:
Good afternoon, everyone.
[English]
I call this meeting to order.
Welcome to meeting number 37 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages.
[Translation]
Pursuant to Standing Order 108(3)(f), the committee is meeting on the study of the Federal Support for French-language or Bilingual Post-secondary Institutions in a Minority Situation.
Members and witnesses may speak in the official language of their choice. Interpretation services are available for this meeting.
A reminder that all comments by members and witnesses should be addressed through the Chair. Should any technical challenges arise, please advise the Chair or the clerk.
[English]
I would like to remind all participants and attendees that you cannot take photos or screen captures.
[Translation]
I would now like to welcome our witnesses for this study.
In the first hour, we have Stéphanie Chouinard, Associate Professor in the Department of Political Science of the Royal Military College of Canada and in the Department of Political Studies at Queen's University, who is appearing as an individual.
Frédéric Lacroix, essayist, will also appear as an individual.
From Laurentian University, we have Robert Haché, President and Vice-Chancellor, who is accompanied by Marie-Josée Berger, Provost and Vice-President, Academic.
The witnesses have five minutes for their opening statements. As you know, Ms. Chouinard, I will be using cards to let you know that you have one minute left or that your speaking time is up.
Ms. Chouinard, the floor is yours for the next five minutes.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thanks to the committee for having me, and greetings to Vice-Chairs Blaney and Beaulieu.
Thank you for inviting us to discuss access to postsecondary education in one's language, which is of the utmost importance for the vitality of the official language minority communities and especially for the Canadian francophonie.
In 1982, recognizing the fundamental role that schools played in the continued sustainability of the minority communities, the Canadian government saw fit to add to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms a right of access for stakeholders to education in the official language of one's choice, from kindergarten to grade 12x, or secondary 5 in Quebec. In 2021, it is now obvious that our society has changed and that those rights are now inadequate to meet the needs of our communities.
In particular, the qualifications expected in the labour market have changed over the past 40 years, and employers now expect their employees to have a higher level of education than previously. Workers now need higher-level diplomas and degrees in order to stay in the middle class. Consequently, more Canadians now attend postsecondary institutions than at the time the Charter was adopted.
In 1981, 37% of the Canadian population 15 years of age and over had a postsecondary diploma or degree. Today the figure has nearly doubled to 65%. As a result of this trend, which shows no sign of abating, minority language communities are now asking their respective provinces to create or, in certain instances, to protect postsecondary institutions where instruction is given in their language.
In other words, the needs of the official language minority communities now exceed the scope of section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That is also true of early childhood, which I will also be discussing with you today, as well as postsecondary education. To use the sociological terminology, the objective of communities today is to achieve institutional completeness in education, which would quarantee the members of those communities a complete education in their language regardless of the path they may choose to enter the labour market.
What happens when postsecondary education is not available close to home? By "close to home", I mean a distance of approximately 80 kilometers from the family home. A few studies conducted by the now-defunct Office of the French Language Services Commissioner of Ontario suggest some potential answers to this question. On the one hand, we see increasing numbers of minority school students gradually leaving their education system for majority schools starting in grade 8 x. The reason for that is simple: those students feel a need to succeed in English in the next phase of their education and therefore opt for instruction in that language to avoid losing out. The lack of access to postsecondary education in the minority language in a given region thus has an impact on the education system.
This decision also has a significant impact on community vitality because early adulthood is the time in life when an individual's identity becomes established. Young people who leave their community institutions during this phase will identify less closely with their community once they become adults. Individuals who pursue their secondary studies in the majority language are more likely to work in that language and to find themselves forming exogamous families, which, as we know, are major contributors to intergenerational language transfer. In short, we have long known that education is the lifeline of our communities.
That being said, our definition of education must now extend beyond what the Constitution prescribes as a response to the needs of our communities. However, postsecondary institutions are so fragile precisely because they are not protected by the Constitution, as we have very clearly seen in recent years. This may be due to inadequate investment over many years, as was the case with the Campus Saint-Jean and, less dramatically, the Université de Moncton and Université Sainte-Anne, or to the fact that French-language programs have been cut in order to save institutions, as was the case at Laurentian University.
