feel just as isolated, just as abandoned and just as threatened in terms of their community's survival as francophones in other areas. The reality of being an anglophone in Quebec is quite different from one place to another. On the Island of Montreal, the situation is not at all the same.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: I was talking about Quebec with respect to the rest of Canada, but within Quebec, you have to get out of Montreal and away from Alliance Quebec.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: If I understand correctly, although you did not say as much, the Government of Quebec has never offered to revise the per capita formula used for minority language education transfers. That issue is not on the table.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: No.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: They should be encouraged to do that.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: There is money available; it is for those who need it, that is, francophone communities outside Quebec, is that not so, Honourable Member for Mount-Royal?

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Are there some grounds for optimism, as the Commissioner for Official Languages seems to say there are, regarding the problem of assimilation in francophone communities outside Quebec, owing to the development of a school system nearly everywhere, although this work is not yet completely finished? What justification is there for such optimism?

• 1715

Mr. Norman Moyer: Our programs are aimed at increasing the capacity in such communities. We can give you very clear indicators, especially the number of youths going to school in their own language, finishing school and getting ready for professional life. They can do all that, and there is a great deal of data on this.

I don't know how to project into the future, with all the pressure of the modern world, the media, etc., and I cannot guarantee anything, but I know that a foundation is being laid and that it is much easier, more common and frequent for minority youths to finish their studies and continue living in their language. A firm foundation already exists.

The survival of these communities depends above all on their determination, and I think that it still exists.

Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Vice Joint Chairman (Mr. Denis Paradis): Thank you, Mr. Bélanger.

Ms. Finestone.

[English]

Hon. Sheila Finestone (Mount Royal, Lib.): I'm sorry, but other business kept me away, and I haven't heard your presentation so I may be asking questions you've already answered. Please forgive me.

I am particularly interested in what's going on in Quebec with the changing dynamic there.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: We have already settled the question.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Are we okay now? Are we all settled?

A voice: You might want to read the transcript.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: We have found a very good solution for it, a new solution.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: I settled Kosovo and you settled the English language in Quebec?

Mr. Norman Moyer: Probably both of us with the same degree of success.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: My community is going to feel more than ever laissée pour compte.

There is a very strong sense that the English community concerns are not being met, that they have been ignored for political reasons because it was the most expedient thing to do.

[Translation]

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: That is what we were saying.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Excuse me?

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: This is exactly what we were saying.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Did you say the same thing? All the better for us if we are playing from the same music sheet.

[English]

I'd like some sense, for the people of the Gaspé region, the Québec region, the Chicoutimi-Lac Saint-Jean region, the Outaouais, and Estrie, of what you are doing to ensure access to health and social services. What are you doing with respect to education? What are you doing with the person who used to represent them at the coordinating tables of the MRC, the community regional tables, and who's paying for that? Are you continuing any kind of granting money directly to the associations to ensure representation, to the school boards to ensure representation, to the hospital and health service sector and to social services? What's happening with youth protection, the youth protection problems and services to those youths? It's a very serious concern in the Montreal area, particularly the ethnic minority groups, the visible minority groups, many of whom are filling the youth centres more than others, for many reasons, none of which need to have happened. How seriously are you looking at the Quebec situation of English-speaking people, particularly with the outflow that has taken place and therefore the more fragile the communities, particularly, let's say, in Sherbrooke and the Eastern Townships?

Mr. Norman Moyer: In the context of the decisions that were announced in the budget, there is more money that will be available for the English community in Quebec.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Are you talking about that $70 million?

Mr. Norman Moyer: Yes, in all of the areas of programming where we work. That $70 million is spread over all the areas of programming.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Yes, I know.

Mr. Norman Moyer: I went through most of them as I made my presentation. We have begun discussing with the community how to get the money directed to the areas of greatest need, and it's very important that we arrive at approaches with them that will allow that to occur. There will certainly be more money available. More money has been offered now to Quebec in the context of the federal-provincial agreement on language of service. When we sit down with Quebec to talk about how that money is spent, we will want to have a discussion about what we jointly perceive as the areas of greatest need. The kinds of areas you were just talking about will be at the top of our list. We view the outlying communities as the communities that are most overtly under stress. We view the smaller communities of relatively new Canadians in the Island of Montreal to be the second area of greatest need, and we hope that with the English communities in Quebec we can work out an approach that will focus the new moneys on those areas of greatest need.

• 1720

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Have you taken into account the need for the small community newspaper as a far more important need than it ever was to keep inter-community communications?

