- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- NDP
- Churchill—Keewatinook Aski
- Manitoba
- Voting Attendance: 61%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $142,937.96
- Government Page
- May/11/23 5:35:52 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have a question that ties into meeting targets.
I have to say that I too am the daughter of immigrants. Like my colleague, I am very proud to be one. I know that immigration is an essential part of our country and that it contributes to building a better Canada.
They say they want to welcome more francophones in particular. In Canada, and more specifically in western Canada, we desperately need consular services to support these families.
Does my colleague agree that we need to ensure that these services are offered on the ground? Does the government need to invest in these services?
106 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the parliamentary secretary, for raising this important question.
We believe it was important for this bill to specifically address the need for an immigration policy, but it must go beyond that. The policy needs to include clear targets to get the numbers up to where they should be. As I said, the 4.4% target does not reflect the demographic weight of francophones, which is declining across the country. We need to get those numbers up and invest in community organizations, of course.
This week I visited the Association des communautés francophones de l'Ontario, or ACFO, here in southeastern Ontario. Representatives from the association made it clear that in order to support immigrants, they need recurring investments, not investments renewed on an annual basis.
The policy about accepting francophone students also needs to be changed, and we need to look at the unacceptable rejection rate among students from Africa. We need to bring in the francophones that our country needs. They want to contribute, and we want to build stronger francophone communities together. We have a lot of work to do.
190 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, today I rise in the House on behalf of the NDP to emphasize the importance of modernizing the Official Languages Act, the framework for protecting the language rights of Canadians.
I am a proud francophile. I was born and raised in Thompson, Manitoba, by two immigrant parents. My mother tongue is neither French nor English, but Greek.
My parents firmly believed that as citizens of Canada, my brother and I should have access to education in French. I managed to learn French not because of an innate gift, but as a result of the battle led by francophones, educators and their allies, who fought for their rights and for public investment, and who inspired a political will in Manitoban society.
We owe a debt of gratitude to our predecessors, at both the provincial and federal levels. I am grateful for the work of the NDP government in Manitoba, which my father was part of. In the 1980s, that government fought discrimination and extended the language rights of francophones, both in law and in services in Manitoba.
I am proud to be part of a generation of Canadians who were able to learn French, one of our official languages. Thanks to francophone teachers, I was able to discover Quebec, Acadia and the francophone communities in my own province. The system in place has opened many doors for people. It has given them many job opportunities and life experiences.
The opportunities available to our generation cannot be taken for granted. We need to continue to be bold in our support for francophone communities and francophones' basic rights.
Unfortunately, it is all too clear that French is in decline in Canada and Quebec. The demographic weight of francophones continues to drop. It went from 25.5% in 1971 to 22.8% in 2016, even though our official languages and the diversity of our language regimes are what make us Canadian and are instrumental in holding our society together. That is why some of our main goals are to protect and revitalize our official language minority communities, guarantee their language rights, and promote and protect French throughout the country.
Another thing that is clear is that the Official Languages Act that is in effect today, and that was last overhauled in 1988, does not really ensure true equality between French and English in Canada. There is no shortage of examples. Some of these include a lack of francophone staff; the difficulty young people have completing their education in French, from early childhood to post-secondary education; the difficulty people have accessing justice in French; the government's inability to communicate in French in an emergency; and the unavailability of public health and safety information in French. That was a big problem during the COVID-19 pandemic, as public service unions and the Commissioner of Official Languages pointed out.
That is not to mention linguistic insecurity in the workplace. According to the Office québécois de la langue française, even in Montreal, two in three workers regularly use English at work because the use of French is not encouraged, so they are reluctant to speak French.
It is even worse in the federal public service. The commissioner tells us the government has not done enough. In his most recent annual report, he says:
...Canada’s linguistic duality is not being expressed or advanced in the federal public service, which naturally has an impact on the quality of service it provides to the public. In my opinion, the root of the problem is the lack of official languages leadership in our federal institutions.
These are just a few examples, but they reflect a worrisome and tragic situation that has gone on for too long. We must do everything in our power to fight the decline of French and protect the language rights of 10 million French-speaking Canadians. That power is in our hands.
Over the years, Canadian society [inaudible] changed. Reform is long overdue, and the only reason we are finally studying this bill after all this time is that linguistic communities have exerted pressure and repeatedly called for new concrete, effective measures.
Ever since it came to power, the Liberal government has been ignoring the demands and needs of these communities, even though they sounded the alarm about the decline of French in this country. Minority language communities are sick of being overlooked and ignored by this government. They are sick of the indifference and lack of leadership shown by this government. I must say that I understand them and I share their feelings. How can the government ignore 10 million citizens? How can it turn its back on them?
The Commissioner of Official Languages himself has pointed to a systemic problem and an immaturity within the federal government with regard to respect for official languages. The federal public service is itself the sector that is most reluctant to enforce the Official Languages Act. The time for empty promises is over. It is time for real change.
I would like to emphasize that modernizing the Official Languages Act is an important first step. Among the notable advances, I support recognizing French as a minority language in Canada and North America, because of the predominant use of English. I am in favour of granting new powers to the commissioner and to the Treasury Board. I also support the clarification regarding positive measures, the introduction of bilingualism within the Supreme Court, and the requirement that IRCC adopt a francophone immigration policy.
Nevertheless, the NDP is aiming higher. For the OLA to really have more teeth, we want a more ambitious bill. We want legislation that is truly adapted to the realities of today and tomorrow.
I want to take the opportunity to remind the communities that the NDP has always supported them and will continue to offer them great support, support that they need, to ensure that the Official Languages Act meets their needs and expectations.
