LANG Committee Meeting

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

For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.

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

Previous day publication Next day publication

37th PARLIAMENT, 1st SESSION

Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Monday, April 29, 2002

1535

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

1540

Mr. Louis Plamondon (Bas-Richelieu--Nicolet--Bécancour, BQ)

1545

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Denis Coderre

1550

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Denis Coderre

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

1555

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Paul Forseth (New Westminster--Coquitlam--Burnaby, Canadian Alliance)

1600

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Paul Forseth

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Marie-P. Poulin (Northern Ontario, Lib.)

1605

Mr. Denis Coderre

Senator Marie-P. Poulin

Mr. Denis Coderre

Senator Marie-P. Poulin

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Yvon Godin

1610

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Yvon Godin

Mr. Denis Coderre

1615

Mr. Yvon Godin

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Denis Coderre

1620

Mr. Yvon Charbonneau

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Viola Léger (New Brunswick, Lib.)

Mr. Denis Coderre

1625

Senator Viola Léger

Mr. Denis Coderre

Senator Viola Léger

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Gérard Binet

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Gérard Binet

Mr. Denis Coderre

1630

Mr. Gérard Binet

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Gérard Binet

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Gérard Binet

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Gérard Binet

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Paul Forseth

Mr. Denis Coderre

1635

Mr. Paul Forseth

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

1640

Mr. Denis Coderre

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Denis Coderre

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Denis Coderre

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Denis Coderre

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Denis Coderre

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Denis Coderre

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

1645

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Louis Plamondon

The Joint Chair (M. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Denis Coderre

1650

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Gérard Binet

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Gérard Binet

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Yvon Godin

1655

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Yvon Godin

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Yvon Godin

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Yvon Godin

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Yvon Godin

1700

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Yvon Godin

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Yvon Charbonneau

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

1705

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

1710

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Denis Coderre

Mr. Louis Plamondon

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Denis Coderre

1715

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Denis Coderre

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

CANADA

Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages

NUMBER 035

1st SESSION

37th PARLIAMENT

EVIDENCE

Monday, April 29, 2002

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

¹ (1535)

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa--Vanier, Lib.)): Welcome, Mr. Coderre. Since we have quorum and you are here, we will start the hearings on Part VII of the Act as it applies in particular to the Department of Citizenship and Immigration.

We thank you for adjusting your schedule to ours. Please make your presentation, and afterward, we will have a question and answer session. We normally get two or three rounds of questions, and when we're really lucky, even four.

Mr. Coderre, you have the floor.

Hon. Denis Coderre (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I truly believe that discussion is important. Therefore, my presentation will be very brief. I would like for us to be able to define as a group how we should approach the official languages issue, especially in regards to immigration and citizenship.

I must admit that I support the Official Languages Commissioner when she states that language or immigration is a factor in community development. So it's not strictly for economic reasons, but also because of economics. In this sense, when we implement a new immigration system, and afterward, a new process for our new citizens, I think that it is appropriate that we seek out francophone immigrants, who will help with the development factor.

We know that there are francophone communities outside Quebec. I believe that it's important for us to work collaboratively with these communities to help them, precisely because they represent such a vital strength in this country, and so that they can find their voice in the matter of immigration. This is why I favour regionalization of the new policy on immigration, that is, help ensure that each region gets a specific model, while sharing common objectives, similar to what is done in Quebec, where we have a Quebec-Canada agreement on immigration that works well. This agreement allows Quebec to choose its own immigrants, especially its independent immigrants.

We have put in place the Provincial Nominee Program, which is a selection program for the province that wishes to find the maximum number of qualified workers. In this sense, I am currently negotiating with many of the provinces. We will soon have an agreement with Nova Scotia, for example. I have asked that this agreement contain an official languages clause.

I think that the first step is not to ask how much money must be put in the system, but to qualitatively assess the will of all partners so that we can fully play our role in terms of official languages, especially within the context of my duties as minister of Immigration and Citizenship.

This requires constant field work to ensure that the regional offices are able to provide adequate services in both languages and also to define together what the priorities are for all the official languages communities. This is why, on March 19, 2002, I announced the creation of a steering committee where regional representatives from Citizenship and Immigration, as well as community leaders from across the country, would be able to sit at the same table and, over the next two years, develop common objectives, a common strategy and certainly, an action plan. Instead of making empty promises, these discussions should lead to finding a concrete way to help francophone communities take their rightful place in terms of immigration.

Second, we have implemented two pilot projects. One of my concerns is the concentration of immigrants. If most immigrants settle in Toronto, Montreal and in Vancouver, this constitutes a problem. When we talk about development, we are referring to development factors. We also have to ensure that we address the issues of the new rural reality and implement a system that will help immigration contribute to regional development.

I would like you to get the news first, Mr. Chairman. In fact, this fall, there will be a federal-provincial conference, where immigration will be on the agenda, but quite certainly official languages as well. In this I wish to acknowledge the efforts made by my provincial colleagues such as Norm Betts in British Columbia, who is already working with the universities and communities to find more workers who are qualified. We also have to take this development factor into account for francophone communities, especially in the rest of Canada. We must also ensure, but this will be up to the Quebec government, finding immigrants who reflect the reality of Quebec society, which has an anglophone minority.

In concluding, Mr. Chairman, I would say that this is a question of establishing partnerships, and not only of telling communities that we are providing funding to build another centre and wish them good luck.

¹ (1540)

It is a question of defining a partnership to ensure that everyone can be part of the decision-making process, and contribute to developing the linguistic minority communities in the country, both francophone and anglophone.

This is how I intend to work. I am open to your suggestions and I thank you for allowing me to make this modest contribution. Obviously, as a francophone, I think that it is essential that we be able to establish together, in a concrete way, throughout government, the means by which we can reflect today's Canadian reality. Thank you.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you.

Mr. Plamondon, you have seven minutes.

Mr. Louis Plamondon (Bas-Richelieu--Nicolet--Bécancour, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you for being here, Mr. Coderre. Welcome to the Committee. You are not here often, nor am I. Today, I am replacing someone.

You speak of immigrants and the agreements you have signed with the provinces regarding certain quotas for qualified workers. I think that there are already certain agreements. For example, Newfoundland has the right to ask embassies to give priority to 700 of these workers during interviews. Such is the system as it exists, or that is being developed.

There is, however, a problem in embassies such as the one in China. There are many people coming to Canada from that country. In China, 100% of immigrants wishing to come here use the services of a consultant. The consultants are very able individuals. If they know that Newfoundland wants 300 people, they'll go through Newfoundland. The immigrants will come to Newfoundland after Newfoundland has called the embassy requesting priority. There are certain priorities: reuniting families, provincial requests, etc. Therefore, the immigrants are accepted and go to Newfoundland. One month later, however, they are in Toronto. We know that 95% of immigrants coming from China go to Toronto or Vancouver.

So you can imagine what happens. This system of cheating or playing the system means that federal-provincial agreements have a more symbolic value than any real practical one. The facts are that the system does not work that way. As for francophone immigration, imagine what happens in provinces other than Quebec. Quebec has its own offices a little everywhere. For example, it has offices in Peking, in China, in Hong Kong, and even in Seoul, Korea, where it can recruit the investors it chooses, in collaboration with Immigration Canada.

Imagine the difficulties that francophones outside Quebec have in enriching their francophone communities, when even Quebec, with full-time staff over there, recruiting its own Chinese immigrants, still only manages to keep 30% of the people it recruits. Seventy percent of the immigrants that have been recruited by Quebec and who benefit from the advantages that Quebec offers because they are investors go to Toronto or Vancouver. The situation is such that I wonder if the embassy in Peking is not Toronto's or Vancouver's embassy, and not Canada's. Last year, 14,000 Chinese students came to study in Canada, and 90% of them went to Toronto and Vancouver. Afterward, those who settle permanently in Canada after three or four years of study settle in Toronto and Vancouver in the same proportions.

