March 27, 1974

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

BILINGUALISM

LIB

James Hugh Faulkner (Secretary of State of Canada)

Liberal

Hon. James Hugh Faulkner (Secretary of State):

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce that arrangements have been completed with provincial ministers of education for renewal of the federal-provincial program on bilingualism in education. Under this program, the federal government will provide funds to assist the provinces with the supplementary costs of providing minority language education and second language instruction for a five-year period, starting April 1, 1974.

You may recall a letter dated January 13 to members of parliament in which I mentioned how impressed and encouraged I was following a series of meetings last fall with ministers of education during which I discussed renewal of this program. In that letter I also mentioned the renewed determination of French-speaking minorities outside Quebec to preserve their language and culture and of a related desire on the part of many English-speaking Canadians to establish bonds of co-operation and understanding between the two language communities of this country.

Since 1970, the federal government has financially assisted the provinces to maintain and improve the educational facilities available in the minority official language, and to improve the teaching of the second official language in the educational systems of Canada.

The objectives of the program, as agreed to by the federal and provincial governments, are twofold; to ensure that, insofar as it is feasible, Canadians of either official language have the opportunity to educate their children in their own language, and that Canadian students have the opportunity to learn, as a second language, the other official language of Canada.

It was gratifying to note that the Commissioner of Official Languages shares my optimism over our progress toward these objectives. In his report tabled on March 21, the commissioner speaks of some important trends, including a desire among English-speaking parents to extend and improve the teaching of French.

The commissioner has also spoken of the commendable leadership demonstrated by the federal government and

sees it as playing the role of an increasingly effective catalyst in the field of language programs. The commissioner stated his conviction that the contributions made by the Department of the Secretary of State constitute a program deserving renewal and expansion.

As under the existing program, the bulk of federal financial support after April 1, 1974, will take the form of payments made to the provinces based on the number of students enrolled in second language programs and the time spent on these activities. In addition, a federal contribution of 1.5 per cent of the annual per student cost will be paid to the provincial governments for administrative purposes and will be based on the total number of school children in each province belonging to the minority language group.

The importance of supporting innovative and experimental measures in minority language education and second language instruction continues to be recognized by the federal and provincial governments and the new agreement makes provision for continuing shared-cost projects designed to meet such needs at any level of the educational system.

I expect federal funding to continue at much the same annual level as at present for most elements of the program. Cost of the over-all program during the past four years has averaged some $70 million annually.

As I mentioned in my letter to members of parliament in January, I feel that the real answer to recognizing the bilingual reality of Canada is through the school system. If bilingualism is to work, the base must be established within our schools.

I am extremely gratified by the level of co-operation I have encountered in discussions with the provinces about the renewal of this program and I look forward to continuing collaboration for the forthcoming five-year period.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   BILINGUALISM
Sub-subtopic:   EDUCATION-ANNOUNCEMENT OF RENEWAL OF FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL PROGRAM
Permalink
PC

William Heward Grafftey

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Heward Grafftey (Brome-Missisquoi):

Mr. Speaker, we on this side of the House welcome most assuredly the minister's announcement. This is a program which in our view merits the support of each and every member of parliament in this House of Commons.

It has always been my view that our educational system as such has a primary role to play in emphasizing the positive benefits of bilingualism, and this the minister certainly emphasized in his announcement.

We on this side of the House have displayed concern and are still concerned that moneys voted by Ottawa to the provinces for second language instruction are not in fact used in all cases for this purpose. Nothing the minister has said in the past or today has assured us that this situation has been entirely rectified. Of course, if second languages are to be properly taught, we need more good teachers and

March 27, 1974

Bilingualism in Education

professors and better teaching methods. At the present time there is a serious lack in this regard.

Mr. Speaker, as an English-speaking Quebecer, I can state that my language rights have always been protected and respected. I am sure that this will continue to be the case. For instance, as an English-speaking Quebecer, I have always been able to communicate with the federal government in my mother tongue. Unfortunately, in the past and even recently, the same situation has not always existed for French-speaking people throughout Canada, even if there has surely been some progress.

The minister's announcement should be greeted with a high degree of what I would call bipartisan spirit. Journalists and other individuals often ask me about our party's stand on bilingualism. Under the leadership of our leader we recognize, and we have said this time and time again, the positive benefits of the bilingual and multicultural nature of Canada. It has always been my view, and I have said this in both official languages, that when individuals or politicians play with the question of bilingualism or language rights for what they feel to be short-term advantage or political gain they in fact hurt this institution and Canada as a whole.

