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

Tuesday, May 7, 2002

1535

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu (Rougemont, Lib.))

Mr. Daniel Boucher (President and Executive Director, Société franco-manitobaine)

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

Mr. Daniel Boucher

1540

1545

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

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

1550

Mr. Daniel Boucher

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier (Ontario, Lib.)

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

1555

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

1600

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

Senator Gerald Beaudoin (Rigaud, PC)

Mr. Daniel Boucher

1605

Senator Gérald Beaudoin

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Gérald Beaudoin

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

Senator Viola Léger (New Brunswick, Lib.)

1610

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Viola Léger

Mr. Daniel Boucher

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

Senator Raymond Setlakwe (Les Laurentides, Lib.)

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Raymond Setlakwe

Mr. Daniel Boucher

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

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

1615

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Ms. Yolande Thibeault

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Ms. Yolande Thibeault

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Ms. Yolande Thibeault

Mr. Daniel Boucher

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

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

1620

Mr. Daniel Boucher

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Daniel Boucher

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Daniel Boucher

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Daniel Boucher

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Daniel Boucher

1625

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Daniel Boucher

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

Senator Gérald Beaudoin

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Gérald Beaudoin

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Gérald Beaudoin

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Gérald Beaudoin

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Gérald Beaudoin

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Gérald Beaudoin

Mr. Daniel Boucher

The Hon. Beaudoin

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Gérald Beaudoin

Mr. Daniel Boucher

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

1630

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Daniel Boucher

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

Senator Viola Léger

Mr. Daniel Boucher

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Senator Viola Léger

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Senator Viola Léger

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

M. Jack Jedwab

1635

1640

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Jack Jedwab

1645

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

1655

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Jack Jedwab

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Jack Jedwab

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Jack Jedwab

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Jack Jedwab

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Jack Jedwab

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Jack Jedwab

Mr. Louis Plamondon

The Joint Chair ( Senator Shirley Maheu)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Jack Jedwab

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Jack Jedwab

1700

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier

Mr. Jack Jedwab

1705

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Louis Plamondon

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

Mr. Jack Jedwab

1710

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger)

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

Senator Viola Léger

Mr. Jack Jedwab

1715

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

Senator Viola Léger

Mr. Jack Jedwab

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

Senator Gérald Beaudoin

Mr. Jack Jedwab

Senator Gérald Beaudoin

Mr. Jack Jedwab

Senator Gérald Beaudoin

Mr. Jack Jedwab

1720

Senator Gérald Beaudoin

Mr. Jack Jedwab

Senator Gérald Beaudoin

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Jack Jedwab

1725

Mr. Louis Plamondon

Mr. Jack Jedwab

Mr. Louis Plamondon

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu)

CANADA

Standing Joint Committee on Official Languages

NUMBER 038

1st SESSION

37th PARLIAMENT

EVIDENCE

Tuesday, May 7, 2002

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

¹ (1535)

[Translation]

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu (Rougemont, Lib.)): I call the meeting to order. Welcome, Mr. Boucher. Mr. Boucher is the President of the Société franco-manitobaine.

[English]

We also have Mr. Jack Jedwab, executive director for the Association for Canadian Studies.

Welcome, Mr. Jedwab.

[Translation]

Mr. Boucher, are you ready to begin your presentation?

Mr. Daniel Boucher (President and Executive Director, Société franco-manitobaine): Yes. Thank you very much.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): You have 10 minutes to make your presentation. After that, senators and members will have seven minutes each for questions.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Good afternoon, Members of the House of Commons and Senators. I am very pleased to have been invited here today to talk about a matter that is very important for our community: francophone immigration in our communities and the link with Part VII of the Official Languages Act.

I have been with the Société franco-manitobaine for three years now, and I would like to congratulate the joint chairs for this wonderful initiative, as I think that it is perhaps the first time that I have made a presentation before the joint committee. I have been waiting for a long time, so I am very happy to be here. I do intend to make more presentations. Thank you very much.

First of all, I would like to raise several points and then, during our exchange, I would like to have an opportunity to answer your questions. I know that you met with people from the federation yesterday, Mr. Arès, Mr. Barette and Ms. Côté, and I know that you had a very interesting discussion with them. I also had an opportunity to go through the document that was prepared by the federation. We agree with the points they raised. So I am going to try and take an angle that is a little different.

I also had an opportunity to read the proceedings of your meeting with Mr. Coderre on April 29. We detected a lot of goodwill on the part of the minister to support us on this very important undertaking for our community.

As you know, Manitoba is recognized as a welcoming environment because of its ethnic and cultural plurality. Manitoba has its heart set on welcoming immigrants and providing them with a social and economic environment in which they can develop. Rich and dynamic, francophone Manitoba is an interesting place for French-speaking newcomers who want to come to North America. The Société franco-manitobaine wants to contribute to the development of its community by facilitating the establishment of francophone immigrants in Manitoba.

We recently consulted our community, and we drew up a list of some guidelines that I want to tell you a bit about today. As you are aware, Manitoba has a co-management model for immigration. We feel that it is a very good model. We have established excellent cooperation with the province and we intend to work closely with Citizenship and Immigration Canada to strengthen our partnership. What is most important here is finding ways of supporting us to an even larger degree in this very important undertaking.

We feel that the federal government, the provincial government and the municipalities, more specifically the City of Winnipeg, must all work together. Our mayor has, on several occasions, stressed the importance of immigration for Winnipeg in particular, and the francophone community is part of that. We are working with him to draw up an action plan with the other partners in this very important area.

There are also other players helping us, but we obviously have Part VII and section 41 and all of the departments that can be involved in that. We have the plan Mr. Dion is currently preparing. We have the Commissioner of Official Languages who also supports our approach and considers it an important part of the vitality of our communities.

I would like to say a few words about immigration in a very general context. Immigrants have contributed to the social and cultural development of the country, as you know, and to the influence of the arts, as well as to advances in research and technology. Today, Canada is a multicultural and, obviously, bilingual country that strives to ensure respect for its different ethnic groups of various origins, from sea to sea.

There has been an increasingly large number of French-speaking immigrants coming to Manitoba, especially since 1999. It is clearly a new challenge to integrate them, and as they like to say, include them in our communities.

In September and October 2001, the Société franco-manitobaine was given the mandate to encourage people to read a document that we distributed in our community and that is entitled Agrandir l'espace francophone. The document targets five areas for action, one of which involves a proactive approach to integrating and including francophiles and immigrants.

The advantages of immigration for us include maintaining and developing the French language; greater access to services in French, which gives us a larger critical mass; a better workforce; enriching culture; a greater number of children registered in our French schools; enhanced services in French, both within government and elsewhere; and new structures for services.

As for the quality of immigrants, they come with a personal heritage; they are well educated, in general, have excellent skills, display initiative and are resourceful, want to learn, and have expertise in areas where there is a shortage in our community. So it is truly in our best interest to welcome new francophone immigrants.

We have a very strong core of francophones in St. Boniface, and we work very closely with partners in our community to guarantee the success of this initiative. Manitoba is often recommended, as Winnipeg is perceived as a small city with all of the advantages of a large one. We also have a significant francophone and bilingual community.

As a community, we all decided to participate in this major initiative, this important challenge, and I can say that it is a great challenge. In these times, it is not always easy to be successful without the support of all partners, whether they be in the community, in government or elsewhere.

We solicited comments from the entire community and we asked the community a very simple question: “Are you prepared to participate in this important initiative?” The answer was very clearly yes. Now, to be successful, we must come up with the tools and put them in place.

However, we have identified certain areas where you could probably provide more concrete support. Our communities are not promoted enough. When I talk about promotion, I am referring to embassies abroad where Canada is not promoted at all. That is a problem. A distinction is made between Quebec and what is called—and I hate this expression—English Canada. But that is not really the Canadian reality. It bothers us. At the very least, we would like to see the terminology changed, as that would help us enormously, and we would like to see our communities promoted to a larger degree. That is something we would like to work on with the Department of External Affairs, for example, and the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. There are perhaps other players as well. Obviously, our province would be very interested in working on this initiative with the federal government.

We have noted some very important issues with respect to immigration. There is a lack of information on where safe neighbourhoods are located, on available housing, on the numerous organizations that help with jobs searches, on English courses, and in many other areas. There is a real lack of information when people arrive here.

There is a lack of assistance and support for families and people who come here. It is currently almost non-existent.

As you know, the climate can be difficult. Many of these immigrants come from hot countries. It is not all that hot in Manitoba.

Their diplomas are also a problem. I know that the federation addressed this, and that you discussed the matter yesterday. Diplomas are not necessarily recognized.

There is no training in French on technical language. It takes at least two years to learn English, for example, in a community like ours, because we make up 5% of the population.

A mutual understanding of cultures is also lacking, especially as regards employment, where practices may vary.

So we are facing a number of different challenges. Housing is in short supply. Here again, partnerships between the federal and provincial government are possible. As I mentioned earlier, there are employment problems related to their knowledge of English and to recognition for their diplomas, etc.