I don't know if you have reflected on some type of coercive action, to achieve a better distribution of this resource of people who come here to study and who want to live in various Canadian provinces because they become qualified. To what extent can you act to help francophone communities outside Quebec expand? The Commissioner has targeted these communities and you referred to them earlier. These communities suffer the same problem that we have in Quebec: the birth rate among francophones is very low. That is my first question.

¹ (1545)

Mr. Denis Coderre: That is a first question? I see your trip to Asia went very well.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I talked to your assistant. I congratulate you on having an excellent assistant.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Yes, things went well. I was told that you performed well. We are proud of you.

Mr. Plamondon, there are several things. First, we must be clear on this. The issue of consultants will be solved, and very soon I will announce legislation that will apply to immigration consultants. We have seen too many horror stories, and I think that we must implement what the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration came up with in 1995. Because of the Mangat case that went before the Supreme Court, we are now able to regulate this. The Supreme Court has confirmed that we have full authority to apply section 114 of the Act, which allows me, as Minister, to regulate immigration consultants.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Like Australia does.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Australia does it, and other countries are thinking about it or have done it, but it is clear.

Second, I have made the problem of concentration a priority. I want to find a solution to the concentration problem. You are certainly aware, however, that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms provides mobility rights. With our partners, therefore, we have to find a way, not coercive but through incentive--I much prefer seduction--to ensure that people remain in the regions. There is a problem with rural exodus. Since you come from a rural area, you know about this as well as I do.

We want to implement a federal-provincial and territorial conference so that we can all approach the problem together, because it is in every one's interest to do so. The last Census was very clear on the question of the decline in the birth rate. We have a deficit of one million qualified workers in Canada. So we have a requirement. The fact that we have implemented provincial programs to incite the provinces to select their qualified workers is one step. It's not like in Quebec, which has the right to choose independent immigrants depending on what they what. Citizenship and Immigration decides ultimately,but this new partnership means that we help the provinces do their own promoting. I believe that it leads to a higher number of people wanting to stay.

As for foreign students, the new legislation will allow them to request landed immigrant status after they have obtained their permit. This is not currently the case, but it is essential that I mention that we also wish to establish partnerships with other countries. We don't want to empty a region. Of course, we are in competition with other regions in the world, but we don't want to drain away human resources that would hinder any country from developing. I think that we should speak in terms of exchanges, and achieve balance.

Last, the language issue will be important in regard to the new evaluation grid for choosing qualified workers. It was already important with the last grid and it will continue to be so with the new one. We wish to enure that this grid will lead to integrating these immigrants so that one day they will become new citizens. I think that all these factors will help us solve a certain problem. You referred to immigrants who leave a province for Toronto. This is a reality. The fact that all players are now sitting at the same table to come up with a common action plan will be part of the solution.

¹ (1550)

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Senator Gauthier.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier (Ontario, Lib.): Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Good afternoon Mr. Coderre. We have been travelling together for a long time.

I believe that the accountability framework that was adopted in 1994, regarding implementation of sections 41 and 42 of Part VII of the Act requires key federal institutions—such as yours—to consult official language minority communities to develop action plans and identify results achieved, all leading to two annual reports that are sent to the Minister of Canadian Heritage and the Minister responsible for the Treasury Board.

I am not very good with computers, but I play around with mine and I tried to find your action plan. The status report for 2000-2001 is not available. The report for 2001-2002 is not available. It's not easy to be a Parliamentarian and find information in this box, and you know that as well as I do. Can you send me a paper copy of your status reports for 2000-2001 and 2001-2002? You could also update your title. It would be useful for the parliamentarians working in this domain.

Mr. Denis Coderre: We have known each other so long that I don't think you need a standing committee to ask me that question. However, I will look into this. What you say is true, and this is why the next plan is being developed in collaboration with the francophone communities. This is why we have set up a steering committee; also, pilot projects lead to better communications between the communities and the government in the matter of official languages.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I called your office this morning, and you were not available, again. At 2:54 p.m., I tried to get a copy; it wasn't available.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Coderre, please send it to the Clerk of the Committee so that we can provide everyone a copy.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: You spoke earlier about the selection grid for selecting immigrants. We know that this grid is based on adaptability. This is a new concept that will have priority over the old criteria, which dealt with what was referred to as the intended profession.

The House Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, in its report, Building a Nation, made three recommendations regarding the number of points that should be given for proficiency in one or both of the official languages in Canada. I am talking more specifically about recommendations 10, 11, and 12. Unless I am mistaken, the proposed changes were not kept. On this I must admit that I have to rely on my computer.

Currently, in the Canada Gazette, we can see that there are consultations taking place regarding recommendations 10, 11 and 12. We have not heard the committee's recommendations on this. Before asking you why, I will ask my questions.

The Commissioner of Official Languages, before this committee, on April 22, 2002, stated that the way it currently reads, the proposed regulation would not lead to meeting the new objectives relating to the two official languages. According to Ms. Adam, the points structure proposed would not recognize the true value of the linguistic competencies of bilingual immigrants. Finally, she recommended that the maximum amount of points allotted for bilingualism be increased to 24 from 20.

Mr. Coderre, in our communities, and I am talking about mine, as a guy from French Ontario living in a minority situation, the assimilation rate is very high, at 37%; the rate of replacement is therefore very critical for us. The communities are worried. At the rate things are going, Canada will itself become balkanized; French will be solely concentrated in Quebec, and English will be the only language used in the rest of the country, unless we receive solid support from new immigrants to Canada. On this topic, it must be stated that half of the demographic growth is based on immigration, not only in francophone communities, but throughout Canada. We are having difficulty surviving. Before, we did not have institutions that could offer us education, health and social services. Today, we have these institutions, we are a community living in solidarity, that wishes to survive.

Our birthrate is low; in fact it is not higher than that of Quebec or all of Canada. Our education levels are perhaps lower than average; before, we did not have schools. This is no longer the case, which explains why the rate is increasing and the trend, reversing. Schooling was a problem when I entered politics, 30 years ago; today, things have changed.

I have three questions. First, I would like to know if you intend to intervene regarding the new regulation, so that recommendations 10, 11, and 12 made by your House Committee will be taken into consideration. Tell us about the agreements with the other provinces. Earlier, you alluded to them and you stated that there would be a federal-provincial conference.

¹ (1555)

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Senator Gauthier, you have used up your seven minutes. We will ask the Minister to respond, and you can come back in the next round.

Mr. Coderre.

Mr. Denis Coderre: We are taking these recommendations under consideration, and we have not yet made any decisions regarding the recommendations on official languages. This will be addressed by the government; things are following their normal course. As I already stated publicly, however, I consider the official languages issue to be essential because it is an integration factor. You will recall that the old grid allotted 15 points for this; the new grid gives 20.

As for redistribution, I have noted recommendations 10, 11, and 12 concerning this, but there has not yet been a final decision. We are taking these recommendations into consideration.

It is clear also that there is assimilation. I am more positive than my colleague, the Senator. I am more hopeful than he is, but he is correct: by 2011, 100% of the workforce will rely on immigration, and in 2026, 100% of the growth in population will depend on immigration. Therefore, we must concentrate on this. I have made many statements on this topic. The language issue is essential in the case of qualified workers, and we are going to ensure that this becomes a development factor for all communities. There is a will and we must act accordingly.

As for the issue of 20 or 24 points, I think that we should discover whether the current points distribution in the grid is adequate. We will therefore work on this.

Second, we are already working with the Commissioner of Official Languages. Besides, as a result of the work performed by your committee, Mr. Chairman, the Act was already respecting the official languages issue, and I fully intend to ensure that the regulations will reflect the Canadian reality.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Forseth, you have seven minutes.

Mr. Paul Forseth (New Westminster--Coquitlam--Burnaby, Canadian Alliance): Thank you very much, and thank you, Minister.

As former lead critic for the official opposition, I was one of the authors of the House standing committee report that has been referred to. Certainly an awful lot of the debate in our committee was on the official languages section. From my perspective, the spirit of why we decided to rewrite this section was, in view of what the people I call the eggheads in the department came up with, to give a better chance for those from the worldwide Francophonie to be able to come to Canada.