Postsecondary education in the Canadian francophonie is currently in crisis, and the collapse of an institution such as Laurentian University clearly reveals the weakness of bilingual institutions, which strive to think and act in the minority community's interest. We realized years ago, in the case of primary and secondary schools, that the minority almost always suffers the consequences of the bilingual education model. It's time for us to take an independent approach— which we have previously established, practised and refined—from kindergarten to grade 12x. There's no doubt in my mind that the federal government has a role to play in this regard, one that it was already performing in part.
We must make sure that targeted, structural investment by the federal government isn't offset by a shirking of responsibility by the provinces. That's the central issue for us today.
I will stop there.
Thank you very much.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon. I'm very pleased to be following Ms. Chouinard because I make extensive use of the concept of institutional completeness in my analysis.
I have written a book entitled, Pourquoi la loi 101 est un échec, published by Boréal, in which I analyze the situation of anglophone and francophone public and parapublic institutional networks in Quebec.
I use the concept of institutional completeness to conduct that analysis. I think the concept is a very important prism through which to analyze fairness in the funding of anglophone and francophone minority institutions, and even majority institutions, thus in Quebec as well.
This concept of institutional completeness originated in the work of Fransaskois Canadian sociologist Raymond Breton in an article he published in 1964. Mr. Breton showed that the level of institutional completeness— that is, the range of institutions available to an ethnic or linguistic group—had a direct impact on that group's ability to sustain itself in its location over time, in other words, on its linguistic vitality.
In Quebec, as is the case everywhere else in Canada, two official language groups inhabit the same territory and each has its own institutional network. The group with the more extensive and stronger institutional network will attract members of the weaker group to its network. As a result, the weaker group will suffer from its institutional incompleteness.
This concept was used in court for the first time in the Montfort Hospital case in Ontario. Ms. Chouinard conducted a survey on the legal use of the notion. I included it in my brief and therefore won't go back over it.
In my book, I apply this notion to Quebec francophones, who are considered a majority group under the Official Languages Act.
In my view, the main problem with the Official Languages Act is the artificial double-majority concept. The act establishes that there is an anglophone majority outside Quebec and a francophone majority in Quebec. Each majority is associated with its own minority, francophone outside Quebec and anglophone inside.
However, the double-majority concept has no sociological basis. This becomes clear when we consider the fact that Quebec anglophones assimilate half the allophone immigrants who settle in Quebec. Quebec anglophones form only 8% of the population, based on mother tongue, but assimilate approximately 50% of immigrants.
In reality, Quebec anglophones have the linguistic vitality of a majority, even in Quebec. In actual fact, the Official Languages Act confirms a competitive and unequal bilingualism between English and French across Canada, including Quebec. Francophones' relative weight has declined sharply in Quebec since 2001, whereas that of anglophones has remained stable or even increased.
The linguistic dynamic in Canada is not governed by provincial boundaries but rather by the country's borders. This means there is only one genuine majority in Canada, and it is anglophone. Canada is an anglophone-majority country. In my view, the double-majority concept, which forms the basis of the Official Languages Act, is false and misleading. The act should be based on the recognition that there is only one real majority in Canada. It should be asymmetrical.
I have applied this idea to funding for universities in Quebec and calculated that the three English-language universities there—McGill, Concordia and Bishop's—receive 30% of total university revenue in Quebec.
I remind you that anglophones form 8% of the population. That means that the funding English-language universities in Quebec receive is 3.7 times greater than the demographic weight of the province's anglophone community. These universities thus constitute an institutional "overcompleteness".
On the other hand, French-language universities in Quebec are underfunded relative to francophones' demographic weight because they receive 70% of funding, whereas francophones form 78% of the population in Quebec. This underfunding of francophone institutions weighs directly on the linguistic vitality of the francophone group in Quebec.
It is interesting to note that federal research funding is largely channeled to the three English-language universities in Quebec, which receive 38.4% of federal funding allocated to Quebec. McGill University alone receives one third of federal funding to the province.
I see my time is up. The rest of my remarks are set out in my brief.
Thank you.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, everyone. It is a pleasure to be speaking to you today from Laurentian University, which is located in Sudbury, in northeastern Ontario, on the land governed by the Robinson-Huron Treaty of 1850 and the traditional lands of the Atikameksheng Anishnawbek and Wahnapitae first nations.