These are the challenges that we are tackling head-on in our community. These are the challenges that the community has decided to deal with, along with our community partners. What we are currently looking for and what we are going to do with the support of the province is set up a kind of reception centre. This is very important for us. We also want to undertake distance teaching initiatives, and we would like that to take place over two years. We realize that people who come here should receive language training. For example, they should be given training on how to obtain accreditation and recognition for their diplomas more quickly.

¹ (1540)

This should be done before these people arrive here, because when they do arrive, they have limited means and it's very difficult for them to adapt. We feel that if the country wants to invest in immigration, we should be investing before the people arrive here and ensuring that they are comfortable when they arrive so that they stay in our communities. When you live in an official language community like ours, the challenges are even more significant, given the population, etc. So for us, this is absolutely essential.

We urge the governments to begin a dialogue with professional corporations or educational institutions on recognizing skills and diplomas. I want to reiterate that, because it is very important. Personally, I have met people who have exceptional diplomas, people who have extraordinary talent. Unfortunately, these people come here, and as you know, they have to take jobs that are really difficult. Often, these people do not stay in our communities. For us, the linguistic challenge is even more significant. Francophones who come to Manitoba and who have to overcome problems with respect to accommodation and language simply go to Quebec, because at least in Quebec, they do not face the language barrier. At least it is something of a relief for them in that regard.

We need support to overcome these problems. We are not competing with Quebec. We understand that Quebec will naturally attract them. We do not have a problem with that. I think it is quite clear that we are not asking for special treatment, but what we want is to have everything possible on our side to successfully attract and retain immigrants.

I am not going to cover all of the details in my presentation, but, as I said earlier, we are counting on your support and we are counting on the federal-provincial partnership. There is a working group or a joint committee that is meeting, and we are counting heavily on that committee to identify some possible solutions. We are also counting on you, members and senators, to help us make some progress in this very important area.

Thank you very much.

¹ (1545)

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Thank you, Mr. Boucher.

Mr. Plamondon, you have seven minutes.

Mr. Louis Plamondon (Bas-Richelieu—Nicolet—Bécancour, BQ): I find you optimistic, Mr. Boucher. Immigration to Canada has changed a great deal in the last five years. At the moment, for example, 90% of immigrants come through the Hong Kong and Beijing offices. So the only contact people there have with another language is English, and that is limited. In those parts of the world, our officials must give priority to family reunification, which applies not only to spouses, but also to father, mothers, etc.

When I went to that part of the world a month ago, an official told me that she spent her time arranging for the entry to Canada of individuals 65 and older who are aunts and uncles of people living here. The waiting time is between three and four months. Under family reunification, there is no obligation to speak either French or English. So for them, Vancouver and Toronto are the priorities. They will probably live in Chinese or Korean once they get here, and learn very little or no English.

If it is difficult to integrate these people into English-speaking communities, imagine what it is like for French-speaking communities. It is even more difficult for a region such as yours.

Quebec has special offices that are parallel to the Canadian government offices to bring in immigrants, particularly investors. Of those who come, 70% turn around and leave Quebec to go to Toronto or Vancouver. Most of those who stay in Quebec live in English in the Montreal region. So we have a major problem integrating these immigrants, 90% of whom come from this part of the world.

As to provincial priorities with respect to skilled workers, these individuals often play a trick, by going to Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island or Manitoba, saying they intend to work there, but then leave the province one month later.

That leaves the refugees. They come here on the advice of their lobbyists because immigrants from this part of the world all use the services of lobbyists. They pay to get into Canada. We are told they believe it is necessary. They all do this. So the lobbyists advise them on how to become refugees. Often they become political refugees when they get here, and 97% of the time, we accept them as political refugees in less than 15 months, on humanitarian grounds. Once they get in, they generally go back to the Embassy of China or Korea, particularly China, and ask for a permit to go back home. So we find there are Chinese nationals with a Canadian passport in China. There are about 100,000 such people. On the francophone side, there are 50,000 Lebanese living in Lebanon who hold a Canadian passport. So passing oneself off as a refugee is a well-known ploy.

That leaves the investors. When they get their famous permit, they go back and do business, mainly in their own country. So integration into the French-speaking world is extremely difficult for all these immigrants who come to live in Canada, Quebec, or one of the provinces of Canada.

I know that this is a very serious problem in Quebec, but at least Bill 101 requires that the children of immigrants take their primary education in French for at least 12 years. In Quebec, they can continue their education at the university level in English or in French. This allows a slight glimmer of hope for immigration in this way, something you do not have in Manitoba.

So for these reasons, I find you optimistic when you say that things are going well with the agreements, that we should be boasting about Canada in our embassies, that there are two realities and that we could integrate immigrants. I have trouble with this, because in concrete terms, whether we like it or not, everything happens in English at the embassy over there as well. I asked one of the senior officials how many applications they received in French. He told me there were none. And 90% of our immigrants come from that part of the world. There are no applications, thus it is difficult to provide services in French, even if a few people speak French and could probably provide service in French. However, in North America, English comes first. Francophones represent 3% of the population of North America.

¹ (1550)

So I would ask you to tell us more about some very specific steps that could be taken to amend the Immigration Act along these lines. Should we take coercive action, without violating the Charter of Rights?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Thank you for your question, Mr. Plamondon. I can tell you that if I were not an optimist, I would not be here today speaking to you in French. So, that is part of our situation.

You made some good points, and I do understand that this may seem like a huge challenge. That is true, but I can tell you very concretely, for example, that since 1999, Manitoba has welcomed about 32 families, chiefly from Morocco. Of these 32 families, some 70% have stayed, which is not so bad, because we were able to find ways of keeping them. But it is not easy. I would say that there are no guarantees.

Our point is that in Manitoba we built an immigrant reception structure by ourselves, to all intents and purposes. Initially, we had no support, because this happened quite suddenly. So we built an immigrant reception structure within our community. What we are saying now is that with the support of the government of Canada—and for a few years now, we have had the support of the province of Manitoba—we think we can succeed to some extent, realistically speaking.

We do not want to provide reception services for people we cannot keep. I think we want to establish certain targets. We have not yet defined these targets, but we want to establish certain targets for each year. For example, if 10 families come each year and the retention rate is 80%, I think we will have succeeded in enlarging our francophone community. That is very important to us. We would be making a step in the right direction.

As regards embassies, I went to the embassy in Morocco a few years ago, and I was completely discouraged. There were francophones working there who did not necessarily understand that there were other communities elsewhere. I took the opportunity to inform them of this. I was not doing any promotion—we had not got that far, but the issue was to say... An Immigration Canada officer asked me why people would want to come to our area. He simply did not understand. And yet he is an ambassador for our country, so to speak.

We view this as an issue of awareness, and of realism, but it is also a question of trying, because we are convinced that we can succeed with fairly limited resources, but also within our own context, not within a context that is— [Editor's Note: Inaudible]

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Thank you, Mr. Boucher. Mr. Plamondon's time is now up.

[English]

Mr. Jedwab, I'd like to apologize. I should have gone to you second.

[Translation]

Would you like to proceed with your remarks?

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier (Ontario, Lib.): This is not right, Madam Chair. We have two witnesses. I do not think it is acceptable for you to ask the two witnesses... You are giving us seven minutes for the two witnesses.

[English]

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): I know. I just apologized. I realize that, Senator.

[Translation]

I am sorry, Senator, but I did apologize to Mr. Jedwab.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: It is not right.

¹ (1555)

[English]

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): I know. I realize that.

Mr. Jedwab, please go ahead.

[Translation]

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: We have a gentleman who is from Manitoba who has probably travelled as often as you have. He's come here and you give him 10 minutes. We won't be able to put any questions to him— [Editor's Note: Technical Difficulties]

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): The committee has rules. Does the committee agree to finish one round of questions on Manitoba and then get back to Mr. Jedwab afterward?

Mr. Jedwab, does that suit you as well?

Mr. Jack Jedwab (Executive Director, Association for Canadian Studies): I would prefer that, as a matter of fact.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Senator Gauthier, you have seven minutes.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Mr. Boucher, you signed an immigration agreement with the federal government. I think it has been extended until October 2002.

Has this changed anything in terms of operations or results?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Are you referring to the agreement between the Government of Canada and the Province of Manitoba?

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: No, I'm talking about the agreement between you, the francophone community, the Société franco-manitobaine, and the federal government. Three million six hundred thousand dollars have been allocated to encourage immigration to your community.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: That agreement was not directly with us. It was signed by the Province of Manitoba and the federal government. We obtained funds from the Province of Manitoba under that agreement.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: In that case, my documents are inaccurate. My apologies. Still, $3.6 million have been allocated by the federal government to promote immigration to your province.

Can you tell me more about that? What have the results been up until now?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: As far as promotion is concerned, this agreement has not made a big difference in terms of result. Although it has enabled us to improve our intake structure, it has not allowed us to do any promotion. That was mainly by design. We decided to reinforce our intake structures instead of doing more promotion and then not being ready to welcome these people. This was an agreement with the Province of Manitoba and the province was on board about that.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: You said that the Mayor of Winnipeg supported you. You didn't refer to the Premier, Mr. Doer.

Could you tell us more about him? Is he sympathetic to this cause?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Yes.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Is his Minister of Education in favour of this? If an immigrant wanted to take French language courses here...