This is the first time in a generation that we have the opportunity to modernize the OLA. I want this to be done in the best way possible. We must make the most of this opportunity. Let us do the work that needs to be done.
I would now like to note several of our priorities for the OLA.
First, we want to ensure that the Treasury Board is the only body responsible for coordinating and implementing the entire OLA. It is the only one that can do it, and it must be in charge of the central agency responsible for enforcing the OLA. To fulfill its role effectively, the Treasury Board has to be able to require federal institutions to produce tangible results. What is more, it has to be able to issue principles and directives with respect to enforcing the entire OLA. Sharing responsibilities with Canadian Heritage, which does not have the necessary authority to fill this role, would lead to conflicts of interpretation and a lack of clarity. For that reason, I think it is essential to develop tools for measuring the impact of the positive measures and assessing the performance of senior officials in their departments.
I also support the proposal from the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne to delete the clause authorizing the Treasury Board to delegate its responsibilities for coordinating the OLA to another federal institution. We want the division of responsibilities to be clear, coherent and effective. We must not repeat the mistakes of the past, which prevented successive governments from enforcing the Official Languages Act.
Second, we want to see language clauses introduced into federal-provincial agreements in order to meet the needs of each community, to ensure that they are not forgotten. Federal institutions must be required to negotiate these language clauses with the provinces and territories. This is essential. I also think that a provision should be included to allow the federal government to work directly with francophone minority communities if a provincial or territorial government refuses to commit to signing an agreement that includes a language clause.
The government missed a golden opportunity to advance the rights of francophone minority communities and provide opportunities for francophiles during the round of negotiations on funding child care spaces. Long waiting lists are still the norm for French-language child care.
A study conducted by the Réseau de développement économique et d'employabilité Canada in 2019 found that 9,500 francophone children were on waiting lists for 745 French-language day cares outside Quebec. A child who is on a waiting list is one who is at risk of losing their language and being assimilated into the English system.
It is not right that people have to fight to get a spot in a French-language day care, school or university. Language clauses could have shortened these waiting lists with dedicated funding. We cannot miss our opportunity during the upcoming health care negotiations.
Third, the francophone immigration policy that IRCC is supposed to put in place should clearly indicate that the main objective is to restore and increase the demographic weight of francophones.
The government has repeatedly failed to meet the 4.4% francophone immigration target since 2003. Given that the proportion of French-speaking immigrants who settle in francophone minority communities every year does not exceed 2%, there is reason to be upset.
Fewer than 50,000 francophone immigrants were admitted outside Quebec between 2008 and 2020. That is well below the 125,000 required to maintain the francophone population outside Quebec at 4.4%. We therefore need to be admitting 75,000 more francophone immigrants.
I do not see the point of setting a percentage that does not reflect reality. I think that we should look at the actual number of francophones needed in our communities. I call on the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship to set meaningful, ambitious targets to get the numbers up to where they should be. A policy is needed to ensure the target is met. Some communities apparently need more than 16% francophone immigration to restore or increase their demographic weight. That is far from the 4.4% that the government keeps talking about. We need to change course.
Fourth, we want the Commissioner of Official Languages to have real power to deal with institutions that do not comply with the Official Languages Act. The commissioner's power to make orders applies only to parts IV and V of the act, but part VII is the part that promotes the equality of the two official languages and that supports the development of official language minority communities. The commissioner must be able to make orders regarding this part as well.
Furthermore, we will have to review the commissioner's power to impose administrative monetary penalties. This should not apply only to a few companies like Air Canada or Via Rail. We must expand the scope.
I agree with the Fédération des communautés francophones et acadienne's position on the positive measures that federal institutions are required to take. It wants to see the wording changed from measures that are considered “appropriate” to “necessary” positive measures. I think this is an important change to clarify the obligation. We must also make sure that we clarify the ways in which official language minority communities will be consulted as part of the process for identifying positive measures. It is vital that we take these consultations into account, because they will provide crucial insights.
Lastly, I will play close attention to the criteria used to define the notion of regions with a strong francophone presence. Geographical realities vary across the country, so we need a clear, precise, meaningful definition. These essential changes are what will ensure this legislation is in line with what our communities need and is geared toward them.
The NDP has always stood with francophone communities calling for guarantees and certainty. We will continue to support them because we firmly believe that everyone has the right to live life to the fullest in French.
In conclusion, I would like to remind members that official languages are everyone's business. They are crucial to our society and social cohesion. We will fight for concrete results for francophones in Quebec and those in the rest of Canada.
At the Standing Committee on Official Languages, I will continue to champion and advocate for official language minority community rights. The NDP will continue to defend the Canadian linguistic duality we are proud of.
We still have a lot of work to do to make sure French is protected across Canada. Time to roll up our sleeves.
2133 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
I will continue, Mr. Speaker.
Can we count on my colleague's collaboration to strengthen the bill in committee, in particular with the creation of a central agency responsible for implementing language policies and clauses to protect the rights of francophones in minority communities and ensure that francophone immigration targets are met to help slow the population decline in francophone communities?
61 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier. I hope to work with him at the Standing Committee on Official Languages to improve Bill C-13.
We have heard extensively about problems with francophone immigration and the fact that the government's failure to meet the targets is contributing to the decline of the French language and the demographic weight of francophones. These targets were set in 2003, and they have never been met, because the Liberal and Conservative governments did not make it a priority.
Does my colleague agree that these clear principles should be enshrined in law so that future governments work harder to allow francophones to catch up demographically?
118 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