Allow me to begin by thanking you for this invitation to appear before your committee. Thanks as well for the important work you are doing here and in your communities to honour the francophone communities' experience in minority communities across Canada. Having lived and worked in both official languages in various regions of Canada, I have witnessed firsthand the impact that the federal government and this committee have had for decades on the protection of linguistic minorities and the promotion of bilingualism in Canada.
Laurentian University is the largest bilingual university in northeastern Ontario and the only institution in Canada with a highly cultural mandate. It offers a university experience in English and French as well as a comprehensive approach to indigenous education.
Our university has been serving francophone students across northern Ontario, a fertile ground rich in Franco-Ontarian history, for more than 60 years. It has been the incubator of the Franco-Ontarian renaissance and a place where many of French-speaking Ontario's most important symbols and institutions have been conceived and celebrated. It is also acknowledged as the first bilingual university in Ontario, governed by the French Language Services Act.
We are determined to secure Laurentian's future as a university where French-language programs and teaching are appreciated and its bilingual character celebrated. We will remain committed to the next generation of young francophone leaders in the arts, social sciences, business, research and design, public administration, education and community development.
[English]
Earlier this year, Laurentian University faced an impossible choice: close the university's doors or set down the path of the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act to ensure the university's survival. We recognized that this would be difficult and that our community would be impacted.
The CCA process is allowing us to restructure our academic and operational affairs in a way that will be financially viable for the university's long-term future. It is difficult. It is still painful for our community. We've had to say goodbye to talented and committed faculty, staff and researchers, many of whom worked right up to the end of the semester to help our students succeed.
Laurentian has revised its academic program offerings to focus on student interest, academic strengths and desirable outcomes for the students. Laurentian continues to offer 28 consolidated undergraduate programs and five graduate programs in French, which have strong enrolments, meeting the needs of our students. In all, given the focus on maintaining in-demand programming, fewer than 10% of all students enrolled in French-language programs are being directly affected by these changes.
These offerings keep us among the most comprehensive institutions with respect to our balance of French- and English-language programs. Furthermore, our francophone students continue to have a variety of French-language courses to choose from in their programs.
Lastly, I want to underscore that enrolment in our French-language programs has been increasing over time. This matters greatly. Contrary to the general trend in northern Ontario's declining population base, strong French-language program enrolment is a sign that Laurentian's francophone students and their communities remain engaged in what Laurentian has to offer.
We look forward to serving francophone communities in the north and across Ontario, Canada and beyond for many years to come.
[Translation]
Thank you. Meegwetch.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I have a question for Mr. Haché, but first I would like to make two comments.
First, I would like to thank the witnesses for being here.
We welcome you with open arms for this study and for the one on the decline of French across the country.
Ms. Chouinard, my first comment is directed to you. Thank you for making us aware of the increasing role universities play in society and thus with regard to language for both Quebec and the minorities.
Mr. Lacroix, you are a prolific author. For example, you have written that Ottawa is highly unlikely to use its weight to support French across the country; that it should take a political tack because French is the only official language that declines from one census to the next; and that substantive equality between English and French, not mere legal equality, should obviously have entailed the adoption of asymmetrical linguistic norms.
You have referred to this in discussing studies on postsecondary education. Ultimately, as Ms. Chouinard said, the minority has suffered for the sake of the majority. I'm sure you'd like to comment, but I'm going to put my question to Mr. Haché.
Mr. Haché, you are at the centre of the study we've undertaken as a result of your university's situation. We regret the general situation, and I would clearly like to say to you, "What a waste!" What a waste it is for a university to find itself in this situation. We are all attached to our university system and to our bilingual institutions.
Before you, we heard from other witnesses, notably from the Franco-Ontarian community, and it seems the relationship of trust with your university is now broken. The francophone community no longer believes you can be the driver of francophone vitality in northern Ontario.
You said some good things today, but, in actual fact, you've abandoned the three satellite universities with which you had cooperation agreements. I understand that what you're going through isn't easy, but the question I want to put to you is very simple.