Do you have a LINC program in Manitoba?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: No.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Do you have any language courses for immigrants?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Yes.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: At what level? Elementary or secondary?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: There are some at all levels for all intents and purposes, but French courses...

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Who pays for those courses?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: The Province of Manitoba does. These are French-language courses for immigrants, but there aren't many. I can assure you that there's a major deficiency in that area. At the outset, that's already a problem. There are English as a second language courses.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: It's a problem at the outset, but the federal government does not contribute to education.

º (1600)

Mr. Daniel Boucher: No. Not to my knowledge.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Are professional skills, trades, academic qualifications, equivalencies for diplomas obtained in European schools, for instance, a big problem for you?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Absolutely. There's a problem for physicians, for instance. They have an agreement with Commonwealth countries, but they don't have one with the countries of the Francophonie. It's quite easy to get an equivalency for a doctor from South Africa, for example, but it's difficult to get one for a doctor who comes from a country such as Morocco. For us, that's a big problem, but we're told that it is a complex problem that is national in scope.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Can a family who arrives in your province, in Manitoba, send its children to a French school if it wants to?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Absolutely, no problem.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: That's good. There are provinces where there are problems with this, such as Quebec for instance.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: In our province there's no problem.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: When Mr. Plamondon tells you that 90% of immigrants come from Asian countries, I'm not sure that his statistics are accurate.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: It's Mr. Coderre who said that.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: The minister said that?

A voice: He said that last week.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Speaking of Mr. Coderre, you're very positive in your comments toward him. You stated that he was an open person, with a welcoming spirit, that he is generous, etc. You're correct. He's the first minister that I hear speak in a positive way about section 41 which commits the government to develop, promote and enhance the communities. I will send him a copy of your comments so that he knows that he has a friend in Manitoba.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Senator Beaudoin.

Senator Gerald Beaudoin (Rigaud, PC): I have a question about immigrants who arrive in Canada with some expertise. You stated that it's not easy to attract an immigrant and obtain equivalencies for his or her diploma. That struck me because on the anglophone side, it seems they are quite successful in that area. We have doctors who come from all over the world and have medical expertise. We have lawyers in Quebec who come from other countries and who can have an academic career. I've known many. There are also other professions: engineers, accountants. Anyway, we have about 40 in Quebec. The same is true in other provinces.

This is an area of provincial jurisdiction and provinces can legislate in the area of degree equivalency. Nothing prevents them from doing so. I must admit that the situation was corrected in Quebec, but I was always shocked to see that the provinces were not using their legislative power with regard to degree equivalency. In addition, the provinces also have powers in the area of immigration. While it's true that the federal government has the paramount power over immigration, the provinces also have some jurisdiction in this area, so long as the provincial legislation does not run counter to the federal legislation. The law is very clear about this. I'm always appalled to find out that the provinces don't use these powers.

Let me correct things immediately. It used to be that in Quebec, given the large families we had, we never looked into this very much, but we woke up several years ago and started to legislate in this area and we were successful. In Manitoba, you say you lost ground in this area or at least that there's a deficiency there.

Have you tried? Did you meet with refusal from your government?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: I could use the example of health and doctors. This is an example that I know, but I know that the same thing happens in other sectors. As you know, the college of physicians is a licensing body. It is really up to the college to determine equivalency or to licence a doctor. The anglophones have colleges of physicians right across Canada. They have told us that it is easier to operate this way. When dealing with standards that are more or less national, they told us that it is easier to license doctors that come from other countries. These are nevertheless people who come from another country, and there is a national standard.

In the Francophonie, however, there are some problems because we haven't done anything in this regard. It's easy for Commonwealth countries because, as you know, the colleges of physicians in our province are, as you know, anglophone colleges. So pressure was exerted at one point and the problem was resolved. But we have been trying to change the way we operate with Francophonie countries for several years now, we have had problems because it all comes back to the issue of a national standard. Trying to find a national standard in French is no easy task.

º (1605)

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: The medical example is a good one because medicine is the same everywhere, whereas the law changes from one country to the next, from one province to the next. We do not have enough doctors. We need to find some more and we have to be able to attract immigrants to our country in this field. But you have raised the issue of the national standard. Who legislates in that area?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: The provinces want to reach an agreement amongst themselves. That is really what it's all about. We talked to the Manitoba Minister of Labour. She indicated that she was prepared to take action, however, she said that it was a very complex issue for the province given that these are independent entities. There is the college of physicians, the college of dentists, etc. So if you were to legislate, you would really be pulling out the big stick.

Nevertheless, they did say that it would be easier if they were able to strike a Canada-wide agreement or an agreement with other colleagues who would agree to sit down together and work out a solution whereby everybody was on an equal footing. This is essentially what we are looking for, but it has not been done as of yet and it is not on the agenda.

I know that there will be a federal-provincial conference. We would like Mr. Coderre to raise this type of issue with his colleagues and that they give some thought to how to deal with the issue of national standards and Francophonie countries. I am convinced that this would be relatively easy to resolve.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: It is clear that no province has enough doctors. In addition, at the outset, this is an issue that comes under provincial jurisdiction; the federal government legislates in this area for other reasons. Things are running smoothly and I have no complaints, however, what I don't understand is why the provinces do not find a way to work together in order to attract more doctors to Canada. It is true that the French-English duality creates a problem, but there are many French doctors in the world.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Absolutely.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: So this issue should perhaps be put on the agenda of the provincial-federal meetings.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: That is right. We are hoping that this matter will be raised.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: I do not want to exceed my time limit. Have I used up five minutes?

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Almost five minutes.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: I will come back to this issue.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Thank you.

Senator Léger.

Senator Viola Léger (New Brunswick, Lib.): Good afternoon. I am pleased to meet you.

Mr. Plamondon, you said that if it didn't work in Quebec, considering that francophones comprised only 3% of the population on the continent, it would be unrealistic to think that it could work outside Quebec. First of all, the expression “outside Quebec” is omnipresent. Indeed, it is almost a definition of Canada, because in Canada, as you were saying the other day, French and English are equal. This is Canada, and not the United States. We have the opportunity to apply this in Canada. In Quebec, the majority is francophone, whereas in the rest of Canada, the majority is anglophone.

Perhaps I should be asking a question rather than adding a comment. I am quite convinced that 90% of the Asians who come here as part of the family reunification program or as investors are not only interested in learning English; they want to succeed. We could offer them two languages; that's what they want, moreover. However, if we don't act quickly enough and we are not able to provide equality in terms of expertise and achievement, there's a problem. In my opinion, it is very important that we do outreach throughout the country in order to reach our objective. It is with this in mind that the federal government can perhaps... We have a lot of catching-up to do in order for things to run smoothly and we are all aware of this. It will take several generations in Canada to do this work. The work has begun.

I was very pleased to hear that you were able to keep 80% of your families; that is already a very good start. Keep it up. It is difficult to establish a francophone national norm; Quebec is very much there, in terms of French, but they do not agree. Is that right? I do not know. It seems to me that it should be possible to establish a francophone national standard if we work together. We can talk about a Canada-wide standard, or coalition. That is all.

º (1610)

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Thank you for your comments. I agree that anything is possible. We have been doing things that may appear unrealistic for a long time now and we are succeeding. So, as far as we are concerned, everything is possible, and we have a vision. I am 43 years old and I have been living in Manitoba for 43 years. I met a person this morning who could not believe that I had lived there for 43 years, that I had been born there and that my father had been born there. So we are succeeding.

The same thing applies to immigration. We have to organize and carve out a place for ourselves and come up with structures that will ensure that people will be comfortable in Manitoba. That is all that we are asking for. As regards this initiative, the federal government is an important player.

Going back to Senator Gauthier's question, I would say that we are fortunate to have the support of the Province of Manitoba, the Premier and some of his ministers; however, cooperation from the federal government is essential if we are to proceed with this initiative. Without this partnership, this initiative will only be temporary; however, we would like to establish a long-term initiative.

Senator Viola Léger: If we want to establish a francophone national standard, Quebec will have to... Is that what is needed, at the outset? Is that possible?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: I think that it is possible. I do not believe that there is or that there could be any big controversy as far as that issue is concerned. I think that this would be in everybody's interest. So we need to put the issue on the table, talk about it and resolve the question once and for all. I am optimistic that this is not an issue that will create big problems.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Thank you, Senator Setlakwe.

Senator Raymond Setlakwe (Les Laurentides, Lib.): I would like to ask two brief questions. First of all, I do not know whether you've already said this, but what is the birth rate of Franco-Manitobans?

Secondly, what is the assimilation rate of Franco-Manitobans in Manitoba?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Low and relatively high. I do not know the birth rate; I do not remember what it is, but it is not—

Senator Raymond Setlakwe: What is it?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: No, it is not whether—

Senator Raymond Setlakwe: Is it 1.4?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Yes, it is about 1.6 or 1.7. So it is quite high, and the assimilation rate is about 50%. The situation is serious. This is why we want to take action now. When the community met last year and produced its document Agrandir l'espace francophone (Growing the Francophone Space), we realized that if we did not take action like that, we would have problems 30 years down the road. We were very honest with ourselves about this problem, which was no easy task. This is why we need to be successful here. This is one course of action where we want to be successful. It is not the only course of action we intend to take, it is one amongst others.