Of course, we know that the provincial government of Quebec has a special arrangement with the Department of Citizenship and Immigration and has immigration officers of its own in some embassies worldwide in an attempt to apply a special sensitivity to attract and work on those of the worldwide Francophonie to come to Canada. Then we had the department come up with those regulations, but when we decided to call evidence on the matter, I certainly did not give a lot of credit to those, so we basically rewrote the whole section.

I want to again draw your attention to the suggestions we made in the spirit that it would really provide a leg up, an advantage, or an additional sensitivity for someone who may only have moderate proficiency in their first language, which they may name as French. But increasingly the language of the world is English. Under the old rules, they perhaps wouldn't have received any benefit at all for having a basic proficiency in English. Now it appears most people worldwide, especially those contemplating coming to Canada, already have basic proficiency in English.

Have you considered the committee recommendation in view of the angle that some proficiency in English would be an advantage for someone who is primarily a French speaker to come to Canada, this to partly respond to this committee's concerns?

º (1600)

Mr. Denis Coderre: First of all, congratulations for your work at the standing committee. I'm not going to use another committee to answer for what I think about all the recommendations. In Latin they say delegatus non potest delegare: a delegate cannot further delegate. I'm not a lawyer, and that's the only thing in Latin I know besides the Sanctus.

Anyway, I would say everything is on the table. I've been in the field. I've been working with the director of the committee, especially on the official languages issue. I already went public saying the language issue is an important one because it's a factor of integration. We have to do something about it.

We can do two things at the same time. First of all, of course, we need some people who can speak one of the official languages. At the same time, we have a tremendous opportunity here, especially for the francophones, to have people come here from parts of the country other than Quebec.

It's not a competition. The United States has five times more francophone immigrants than we do. We have to do something about it.

I'm considering everything that will reflect the new reality. Why is someone coming to stay in Canada? Of course, he wants to provide a future for his kids and family. He wants to be in a place where they feel welcome. It's pretty easy. It's Canada. At the same time, he also needs to have a job for his own skills so he can work. It's the kind of thing we should decide together.

I'll give you an example of Algeria. They're very keen on petroleum. You have oil in Alberta and Newfoundland, so maybe we can do both. You have some francophone communities there.

We can manage to find a proper way. We need to be creative, provide some innovation, and make sure it's a partnership where everyone will get a part of it. It's exactly why we'll have it federally and provincially.

In Alberta, it's the first time we signed a provincial nominee program for 200 a year. It's a start. Manitoba did a tremendous job. They now have 1,000 cases per year. In Manitoba, you have St. Boniface, St. Vital, St. Norbert, and all those places.

We can have a one-two punch at the same time. I'm dedicated to it. It's the kind of thing I'm looking for. In due process, I will give my answers to all the recommendations you provide.

Mr. Paul Forseth: In closing, I would say look at our recommendations in view of advantage to the Francophonie. I'm looking forward to you deciding and coming down on what we recommended, rather than what I call the eggheads in the department. They were wrong, in my view.

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Senator Poulin.

Senator Marie-P. Poulin (Northern Ontario, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Coderre, I would like to thank you for being here, and congratulate you on your commitment to this matter of great importance to the future of our country and all our communities, throughout the country, in all provinces and in all the territories.

In your opening comments, you mentioned your negotiations with the provinces and that you wish to establish a partnership with the provinces so that they can help you achieve your objectives.

Will the fact that certain provinces are not officially bilingual hinder or help your efforts?

º (1605)

Mr. Denis Coderre: We have to work in collaboration with all our partners. I don't want to act depending on whether a province is bilingual or not. That would mean that I would only deal with New Brunswick.

We need to work with all partners. I don't doubt that each province has the best intentions. Also, immigration will be the engine of the next policy in Canada; it is the key issue. For workforce and demographic requirements, we all need immigration. Whether you call it a necessary evil or not, we have to find solutions because of the rate of assimilation, for example. We mentioned the figure of 37 percent: that's a good reason.

We have to work, and each party has its own duties. I don't want to enter an area that would lead us to talk about labels and all. I want to show that today there is a will to take action. I have already spoken with six of my provincial counterparts, and I have felt that there are good intentions there as well.

It is vital for economic, cultural and development reasons in a province or region. It has become a fundamental issue. This is why the provinces and territories have unanimously accepted to attend the federal-provincial conference, not in an atmosphere of splitting the pie, and making empty promises, but together coming up with an action plan that will allow each partner to fully play their role. This is how I see things. I don't have to speculate on people's good faith. I am sure that the will want to work accordingly.

Ontario is important. Sudbury is important. We must find a way to define immigration in regard to Northern Ontario. What must be done? It can't only come from Ottawa. It cannot be your humble servant stating how things must work. Everyone has to chip in, take up responsibility and fully play their role.

My role will be to bridge the gap, make the link, and that is what I intend to do.

Senator Marie-P. Poulin: As Minister responsible for Immigration and Citizenship, do you think that the municipalities have a role to play?

Mr. Denis Coderre: Again, my policy is one of respect and assistance. I am not telling the municipalities what to do because that falls under provincial jurisdiction. Obviously, I have already met with mayors, and we can work together. Before embarking on this adventure, however, I wish to consult my provincial colleagues and work with them, and ensure that we are not only talking bout official languages, but also municipal relations. This is a problem in Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver, for example, but also for municipalities that would like to have immigrants, but have problems in doing so.

This is my approach for this strategy and partnership. This is part of the action plan, as well as the priorities of our government, but everything is being done fully respecting the regions. If we respect the regions, their way of doing things and what they are, while establishing common objectives, we will have a policy that reflects Canadian reality and in which all participants will be able to participate. I believe that we must be as inclusive as possible.

Senator Marie-P. Poulin: Thank you, Mr. Coderre.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Godin.

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

Good morning, Mr. Coderre. You have told me things that I did not know concerning New Brunswick when you stated that you had started negotiating with Norm Betts for British Columbia. I thought Norm Betts was in New Brunswick. I think you made a small mistake.

Mr. Denis Coderre: I will ask the Clerk to make the correction.

Mr. Yvon Godin: Its for the minutes. Norm Betts is still in New Brunswick.

The Official Languages Commissioner states that Ottawa, through the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, should encourage its embassies, as well as foreign embassies in Canada, to respect the linguistic duality in Canada.

I remember one case where there had been a complaint, and I don't think it was unique. I will give you an example. Certain companies were interested in coming to New Brunswick for secondary and tertiary bottom feeding fish processing, but later decided not to come because the people at the Canadian embassy told them that they would be better off locating in Toronto for business.

This can't be the general situation, but cases like this exist. There are people in the embassies promoting certain Canadian cities. You say that you will propose regulating consultants. You seem to be aware, then, that there are certain things that are not right. Are there any studies to see what kind of promotion is taking place in the embassies regarding all the communities in Canada? In New Brunswick, one third of the population is francophone, especially in Moncton, and Dieppe and the surrounding area. Not long ago, the Société des Acadiens et Acadiennes asked that the doors be opened to immigration. Has your department conducted any studies or is it ready to study how the Canadian embassies abroad are working to encourage people to settle in regions such as ours, where we speak French outside Quebec?

º (1610)

Mr. Denis Coderre: Let's be clear about this. The embassies are under the jurisdiction of my colleague at Foreign Affairs. I can tell you that our staff at the department of Immigration are doing a stellar job. I have already visited five regional centres, and I can tell you that they promote Canada. If you have specific examples, I would like to have them. The reality is that we want to find ways to ensure that there will be less concentration, and we will work with our counterparts. Earlier, I thought I had mentioned New Brunswick, and I am sorry, but the Norm Betts's of this world also have to define their requirements. They do so, for example, in New Brunswick. I want to work with my partners so that together we can establish a policy on promotion.

If the Maritimes decide to go ahead, we will work together. All regions across the country have their charms. We give people a choice to come to Canada, and settle in the regions.