To reiterate, and I have spoken to many members on both sides of the House in this regard, there should be no specific Liberal, NDP, Social Credit or Progressive Conservative position on bilingualism. There should only be one united House of Commons bipartisan position. In this spirit of bipartisanship, I welcome the minister's announcement.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   BILINGUALISM
Sub-subtopic:   EDUCATION-ANNOUNCEMENT OF RENEWAL OF FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL PROGRAM
Permalink
?

Mr. Mark Hose@Fraser Valley West

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Anyone listening to my pronunciation of those words will be convinced that I suffer as one of the victims of the lack of a bilingual program in our country in earlier years. My party and I have traditionally supported the bilingual program. We welcome the minister's announcement along with his courtesy, extended to the spokesmen for the various parties, in making certain that his statement was available at least an hour and a half before the House opened. Having said that, I have to ask myself: what was his hurry? I can see nothing in the new program that is not really in fact a continuation of the existing program, and he implies in the statement that funds appropriated some three or four years ago for that program have not been used.

The old program supported minority language instruction and second language instruction. What we cannot ascertain from the minister's statement is what proportion, within the broad parameters of the program, is assigned to each. It seems to me that phrases such as "the bulk" and vague language of that kind do not help parliamentarians or the spokesman for any party very much in judging whether this program is designed as a tokenistic approach or whether the government is serious in its stated objective of attempting to increase the degree of bilingualism and the number of people capable of biling-

[Mr. Grafftey.l

ual communication in Canada. We really do not know how much is allocated for each program in each province.

We are concerned as well about the contribution of 1.5 per cent of the annual per pupil cost to each provincial government for administration. In British Columbia this amount may be relatively minor because of the approach of the former government of the province. I am happy to report there is a new approach now, but the former provincial government either did not take advantage of the program or, if it did, the money was used to finance the status quo across the province and very seldom if ever passed on to the school districts.

Last year the Commissioner of Official Languages called second language instruction in Canada a national disaster. I notice that in his new report he has backed off somewhat from that statement. Perhaps he has been speaking to affluent English-speaking Canadians at cocktail parties, because I think there exists among the affluent and better educated Canadians a keen desire that second language instruction and bilingualism be enhanced. This is not true. What is actually happening in our country is that bilingualism and second language instruction are not increasing at all. In spite of the government's programs and policies the bilingual program is actually on the decline. With your indulgence, Mr. Speaker, I should like to cite briefly a few figures.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   BILINGUALISM
Sub-subtopic:   EDUCATION-ANNOUNCEMENT OF RENEWAL OF FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL PROGRAM
Permalink
NONE

Lucien Lamoureux (Speaker of the House of Commons)

No affiliation

Mr. Speaker:

Order, please. The hon. member will appreciate that at this point I should perhaps interrupt him just for a moment. I realize he has not completed his statement, but I think I have to remind the hon. member for Fraser Valley West and all hon. members that under the Standing Order comments should be brief. I have said before and I repeat that it is difficult for the Chair to determine the extent of brevity. I would think the guideline should be the length of the original statement by the minister, and when the statement takes five minutes and the comments ten minutes perhaps the hon. member who makes the longer statement is not respecting the spirit of the Standing Order. I mention this for the guidance of the hon. member and all hon. members who offer comments within the terms of the Standing Order.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   BILINGUALISM
Sub-subtopic:   EDUCATION-ANNOUNCEMENT OF RENEWAL OF FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL PROGRAM
Permalink
NDP

Mark Willson Rose

New Democratic Party

Mr. Rose:

Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for your advice and will be guided by your suggestion. I did not realize I had exceeded or was likely to exceed the time taken by the minister in making his statement. It seemed to me that he spoke for a lengthy period. I will skip the documentation of my argument that second language training is on the decline.

I suggest that a much larger program in the schools would accomplish our bilingual objectives much more expeditiously than the kind of programs that are embarked upon at the adult level. In my view it is much better to spend the available language instructions funds on school children than on 50 year old members of parliament, civil servants and about to be retired brigadiers.

I should like to observe in closing that universities across Canada by and large no longer require a second language. What we are doing about bilingualism through the program the minister has just announced today is a

March 27, 1974

mere drop in the bucket compared with the $500 million we are spending on post-secondary education. I should like to ask the minister, parenthetically and rhetorically, what he intends to do and how he is going to use his influence to increase second language instruction in universities. It does not necessarily have to be French, but I suggest it is the mark of an educated person to be able to converse in more than one language and I think that we in North America are unique in the world in being limited in our ability to communicate in a language other than our mother tongue.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   BILINGUALISM
Sub-subtopic:   EDUCATION-ANNOUNCEMENT OF RENEWAL OF FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL PROGRAM
Permalink
SC

René Matte

Social Credit

Mr. Rene Matte (Champlain):

Mr. Speaker, I am not as

satisfied as the hon. minister, and I should like to make a few comments to prove it to the House.