We were very honest in making this observation and the people really agreed to take on the challenge. So it is bearing this in mind that we want to move things along. But I can guarantee that in 35 years we will still be there. I can tell you that in advance.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Ms. Thibeault.

Ms. Yolande Thibeault (Saint-Laurent, Lib.): Since we are on the topic of assimilation, from what I can gather, you have told us that you have managed to make some progress and to attract French families since 1999. Is that correct?

Does that not coincide with the fact that the federal government has transferred certain responsibilities to the province?

º (1615)

Mr. Daniel Boucher: That is a partial reason, yes, but we had already started to take action. I went to Morocco, at one point, to do some recruiting, and the people quickly began to arrive.

So, given the situation, we were forced to get organized. And we realized that this was good for us, but it also represented a major challenge. We had to first look after the most pressing things. Then, it was the agreement with the Province of Manitoba that made our work easier.

Ms. Yolande Thibeault: In addition to Morocco, are there other countries where you have begun to do some outreach?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Not quite the way I would have liked; let me mention, however, that there are 22 countries represented at the Collège universitaire de Saint-Boniface. There are people from back Africa, North Africa, France, Belgium, etc. attending the college. That is good news for us and this is important.

What we really needed to do for ourselves at that point was to stop for a moment and organize ourselves so that we would be able to keep the people in Manitoba and ensure that they were properly welcomed as soon as they arrive. So that is the point we have reached in our project.

Ms. Yolande Thibeault: Perhaps this is not a very nice question to ask you, but how do you intend to prevent these people from becoming assimilated, just as 50% of Franco-Manitobans are?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Obviously, there is no guarantee. However, we do have solid institutions. We have established educational institutions, we have our school system, a university college, health institutions to name but a few. It is really up to us to ensure that these people, when they attend our institutions, obtain quality services, whether these services be in the area of education or any other sector. We believe that if we can provide them with quality service and an attractive life style, they will stay in our community. All we can do is make it as good as we can for them.

Ms. Yolande Thibeault: If the people who go to your community all come from the same country or culture, do you feel that it is easier for them to remain in your community? I would imagine that they would be less inclined to move to the big centres if they found themselves amongst a small cluster of their own kind in your community.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Yes, absolutely. There are more and more people coming from certain countries, and groups are forming, but we want to do, is to include these people in our community. We do not want to create parallel communities. We want these people to feel at home in the whole community and we want to feel comfortable with them. But there are many groups that are forming. We respect their religion, their culture, etc. It is important to do that. This poses a challenge to us as well, as Catholic francophones welcoming Muslims. This is a challenge but we have to deal with it. We must take action and be open. These are things that we are working on. We are moving ahead.

Ms. Yolande Thibeault: Thank you very much.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Mr. Bélanger.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger (Ottawa—Vanier, Lib.)): Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to make a few brief comments. Senator Léger, I too find the expression “outside Quebec” a little bit irritating. Moreover, I have tried to push this to the extreme. The extreme being that the Senegalese, the Moroccans, the Algerians and even the French are all francophones outside Quebec. At a conference in Paris, I have tried to suggest that we all introduce ourselves as francophones outside Quebec. They didn't find that very funny.

We already have immigration offices in Manitoba or in Quebec. If I'm not mistaken, Henri Bergeron wrote a small book on the topic. It's a story about a woman who was bringing groups of people who were leaving Quebec and going through the United States in order to get to Manitoba. She lost a few people along the way.

I'm interested in these 10 families. Mr. Boucher, I would like you to tell me a little bit more about them. How did you do that? What did you have to do in order to find them, in order to recruit them? Did you receive any financial support to do that? I think that the province has a budget of $3.8 million. What percentage of this envelope did you receive?

Yesterday I mentioned that an MP from the Conservative Party had an idea that I find interesting, particularly as it pertains to rural issues. Instead of allowing one family to settle in an area, he suggested that we should allow a group of families to settle there. His hypothesis, if you can call it that, is that since these families would not be all by themselves, they could help each other out and would be more inclined to remain and to become integrated into a given community, or to be included, if you like.

So your endeavour interests me. I would like you to please provide us with more details.

º (1620)

Mr. Daniel Boucher: First of all, there were 35 families involved. Ten families represented the annual target I invented earlier. This could be 25, but I think that, for the time being, 10 would not be too bad. Thirty-five families have come since 1998-1999. As I said earlier, these people came as a result of a trip that I had made to Morocco in order to really promote the community. So this was the situation. I did some promotion and the province had also asked me to do some promotion on its behalf. There were no provincial representatives there, but I have been asked to represent them as well. So I arrived with lots of things and I gave lots of conferences, etc. These people were already in the system and they chose to come to Manitoba. Of these 35 families, approximately 70%, perhaps 75% have remained with us.

At the start, we used the financial resources of the Société franco-manitobaine. At that time, we had one employee—she is still with us today—who looked after everything. She picked the people up and they even stayed in her house. That's the way it worked. They would arrive and we would have to do something. So we organized them initially. I think that it is because of the way we welcomed them that we have had such a relatively high retention rate. So this is how we welcomed these people.

We then approached the province and requested assistance in the area of intake and integration. The province gives us $52,000 per year in order to do that, which is not a tremendous amount of money, but we are working on it. This was a first step for the province.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): What is the percentage of francophones in Manitoba?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Five per cent.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Five per cent of $3.8 million is a little over $52,000.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: That's right. Exactly.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): I see. Fifty-two thousand dollars is not even 1 per cent.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: No, you are entirely correct. In fact, we certainly want to increase that amount. But the province has much more structured communities. There are a lot of Germans, for example, who come to the communities. The province brings 40 families at once. Those people settled in Carman, in Manitoba, or in Morden—[Editor's Note: Inaudible]—and they all have a job. So the province has invested in that area, but it is heading towards our community. So at some point, that amount will be increased. We are very grateful for that.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Shouldn't any future agreement contain a criterion whereby part of the $3.8 million or of the total amount of the agreement, whatever it may be, should be given to the francophones based on their demographic weight in Manitoba?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Absolutely. We will insist on that if there is a new agreement, because it reflects linguistic duality once again. It is also a question of transfer of power. When the federal government transfers a power to a province, what are the ensuing guaranties? Those are critical to us. I must say that at the time, things were going quite well. Ms. Robillard, who was the minister, had included a clause in the agreement which stipulated that something had to be done for the francophones. That was something positive.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Some committee members— [Editor's Note: Inaudible] —in the legislation.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: That's wonderful.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Mr. Plamondon.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: You say that 75% of the 35 families that you welcomed stayed, so about 20 families. Did you bring them to Saint-Boniface? Are they concentrated in the same area?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: No.

There is a serious housing shortage in Saint-Boniface. It is a challenge. It is one of our major problems, but we have nonetheless set up networks to enable people to meet. People can study in French, etc., but there is no housing.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Just as Senator Gauthier did earlier, I want to talk about access to education in French for those families. After all, they lived right beside Saint-Boniface, a major francophone centre. If, for example, an immigrant wants to live in French but lives 150 kilometres or more from a major centre, it is much more difficult for him to study in French.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: It depends on the community. Of course it will be easier if you live near a community with French schools; after all, there are about 40 francophone villages in Manitoba. But if he lives in a place such as southeast Manitoba, he may run into a few problems.

º (1625)

Mr. Louis Plamondon: What percentage of the children of those families are enrolled in French schools? Is it 50/50?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: All of them. They all go to French schools.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: That's mainly because they don't understand enough English, is it not?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: That is part of the reason. It is also a choice they made to attend our schools, which is very good for us.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Senator Beaudoin.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: I have a question for you on university colleges. I am a great believer in education because it is so important. Can university colleges be the equivalent of a university?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Yes. It is a university.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: In the provincial structures of the particular province?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: It is one of the province's universities.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: University degrees are awarded.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: That is correct. In our case, it is affiliated with the University of Manitoba.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: How many are there in Canada, if you exclude Quebec? Is it common in the provinces?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: No.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: There are some in Ontario.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Yes, there are some in Ontario. In Alberta, there is the Faculté Saint-Jean and where we live, there is the university college. I think those are the only ones in western Canada.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: You have one in Saint-Boniface.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Yes, it is the Collège universitaire de Saint-Boniface. Of course, in eastern Canada, it is—

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: The Acadians must have one.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Yes, the Acadians do have one. There is the Université the Moncton, the Université Sainte-Anne—

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: The Université de Moncton has a very clear university status.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Yes. Our status is also very clear. It is called a college, but it is a bona fide university.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: I wonder whether something shouldn't be done to establish equivalencies between university degrees and those awarded by university colleges. That has always struck me. It is unfair, in fact, that there aren't any. I mentioned doctors as an example. Sooner or later, everyone needs a doctor. So that would be one area to explore. I can understand that there may be some reluctance in a province with very few French-speaking Canadians, but we must legislate, and we have the power to legislate.

Of course provinces should also handle immigration. As for university equivalence, that is guaranteed; it is explicitly stated in the Constitution. I think something should be done in that regard. Perhaps it should also be discussed at the interprovincial conferences where health is on the agenda. I fully agree that transfers and other issues are very important, but I think it is critical to have equivalence for diplomas and degrees.

