Ottawa, September 27, 2007
The Fleuve francophone:
Embracing the Strength of Canada’s French-Speaking Communities
Speech delivered on the occasion of the Symposium,
Produire et reproduire la francophonie en la nommant
Graham Fraser – Commissioner of Official Languages
Check against delivery
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a great honour for me to welcome you to this symposium entitled Produire et reproduire la francophonie en la nommant. I find this theme intriguing—it provokes rigorous and constructive thinking about Canada’s French-speaking community. And, being aware of the sharp minds of those gathered here today, I have no doubt that very pertinent ideas will emerge from this symposium.
In my mind, our country’s Francophone community conjures up visions of a river whose source goes back to Canada's origins. I'm sure you will agree that this long river have not always been calm. For a long time, French-speaking people were absent from the corridors of political and economic power. But they have certainly covered ground over the past 40 years! So much so that our Francophone community—a kind of Fleuve francophone—has forged new and more extensive passageways, etching crucial channels into the Canadian landscape.
I find this period of recent Francophone history in Canada especially fascinating, particularly since its outcome remains unknown—Francophone and Acadian communities have yet to compose this page of our history.
Legacy of the Estates‑General
I would like to begin by noting the anniversary of an event that—though its legacy is misunderstood—marked the history of Canada’s French-speaking population. It will be 40 years ago this November that more than one thousand Francophones from across the country gathered for the Estates-General of French Canada. Their goal was to discuss the future of the Francophone community, particularly the place of Quebec within Canada.1 Many would agree that this event marked if not a split between Quebec and the rest of the country’s French-speaking community, then at least a strong divergence of opinion. The French Canadians of yesterday set the stage for a growing affirmation not only of Quebec but also of Francophone communities outside Quebec.
It was at that time that the Francophone community divided, as Quebecers moved towards an assertion of nationhood, a process that Francophones from elsewhere in the country could only follow as spectators. Yet, the history of Canada's French-speaking people has shown us on several occasions that there is more than meets the eye.
On the one hand, at the dawn of the Quiet Revolution, political acts to claim more power were on the rise in Quebec. The province’s growing identity and political arena had a profound impact across the country. Quebec's Anglophones, the English-speaking majorities in other provinces and territories, and French‑speaking minorities were forced to redefine and re-identify themselves. The interdependence of groups in Canadian society resulted in changes in all respects.
On the other hand, the findings of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism paved the way for French‑speaking communities outside Quebec to seek greater rights and respect. The Commission called it a major political and constitutional crisis at the time and made several recommendations to establish equal recognition of both English and French as official languages.
Thus, redefining the identity of French‑speaking communities was initially based on exclusion; the term “outside Quebec” pretty well says it all. It calls to mind the title of a book, which speaks volumes: Hors du Québec, point de salut?2 Yet, little by little, this division gave way to an awakening among French‑speaking communities that weren't afraid of a fight and knew how to use victories to their advantage. The first Official Languages Act established the legitimacy of Francophone demands. In theory, this was a move from tolerance towards an acceptance of French. In practice, however, this acceptance was slow in having an impact, as the scope of the first Act was rather limited. The Fédération des communautés francophones hors Québec, founded in 1975, issued a clear message of dissatisfaction. Its first report, Les héritiers de Lord Durham, sounded the alarm.
There was a general feeling that the federal government wasn't doing enough. French-speaking communities felt the need to organize and build institutions to represent them and establish their identity. The older Acadian community preserved its regional identity. However, in the 1970s, the Acadian region was shifting and the community asserted both its uniqueness and attachment to Francophone communities.
I don't want to give an entire history of the Francophone community: we must simply remember that Canada’s French-speaking community has expanded and confined. A number of sociologists, including Joseph Yvon Thériault, have studied the “provincialization of identities,”3 which gave rise to several French‑speaking communities.
The Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
From its inception, the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages had to learn to ride the tumultuous rising tide of Canada’s French-speaking community. The first Commissioner, Keith Spicer, was struck by the deep rift between Quebec nationalism and the Francophone movements in other provinces. He felt that the indifference of both Canadian Anglophones and Quebec Francophones relegated French Canadians to the status of “wondering Canadians”—strangers in their own country. He was pleased to see Canada’s French-speaking communities take advantage of the federal government's support to begin their cultural and political renaissance.4
It was well established that the mission of the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages would be to protect and promote both of Canada's official languages and the minority status of French in Canada would lead it to place greater focus on overseeing that language and culture.