Are you prepared to transfer the French-language programs that Laurentian University offers to an organization such as the University of Sudbury, an educational institution that would be solely by and for northern Ontario francophones?
:
Thank you for that question.
Laurentian's financial position has been deteriorating for many years. Many problems have arisen along the way, including in the relationship with the three federated universities, to the point where our financial situation was no longer sustainable. We had reached a dead end and substantial changes had to be made so we could continue pursuing the university's mandate.
In the review we conducted, we focused on the most popular programs, where enrolment was high, and we're moving forward in that frame of mind.
I should point out that the programs that were terminated were mainly ones that had only two or three students a year. From both financial and academic standpoints, it's unsustainable to have such low enrolment in certain programs, despite the efforts we've made over years to attract students.
In spite of it all, as I previously said, the francophone student population at Laurentian University has risen in recent years. As a result, the programs that will continue are programs that are of interest to students and that we will continue to support.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
My questions are for Mr. Haché, but I also have a brief question for Ms. Chouinard after that.
Mr. Haché, the cuts to French-language programming have stripped Laurentian University of its soul. You say you have a plan, and I'd like to hear it.
Before starting in on official languages and programs, I'd like to clarify some points. We've clearly spoken together over the past year. On a few occasions, we've discussed the Alphonse-Raymond amphitheater, where the Department of Canadian Heritage wanted to fund renovations.
Is that true?
On the one hand, Laurentian approached the province and asked that the federal government and Minister Joly's office intervene on official languages. The university approached the provincial government and began those discussions.
Mr. Haché, during another committee meeting last week, you said you had also discussed Laurentian's finances with the provincial government. You'd been having important discussions with that government for some time.
I have to ask you a very simple question, the answer to which will enlighten some members who appear not to understand government jurisdictions.
What level of government is responsible for postsecondary education? Is it municipal, provincial or federal?
Federal funding to Quebec represents a substantial fraction of university budgets. We're talking about some $900 million a year, which is a lot of money. The federal government invests in English-language universities to a disproportionate degree.
The federal government also provides funding through the Canada-Québec Agreement for Minority-Language Education and Second-Language Instruction to anglicize programs offered at French-language educational institutions. That money is therefore used, for example, to establish English-language programs at francophone CEGEPs and universities. So it seems to me the original mission of that funding has been changed in order to anglicize French-language universities and educational institutions.
The federal government has also invested heavily in Quebec's health system in order to anglicize services provided. Between 2008 and 2013, $32 million was granted to McGill University to establish a program to train health workers to provide health services in English in defiance of the Charter of the French Language, which theoretically guarantees the right to work in French in Quebec.
I also took a look at bilingual and francophone universities outside Quebec through the prism of institutional completeness. I found that, in Ontario, for example, approximately 3% of the revenues of French-language and bilingual universities came from French-language programs, whereas, based on mother tongue, francophones constitute 4.7% of the population of Ontario. French-language educational institutions are thus chronically underfunded in that province.
That's also the case in Alberta, where French-language educational institutions are 80% underfunded.
As we establish profiles for all the provinces, we realize that all French-language educational institutions in Canada are underfunded, including those in Quebec.
In so saying, I don't mean the federal government is responsible for this situation, but rather that, through its investments in research and certain agreements such as the Québec Agreement for Minority-Language Education and Second-Language Instruction, it invests a great deal of money that doesn't support French-language educational institutions.
I think that funding invested to support the vitality of English could simply be withdrawn and invested in French-language educational institutions outside Quebec. The $50 million paid annually to support the vitality of English in Quebec could be invested in educational institutions outside Quebec because English has no need of it in Quebec. If you're looking for money, that's where you'll find it. Here's at least $50 million that you could get your hands on in short order.
Thanks to Mr. Haché for his participation.
It's very important for francophone and indigenous communities, as well as people from northern Ontario, to understand the causes of the financial crisis at Laurentian University.
[English]
Mr. Haché, the last time we spoke, we talked about the decision that led up to the university's plunging into bankruptcy protection, which my colleague, Mr. Lefebvre, has said cut out the heart and soul of Laurentian. You said there were a number of meetings between the provincial and federal governments in the lead-up to that.
