This site will be a venue of exchange, interaction and discussion. Thus, we encourage the sharing of different viewpoints and arguments, without however a private exchange solely between two individuals. Please be aware of the conditions of use before participating in this blog.
François Boileau
French Language Services Commissioner
Notwithstanding the criticisms that can be levelled at the government, I believe it is important to recognize that the Minister’s 10 years of public commitment to serving Ontario’s Francophonie deserve to be acknowledged.
In an interview on Radio-Canada last week (to listen, just set your cursor to 16:39), I said the number of Francophones in the Durham area warranted designating that area under the French Language Services Act. With 12,000 Francophones in the area, we would think the numbers were sufficient. Officially, however, according to the criteria applied by the Office of Francophone Affairs, that is not the case. Allow me to explain.
I had an opportunity to examine how areas are designated and how the criteria used for this have changed in my Annual Report 2011-2012 Straight Forward. I would nonetheless like to make a few additional explanatory comments.
In the course of its work nearly a half-century ago, the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism adopted an idea borrowed from Finland: that language rights be considered on a geographic basis. The Swedish minority in Finland had enjoyed language rights since the 1920s if it represented 10% of the total population of a given area. It should be noted that there have been further developments in the linguistic situation in Finland since 2004 and the Swedish minority, which represents about 5.5% of the population, is now in an even better position in terms of language rights. To learn more about Finland, I invite you to read the excellent report prepared by the Official Languages and Bilingualism Institute of the University of Ottawa.
In addition, Parliament has not adopted the idea of bilingual districts, where services might have been obtained in both languages at both the federal and the provincial and municipal levels. It has opted for a paradigm in which rights attach to persons rather than applying on a geographic basis, although that statement must be qualified to some extent (that not being the purpose of my remarks today, however).
In 1968, the Robarts government in Ontario endorsed the principle adopted by the B&B Commission by declaring that all ministries would be encouraged to offer bilingual services in offices located in areas where the numbers of Francophones warranted, based on analyses of the federal census. About 13 counties, districts and municipalities in Ontario were identified where the Francophone population represented at least 10% of the total population. Over the years, and in particular in 1978, the government added more counties, districts and municipalities. And then in 1986 came the French Language Services Act in which the municipalities and areas designated under the Act are set out in the Schedule.
Although there are no criteria stated in the French Language Services Act and no regulations to that effect, the government of the day has retained the 10% of total population criterion. It has also added the criterion of 5,000 or more Francophones in urban areas. The government has also been generous enough to retain all of the areas designated before the Act was passed in 1986, which is a very good thing in view of the not always positive fluctuation in the number of Francophones in some areas over the years.
However, the government has also indicated that it is open to going beyond those criteria, as demonstrated when the Kingston area was formally designated in 2006 by order in council. Kingston thus became the 25th area designated under the Act. Today, a very large majority of Francophones living in Ontario reside in a designated area.
To come back to the situation in Durham, we first need to note that the Office of Francophone Affairs naturally relies on Statistics Canada’s definitions in matters of census geography, for determining what an urban area (now called a population centre) is, for example. Using those definitions, there may be a large Francophone population in the Durham region in absolute numbers, but unfortunately it does not even come close to the 10% needed. In the regional municipality of Durham, only the cities of Ajax, Oshawa and Whitby are recognized as population centres. Here again, even applying the IDF, there are fewer than 10,000 Francophones when those three cities are combined, while the criteria require that there be more than 5,000 Francophones in each of those places (which is not the case). These data may be obtained by contacting the Office of Francophone Affairs.
That said, many other areas no longer have sufficient numbers under the criteria applied by the Government of Ontario. From time to time, I even get questions about whether it would be possible to withdraw designated status from regions that no longer have the requisite numbers under the criteria. First, I am fortunately not the one who has to answer these questions; that is the Minister Responsible for Francophone Affairs. Second, withdrawing a region’s designation status would certainly be contrary to the spirit of the French Language Services Act, a statute that is, I would recall, quasi-constitutional legislation that takes precedence over all other enactments of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. The purpose of the Act is twofold, as the Ontario Court of Appeal held in Lalonde (Montfort): to protect the Francophone minority in Ontario and also to advance French and promote its equality of status with English in Ontario society.
As well, applying those principles, the government went beyond the quantitative criteria to ensure that the Kingston area would be designated. The government does not want to create controversy and seeks unanimity among members of the legislature, and I entirely understand this. At the same time, however, we have to move forward. After all, Francophones in the regional municipality of Durham do not have access to government services in French in their area, unlike Francophones living in other regions that are designated and for which the absolute figures are sometimes lower than in the Durham area.
I may have to consider this question further in the years to come.
Likewise, single dependent Francophone students who are attending full-time studies in French and must travel more than 80km from their family home to get to their institution are eligible for the Travel Grant even if there is a closer institution.