The University of Ottawa, for example, has succeeded in doing so in some fields. There is the Faculty of Law, where half of the curriculum is for legal students who will pursue a career as a lawyer or notary in Quebec and the other half is for those who will pursue a career in Ontario. The Faculty managed to do that, which is quite a feat. Perhaps it could be emulated elsewhere.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: You are entirely correct. I think it is a matter of admitting that there is a problem and recognizing that it is fairly easy to solve. For example, there is a shortage of doctors in the health sector, as you mentioned, and something must be done. I think the health ministers can solve this.

As for our federation, we recently tabled a report on health. Recruitment and training are discussed in it. All of those things must be taken into account and addressed in any measures that are taken. I am talking about medicine, but there are still a lot of problems to solve in other areas.

I can assure you that within three years, we will have solved the problem of doctors and equivalencies.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: For nurses as well?

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Yes. It is a crisis, and I think they have found some solutions. So they will certainly do something.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Thank you, Senator Beaudoin.

We have enough time for two short questions before moving on to Mr. Jedwab.

Senator Gauthier.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Earlier on, you spoke about the $3.6 million agreement between the federal government and the province. Perhaps you are not aware of this, but I was told that the agreement contained a section on the francophonie.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: A clause. It is not about money.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: That is not what we were told. We were told there was a section pertaining to the francophone community. Manitoba's efforts thus far have focused mainly on professionals, which the province needs. Language is not a criterion for the province. Do you agree with that? Are you going to do something to change that?

º (1630)

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Absolutely. In the agreement, there is a clause that talks about our communities. The money has not been transferred to us, but it may happen yet. We have received $50,000 of the $3.6 million. That isn't much.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: So I was misinformed. I was told a sum had been set aside for the Société franco-manitobaine.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: No. If that is true, I have not seen it.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Senator Léger, one last question.

Senator Viola Léger: Because of the low birth rate, there are far fewer students enrolled in French universities. That is why we invite many foreign students to attend our francophone universities. The purpose of that was not to increase immigration, but is it possible that they like it so much here that later on... I know it is selfish to say that, but I imagine it does happen.

Mr. Daniel Boucher: Mr. Jedwab was telling me that of those people, one in five stayed here.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: There are 14,000 Chinese students who come to Canada every year.

Senator Viola Léger: Not in francophone universities.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: No.

Senator Viola Léger: That is what I mean.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Mr. Jedwab, could we ask you to make your presentation? I am looking forward to hearing your comments.

Mr. M. Jack Jedwab: I would first like to apologize because I will probably force the people around the table to do a sort of paradigm shift. When Joan Fraser took the initiative to encourage the committee to hear me, she asked me to speak about anglophones in Quebec, so that will be the focus of my presentation.

I now understand you would also like me to talk about immigration; not necessarily anglophone immigration in Quebec, but immigration in general. Of course I will be very willing to answer any of your questions on that, since I did carry out a study for the Official Languages Commissioner on the role of immigration. However, the presentation I prepared is mostly on the situation of anglophones in Quebec.

I will speak in English and in French. I hope that will not be confusing for the interpreters. I will also try to deal with the question of Part VII that deals with more than immigration; it is also deals with the role of government vis-à-vis official language minority groups.

I also have the draft of a document that I prepared and hope to complete soon. I will send it to you so that all members of the committee can have a copy of it. I was somewhat pressed for time, so I did what I could, but it is not yet finished. It is based essentially on a set of presentations in French on the situation of the anglophone community in Quebec, presentations that are based on a set of surveys and special studies carried out on the attitudes of Quebec's anglophones.

I would first like to make two very clear points. First of all, in my view and based on the data I compiled, the problems facing anglophones in Quebec are not that they have poor access to services in English. There may be a few problems outside Montreal. In some places, there may be some gaps, so to speak, in social and health services, but generally speaking, I do not agree that anglophones suffer from a serious problem of lack of services in English in public and private institutions. The figures I compiled reflect that.

Secondly, the question of linguistic assimilation is not, generally speaking—everything being relative—a problem faced by anglophones in Quebec. That may be different outside Quebec. In places like the Eastern Townships, for example, there is a higher-than-average level of linguistic transfer among young people. The percentage can be as high as 20%, which is even higher than the average among francophones in New Brunswick, but that occurs in interlinguistic marriages. So it is to some extent the natural choice an anglophone might have to make in that environment. Given all the data, I disagree that the question of assimilation is a major problem facing anglophones in Quebec.

That said, I think the problem for anglophones is twofold. First of all, there is the retention problem, so to speak, or the interprovincial migration issue, which, over the past 25 years or so, has led to a significant reduction in the historic proportion of anglophones in Quebec in actual numbers and percentage. As for native speakers, the anglophone community has lost approximately 150,000 members over the past 25 years, which is quite significant demographically speaking.

The second problem facing anglophones in Quebec is disempowerment, the feeling of not having any significant influence, the feeling of not being a full citizen with access to the machinery of government, of not feeling you have a say in the decisions made by political bodies, on the one hand, and on the other, of not being represented by the government or within the machinery of government, be it at the provincial level or within the public service, both federal and provincial. As we all know, the representation of anglophones in Quebec's provincial public service is very, very low. Moreover, the representation of anglophones in Quebec's federal public service, in the machinery of the federal government, is below average given Quebec's total anglophone population.

I prepared a chart. Once again, it is still a draft. This chart reflects the percentage of political representation of Quebec's anglophones in the provincial government, in the federal government and the new megacity of Montreal. There are about six Quebec anglophones whose mother tongue is English in Quebec's National Assembly, which is approximately 4.8% of the entire National Assembly, which is less than the percentage of Quebec's anglophone population.

º (1635)

The same applies for the federal government. The percentage is approximately 5.3%. I include my friend Clifford Lincoln in the anglophones to reach that percentage, even if he is from Mauritius. Despite that, it is 5.3%. There are 75 ridings, which means approximately four representatives. That is a fact. What I might call disempowerment, in another context, if referring to francophones in the federal government, as part of the machinery of government or in terms of political representation, others will call demographic deficit. I called it demo-political deficit, in other words a combination of demographics and politics. Whatever term is used, there is a deficit that must be filled.

As we all know, many anglophones from the megacity of Montreal disagreed with the project; the percentage of anglophones among elected representatives is approximately 28%, which is higher than the percentage of anglophones in the new megacity, that is, the Island of Montreal. So there is no deficit there.

That said, we saw during the entire debate surrounding the creation of the new megacity that anglophones feel they were not taken into account in the decision-making process which led to the creation of the megacity. I personally support the idea of creating megacities, but I am referring more to the perception of not being represented. It is a case of disempowerment, which is the feeling that a decision was made without taking the minority's opinion into account. It is said that the majority must take precedence over the minority instead of considering Quebec's 300-year history.

That feeling is quite widespread, so when I gathered data with Environics, one of the questions asked was who was first and foremost responsible for linguistic matters: the federal government, the provincial government, the municipal government, etc. Most anglophones, 65% of them, said that the province had first jurisdiction in matters pertaining to the promotion of linguistic policies. Twenty-six per cent said it was the federal government. [Editor's Note: inaudible] they probably would have said they were right. But we also asked the question the other way. We asked who should have first jurisdiction over linguistic policy. Seventy-five per cent of Quebec's anglophones said that it should be the federal government and 19% said the provincial. Six per cent said it should be a combined jurisdiction between the various levels of government. So there is still that gap. Yes, the provincial government does have the jurisdiction, we know that, but people want the federal government to have it. Rightly or wrongly, this lack of confidence in their government is also a symptom of disempowerment, which I think should be taken seriously.

Based on the results of our survey, anglophones have a feeling very similar to what we have been hearing for about 20 years now during the debates on the Meech Lake Accord or other debates, of not being recognized for their differences, of not being respected, in other words, the feeling of being rejected. That feeling is common among Quebec's anglophones and is similar to what you will find among many francophones outside Quebec in terms of their feelings towards the rest of Canada. I do not know what terminology is being used. If I say I am anglophone, they say my compatriots are in the rest of Canada. When I say I am francophone, they say my compatriots are outside Quebec.

º (1640)

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): [Editor's Note: Inaudible] —English Canada.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: Now let's move on to another topic. I was asked to speak a little about anglophone immigrants. I will do so quickly in order to stay within my seven minutes. I presume I made life easy for the interpreters by speaking in just one language.

“Did the extent and quality of French-language instruction that you received prepare you to be successful in Quebec?” That is one of the questions asked in the survey conducted by the Institut Missisquoi, a research institute in Quebec.

Forty-four per cent of anglophones born in Canada responded that

[English]

the extent and quality of French-language instruction

[Translation]

they received did not prepare them to be successful in Quebec. Thirty-two per cent of immigrants, people born outside Canada, responded that they had not received sufficient training despite the fact that the rate of bilingualism among anglophones is very high; it is approximately 80%. So there are the other questions.

Do anglophone communities in the regions feel that their future is threatened? Yes. Rightly or wrongly, two-thirds of anglophones say they have that feeling. It begs the question as to why they have that feeling, but it certainly exists, whether you like or not.