Mr. Norman Moyer: We try not to go that far. I'd like to get the money to the communities and let them make the decision about whether or not they should spend it on supporting their newspaper or on hiring another person to represent them in discussions they're having. If a community decides its most important need is to support an active community newspaper, they should be able to make that decision within the context of the moneys they get from us. But I wouldn't want to be telling them that that's what they should do.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Mr. Moyer, I understand and I also know that these communities have indicated to you that the division that was indicated to them of that $70 million split is far from adequate for the circumstances and the changes that have taken place in the province of Quebec. That would include service to youth in trouble. It would include particularly off-island, where they have no place to send them and there are no housing or support measures for those young people. There is very poor service available to the elderly off-island, and on-island there's a change as a result of the changes to section 93 on the school education that has left them again in some difficulty.

On the question of the cultural institutions, I know you have a cultural institution list that is far from adequate and does not reflect all the cultural programs in Quebec. You're saying that CUSAC, or whatever they call that executive committee with which you meet, don't even have all... although they're a very good group and they're doing a very good job and trying very hard. It's very hard when you haven't got much bread on the table to divide up into 60,000 little pieces. The crumbs you're going to spread are going to have to grow an awful lot of moss or the yeast is going to have to grow—I think that would be a better expression, now that I think of it.

I'm out of breath from all these meetings. This is my sixth meeting today.

Go ahead.

Mr. Norman Moyer: Certainly there were new moneys announced in the budget. I think they're more than crumbs, but we will have to work with the anglophone community in Quebec both on what they're going to get and how they're going to use it. We're just at the beginning of that process now. They have said to me exactly what you said. They've said that they believe they need a much larger share of the money to support the services they need for their communities. I can only say to you that they are not alone in having said that to me. Every place I look there are very important needs for communities that are under pressure. While we got an additional $70 million in the budget, if you added up all those needs it would quite likely exceed $70 million.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: I'm sure it would.

When you are chatting or working with these groups, are you asking some of these significant questions with respect to how they are sharing? Is there recognition that there's a new dimension that has come about that requires perhaps a different division, which of course those people who've been used to a certain share are not going to find very comforting?

Mr. Norman Moyer: Exactly. We are having those conversations.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Are all the areas I've just underlined areas they are looking at?

Mr. Norman Moyer: We are not quite at that level of detail with them. Maybe some of the staff in the Montreal office doing it would be more familiar with those specific areas than I am.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Thank you very much. I will read the Hansard and then be in touch with you again, I'm sure.

[Translation]

The Vice Joint Chairman (Mr. Denis Paradis): Thank you, Ms. Finestone.

Senator Rivest.

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: All the requests are legitimate and I understand that. You replied to Ms. Finestone that you're also receiving other kinds of requests, but your priorities are focussed on the communities that are the most in need. We are not talking about the one that have the loudest voice or the greatest power.

Mr. Norman Moyer: Yes, and this is exactly what we have always done.

• 1725

Senator Jean-Claude Rivest: When the annual budget is announced, some persons are better organized than others and come promptly to us. Regarding additional budgets or currently available funds, the criteria for helping communities is based on needs, isn't it? We might see all kinds of initiatives. In Montreal, for anglophones, or in Moncton, for francophones, there are several options. For instance, I was a member of the Legislative Assembly in Quebec and since I was elected, in my own riding, St. Patrick Church was torn down, the Jefferey Hale Hospital was closed, as well as St. Brigid's Home. As for Quebec High School, 90% of students are francophones who are there to learn English, and it has become a kind of Berlitz. However, the anglophone community still exists, with its needs, and I wonder if it is in touch with you. Is it?

Mr. Norman Moyer: Absolutely, and this is the tenor of our current conversation with Quebec. We must find out how better to target the communities with the greatest needs.

[English]

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Could I have one supplementary, please?

Theatres like Centaur, Saidye Bronfman, and then you take a look at Sherbrooke, with a very fine—I've just forgotten the name, in North Hatley.

The Joint Vice-Chairman (Mr. Denis Paradis): The Piggery.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Yes. Are they also financed out of that money or do they fall under a cultural description?

Mr. Hilaire Lemoine: They would normally fall under the cultural description.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Thank you.

[Translation]

The Vice Joint Chairman (Mr. Denis Paradis): Thank you, Mr. Moyer and Mr. Lemoine.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: I won't be there next Thursday for the Steering Committee, but I will be there on Tuesday.

The Vice Joint Chairman (Mr. Denis Paradis): The clerk will take the necessary steps to confirm whether the other members are available and advise Mr. Plamondon.

Mrs. Sheila Finestone: Please, call Mr. Plamondon to advise him. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Vice Joint Chairman (Mr. Denis Paradis): Thank you.

To conclude, I would like to congratulate Ms. Finestone on being elected to the executive of the Inter-Parliamentary Union.

The meeting is adjourned.