We were talking about Quebec. The same holds for Alberta. Alberta has offices abroad and promotes its own region. I know that it does so in Korea, for example, or in Taiwan. In terms of immigration, this becomes an additional tool that helps us attract immigrants. You talk about francophone immigrants, but I am talking about all immigrants. We are talking about a way to attract qualified workers to the regions. We have to find solutions together, because currently there is concentration. When 75% of the workers go to Toronto, Montreal or Vancouver, this creates problems. We have to make sure that some of them go to the regions.

Mr. Yvon Godin: You mention negotiations and talks with the provinces. Can you tell us what these include? For example, you just mentioned that in Calgary, or in Alberta, as in Quebec, qualified workers are brought in through immigration. A province like New Brunswick, with its 750,000 inhabitants, is not very imposing. We don't have the same resources as in the other provinces. Are there any federal-provincial agreements that would allow joint initiatives?

Mr. Denis Coderre: There is already an agreement between the Province of New Brunswick and the Canadian government for the Provincial Nominees Program. We are talking about 200 people per year, I think, but they haven't been able to reach this number.

What I am saying, finally, is that the regions also have to act. You can't say that it is all Ottawa's fault, when it is convenient to say so. Everyone pitches in, and we all agree that there is a problem, and we will solve it accordingly.

This is a first; there will be a federal-provincial conference. As for New Brunswick, your province, I see that ministers such as Norm Betts are touring the universities, working with the chambers of commerce and with the business community to try to find a solution.

The additional message that I am sending today, is that, in my opinion, the French fact, as a development factor, could also be an immigration criterion. I would like our government to use this additional tool to promote and encourage development of the linguistic minorities, as well as the linguistic duality of Canada.

º (1615)

Mr. Yvon Godin: I would like to get back to the question raised by my colleague, Senator Gauthier, who said that the reality in his community resembled ours: people leave and don't come back. With the latest Census, we have the numbers of inhabitants in the regions where there are problems.

Is the government making a greater effort to attract francophones from abroad to regions outside Quebec? Is there something new and concrete being done currently to help the provinces? I am not saying here that the federal government is the big bad wolf. I didn't say that. The federal government has national responsibility. The provinces must also take on their responsibilities. I am talking about joint initiatives; this is not a question of passing the buck...

Mr. Denis Coderre: Immigration, as you know, Mr. Godin, is a shared jurisdiction, which means that each party has a role to play. Through promotion, seduction and creativity, we should develop a strategy regarding the French fact, jointly with la Francophonie. We should also find a way to include our partners so that they can be part of the process. The fact that it is a shared jurisdiction and that there is now an increased will and enthusiasm in the provinces means, I believe, that we could be seated at the same table and together establish how to proceed. This would be a step in the right direction.

Obviously, we have perhaps made errors in the past, and we will commit more, but like they say, where there is a will there is a way. This is how we want to function. Certainly, I need to meet all my colleagues, because I feel that there is a real desire for discussion. Mr. Chrétien has said that we need more immigrants in Canada. Therefore, we are on the right track.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Charbonneau.

Mr. Yvon Charbonneau (Anjou—Rivière-des-Prairies, Lib.): Mr. Coderre, you have a department that has two portfolios: immigration and citizenship. We particularly hear, through questions that are asked of you in the House or by the media, about the immigration portfolio. We hear much less regarding citizenship. We know that immigration is a shared responsibility.

Is the citizenship portfolio also shared? This is my first question.

Mr. Denis Coderre: No.

Mr. Yvon Charbonneau: I have understood, through your answers to previous questions, that the minister and the Department of Immigration cannot do much regarding assimilation problems in the regions. When we send francophones to Moncton and their grandchildren are anglophones, two generations later, the Department of Immigration can't do anything. We can't do anything either regarding immigrant mobility. They land in Sudbury, but they can go to Toronto afterward; they can go to other provinces.

Is it through your efforts under your responsibilities in the matter of citizenship that you hope to develop a strategy to confront this problem? I am trying to see, through my question, how citizenship, within your mandate, can help you complete your work as Minister of Immigration. Do you have the resources? What are they, in fact? It would be good of you to remind us. As Minister of Citizenship, what are the resources that you have or that you would like to have to complete what you can't complete as Minister of Immigration? I am giving you the opportunity to balance both aspects of your mandate, one against the other.

Mr. Denis Coderre: In fact, there is much talk about immigration and new arrivals, but we too often forget that there is a citizenship aspect that is essential. The citizenship aspect, is a policy of accompaniment. When an immigrant and his family applies for Canadian citizenship, three years after arriving in Canada, it is not the end of a process; it is the start. When we establish an immigration policy and a citizenship policy, it has to become an accompaniment policy, because the entire notion of integration is essential. When we created the steering committee and pilot projects to establish supplementary tools or a common strategy to ensure French-speaking new arrivals in the regions, this was the final result of a citizenship policy. This accompaniment policy will oblige us to prioritize the entire notion of integration. When we talk about integration, we are obviously talking about education. Immigration and citizenship being Canadian values, how can these Canadian values, these linguistic values, be promoted? Obviously, there is also the role of links between cultural communities. There are multicultural communities where French is spoken. I think that is part of the process. I think that citizenship is the start of the process of this accompaniment policy. We are reflecting on the possible submission of a Citizenship Act that we have already discussed. This citizenship policy already exists, so the new policy that we will propose will have to foresee concrete ways of accompanying people while respecting the regions.

º (1620)

Mr. Yvon Charbonneau: With the current state of things, Mr. Coderre, are you able to tell us what share of your global budget is assigned to citizenship, compared to the immigration aspect, in terms of full-time resources, for example?

Mr. Denis Coderre: With a total budget of approximately one billion dollars, 30% goes to Citizenship, and 70% goes to immigration.

Mr. Yvon Charbonneau: Thank you.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Senator Léger.

Senator Viola Léger (New Brunswick, Lib.): I guess that a qualified immigrant worker comes here to work. Let's suppose that the immigrant doesn't speak either English or French. He or she is probably indifferent about working in English or in French. This is what I think, but perhaps it's an illusion.

If the worker comes to Canada, it seems to me that he or she must be ready to learn both languages in Canada, French and English. I know that things must be taken one step at a time, and with respect, as you say. If immigrants are sent into la Francophonie, are we not isolating ourselves even more? I am sure that in Calgary, there is a very nice francophone community. Perhaps your department and the others should make major efforts so that the qualified worker can find a francophone atmosphere. Surely the same applies in Toronto; there are thousands of francophones there. In other words, whether the immigrants are within francophone or anglophone communities, aren't they ready to learn anything?

Mr. Denis Coderre: I don't know if they are ready to learn just about anything. If a qualified worker wants to come to Canada, it's because of our country's reputation. We have to be realistic. To ensure his development, we have to ensure, for example, that the family can also live within a francophone environment as well. Does the person necessarily have to work in French? I think we have to be realistic. What we want is to ensure that the worker can contribute to preserving a community in a given region.

I think that this is the reason why we want to use the issue of la Francophonie as a development factor in the regions where there are minority communities. Do we have to promise each francophone coming here that he or she will work in their language? We have to be realistic. It would not be honest of me to say that if the worker goes to a given region, he or she will work in his or her language. Can we together define the partnership so that the person immigrating here to a community can have a way of developing in his own language, culturally, in school and so on? I think that we have to consider this. This is why before giving any answer, we are doing a pilot project in collaboration with the communities. This is why we have established a steering committee that will come up with recommendations.

º (1625)

Senator Viola Léger: In other words, I think that you are referring to francophone immigrants from the international Francophonie. These immigrants you would especially like to see come to Canada.

Mr. Denis Coderre: The message we are sending is quite simply that there are two official languages in the country, and that there are francophones in this country. We would be ill advised not to go out and find these positive elements, along with others. It is a resource factor. There is an international Francophonie. We believe that immigration is a development factor that also reflects Canadian reality. So we want to solicit francophone immigrants so that they can settle anywhere in Canada.

Senator Viola Léger: I other words, perhaps this was an omission before—we couldn't do everything at once—and you would like to put the emphasis on this.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Where I come from, we say that the reason why the windshield is so much bigger than the rear-view mirrors is because you have to look forward much more often than you have to look backward.