We also asked two questions on the public service. Would anglophones be interested in seeking a job with the Government of Canada in Quebec or with the Government of Quebec in Quebec? In both cases, 50% of respondents said yes. It is a myth that they are under-represented in the public service because they are not interested in working for the Quebec government in Quebec or for the Canadian government in Quebec. This major survey, with 3,000 respondents, reflects the true attitude of anglophones.

We also asked them whether they felt they have equal access to jobs with the Government of Quebec and the federal government. Their answer was no. A high percentage of anglophones do not have that impression. They have the impression they have less chance of getting a job than other Quebecers, be it with the Quebec government or the federal government.

As for the leadership of the anglophone community, I will not address that.

As for immigration, I would first like to say that the immigration level for English-speaking persons coming to Quebec is relatively high. In other words, there is no gap, as is the case elsewhere in Canada, between the number of English-speaking people settling in Quebec—when their mother tongue is English, there is a gap, but it is fairly small—and the percentage of anglophones in Quebec. If you use the criterion of first language spoken, you could say that approximately 28% of Quebec's anglophones are immigrants.

That is a very interesting point. In the breakdown according to mother tongue, it turns out that 14% of the anglophone community was born outside Quebec. So there is still a good percentage of immigrants in Quebec who are anglophone or who speak English.

Outside Montreal these populations are very concentrated. In Montreal itself, they are becoming increasingly concentrated. It might be interesting for the communities outside Montreal to receive more anglophone immigrants. Quebec has been wanting to regionalize immigration for many years. Right now there is the McDougal—Gagnon-Tremblay Agreement, and there was another agreement before that.

I would just like say in passing that the McDougall—Gagnon-Tremblay Agreement has not reduced the total percentage of anglophone or English-speaking immigrants in Quebec. But could something be done there. I think that something could indeed be done to encourage English-speaking immigrants to settle outside Montreal. Economic factors obviously play a role in that. Language transfers among anglophone immigrants are very limited: 3.5% on average. Anglophone immigrants who settle in Quebec do not adopt French as their main language.

There is another problem that has already been raised, and that is the issue of interprovincial migration of immigrants, meaning immigrants that come to Quebec and then leave for another province. Among immigrants arriving between 1980 and 1995 there has been a net loss of around 25%. I am talking about immigrants who speak English only, who settle in Quebec, staying four, five or six years, and who then leave the province to go elsewhere in Canada. That is a problem. It is part of the ongoing, major problem of the out migration of anglophones, which leads to various social problems, including aging of the community, on the one hand and, on the other, the feeling of disempowerment, of not counting politically and not being reflected in the institutions.

Even in the case of francophone immigrants, there is a net loss of 3.7% to other provinces. There are more francophone immigrants leaving Quebec to go elsewhere in Canada than there are francophone immigrants from the rest of francophone Canada coming to settle in Quebec. Right now, the pool of francophone immigrants in Quebec is larger, but there are still quite a few who have left: 2,700 left Quebec between 1980 and 1995, and 1,020 came from other provinces to Quebec. We had a discussion about whether francophone immigrants who settled in Manitoba left there to go to Quebec. There are more francophones leaving Quebec for other provinces than francophones coming from elsewhere in Canada.

I will end on that. I will be glad to answer your questions in either official language.

º (1645)

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Thank you, Mr. Jedwab.

Mr. Plamondon.

º (1655)

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Thank you and welcome to the Committee on Official Languages.

I read parts of your report, but I mainly want some clarification on a few details you have just given us. What is the percentage of anglophones in Quebec?

Mr. Jack Jedwab: It all depends on your definition. You can define them by mother tongue or by the first language learned;

[English]

first official language spoken

[Translation]

or by the language spoken at home. The lowest percentage corresponds to those whose mother tongue is English. They account for about 8.8% of the population.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: And the rest?

Mr. Jack Jedwab: — [Editor's Note: inaudible] —10%.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: The anglophone community has been strengthened by the arrival of immigrants, almost 100% of whom have assimilated into the anglophone community, especially at one point.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: Yes, that was the case 30 or 40 years ago. Today, the situation is somewhat the reverse.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Yes.

When you talked about representation in terms of the percentages, it caught my attention, with respect to both MPs and MNAs. Your figures were based on those of English origin—I do not like that expression either—and did not include allophones, most of whom are integrated into the English-speaking community. If you include both the anglophones and allophones who are elected to Ottawa or Quebec City, then it comes pretty close to 10%.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: Yes, to be fair, I should add the allophones to the anglophones. Mr. Levine in Quebec would be a case in point.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Yes.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: That can increase the percentage.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: There is already Mr. David Payne who is an anglophone. Here we had M. Nunez, our friend from Chile.

The other thing that struck me, is the the percentage of anglophones in the federal public service. You said that, at the federal level, the percentage was 5.3%.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: I did not talk about the public service. It is the members' ratio which is 5.3 per cent. According to the Commissioner of Official Languages data, 6,9% of federal employees in Quebec are anglophones; in Quebec, it's 0,9 per cent.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: As you may know, when we talk about the public service and the number of francophones or anglophones employed in it, we exclude those living within 50 kilometres of the capital, which means that all the anglophones in Aylmer, on the other side of the Ottawa River, are not included in your data. So all the employees in the National Capital Region are excluded.

We have often discussed that issue here in the Committee on Official Languages. Two years ago I asked how many anglophones in Quebec were working in the public service in the National Capital Region, and I never received an answer. If we included those people, your percentage would be higher. I do not have any objection, but this figure regarding anglophones in Quebec who work for the public service is often misrepresented. In the Committee on Official Languages, every time we have debated these statistics presented to us, we have said that they were inaccurate because people working in the public service in west Quebec and in Ottawa are not included. I did not know whether you were aware of that.

As for the rest of your presentation, I would say that it reflects quite well the views of the anglophones that I know, because I do have anglophone friends who are active in my party as well as in the Parti québécois. There are some in all the parties. You have represented their views quite well.

In fact, I think that they can feel reassured. I believe that their influence in political affairs is much greater than they think. That is what I often tell them.

Thank you.

The Joint Chair ( Senator Shirley Maheu) : Senator Gauthier.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: I read your report. It is very good and I congratulate you.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: Thank you.

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: You have identified the problem well. I do not want to talk about the new paradigm that you alluded to earlier. I am not prepared to speak to that.

Linguistic minorities in minority situations usually identify first with where they live: their parish or region. Then they usually skip the provincial level and go directly to the federal level. These people call themselves federalists, and that is understandable. The provincial governments have not really listened to these minorities or been generous toward them.

In Manitoba, the linguistic minority had problems from 1905 to 1988. In Ontario, Regulation 17 was brought in around 1915. The right for franco Ontarians to administer their school was obtained in 1997, 15 years after the adoption of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Before that, we had the constitutional right to manage our schools, but it was no right in practice. I could talk about that for hours and hours.

The federal government's policy on immigration and the integration of immigrants needs to contribute to Canadian unity, to linguistic duality, if I have correctly understood the policy announced recently in Bill C-11. The analysis in your study would have been useful to us here in the committee. In your presentation, you touched on current problems. That is of interest to me.

Francophones are in a situation of linguistic deficit in Canada right now. You have a political deficit in Quebec, but we can talk about a linguistic deficit in the rest of Canada, the ROC, as people call it. I do not like that expression, but we hear it a lot today. In Quebec, people talk about Quebec and the rest of Canada, and in English Canada, people talk about Quebec and the rest of Canada.

Linguistic duality is a reality, a fundamental characteristic of our country. In your study, you talk about demographic renewal. I find that term interesting. The Commissioner of Official Languages is using it now, and I think it is a wonderful expression.

For years, we tried to obtain educational institutions, health institutions, etc. We have had them for a few years now and we are starting to work toward improving the quality of life in our communities.

You talked about anglophones. I am going to skip a question, because I want to talk about anglophones in Quebec. It is true that 25% of unilingual anglophones that come to Quebec leave that province within a given time. That means that around 75% of anglophone immigrants stay in Quebec. I cannot tell you about the rest of Canada. You did a study on this, and I would like to know how many of the 1,800 French-speaking immigrants who settled outside Quebec last year remained in the communities that they first came to. Do you have any data on that?

Mr. Jack Jedwab: Yes, but I would first like to say that I have started to use the term “ROQ” in Quebec. Since I am a Montrealer, I talk about the balance du Québec and I call it the ROQ.

It has been used in the newspapers recently.

Regarding interprovincial immigration, I should be able to come up with the figures quite quickly, but I think that about 80% of the people you are talking about stay in the rest of Canada. In Quebec, as we have seen, there are more francophone immigrants leaving Quebec than there are coming to Quebec.

I would like to give you another example. We talk a lot about international immigration, but there is also interprovincial migration. It is an important reality that we need to take into account along with international immigration.

In Vancouver, although the rate of language transfer is among the highest in Canada, there has still been an increase in the actual number of francophones, since migrants from Quebec came there in large numbers between 1986 and 1996.

When the results of the next census are made public, they will show an increase in the number of francophones in Alberta; once again, these are francophones from Quebec. I do not know what all the trends are; studies need to be carried out on this. Do these new arrivals from Quebec use the francophone institutions in the provinces where they settle? Do they go to French school?