In your meetings with the federal government, did you ask for financial help or support to avoid having to go into bankruptcy?
I would like to thank the witnesses for their participation.
My first question is for Mr. Haché. I want to review the timeline. From what I understand, my colleagues from the government party in your region did a good job of representing you to the office of the Minister of Official Languages, Mélanie Joly, last December. A notice of intent was issued in February, and Laurentian University was visibly preparing for major cuts. I had a chance to meet with groups that were making submissions to allow us to intervene. In April, the hammer dropped and a number of French-language programs were unfortunately cut.
Before her testimony on Tuesday, the minister simply announced publicly that the sum of $5 million would be provided to assist Laurentian, once again implying that it wasn't the federal government's responsibility to assist postsecondary institutions.
Mr. Haché, I have to tell you I find it unfortunate that we're playing politics here. Paragraph 2(b) of the Official Languages Act provides that the purpose of the act is to
2(b) support the development of English and French linguistic minority communities and generally advance the equality of status and use of the English and French languages within Canadian society;
As can see, there was an ongoing operational problem between December and the moment when submissions were made by members of the present government. The minister came and told us that she had not been aware of the situation and that she would have intervened if she had been.
For my part, if I were to see that Laurentian University, or any other postsecondary institution, was running headlong into a wall, and if I wanted to protect both official languages in the minority communities, I would take action instead of hiding behind the division of federal and provincial powers. That's the minister's responsibility.
Mr. Haché, can you tell me how you interpret the actions of the Minister of Official Languages in the Laurentian University file?
[English]
I have to confess that I was deeply disturbed when I heard the news about Laurentian University's cuts. My colleague Paul Lefebvre and I were aware of budgetary concerns. However, they were far beyond what we had imagined, and we certainly did not see this going through the CCA process. It was tough and it hit the heart of Greater Sudbury.
Like many of you, we reacted emotionally. Laurentian is such an important post-secondary institution; it's much more than just bricks and mortar. Laurentian is a community of people who contribute to economic development and to cultural, economic and educational wealth. It's a really hard sense of loss and tragedy for the faculty and students who are pursuing their passions.
[Translation]
Mr. Haché, you mentioned that there was no department for postsecondary education in Ottawa. All proposals have to go through Queen's Park. Based on your experience, can you confirm that the federal government can't grant operating funding to you directly without going through the province?
:
Thank you for that question, which is an important one.
All the programs we cut had very few long-term students. There had been two or three students per year in each of those programs over the previous 5 or 10 years. It was very difficult to support those programs even with the additional grants. In addition, classes with only two or three participants don't provide the best environment for students.
Laurentian didn't single out the programs that had to be terminated; it was the students who did so by showing a lack of interest in them year after year. We obviously retained the programs in which students were interested and that enjoyed high enrolment. This situation will also be an opportunity for us to establish new programs that are popular with students.
Lastly, it's important to draw a distinction between programs and courses. From a linguistic standpoint, in theatre and arts, for example, we will continue to offer a good range of courses. These are simply four-year programs that will no longer be offered at our university. However, we will continue offering exhaustive study programs in English and French. I should note on that point that we made cuts on both the English and French sides. There was no preference. The decisions we made were similar in both cases.
:
Thank you, Mr. Boulerice. That's all the time we have.
Now we must thank the witnesses for taking part in this study on federal support for French-language or bilingual postsecondary institutions in a minority situation.
Stéphanie Chouinard, you are an assistant professor in the Department of political science at the Royal Military College of Canada and in the Department of Political Studies at Queen's University. Thank you.
Frédéric Lacroix, essayist, thank you.
We also thank, from Laurentian University, Robert Haché, president and vice-chancellor, and Marie-Josée Berger, provost and vice-president, academic.
Once again, thank you.
Colleagues, we will take a brief pause to see off the witnesses who are here. Then we will welcome more witnesses for the next hour.
I suspend for a few minutes.
:
Good evening, we will resume.
For the benefit of the witnesses who just joined us, I will repeat a few simple guidelines.
First, I would like to inform you that screenshots or taking photos of your screen is not permitted. Like members, witnesses may speak in the official language of their choice because interpretation services are available. Lastly, I would ask you to direct your questions to the Chair. Thank you.