Senator Viola Léger: Thank you very much.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Binet.

Mr. Gérard Binet (Frontenac—Mégantic, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good morning, Mr. Coderre. I am pleased that I can ask a few questions today. After September 11, we had a lot of questions regarding immigration, but since the last Census, we have seen that it is very important.

I would like to know what is the percentage of immigrants in the business category. In terms of percentage, how many are in the business category?

Mr. Denis Coderre: Our objective is 1% of the population, or almost 300,000. Last week, I believe that we announced that for 2001, we were looking at 250,356 new arrivals. Quebec aside, francophone immigration represented 4.54%. This first priority is to reach this percentage.

We could say that this immigration is a development factor, and ensure that we are strategically approaching how to attract immigrants. We could say that here, there is also a language factor that we must take into account to attract more immigrants.

Mr. Gérard Binet: This is not quite the answer that I was expecting. Among the immigrants coming here, most have been selected because they are business people. We know that there are immigrants for family reunification, and there are refugees. What are the relative numbers?

Mr. Denis Coderre: There are three categories. There are refugees, family reunification and independent, or economic, immigrants, namely qualified workers, investors and entrepreneurs. In 1990, I estimate that it was 50-50: 50% of immigrants for family reunification and 50% economic immigrants. Now the proportion is 60-40. There are 60% of immigrants under the economic or qualified worker categories, and the others have arrived for family reunification or as refugees.

Mr. Gérard Binet: There are approximately 10% refugees. This means that it is all quite profitable for the country. Immigrants are not an additional financial burden on the country. Immigration is profitable.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Immigration is not an expense, but an investment. We are told that in 2026, the growth in the population will be 100% dependent on immigration, and that in 2011, in just nine years, 100% of the workforce will rely upon immigration, and our country has a deficit of one million qualified workers. I think we have to roll up our sleeves.

º (1630)

Mr. Gérard Binet: As you said earlier, Quebec manages its own immigration.

Mr. Denis Coderre: It does so regarding independent immigrants, but not for refugees or those coming here under the family reunification program. Quebec selects the independent or qualified worker immigrants.

Mr. Gérard Binet: As we know, democracy is expanding throughout the world and immigration is becoming increasingly difficult. We know that the Canadian passport is the most popular throughout the world, nevertheless, it is decreasing.

Does Quebec meet its objectives?

Mr. Denis Coderre: I think that the latest figures for Quebec amounted to 37,000 new arrivals, but as Mr. Plamondon stated earlier, there is a problem. Holding these people is problematic. Many come through Quebec, and leave for other regions. Many go to Ontario, especially. This is why retention is a common problem, and priority.

In terms of percentage, I would say that 90% of our immigration comes from China, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, the Philippines, India, and surrounding regions.

Mr. Gérard Binet: That was precisely my previous question. In which country do we attract the most immigrants? Francophones must be quite rare in the countries you just mentioned.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Which means we have to be very creative.

Mr. Gérard Binet: In concluding, Mr. Coderre, I would like to congratulate you for your excellent work.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Thank you.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you, Mr. Binet.

We will now go to our second round. Mr. Coderre, I would like to ask you some questions following this second round, and time permitting, we will go on for a third round.

[English]

Mr. Forseth, you're first. We'll have five minutes in the second round.

Mr. Paul Forseth: Thank you.

Our researchers have provided some questions. One of them simply says, “Does the Department of Citizenship and Immigration plan to take special measures, or measures to supplement those that now exist, to make its regional offices aware of the need to recruit francophone immigrants in communities outside Quebec?”

The mere fact that this question exists is saying we really have a problem. Today at committee we've heard all kinds of things: “We have to do better”; “We have to re-evaluate what we're doing”; or maybe, “We must apply more resources.” There are lots of nice-sounding phrases. But are we just really fooling ourselves? It looks as though the Francophonie worldwide is really facing a problem of decline.

We must be truthful to ourselves and recognize that regardless of all the nice-sounding phrases, and perhaps despite continuing to pour resources into an issue where we want to go, it may not really pay off.

So I'm asking you, is there really an answer, a real, concrete answer to the obvious inherent assumption of all the questions and conversation we've heard today: that Francophonie worldwide and Francophonie within Canada is under pressure and is basically in decline?

Mr. Denis Coderre: Even in English you sound good. I would say that we have to be very careful in what we're saying. I'm not the person who thinks…

[Translation]

that francophones outside Quebec are zombies and that absolutely nothing should be done. I am saying this in French so that everybody understands.

[English]

I think what we need to do, if we recognize and agree that immigration is truly a factor—not just based on economy but also on the values Canada represents—is think that if there's a will, there's a way.

I see tremendous people all over the country, francophone or not, who are truly dedicated to their communities. So what I'm looking for, as a minister, is to make sure that we can use those tools to give a future to our newcomers.

The reality is pretty simple. When you have 48 immigrants out of 100 going to Toronto, 15 to Vancouver, and 11 to Montreal, it will create problems in the future, because there's always a matter of resources. We have to talk about integration. So we have to be creative and through innovation find ways ahead.

You know as well as I do, where you're coming from, that there are some rural problems. It's rural versus urban region. It's regions versus other regions in the country, who also truly need to have a place in the sun too. So that's why I feel that immigration is clearly one of the issues.

I don't agree that the francophone community is in decline. What we need to do is stick together and find proper ways to build bridges. From the census, we realize that the demographic problem is a very serious one, and that it's not just a matter of language. It's a matter of asking Canadians what kind of society they want to live in, because in the future, when we look at our social programs, we will need some revenues eventually. We need some investment. We need to make sure that we will be able to fulfill our duties and represent concretely what the value is all about. So that's the reason why immigration is also a factor.

But for the purpose of the standing committee, I think that it is important also to send a message of hope and send a message that, concretely, everybody is focused on the same goal—to make sure that we can use immigration as a proper development tool for the Francophonie as well.

º (1635)

Mr. Paul Forseth: Okay, so for the Canadian context then, the idea is to work harder, smarter, and put more resources into perhaps attracting those who are primarily French speakers to Canada. But I'm just giving you an opportunity to express any other ideas to the larger question—

Mr. Denis Coderre: Well, build a partnership.

I mean that if it's always coming from Ottawa, we have a problem. I said let's change the handshake from that way to another way. Let's find a way, in your own words, in your own way of doing things, in your own imagination and creativity, how to contribute. The will is there in Ottawa to make things happen, and in the province too.

When I went with George Abbott in B.C., he was totally dedicated to it. As I said, we need to focus together on what kind of society we want to live in for the future, and what's the best way to represent our values. One of them is immigration, which is totally the tool to do so.

When I deal with communities, some of them have asked me, “are we going to have more resources for cementing... We need some cultural centres.” I respond that the first thing we need to do together is to sit at the same table and decide what we are prepared to do individually, and what's your share of the risk, and what's your share of the responsibility you're able to assume. Because of that, I feel it will work pretty well. I really feel that, and I felt that at the director committee. As I said, some of its members are from the Department of Citizenship and Immigration and some are from francophone communities who want to be part of it. So let's do it.

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you.

Senator Gauthier

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: This is becoming quite interesting. Tell me about the reception system you talked about. We have created welcoming links with new immigrants. There is the IPOLC. Are you familiar with the IPOLC?

Mr. Denis Coderre: Yes.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: This program creates links and helps establishes partnerships with the communities. I think that the solution lies there.

Mr. Denis Coderre: It is the key.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: The official language minority communities must establish solid ties with the ethno-cultural communities.

The definition for the regions is a problem, in my opinion. Currently, we define regions according to geographic boundaries. I would like to look at the possibility of defining regions where linguistic minority communities are present, but lack support. Do you remember last year, less than 1% of French speaking immigrants settled outside Quebec. There were 250,000 new immigrants, and less than 1 percent went outside Quebec. I think that we should therefore define what a region is in terms of immigration and perhaps the linguistic factor should be added, or the community factor. This would lead to creating closer ties, developing projects with the communities and providing them with the ability to think up ways of attracting immigrants.