Daniel talked about French-speaking immigrants, who have generally used the French schools. That is excellent, but is it the case for francophones from Quebec as well? We do not have all the numbers, and these things need to be studied. Interprovincial migration is an important phenomenon.

There again, there are more Quebec francophones leaving Quebec than there are people from elsewhere coming there, except during certain periods when the Liberal Party was in office. But that is another question.

» (1700)

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: May I ask another short question?

In your study, you put a lot of emphasis on the need to allow and encourage demographic renewal.

The 1996 statistics indicate that 80% of the Canadian population is of immigrant origin. In the francophone minority population outside Quebec, such as the communities that Mr. Boucher was telling us about, around 5% are of immigrant origin. Do you have any suggestions for us on how to convince the government to improve its “propaganda”, if we can use that term, to encourage more francophone immigration to Canada? If we do not increase the francophone population and maintain our numbers, Canada will no longer exist. Mr. Plamondon will be right: Quebec will be francophone and the rest of Canada will be anglophone.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: Are you talking about immigration?

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: Yes.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: If the will is there, both the political will and the community will, as is the case in Manitoba, then it can be done. If communities do not want to receive thousands of francophone immigrants, however, we cannot force them. If the desire, the will and the resources are in place, it can be done.

In the study that I presented, I asked whether there is any other country that attracts a large number of francophone immigrants. Our neighbour to the south, for example, takes in quite a number, despite the fact that the rate of linguistic assimilation is very high there at 90 per cent or more. There are quite a few francophones who settle in various parts of the United States, not just in Florida, I might say. There are also many Haitians that immigrate to the United States. These people are considered francophones or francophiles, since they speak Creole but are still francophones.

So if we rethink our immigration policy, on the basis of what is being proposed by Ms. Adam and others, including Mr. Coderre—by the way, I had the opportunity to read the transcripts that Mr. Coderre sent me—we will shift the focus away from the strictly economic perspective. There has to be a balance between the two, of course. If we focus only on the economic side, we can certainly go abroad and compete with many other countries that are all trying to attract economic immigrants. Historically, however, Canada's immigration has not been based solely on economic criteria. People with all sorts of talents have come to settle in Canada. Judging from our performance in this area, compared with many other countries, Canada has done fairly well. If the political will is there... I do not think that it will be as easy as it is around this table.

In fact, I have had the opportunity to talk to a lot of people in various places and it seems to me that there is still a lot of resistance, not from Mr. Coderre, but elsewhere, among the public. There is another vision of Canada, which is that all anglophones should go to the ROC and that all francophones should... That is another vision of Canada, which I do not share, but it is true that there are many different visions. Luckily, those...

Senator Jean-Robert Gauthier: The grid proposed by the Commissioner of Official Languages—

Mr. Jack Jedwab: I support the proposal by the Commissioner of Official Languages. I prepared the briefing document, didn't I?

» (1705)

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Thank you, Mr. Jedwab. Mr. Bélanger.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Thank you for giving me the floor because I'm going to have to leave. Mr. Jedwab, thank you for coming here today.

I wanted to follow up on the comments made by my friend here about the public service. I gather from these comments that this may be an issue that our committee could address. Perhaps you are right. I do not know whether or not this is the case, but as far as the percentage of Quebeckers in the national capital region is concerned, it could vary between 6.9% and 10%. This would have to be checked.

But if we were to do that, we may have to dig a little bit deeper and look at the national statistics. Then we would be dealing with percentages similar to the demographics of communities, that is about 75:25. However, regarding the comment about Quebec's ratio, it remains at 0.9%. This may be an issue that the Government of Quebec should look at because, in my opinion, there is some underrepresentation. So we could, as a committee, examine this issue.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: There is a whole cultural issue associated with this.

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): I have a question about the point you raised in your last comment, Mr. Jedwab. As members of a committee who want to see some progress in the issue that we have been discussing in the past few meetings, could you tell us whether we are dealing primarily with resistance stemming from bad faith or is it more a question of inertia on the part of the federal machinery of government?

This concept of integrating the whole immigration issue into the linguistic duality of the country and the demographics of our communities is quite recent. The efforts made by the francophone minority community are even more recent. Where should we be focussing our efforts? If there is a problem of inertia, it will probably be possible to shake things up so that the situation is rectified. However, if we are being stonewalled by people, primarily in the provinces, who do not feel that it is necessary to integrate the concept of linguistic duality into the issue of immigration, we will have a tougher job. I am not asking you to identify individuals here. I have no intention of embarassing you, but I would appreciate it if you could provide us with some indications.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: Thank you. It's difficult to embarass me.

I would not say that it's bad faith. First of all, there is some inertia because this is a new approach. In my opinion, we should have adopted this new approach when we created the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism. I do not know why we did not realize, as a result of all these interesting and substantial analyzes, that this was something that could result in a positive demographic contribution. However, we did not do this at that time.

I do not think that is about bad faith, but more a result of the economic immigration we want to advocate. Take the case of the 160,000 people from Haiti who, for the past 10 years, have been going to the United States. Some say that this is not about economic immigration. Many people feel that we should be emphasizing economic immigration, and this has been the philosophy that they have been following for many years. This is what their analyzes have led them to conclude about Canada's economic situation. And despite the fact that we have francophone communities here, they do not necessarily want to bring people over them France. A certain number come every year, but this is not how we go about getting a very large number of immigrants, at least not from France or Belgium, where the economic situation is relatively good. You never know, that could change after France's last election. Some people are saying that Canada should be emphasizing economic immigration, and that may contradict with the other objective that we spoke about earlier.

They are saying that the amount of money that needs to be invested in integration is much too high, even in Quebec. You must not think for a minute that Quebec, despite its objectives, is not sensitive to this aspect of economic immigration. I presented a brief on immigration and integration before a parliamentary committee in Quebec about two years ago. I noted one thing that was a little bit embarrassing. There was talk about a target of 40% or even 50% francophone immigration in Quebec and they were congratulating themselves, they were pleased that they had succeeded in obtaining 40% francophone immigration. However, how is this calculation made? They took the immigrants who said that they spoke only French when they arrive—let's say that they accounted for 22%—and added to that were the 18% who stated that they spoke both French and English when they arrived. And voilà! They achieved their 40%. They said that these were francophones.

I asked the former Minister, Mr. Perrault, how he had arrived at this figure. You could easily divide by two: 50% being anglophones, 50% being francophones. You could easily add them to the total of anglophones. Why not? The logic is the same. What are the percentages? Approximately 15% are anglophones, to which we add the 20% of individuals stating that they spoke both languages when they arrived, for a percentage of 35% anglophones. This is how we can show the people that the targets have been achieved. According to this scenario, I am nearly 100% francophone. That is what I told Mr. Perrault, and he did not contradict me.

The officials in Quebec's public service are very aware of this issue. They have gone to great length to attract investor immigrants from Asia, as Mr. Plamondon mentioned, but many of these people have left Quebec. The other provinces are saying that Quebec—[Editor's Note: inaudible]. The money is in Quebec, but the responsibilities are in Ontario. There is the tax issue.

» (1710)

The Joint Chair (Mr. Mauril Bélanger): Mr. Jedwab, Mr. Boucher, I would like to thank you for coming to see us. I must apologize to you, because I have to leave now.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Senator Léger.

Senator Viola Léger: I really liked what you had to say about disempowerment. You were naturally referring to the minority anglophones in Quebec, describing their feelings of rejection, if I understood correctly. There is, therefore, a type of inferiority complex. You did not use this term? I have experienced that; you have this feeling when you are a minority. So that would apply to the minority anglophones in Quebec. Do the anglophone immigrants who become integrated in English have this feeling of disempowerment? Do they also have an inferiority complex as Quebec anglophones?

Mr. Jack Jedwab: I think that they may adopt this pessimist feeling quite quickly. You must also understand that many immigrant anglophones in Quebec come under the entrepreneur category. So the unemployment level is not very high. As I mentioned in the report, their average salary is at times much higher than that of anglophones born in Canada because many of these immigrants are not refugees. Many of them are entrepreneur immigrants. But yes, we have heard a lot of anecdotes about this pessimistic feeling. This is something that needs to be studied. You could say that this is not real. Mr. Plamondon has said that this is not the case, that they have power.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I said that they have a great deal of influence.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: That is not the impression that I get when I talk to anglophones. They have the impression that they are somewhat expendable. I will give you a cautious example.

In Quebec, when you need to find a riding for a francophone star, who is not the best, during an election campaign, he or she is run in a riding where there is a heavy concentration of anglophones. The anglophones are under the impression that this will be done at every level. This is what the disempowerment is all about. We are expendable. Indeed, some anglophones may have a great deal of influence, like many francophones, but I would say that the great majority of anglophones—and this is backed up by the polls—have the feeling that they do not have a great deal of influence, that things happen without them being able to be part of the decision-making process, that they are not included in the government process, they are not considered by the public service and the political authorities. Where does this community fit into this process? There are all kinds of reasons that explain this. I am simply stating today that this is a problem. Everybody should agree that there is a problem and they should not give it short shrift, because the problem is real. We have the feeling that we do not have the same worth as other Quebecers, we are not worth as much. Some people say that they are allophones. Sometimes I say jokingly that I am an allophone. The first language that I learned, and which I still understand--I relearned it recently--, is Yiddish. I did this to become an allophone once again, because, politically speaking, allophones are very popular in Quebec. Mr. Parizeau didn't even mention the anglophones; he only talked about ethnic groups when he...