For the second part, we have Denis Constantineau, from the Northern Ontario Coalition for a French-language University, and Pierre Riopel, Chairman of the Council of Regents of the University of Sudbury.
Mr. Constantineau, you will be first to take the floor. You will have five minutes to make your opening statement, and I will inform you when you have one minute left or when your time is up.
We will then move on to Mr. Riopel.
Mr. Constantineau, please activate your mic and begin your statement.
On behalf of the Northern Ontario Coalition for a French-language University, I'd like to thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak to you about the disastrous situation in which university education in French in Sudbury finds itself at the moment, further to unilateral decisions made by the supposedly bilingual Laurentian University, about the repercussions of its decisions, and the solution looming on the horizon.
The coalition has rallied institutions, individuals and organizations active in a variety of sectors in greater Sudbury and northern Ontario. It was established through PlanifSudbury, a francophone issue table, in response to the current events at Laurentian.
In February, as you have already heard, Laurentian invoked the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act on grounds that it was facing unprecedented financial challenges. This announcement sent a shock wave through our community.
As we feared, on April 12,Laurentian announced that it was eliminating 28 French-language programs, accounting for 40% of the 69 programs that were axed. By doing so, Laurentian failed to meet its commitments to the francophone community and lost its confidence. This measure put an end to dynamic programs that played a role in creating the contemporary Franco-Ontarian identity.
Laurentian University history professor Gaétan Gervais, together with Michel Dupuis and Jacqueline England, created our Franco-Ontarian flag, which was raised for the first time on the University of Sudbury campus in 1975.
Programs in French studies, francophone literature and culture, and theatre, also disappeared. They educated generations of young adults who pursued careers in the arts, education and cultural facilitation. The Théâtre du Nouvel-Ontario, the Éditions Prise de parole publishing company, and the CANO-Musique cooperative were born there. They were the pioneers of what we now recognize as the key components of our community and of French-speaking Ontario as a whole.
By eliminating these programs, Laurentian University is depriving the community of its future leaders. By dismissing all the professors working in these 28 programs, it has stripped the francophone community of the sources of knowledge and research essential to its development.
It is also forcing many young francophones and francophiles to pursue their university studies elsewhere in Ontario, with all of the additional expenses this requires. It intensifies the regional exodus of young people to major cities, a problem all too common already in communities across the country.
These events illustrate the limitations of bilingual educational institutions. As federal transfer payments for official language minorities are never accompanied by an accountability framework, it's not surprising to hear that French money is being used to clear our snow-covered sidewalks.
Recruitment and promotion for French-language programs are not always a priority for bilingual institutions. Laurentian has been slacking off in this regard for several years. Despite all the efforts, resources made available to those in charge of these tasks were laughable. That's why francophones in our region have been demanding the creation of a French-only university for 50 years.
It was in the wake of these events that the University of Sudbury announced on March 11 that it wanted to become a university designed by, for and with francophones. It turned over its two available charters to the francophone and indigenous communities so that they could establish their own institutions. Our coalition is working to achieve this objective and has formulated the recommendations that follow.
First of all, we suggest that all French-language programs at Laurentian,that were not eliminated, be transferred fully and immediately to the University of Sudbury.
We would also like federal transfer payments for official-language minorities that were formerly paid to Laurentian to be immediately transferred to the University of Sudbury so that it can begin planning its curriculum.
In addition, the Ontario government needs to intervene and make sure that Laurentian's 2021-2022 programs go ahead and that it should suspend the announced cuts, so that it can obtain the funding required to keep its creditors at bay, and facilitate the transfer of the programs in question.
We further recommend that a provincial implementation board be given a mandate to establish a structure for the delivery of French-language university education in the North, to determine its programming and to design the working and learning environment for such an institution. This board could study the needs and involve future students in its work as part of the process of developing its programming. The board could submit a transition plan between the interim programs available and the opening of a French-language university for the North.
Lastly, we would like recognition for the importance of the indigenous studies programs offered for over 40 years at the University of Sudbury, and for steps to be taken to support indigenous communities to help them become sustainable.
Let's be clear, we do not want Laurentian to disappear. Our community needs this institution. However, we want a university that is entirely designed by, for and with francophones to stand proudly besideLaurentian.