In both cases, students do not have to fill out a separate application form for this grant, because their eligibility is based on the information supplied on their OSAP Application for Full Time Students (see questions 195 and 196 of the application form). Students must therefore use the 2013-2014 OSAP Application for Full-Time Students. Students must self-identify as a Francophone student through the OSAP application and confirm that they are enrolled in a French language program.
The Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities added this important information on the webpages of the Commuting Grant and the Travel Grant. We must click “All the details” to view them.
I want to point out that Travel Grants are awarded to dependent students (less than 4 years out of high school) who leave home and move closer to their postsecondary institution to take a full-time program. The value of the grant is $300 per academic year.
As to Commuting Grants, they are awarded to dependent students who live at home with their parents while attending school but have to travel more than 80 km to get to the closest postsecondary institution. The value of the grant is $500 per term, up to a maximum of $1,500 per academic year.
This investigation report contains an in-depth analysis of the issues arising from the elimination of the Fellowships for Studying in French program. It is based on the responses that the Ministry provided to my office, statistics concerning access to French-language postsecondary education programs in Ontario, and observations by associations and stakeholders.
In short, the government went against the principle of the active offer of service in French by eliminating the Fellowships for Studying in French program without first providing other specific measures to bring Francophones and Francophiles closer to genuine equal opportunity. I am nonetheless delighted that the government rectified the situation by broadening the eligibility criteria for the Travel Grant and the Commuting Grant to include Francophones and Francophiles. Nevertheless, I believe that this measure is not sufficient to make up for the inequality between the availability of French-language college and university programs and the availability of English-language programs, especially in Central-Southwestern Ontario.
Yesterday I had the opportunity to attend the kick-off of the 30th anniversary celebrations of the ACFO de London-Sarnia. I sincerely congratulate all those who, over the years, have made a personal commitment to serving their community, either as a volunteer or as a staff member. Also worthy of note is the 10th anniversary of the newspaper L’Action, which was established at the time of the ACFO’s 20th anniversary celebrations.
As noted by Denis Longpré, a volunteer who has been involved in the community for many years, the ACFO has certainly had its ups and downs, having experienced financial difficulties and sometimes a shortage of volunteers to carry on. Yet there is hope, I believe. Primarily because of the diversity of all the small organizations that form the broad fabric of the region’s Francophone community. These groups – the Centre communautaire régional de London, the Congolese community and the Burundian community, to name only a few – bring that freshness which comes from other parts of the world and further enriches the Francophone space.
Of course, it requires mutual understanding, open-mindedness and an affirmative desire on the part of the Francophone community not just to exist but also to take its legitimate place while playing an active role in the development of a better society in Southwestern Ontario. Hope also springs from that rapprochement with Anglophone partners which is so essential, which helps improve the delivery of French-language services to people who are often in vulnerable or precarious situations. An excellent example of this is Vanier Children’s Services, a centre for children up to the age of 14, which has actively offered fully bilingual intake services, crisis counselling, consultation and family therapy services for years. I definitely noticed that rapprochement on September 18, when I took part in the French-language services exhibition put on by the Table de concertation francophone de London and the Centre communautaire régional de London. This community vitality is promising and, yes, full of hope.
Aside from the genuine pleasure I got from giving a speech (peppered with anecdotes) on the 400 years of Francophone presence in Ontario, I am honoured to have been invited to the celebrations. I will be happy to go back there – and anywhere else in Ontario – whenever I am asked. Incidentally, one of the few places in the province that I have not yet visited as Commissioner is Sarnia. I would love to go there one of these days!
In the meantime, my next stop is Québec, where I will attend the annual forum of Lawyers Without Borders Canada, whose theme is “Changing society through the law”, and I will give a speech on collective language rights litigation in Canada and its impact on Francophone minorities. Stay tuned!
I just posted a news release with my reactions following the introduction of bill 106 on the independence of the French Language Services Commissioner yesterday at the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. If this bill is passed, the resulting amendments to the French Language Services Act will make the French Language Services Commissioner an officer of the Legislature.
In my opinion, there could not have been better Francophone affairs news than the introduction of this bill on Franco-Ontarian Day. Why? Well, I have already gone over the reasons why it is so important that the position of Commissioner reports to the Legislature both on my blog and at section 2.1 of my 2012-2013 Annual Report. Let me go over them quickly once again:
Please do not hesitate to refer to these sections once again to get a better picture of the situation.
I am grateful to the Minister Responsible for Francophone Affairs and the Francophone Affairs Critics for their contribution and support which were instrumental on carrying the bill quickly through the first and second readings. I hope, of course, that this support continues in the Standing Committee on the Legislative Assembly and through the third reading. Stay tunned!