The early days of the Office reflected the first Official Languages Act, which focused on federal institutions. At the time, French-speaking Canadians viewed the federal government as a centre of assimilation. So my predecessors set out to apply language reform within the federal government, which slowly became integrated into public service practices. They also developed tools to better assess needs, deficiencies and successes. There are still flaws in the application of the Act in federal institutions today, but the culture and structures are now oriented towards a constant improvement in bilingualism.
Major language debates have taken place in the streets, in newspapers, within the public service, and before the courts. The Commissioner’s Office has not hesitated to exercise its role as a judicial body to advance language rights, as it did in the case of the Association des gens de l’air. French-speaking communities are protected thanks to the adoption and application of the Act and the inherent rights specified therein.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms of 1982, the new Official Languages Act of 1988 and amendments to the Act in 2005 are tools that have enabled us to enhance our support of the Francophone community. In addition, legal clarifications have compelled governments to assume responsibility, especially with respect to education, and have brought us closer to our ultimate goal: the full recognition of a rich Francophone reality throughout Canadian society.
During this time, more and more studies and other efforts pertaining to the French-speaking community were undertaken by the Commissioner’s Office and by others across Canada. Consequently, a deeper understanding of French Canada broadened the scope of advocacy groups, researchers and the Office of the Commissioner. At the end of the 1970s, the Fédération des communautés francophones hors Québec spoke of the “overall development of communities.” It took more than 10 years for this concept to be incorporated into the Official Languages Act and another seven years before the concept would be legally binding.
Last year, we published a study on the vitality of official language minority communities. Researchers like you helped us analyze recent data on the subject. We know that the vitality of the Francophone community is directly related to the strength of various community components. Education is a major area, but we must also invest in arts and culture, health care and immigration. Each community has a role to play in global development and our Office is here to support communities when needed. The knowledge that you generate is of enormous help.
The French-speaking community shook up Canadian society as it strived to define itself and its needs. It had to learn to recognize, create, recreate and identify itself. To do so, at times it was compelled to exclude. Saying who we are is also saying who we are not. But the time for exclusion has passed. Canada’s French-speaking community is on firm ground. It has established its boundaries and diversified its sources. Above all, it continues to flourish, more exuberant and vast than ever.
There is no doubt: the Francophone community still has its work cut out for it if it wants to continue actively contributing to the country’s vitality. While the French-speaking community has become more and more visible, its demographic presence has declined. Furthermore, a lack of political and social leadership in the area of linguistic duality has sometimes resulted in an erosion of Francophone acquisitions. Solid foundations have been laid in the past 40 years. Now that the builders have been identified and recognized, now that the specific characteristics relating to each group have been brought to light, now that a solid legislative framework supports them, Francophones have entered an era of rapprochement and inclusion.
Rapprochement
I arrived at the Office of the Commissioner at the right time—dialogue, respect and inclusion are values that I firmly uphold. The Office has always fostered an inclusive vision of the Francophone community. My predecessors supported and launched numerous initiatives fostering national dialogue. Here are a few examples of their accomplishments:
- Keith Spicer, convinced that language learning at a young age is ideal, was instrumental in founding Canadian Parents for French;
- Max Yalden organized symposiums that brought together key actors from various circles;
- D’Iberville Fortier breathed new life into Office communications by instituting more initiatives and meetings to reach a larger audience;
- As Commissioner, Victor Goldbloom continued be a strong advocate for a better dialogue between Canada’s linguistic and religious communities; and
- Dyane Adam and her team conducted a study on immigration and the enhanced vitality of communities in 2002, and they contributed to the discussion that led to the amendment of part VII of the Act.
By the same spirit, I will pursue that national dialogue to help broaden the Francophone presence in this country.
This dialogue must build lasting relationships, which is not always an easy thing to do. I believe that my experience in journalism and my passion as new Commissioner will be put to good use in this endeavour!
How can we most effectively ally the various identities: Franco‑Ontarian, Acadian, French‑speaking Quebecer, Aboriginal, Franco-Manitoban, immigrant, Francophile, and others?
Numerous initiatives have been undertaken in recent years in all parts of the country. All of the community organizations have established action plans that target increased cooperation among Francophone groups. Several groups have broadened their definitions of the Francophone community, making it more inclusive. Various research bodies, such as the Research Chair in Education and Francophone Identities, the Centre on Governance and the Unit of Educational Research: A School for All—which invited us today—have also been instrumental in giving us bridge‑building tools for social groups.