» (1715)

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Senator Léger.

Senator Viola Léger: When people have this feeling, regardless of where they may live, it is serious. This lies at the heart of the issue. This has been going on for a long time, which makes this situation so troubling, and for new immigrants to have this feeling, is particularly worrisome. I believe that we should be focussing on this issue.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: I feel that the federal government could be doing more in this area and that anglophones believe that the federal government could be doing more in this area.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Senator Beaudoin, followed by Mr. Plamondon.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: I would like to go back to one issue. If I understood correctly, you were talking about the role that provinces could play in the area of bilingualism. If I am not mistaken, you seem to say that this was a matter that was primarily up to the provinces at the outset. I don't have the impression... Obviously, New Brunswick is a special case because this has been an unbelievable success. New Brunswick is a very bilingual province, and this is solidly entrenched in the Canadian Constitution. This is solid, Ms. Léger. The Supreme Court's interpretation of this section will always be liberal.

Are you saying that this should come from the provinces first? History does show this to be the case at all.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: Could you repeat the question?

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: For example, New Brunswick... I am setting Quebec aside because there is section 133 of the Constitution and there is also the issue of numbers. New Brunswick has managed to achieve a wonderful thing: the equality of both communities, etc. Bravo! It is wonderful. But no other province has managed to do that. I am still under the impression that if we want to have bilingualism that is growing, developing, we will have to turn to the federal authority to a large extent.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: I think that there has been, in Quebec or elsewhere, some decentralization. According to the Constitution, education comes under provincial jurisdiction. Education is a key element in integrating immigrants. It is essential. This is a provincial matter. Health also comes under provincial jurisdiction.

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: Yes, but I asked Mr. Boucher why diploma equivalency, which clearly comes under provincial jurisdiction, has not been addressed in the provinces other than in Quebec? New Brunswick is a special case, but in provinces where there are very few francophones, this issue is not being dealt with. So if we were to rely on that, the future would not be very rosy; however, since our country is bilingual, and since this has been enshrined in the Constitution and since the federal government can put both languages on an equal footing, that helps us considerably. We can at least state that, although the numbers may not be equal, the languages are. This has always been my philosophy, and that is the beauty of the Official Languages Act. However, this being the case, action must come from the federal level.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: Leadership must come from the federal government, but I think that everybody would also like to see some leadership at the provincial level.

» (1720)

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: Yes. I am really hoping that this will be the case.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: But when it comes to leadership and responsibility for the minority official language communities, the federal government has an important role to play. This is a fundamental aspect for the unity of the federation. The federal government must fully fulfill this role.

We have been talking about linguistic duality for many years. This is a concept that we use, but we have to define the notion of linguistic duality properly. I read the debates that took place in Parliament pertaining to the study done by the commissioner at the time that this concept of duality was introduced and this concept is not very clear in my mind, nor was it clear in the mind of the legislators at that time. What was meant by this exactly? Where were they going with this duality? This is a very broad concept; you could go a long way with it. I hope that this committee will help us define what exactly is meant by duality.

Ms. Adam asked me whether or not promoting francophone immigration outside Quebec, for example, ties into this duality, and whether or not it is the responsibility of the legislative assembly to promote and sell this duality.

I am no legal expert, but I have tried to discuss the matter a bit with a legal expert—

Senator Gérald Beaudoin: If that is the case, that answers my question because this is what I want as well and I don't have a great deal of hope at times because if I look at what has happened in the past, it is, rather the opposite that has occurred. However, that answers my question very well.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Mr. Plamondon.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: I would like to follow-up on what Ms. Léger said. Still on the topic of influence, I recall seeing a documentary a few years ago on television where it was explained that the priority amongst anglophones in terms of their participation in public institutions, was neither at the municipal or provincial level, nor was it at the federal level, but at the school board level. In some cities, for example, all of the elected municipal officials were francophones, but all of the elected representatives of the school boards were anglophones because, as far as the anglophones were concerned, that was where the priority lay. It's a matter of habit, culture or I don't know what. I cannot explain this. So this was also a choice that was made by anglophones in Quebec not to run in municipal, provincial or even federal elections. This has been a long tradition. As for public servants, if we go back to the situation the way it was 10 or so years ago, we can see that most of the anglophones from Quebec preferred to work in their language, and therefore at the federal, where the public service was English, and the francophones preferred to work in the provincial public service because they could work in their language. That is pretty understandable.

This is why I said that the anglophones that I rub shoulders with, such as Mr. Goldbloom, an anglophone, who I believe is a representative of your minority and who worked at the Museum of Religion in Nicolet... In my riding, 99% of the people are francophone. Those that comprise the remaining 1% of allophones and anglophones all speak French.

The President of the Pierre-de-Saurel Historical Society is an anglophone: Mr. Jones. We are good friends and I don't think that he has a big inferiority complex because he is anglophone. He asserts himself and discusses issues. I am saying that the anglophones have a great deal of influence, even outside of Montreal, and that there aren't any behaviors... Sometimes you see this in some people, but the influence is very tangible, and that is good, because the anglophone community in Quebec has made a wonderful contribution. Everybody is in agreement about that.

I think that what you have said is factual, but this was a result of the anglophone community's desire to live a little bit in isolation, in its own way, with its own customs and with the influence that it decided to have.

Mr. Jack Jedwab: There is a significant anglophone representation at the municipal level in Montreal. There was also very significant representation in most of the 27 municipalities before the merger took place. The percentage of anglophones at the provincial level is declining. Culturally speaking, I wonder whether or not this phenomenon is recent or whether it is going in the opposite direction. This phenomenon is declining so the answer is no.

As for the rest, as for the various debates being held in society, I think that the reasons vary when you ask anglophones why they are leaving Quebec. Moreover, this is backed up by the polls: some say that they are leaving for economic reasons, others cite political reasons.

» (1725)

Mr. Louis Plamondon: What is the approximate percentage of people leaving Quebec?

Mr. Jack Jedwab: Pardon me?

Mr. Louis Plamondon: How many anglophones are leaving Quebec, as you suggested? You made a calculation based over a 15-year period, but what is the figure for, let's say, the last 5 years?

Mr. Jack Jedwab: No, there has been a decrease. But you will see this, in the next census, if you include the quarterly reports put out by Statistics Canada. If we include all of the figures for the past five years, you will nevertheless see that there is another drop of probably between 25,000 to 30,000. This is significant. This is 25,000 or 30,000 individuals for whom English is the mother tongue. This is significant.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: Approximately how many francophones leave Quebec? Is it not 150,000?

Mr. Jack Jedwab: Who leave Quebec? No, not that many.

Mr. Louis Plamondon: No? You talked about—

Mr. Jack Jedwab: No. Fifty per cent of all the people who leave Quebec are anglophones. I'm talking about interprovincial migration. As for the reasons why the anglophones are leaving Quebec...

[English]

Many reasons were identified...non-immigrant English Quebeckers, and a potential decision to move to another province.

[Translation]

This was according to a poll of 3,000 respondents, which is quite a significant sampling size. Of those people who were born in Canada, 24% mentioned economic reasons, 26% cited political reasons and 5% talked about a feeling of discrimination. Among the immigrants to Quebec, 15% said that it was because of feelings of discrimination, 15% said that it was for political reasons and 31% cited economic or other reasons, such as family obligations. Nevertheless, I think that this is an important phenomenon that should be pointed out and I think that this reflects...

As I said, I don't agree with those people who say that the anglophones may disappear because of linguistic assimilation or, yet again, because they cannot receive services in English. I feel that there is no basis to this argument. I do not agree with that argument and I say so publicly. We often hear this type of comment in Quebec. We may see examples of that. I am not saying that this does not happen. That may happen outside of Montreal, particularly in the “ROQ”, the rest of Quebec, but as for the rest, that is...

I try to look at the problem and understand what it is all about, so that we can live in a paradise. I really like Quebec, but a lot of people are leaving. So I'm trying to understand why and I feel that it is important for those who are examining Part VII, in order to better understand what is meant by this objective of duality and how we are to attain it. You have to realize that this concept of duality does not mean the same thing for anglophones in Quebec as it does for francophones elsewhere in Canada. For francophones outside Quebec, duality is closely linked to the phenomenon of linguistic assimilation and to ways to prevent this from occurring. For Quebec's anglophones, this is not what community duality means. They are not concerned about assimilation, but rather, by this feeling that, as a community, they are not able to have any, let us call it collective influence. As individuals, there are some who, naturally, have some influence, as we can see, and as many other Quebecers have, individually, but collectively they do not have the feeling that they contribute fully. Has the big political debate resulted in this perverse effect? Possibly, however, I do think that it is important that we study this issue.

The Joint Chair (Senator Shirley Maheu): Monsieur Jedwad, je pense avoir dépassé le temps durant votre intervention. We did the same thing with Mr. Boucher; it was not difficult to forget about the clock. Thank you very much for your presentation.

The meeting is adjourned.