Thank you. I'd be glad to answer your questions.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to thank the members of the committee for having me, and for their interest in French-language postsecondary education in Mid-Northern Ontario.
I had a discussion with my colleague Denis Constantineau to prepare for this meeting and fully agree with what he said today.
My name is Pierre Riopel and I am Franco-Ontarian. I'm the Chairman of the Council of Regents at the University of Sudbury. My 30-year career in education has been as a school- and college-level administrator. One of my former colleagues is with us today.
I have the soul of a teacher, and would ask you to allow the history teacher I once was to give you a short history of the University of Sudbury, an institution that is dear to me.
In this history, there are four important dates.
The first is 1913. That's when the Jesuits founded Collège du Sacré-Cœur in Sudbury, a French-language classical college. This was against the background of Regulation 17, which prohibited education in French in Ontario.
Collège du Sacré-Cœur became Université de Sudbury in 1957. Everything was in French—administration and teaching.
In 1960, Laurentian University, A bilingual institution, opened its doors. That's when the Laurentian Federation was established, with the University of Sudbury as a member.
This model operated successfully for 60 years. However, we have all just witnessed the withdrawal of Laurentian University from the francophone side of things, but never more so that in the process unwinding publicly before the Superior Court of Ontario under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, the CCAA.
The final date is 2021. Under creditor protection, Laurentian University offhandedly and abruptly disbanded the Federation and massively cut back its programs to eliminate all kinds of services and jobs.
Rector Haché made some revealing admissions when he was cross-examined on April 23 as part of the CCAA process. The Laurentian University application under the CCAA is approximately 1,500 pages long in four volumes. No mention is made of the French Language Services Act. Rector Haché expressed no concern about Laurentian University's inability to continue to provide existing services in French. None! However, Laurentian University has since 2014 been designated under this program, which requires it to rigorously maintain specific French-language faculties and programs.
Moreover, by severing federative links between Laurentian and the University of Sudbury, the latter lost its ability to fulfil its obligations under its designation in the French Language Services Act. None of this appears in the legal documents presented by Rector Haché to the court.
Overnight, the University of Sudbury lost its right to teach students of the Laurentian Federation. Before Laurentian submitted its application under the CCAA, on February 1, there had been no consultation with the francophone community. Likewise, there was no consultation prior to the announcement by Laurentian University on April 12 of significant cuts to its French-language programs. The cuts are the outcome of financial calculations without regard to the repercussions of these decisions on students, teaching staff, employees and the entire communityx.
In light of these events, the University of Sudbury is currently focusing all its efforts on creating a new future. We have hired some legal consultants, including constitutional expert Mr. Ronald Caza; we adopted two resolutions on March 11, one of which is to transform the University of Sudbury into a French-language university. We also struck two special committees, one francophone and another for indigenous communities, and have established a francophone working group to develop a business plan with the assistance of PGF Consultantsx.
As my colleague Mr. Constantineau mentioned, we have received a great deal of community support. We also received a petition signed by more than 400 francophone professors from across Canada and around the world. A campaign was also set in motion by the Assemblée de la francophonie de l'Ontario, the AF0, which led to Rector Haché and the chair of the board of governors receiving 3,000 letters of support from individuals.
The time has come to realize this French-language university project, given that a university like this has been wanted, imagined and desired by several generations of Franco-Ontarians. The time has come to create our French-language university in Sudbury, by, for, and with the Franco-Ontarian community. It will be a historic occasion.
Thank you very much for your attention. I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Historically, Franco-Ontarians were in favour from the beginning. What we are requesting is the immediate repatriation of everything being done in French at Laurentian University.
There are three months remaining before the September term begins. Time is short. We know that we are being very ambitious, but such things have previously been dealt with at the high school and college levels. There are solutions.
There is certainly, through the province, support for the project. We were very pleased with Minister Joly's announcement about the $5 million, because we were in the middle of talking about management and governance by, for, and with francophones.
Good afternoon, Mr. Constantineau and Mr. Riopel. Thank you for attending.
It's important for us to know what's going on in our community.