There are many immigrants. There are 250 million people speaking French on this planet, and there are 50 million others who are “francophonable”. I don't know if you've heard that term, we won't look for it... You referred to the Chinese and the Japanese. These people are probably not “francophonable”. This is a neologism that I have just come up with.

º (1640)

Mr. Denis Coderre: Senator, first, I would like to thank you. The question of a steering committee and pilot projects was studied in collaboration with the IPOLC. It is important and even essential that we be able to work accordingly. I believe that we signed an agreement last January with the Minister of Canadian Heritage. Like you, I think that this is probably the best tool for making agreements between the communities and the Canadian government work.

As for defining regions, I have noted your comments. The first thing I would like you to know today is that there is a will to go in this direction. The issue of 1% also disturbs me. There is a will to act. Yes, there is a way to attract francophones. The real problem is this: are they aware of all these regions? We are referring to this here. This is why we have to base our activities on promoting the regions. We have to learn about the regions. Communication is essential, and I think that promotion will contribute to improving the situation.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: You could perhaps send someone to Paris. There will be an election on Sunday. If Le Pen is elected, there will be a lot of people wanting to come to Canada. You are aware of the problem.

Mr. Denis Coderre: I will take that as an opinion on your part. Thank you.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: We will not talk about Mr. Le Pen.

I would like to know when the federal-provincial meeting on immigration will be held.

Mr. Denis Coderre: This fall. The time and place are not yet set, but it will be this fall.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: This fall. There is still no exact date?

Mr. Denis Coderre: It's coming.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: November?

Mr. Denis Coderre: It will be in the newspapers.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Do you have a date in November?

Mr. Denis Coderre: I have not set a date or place.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Who will attend?

Mr. Denis Coderre: Provincial and territorial ministers, and your humble servant.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Yes, but there are no provincial ministers of immigration that I know of except for Quebec.

Mr. Denis Coderre: There are ministers who are responsible for immigration, for example, Ms. Barrett, the minister from Manitoba. In the case of Mr. Betts, he is the minister for innovation and small business. There are people who have responsibility for immigration issues. I have already met with six. So I guess there are some.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: As for language courses for new Canadians or new immigrants, outside Quebec, it is pretty difficult to get access to French language courses. I think that there are two school boards in southern Ontario that have agreements with your department to offer these courses. I've been told that next year, this wil no longer be available at the elementary level, and that it will probably be the same at the high school level. It is important that immigrants know that we not only offer language courses, but development courses. Do you have anything to say about this?

Mr. Denis Coderre: This is part of the integration process. I have noted what you have told me. I know that our government has allocated funds to language development. If we want to encourage francophone immigration, we will have to take measures accordingly.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you, Senator.

Mr. Plamondon.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I have many questions, and I will try to ask them quickly.

You say that you will regulate the consultants. There will be an official list of consultants, and not just anybody will be able to be one. In British Columbia, it seems, there will be 2,400 consulting firms. Persons from China wishing to immigrate to Canada must pay between $5,000 and $50,000. They are under the impression that everything can be bought in Canada. It's off to a wrong start. We know that 100% of the immigrants from this country use a consultant. They think that it's impossible to make a normal request and that the request will go through.

As for education, there is a cancer, and it is the following. The provinces do not list their schools or universities. Therefore, universities are invented: Université du Rideau Inc., P.O. Box 139. The student in China claims that he will be studying at Université du Rideau, P.O. Box 139. Under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, we cannot doubt his claim, and he comes to study in Vancouver. He never studies, but he gets in to the country. He gets a fake diploma, and then he can emigrate. It's a classic case. They enter in droves this way.

There is a problem because of jurisdictions. Education is under provincial jurisdiction. The advantage is that British Columbia attracts many students who spend in the province. There are wealthy individuals who can spend up to $300,000. Some American universities tell people that they will accept their kids if they build a pavilion or research lab for 2 million dollars. This is the way to enter the United States, through certain universities. This is also being done in British Columbia. I don't know if it occurs in other provinces.

I wonder if we shouldn't reflect on all this. We will try to imitate Australia regarding the consultant issue. I gather that under your new regulations, they will have to post the names of consultants and state what they do and who they employ. I also guess that they will have to publish the personal address of whoever is making a request to become a Canadian citizen, and not the consultant's address.

As for the schools, we will have to come to an agreement with the provinces so that the universities are identified: if you are interested in studying in Canada, this is where you will study. We have to think about this. This is not a question. You can verify this and think it through.

There is another thing regarding students. In Korea, for example, anyone who wants to study in Canada is sent to the Canadian Cultural Centre. They are told that the Canadian Cultural Centre has all the information on the universities and schools that they can attend. But—and there is a small condition—if Laval University wants to get on the list, it must pay $12,000; otherwise its name doesn't go on the list. I checked, and I saw that the University of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick...There were some francophone universities on the list, but it wasn't that interesting. Out of 14,000 students coming from China, there are 12,000 who are going to Vancouver and Toronto. For schools in Toronto, it's very interesting: they pay $1 to attract a student who will study there for three years. Laval University is not very interested in paying $12,000 to attract eight students. It's a major expense.

I know that the Canadian Cultural Centres are not under your department's jurisdiction, but under that of Canadian Heritage, but I would like you to reflect—again, this is not a question—on the fact that universities and CEGEPs in Canada must pay to get on a list that goes out to whoever wants to study in Canada.

I went to the Canadian Cultural Centre in Seoul, and the director there, a very amiable Korean, showed me the Centre's list of responsibilities, and told me how the Centre proceeds to inform students. She showed me the list, which was in the Canadian language, namely, English. When I asked her if she had a French copy, she was very surprised. She introduced me to her six assistants, and none spoke a word of French.

I'm not saying that everyone has to be bilingual there, but someone who has read on the Internet that it is possible to study at a francophone university in New Brunswick or Nova Scotia, or at Laval, doesn't get the impression that things are very bilingual upon visiting a Canadian Cultural Centre.

With the Committee on Immigration, however, the documents that the ambassador and the staff presented were all bilingual. In China, that was not the case; everything was in English, everywhere.

º (1645)

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Plamondon.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: This is my last question. I will finish in 30 seconds.

The Joint Chair (M. Mauril Bélanger): You have been speaking for a little more than five minutes. Please, conclude.

M. Louis Plamondon: The work itself, at the embassy, with the Committee on Immigration, is also in English only. I don't know if this seems normal to you. All the information is in English. Everything is filed in English. There is no bilingualism, except at the door: the official sign is in both languages.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Coderre, could you answer quickly, please?

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I am not expecting any answers to my first two remarks. I wanted to inform the Minister of the facts.

Mr. Denis Coderre: You said many things at the same time; you mixed everything up.

º (1650)

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I only had five minutes.

Mr. Denis Coderre: In passing, I believe that the Canadian language is English and French. We will never agree on this.

Second, if there are problems with our Immigration Canada staff, please tell me. I visited five offices, and the documents were in both languages. This will have to be checked.

As for Laval University and the $12,000, I don't know what you're talking about. I will check this out. In any case, Laval University is on the Internet.

One must be careful in stating that temporary workers or foreign students are an expense. They are not. When someone studies at Laval University, it is an investment for the university and for the region. Words must be chosen carefully.

There have been special agreements with the embassies. There is an office funded by CIDA and the Department of Foreign Affaires. It is the Bureau canadien de l'éducation internationale, which establishes agreements with schools for promotional purposes when recruiting qualified workers or foreign students. One of the problems is that of diploma equivalency and certification. This is what we are working on.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Binet.

Mr. Gérard Binet: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I come from Frontenac—Mégantic. Mégantic is a region where things were very difficult ten years ago; today things are going well. Spanish investors came there recently, and it was a very profitable experience for the region. We also had a French immigrant who re-started an industry in the region. In Mégantic, therefore, things are settled and going well.

In Frontenac, there are the asbestos mines: Hamish and Lethowski. In the asbestos mines, which are 125 years old, there were many workers of all races and languages. Today, in Thetford Mines, only French is spoken; there are very few Anglophones.