The Quebec government’s announcement in November 2006 regarding the adoption of its new policy on the Canadian Francophone community was welcomed with enthusiasm by the Office and by proponents of a strong and united Francophone community. The creation of the Centre de la francophonie des Amériques brings hope for the permanence of French in Canada and North America.
Inclusion
It is admirable that Francophones are providing themselves with the means to better communicate and live together. It is also admirable that they have opened their doors to those who take an interest in their language. I cannot ignore the increasing number of Francophiles who, like me, wish to dive into a language, a culture – into the Fleuve francophone.
I caught the French bug in Quebec while working on an archaeology project one summer. I share this experience because it illustrates how contagious the French language can be. I believe that we need a variety of opportunities for dialogue to reach a greater proportion of the population. Toronto's Festival international du cinéma de langue française, for example, gives the French-speaking community visibility. It introduces its clientele—Anglophones for the most part—to a vibrant and creative Francophone community. Of course, this is not enough. The role played by institutions such as the University of Ottawa is key to making French a Canadian language—a language that belongs to each and every citizen of the country.
French immersion has been one of the most successful educational experiments in the history of Canada. It has been hailed as the most popular language-learning program ever recorded in the field of language instruction.5 There are currently 300,000 immersion students in Canada, of whom 115,000 are in Ontario. Immersion programs not only make it possible to learn French, but also raise interest in living in a French-speaking milieu. This increasing interest among youth is an opportunity for Francophones. For example, I was fascinated to learn that 63% of the student population at Campus Saint-Jean come from immersion and this proportion is at 28% for the Collège Universitaire de St-Boniface. It is my belief that we should work harder to build bridges among youth and strengthen existing ones to keep the dialogue alive.
I also believe that the inclusion of immigrants and Aboriginal people, particularly in French‑speaking and Acadian minority communities, can provide the Canadian Francophone community with added political strength. We all stand to gain from discovering the wealth of values and traditions that these people offer. Funds allocated for the recruitment and integration of immigrants under the Action Plan for Official Languages has initiated a respectful and genuine dialogue among people of various ethnic origins. Openness on the part of community members also helped create a welcoming atmosphere. However, it is essential that another phase succeed the Action Plan so the initiatives currently underway become well established.
Conclusion
In closing, I would like to take advantage of your presence—researchers, students and members of the Francophone community—to ask for your support. As I mentioned earlier, ensuring the continued presence of an extensive and inclusive French-speaking community has its challenges. New problems arise, and we need to consider them. Some are worried that the Francophone community will lose its distinctive characteristics if it is too open. They see openness to other communities as a threat to their culture. Immersion is also cause for concern. Immersion programs appeal to many French‑speaking youth, to the detriment of French schools and the French‑speaking community associated with them.
The place of the Francophone community in Canada, on the North American continent and in the world must be based on all of the identities it represents. In recent decades, attitudes have changed, and support for linguistic duality is stronger. In 2006, 72% of Canadians were in favour of bilingualism, a 16% increase since 2003. However, this support does not always translate into concrete action. For example, parents acknowledge the right to education in the minority language, yet they hesitate to register their children in immersion. There is a lack of leadership with respect to linguistic duality—in politics and in the public service. We must encourage national and international dialogue that acknowledges the added value of linguistic duality in Canada.
I am committed to continuing my support for our country’s Fleuve francophone in all its diversity. Despite the extraordinary progress made, we still have our work cut out for us just to keep the momentum. This symposium is a unique opportunity to report on and share invaluable knowledge to build the Francophone community of tomorrow.
Thank you for your attention, and for this invitation.
1 “Les États généraux du Canada français, trente ans après”, text compiled by Marcel Martel, with Robert Choquette, Ottawa, Centre for Research on French‑Canadian Culture, 1998, p. 5.
2 Sheila McLeod Arnopoulos, Hors du Québec, point de salut?, (Montreal: Libre expression, 1982).
3 Joseph Yvon Thériault, “Entre la nation et l'ethnie. Sociologie, société et communautés minoritaires francophones
”, Sociologie et sociétés, Presses universitaires de Montréal, Montreal, Vol. 26, No. 1, Printemps 1994: pp. 15–32.
4 Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages, Annual Report, 1976, p. 8.
5 Sally Rehorick and Viviane Edwards (dir.), “French Immersion: Process, Product & Perspectives,” The Canadian Modern Language Review (Welland, 1992).