In his opening address, Mr. Constantineau mentioned that Laurentian University was the cradle of Franco-Ontarian identity. That's why it's heart-rending for us to see what happened. I had mentioned it at the very outset to Mr. Haché. By eliminating these programs, they took away the University's soul. It no longer looks like us and no longer draws us together, which is worrisome.
It's important to determine what we have to do to ensure that students and the francophone community have a place that looks like them and where they can get together.
Your coalition project with the University of Sudbury is very interesting, as I told you. It needs to be studied very closely.
Mr. Riopel, on the matter of transferring programs from Laurentian University to the University of Sudbury, you mentioned that it all began with discussions you held with representatives of the provincial government and that this was the key.
Could you give us a brief update on these discussions?
We held discussions with our friends at Hearst. To locate it geographically, I can tell you that Hearst is a six-hour drive north of Sudbury. So it's a hike. We also held discussions with our friends at the Université de l'Ontario français, who are in Toronto, so about a five-hour drive south. All three are open-minded, of course.
In postsecondary education at the moment, it's in the nature of the beast to have networks and articulation agreements, and for our students to be able to take courses at other institutions, and to use technology, as we are doing right now.
I am happy to tell people that a network would be great and I don't see a problem there, but that what I want first is a university. We can create a network afterwards. Our intent on this subject is clear.
I'd like to thank our two guests, whose presentations were very interesting.
According to an article published on the Radio-Canada website, a number of representatives of bilingual universities, including the University of Ottawa and Laurentian University, met secretly with a view to having the Université de l'Ontario français project cancelled on grounds that bilingual universities could provide an alternative solution.
What do the two witnesses think about that? There appears to be rather fierce competition from the bilingual universities, and there are not many universities by and for francophones. I'd like to hear what you have to say on this.
Mr. Constantineau could answer first, followed by Mr. Riopel.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to thank Mr. Constantineau and Mr. Riopel for being with us today.
Right off the bat, I'd say that I'm totally onside with your initiative and your plans for a university by and for francophones in mid-northern Ontario.
As Mr. Blaney said earlier, if the committee can come up with a positive and constructive contribution on the subject, I would of course like to be involved.
I'd like to hear your opinion about the mechanism which, it would appear, requires provincial-federal participation. Do you feel that this would give a provincial government that is less favourable towards the rights of francophones and services in French the right to veto certain initiatives?
Don't you think this might be a mechanism we should review one day?
:
As someone who is not a legal expert, I find it a little difficult to answer this question. I believe that it's a matter of jurisdiction. I think that it's an additional barrier that needs to be overcome, particularly in the postsecondary field.
As for governance, I do not administer budgets on a daily basis. At the previous meeting, I listened closely when people talked about the concept of accountability. I believe that's extremely important. I experienced it in schools, for example, at a time when anglophones were in the majority on school boards.
As Mr. Constantineau mentioned a few moments ago, we used to get French money. All of a sudden, the French money was disappearing and we didn't know where.
We were told that money was being spent on French-language schools, which was not necessarily always true. We know it, and it's a fact. Let's just say it complicates things for us.
:
Thank you very much for your testimony, Mr. Riopel and Mr. Constantineau.
My mother is Franco-Ontarian. She is a native of northern Ontario, more specifically Opasatika, which is not far from Kapuskasing. I'm therefore quite interested in your specific situation, and the circumstances for francophones everywhere in Canada.
This situation is somewhat confused. Mr. Haché said that the number of Francophone students is stable and is even increasing. However, we can see that many programs have been cut. Can you explain that to us? Were there also significant cuts made to English-language programs, or was it mainly for the francophone programs at the university?
My question is for Mr. Riopel.
:
Thank you. That's all the time we have for this meeting.
I'd like to thank the witnesses for having agreed to take part. In passing, I'd like to congratulate our analyst and our clerk for having brought you together this afternoon. You already know one another well.
I would now like to thank Mr. Denis Constantineau, of the Northern Ontario Coalition for a French-language University, and Mr. Pierre Riopel, the Chaiman of the Council of Regents at the University of Sudbury.
Thank you.
I would also like to thank the technicians and the entire team who were with us this afternoon.
On that note, I will adjourn the meeting.
The meeting is adjourned.