We know that there are educated immigrants. A doctor coming to Canada who cannot work is an unhappy immigrant. Have you planned anything specific for immigrants who have a profession and who can help in our regions? When people come to our region, they learn French, whether they want to or not. I can assure you that at Hamish or Lethowski, the language is French.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Mr. Binet, according to the agreement, the Quebec government has its own grid and process for selecting immigrants. In the other provinces, qualified workers must be certified. There is a problem with diploma equivalency. We must take this into consideration and it will be part of the discussion at the federal-provincial conference.

I have also asked that the grid be more representative. I have nothing against doctorate degrees, master's and bachelor's degrees, quite the contrary, but I would also like skilled workers, technicians, etc. When the roof is leaking, a doctor in microbiology isn't going to fix the problem.

However, we can't have immigrants competing with our own people, our own electricians and carpenters. There has to be an equivalency process for certification. The grid, therefore, must not lead to unfair competition. It must represent society. The House Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration recommended as well that the grid be more representative so that we could recruit immigrants who can perform manual tasks, for example. I am working on this.

Mr. Gérard Binet: Mr. Coderre, thank you for your excellent work.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Godin

Mr. Yvon Godin: Canada has two official languages, English and French. In regions such as Vancouver, there is such a concentration of Chinese people that the Chinese there don't even need to learn English. They can live in their own environment because of the concentration of fellow Chinese residents in a region, village or neighbourhood.

Have you looked into this?

º (1655)

Mr. Denis Coderre: I think we should be careful. We shouldn't set one community against another. I think that we have to send out a message of openness. Also, we need integration policies that reflect Canadian reality.

To get Canadian citizenship, for example, unless I am mistaken, people must have knowledge of one of the official languages. There is work to be done here.

With the new immigration policy, notably in regard to qualified workers, we have strengthened the linguistic aspect, because that is the basis for the integration process. I will not play the role of policeman. What I believe is important is to ensure that we can put out a message of open-mindedness. The Chinese community in Vancouver is an important factor in our cultural heritage. It is a positive element, like all communities. This is what we have to work on regarding future qualified workers.

I referred to three categories: that of the refugees, family reunification and qualified workers. The language issue is pertinent particularly in the case of qualified workers. When a woman immigrates to Canada, and her husband, who is in another country, speaks neither French nor English, will we stop him from coming here? There are certain things we have to take into account.

As for the economic issue and qualified workers, I have already stated what our orientation will be.

Mr. Yvon Godin: Our colleague from the Bloc Québécois told us that a university must pay $12,000 to get its name on the list.

Mr. Denis Coderre: That remains to be verified.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: No, that has been done.

Mr. Denis Coderre: I will verify.

Mr. Yvon Godin: You say you are going to verify. You are perhaps not able to say you will do anything, but I think it is abnormal. If only Laval University can pay this amount, small universities are at a disadvantage.

When you state that you will verify this, will you do so in both ways? Will you verify that it is true, and what can be done?

Mr. Denis Coderre: Mr. Godin, if there is one domain where there should be no partisanship, it is in immigration and our future policies.

I said that I would verify this, because first of all, I am not aware of this. I am not sure what he is referring to. Is it a consultant. Is it the centre? I will verify and respond as soon as possible.

I am surprised, because everything is on the Internet, and it doesn't cost $12,000 to get access to it. I don't know what he is referring to.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: As your assistant will confirm, it costs $12,000 to register with all 18 of the Canadian Cultural Centres.

Mr. Denis Coderre: It's debatable, and the Canadian Cultural Centre is not under my department's jurisdiction.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I know, and that is why I told you that it was not a question.

Mr. Yvon Godin: Are you going to stop, you two Quebecers? I have the floor.

Mr. Stéphane Dion is supposed to present an official languages plan. What role is your department playing in this? I know that Mr. Stéphane Dion has been named official languages coordinator for the country and that each department has a role to play. What is the role of the Minister of Immigration?

Mr. Denis Coderre: Citizenship and Immigration Canada, as a department, must conform to the legislation, and has a role to play. We have been talking about contribution for the past hour and a half, especially at the linguistic level, and that the kind of immigration we would like to have in the future becomes a factor in development. I am a member of the Cabinet Committee on Official Languages. My colleague, Stéphane Dion, will be presenting his action plan. Each department makes its own proposals, and I think that I have made some here today.

Mr. Yvon Godin: You said that we had to be careful, but don't you find that sometimes... One must be polite, but there are two official languages and the Commissioner of Official Languages said that emphasis must be put on la Francophonie outside Quebec. In certain regions, we will perhaps have to be less polite. We will have to designate regions where we want to increase the number of immigrants.

» (1700)

Mr. Denis Coderre: I think that we have to increase the number of francophones in a region, while remaining polite, Mr. Godin.

Mr. Yvon Godin: We are not making much progress, Mr. Coderre. Things are not moving fast.

Mr. Denis Coderre: When you move forward, is that being impolite? We don't have the same upbringing.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Charbonneau.

Mr. Yvon Charbonneau: Mr. Chair, my question is to stimulate discussion on everything dealing with citizenship and immigration.

Your department has a certain mandate. At other times, during the discussion, you stated that one aspect was under Heritage Canada's jurisdiction, for example. Therefore, it seems that one of the aspects of Heritage Canada's mandate can contribute to solving certain problems.

In the previous exchange, the mandate of the minister responsible for official languages was highlighted. This is a third player who must be included in finding solutions. I would add also that within the government we need to include two other major partners.

Human Resources Development Canada seems to have a role to play. Human Resources Development Canada issues qualification standards, has certain tools and programs and could update certain tools, new programs and new measures to contribute to keeping immigrant francophones in certain regions.

The other player, with many heads, is made up of the regional development agencies. In each region, in the Maritimes, in Central and Western Canada and in Ontario, and even in Quebec, there are regional economic development agencies. If we want to keep people in certain regions, we can't use chains, or subsidies. We must keep them there with jobs. If we want to encourage regional development, ensuring that there is the most desirable demographic balance possible, with jobs and infrastructure, it seems to me that at least five partners could contribute to finding solutions, with your partnership approach. I think that at least five partners should come together.

Mr. Denis Coderre: We are already doing this. You know that the evaluation grid has been modified within the framework of the new partnership with Human Resources Development Canada, because the entire question of qualification and market representativity is essential.

I am trying to say that regional development is a government priority. When we talk about Heritage Canada, for example, we are talking about the entire notion of citizen relations. Therefore, Heritage Canada has a role to play in the policy of accompaniment. This is the goal, in fact.

We can go further and talk about the Department of Industry. We have implemented a new innovation strategy. When we talk about innovation and human resources, we can show in a certain manner that the only way to get a policy that reflects the new reality is to establish this policy within a partnership context.

So I totally agree. When we make a decision, it is a Cabinet decision. We have established a regulatory process at the House Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. Cabinet, and therefore the government, will respond to the Committee's recommendations. I was happy to see that we were able to go further than the Act. The regulatory process is essential to implementing the policy. The fact that the government is responding shows to what extent we are aware of the issue you have raised. Thank you.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): I will now ask a few small questions.

Of the 30 to 31 million people in Canada, approximately 75% speak English, and 25% speak French. Do we agree on this?

A voice: Yes.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger: In the matter of immigration, the government has set the target to increase the population by 1%, or approximately 300,000 people per year. Is there a linguistic distribution within this figure, not upon arrival, but once they have settled?

Mr. Denis Coderre: Currently, no.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger: Should there be such a target?

» (1705)

Mr. Denis Coderre: I think that we should be realistic. The first step is to establish the partnership with the francophone communities. The fact that there is a will to put the emphasis on francophone immigration can be a partial response. I don't think that we should now establish quotas or establish a certain percentage. That is not the goal. We don't function by quota. We have indicators. The objective is to demonstrate that there is a will to go forward, that the pilot projects are in place, that because of the IPOLC, there is in fact a new will and a new partnership between the communities and the government, and that we are sensitized about an increase in francophone immigration.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): How does the department intend to determine whether its efforts have been successful.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Primarily through the pilot projects, through decisions that will be taken upon applying the grid. The application of the grid will be effectively a good way to proceed.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Will there be a way to calculate, to verify or see whether over a period of five or six years, the measures you have taken have been fruitful?

Mr. Denis Coderre: Each year, in November, the minister responsible for Citizenship and Immigration receives the figures on immigration. At that point, there is an evaluation. I will be in a position to provide answers at that time.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): In regard to official languages. Is that correct?

Mr. Denis Coderre: Yes, regarding the percentage and everything else.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you. I will now go on to my second set of questions.

The Act has been recently modified, as you know. Also, the members and the Co-chair of the Committee, Ms. Thibeault, were key players in that process.

We state that we have to take into account the Canadian reality in our immigration policies. There is also a Treasury Board policy that has recently been unveiled, which describes in a very specific manner how the government must deal with the other levels of government or third parties regarding these obligations. The obligations of the government of Canada must be respected. Will the Act and this new Treasury Board policy be at the centre of your concerns if you sign or renew any provincial agreements?

Mr. Denis Coderre: I already said, particularly regarding the agreement that was signed with Nova Scotia, the first that I negotiated and signed as Minister, that there would be a clause on official languages so that we can establish together what can be done to attract francophone immigration in a concrete way. I also want to put this on the agenda at the federal-provincial conference so that we can address this issue. As for me, what is important is that we establish the partnership and that within the process, all the experts be included. I could report on what we have discussed during the conference, but I believe that there is a desire to include a clause on official languages in all the agreements.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Coderre, I have no doubt that you intend to do this. I hope that you don't think that my question...

Mr. Denis Coderre: No, but it is a specific question.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): You may not always be a minister, but Canada will continue to go on. It is within that context that I am asking my questions.

Since my time is running out, I will hurry.

I was specifically alluding to the Act and the new Treasury Board policy. The question I should ask you is this: within your departmental policies, are the two new elements that are now in the heavens at Immigration, namely, the Act and the new Treasury Board policy, now integrated within the process of renewing agreements and negotiating new ones?

» (1710)

Mr. Denis Coderre: We do wish, in fact, partly through Part VII, to fully play our role in the matter of official languages, and work with the Treasury Board to respect its new policy. We are aware of this issue and are continuing to work with the Treasury Board.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): I would like to ask one last question, if you will. Does this same approach apply in the case of agreements, current or future, that the government of Canada may sign with the provinces regarding language training and integration of immigrants or refugees?

Mr. Denis Coderre: These issues will be on the agenda of the federal-provincial conference.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Will all the issues that we have just discussed, you and I, be on the conference agenda?

Mr. Denis Coderre: Yes.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you.

There are two more short questions, one from Mr. Plamondon and one from Senator Gauthier, and then we will conclude.

Mr. Plamondon.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: As for case priority when someone goes to an immigration office, the officials there are working in accordance with the priority that has been established within the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Reunification of families has priority over qualified workers. If 50 requests are received by the immigration office, persons who wish to immigrate for family reunification will wait five or six months before getting a response, and qualified workers will wait 30 to 36 months.

Mr. Denis Coderre: Depending on the regions.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I am referring to the regions of concentration that you mentioned, namely, Pakistan, Korea, China, etc. You stated that 90% of immigrants come from these regions. This is a problem for francophone communities. Ms. Léger stated that when these immigrants come here, they can choose one of two languages. The problem is that qualified workers, such as computer technicians that we need so badly, and engineers, have all been trained in English. Therefore it is easier for them to choose an Anglophone community than a francophone community.

We will have to use the cultural card to bring them into a francophone community. If they live near a francophone community, in Montreal, in New Brunswick or in Saint Boniface, they may wish to integrate to discover French culture. For work, however, of course they will want to integrate in English. There is no doubt that they will want to work in English because they have been trained in English in an American university, or in a university in their country, or in a Canadian university in a city like Toronto or Vancouver.

Upon giving the priority to family reunification rather than to qualified workers that we need so badly, therefore, this means that the new arrivals, father, mother, etc., will not be obliged to have knowledge of French or English, while the qualified work must have an certain knowledge of English. In some cases, they have a knowledge of French, but it is quite rare in people from these countries.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Plamondon, your question, please.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Is there any way to reverse the priorities to avoid people arriving here without a knowledge of French and English settling in ghettoes where they continue to function in their mother tongue and not in one of Canada's official languages.

Mr. Denis Coderre: We're still mixing apples and oranges. First, I think that the issue of family reunification is essential; it is a priority. We should perhaps ask a couple if they can live separately for four or five years. There are realities that must be taken into account.

This being said, there are obviously things that can be done. The new grid, the new Act, the new regulations and our will to act lead us to conclude that if anything needs to be done, it is to put the emphasis on case management. We must ensure that there is a smaller inventory so that we can have as many qualified workers as possible because the need is there. The 60-40 ration will continue. We can take care of family reunification within that number.

I agree with you that we have to put the emphasis on managing qualified workers to process the cases as quickly as possible. But there is a reality: my role is to ensure that there is a balance between vigilance and openness. There is the entire question of verification, security, medical testing and the rest. Sometimes this requires more time. I am well aware of all this and our government and our department is working on this.

» (1715)

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Senator Gauthier.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Mr. Coderre, I would like to get back to another issue. We spoke earlier about integration. One of the problems, one of the obstacles, in fact, in settling in our minority official language communities is diploma equivalency. I suggest that there should be another aspect to your federal-provincial conference. We should perhaps sensitize the provincial authorities who, with the professional bodies, doctors, engineers, etc., have the authority in this field. We would have to give them the means or take measures, if you can do this at the federal level, to help them better adapt equivalencies for their diplomas so that immigrants can integrate. It is difficult to attract doctors outside the large centres. It is difficult to bring in engineering specialists to the northern regions, for example.

You spoke earlier about Northern Ontario. There are mines and developments being planned for this region. On this matter, Mr. Charbonneau stated that we have an economic development agency in Ontario, but that is not correct. We don't have one and we have never had one. There is FedNor in the North, but this organization falls under Industry Canada, and it's not the same thing. There is no economic development agency in Ontario that I know of. On this topic, I would appreciate a quick response...[Editor's note: Inaudible]... in November.

Mr. Denis Coderre: This will be quick because equivalencies are the priority. Professional bodies are under provincial jurisdiction; this is why we want to work with our provincial and territorial counterparts. This entire issue remains important, however, given that we want to ensure that workers arriving here as qualified workers can be properly certified.

I would like to raise one last point, Mr. Chairman. We referred to the action plan. The department doesn't have one currently. We are in the process of preparing our first plan. I think that this is important.

However, each agreement we have with our service suppliers requires an action plan, and this requirement is contained in section 5.4 of the contribution agreement that is drafted by our department, which states:

The Services Supplier promises to:

a) consult the official languages minority communities on an annual basis regarding establishment services requirements. Where there is more than one services supplier, the consultative process will be coordinated by ____;

b) organize, if necessary, activities, projects and programs to meet the needs of both official languages communities;

c) inform clients about services that are provided by other organizations in the minority official language.

As you know, we are not legally bound to make this public, but we do so, and I think that it is important to mention this; we are continually making efforts to improve, and that is one aspect of our departmental priorities.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Coderre, if you wish to submit that document, please feel free to do so.

Mr. Denis Coderre: It is only in French, however.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): You may do so at an appropriate time.

Mr. Denis Coderre: We will send it to you.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): OK. I only need to thank you for being here today. You have seen that there is keen interest—

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: [Editor's note: Inaudible] —a commercial.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): A commercial? My God, I don't know anything about that.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: ilingualism, bilingual reality... You have officers in each Canadian embassy abroad. Could you ask them to talk about Canadian linguistic duality rather than bilingualism? The term “linguistic duality” has a more encompassing meaning that “bilingualism”.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you. Mr. Coderre, until we meet again. Ladies and Gentlemen, tomorrow we meet with the Minister of Justice, at 15:30 p.m., across the hall.

Thank you. The meeting is adjourned.