We have often heard fine statements about the intentions of the government, and I think this is mostly what this is, since we would have to know exactly how these programs will be applied for the simple reason that we agree with the suggested assistance for the teaching of a second language. However, as concerns the teaching of the language of the minority, Quebec has had experience in this field with Bill 63, which was introduced with the best of intentions and allowed everyone to choose the teaching language he preferred. This experience was a catastrophe and all Quebecers now want to have this bill amended.

We are faced with a somewhat similar situation. Mr. Speaker, when it is a matter of teaching the language of the minority, we must distinguish between the French-and English-speaking groups. I find the reason in the first page of the minister's statement where he says that he sent a letter to his colleagues in which:

... I mentioned also the renewed determination of the French-speaking minorities outside Quebec to preserve their language and culture and I spoke of a related desire on the part of many English-speaking Canadians to establish bonds of co-operation and understanding between the two language ...

Mr. Speaker, there is the difference. For one group, the French-speaking minority, it is a matter of survival while for the other group it is a matter of understanding. Now, considering that distinction, the special assistance granted to the English-speaking minority in Quebec is unjustified. There is in Quebec an important English-speaking minority which as a result of historic circumstances or others, is richer and has better structures than French-speaking Quebecers. Therefore, helping this linguistic minority would only serve to worsen even more an already quite disastrous situation.

Mr. Speaker, there is a way to solve this problem. The money would be used wisely if it helped create in the province of Quebec an education system where, at the elementary level, French only were taught in French schools. English-speaking Canadians would benefit from that. I am sure, as the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi (Mr. Grafftey) himself indicated, that if he had had the opportunity to attend a French school at the elementary level up to Grade 7, and then move on to an English school at the secondary level, he would be a lot more fluent in the language spoken by Moliere and could represent more effectively the 80 per cent of his constituents who speak French.

Veterans Land Act

These are facts, Mr. Speaker, and they certainly deserve being emphasized. We agree with the assistance given to the teaching of the other language, but as far as the minority in Quebec is concerned, we must discriminate, for there is no linguistic problem for the Englishspeaking population in Canada. There is only one such problem in Canada, and it is the one with which Frenchspeaking Canadians are faced and which affects the French-speaking minorities in all Canadian provinces, except Quebec. Mr. Speaker, I felt it was necessary for me to make these remarks, and I hope these programs will be directed along these lines.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   BILINGUALISM
Sub-subtopic:   EDUCATION-ANNOUNCEMENT OF RENEWAL OF FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL PROGRAM
Permalink

AGRICULTURE

PC

Donald Frank Mazankowski (Progressive Conservative Party Caucus Chair)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Don Mazankowski (Vegreville):

Mr. Speaker, under the provisions of Standing Order 43 I rise to move a motion of urgent and pressing necessity arising out of the chaotic condition that prevails in the beef industry, aggravated by the government's subsidy program which has caused panic selling, the accumulation of large numbers of unsold cattle at yards, markets and feedlots, together with a serious depression of prices to the extent that the subsidy of 7 cents per pound has now been nullified. Reports today indicate that a number of major markets have suspended their operations in Alberta. I therefore move, seconded by the hon. member for Pembina (Mr. Hollands):

That the deadlines of April 13 and April 6 on A3 and A4 grades of beef, respectively, be removed and that eligibility for subsidy on these grades be extended until the market returns to orderly and profitable levels.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   AGRICULTURE
Sub-subtopic:   SUBSIDY TO BEEF PRODUCERS-REQUEST FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO MOVE MOTION
Permalink
NONE

Lucien Lamoureux (Speaker of the House of Commons)

No affiliation

Mr. Speaker:

The House has heard the motion of the hon. member. Pursuant to the provisions of Standing Order 43, this motion requires the unanimous consent of the House. Is there unanimous consent?

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   AGRICULTURE
Sub-subtopic:   SUBSIDY TO BEEF PRODUCERS-REQUEST FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO MOVE MOTION
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Yes.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   AGRICULTURE
Sub-subtopic:   SUBSIDY TO BEEF PRODUCERS-REQUEST FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO MOVE MOTION
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

No.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   AGRICULTURE
Sub-subtopic:   SUBSIDY TO BEEF PRODUCERS-REQUEST FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO MOVE MOTION
Permalink
NONE

Lucien Lamoureux (Speaker of the House of Commons)

No affiliation

Mr. Speaker:

There is not unanimous consent; therefore the motion cannot be put.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   AGRICULTURE
Sub-subtopic:   SUBSIDY TO BEEF PRODUCERS-REQUEST FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO MOVE MOTION
Permalink
NDP

Stanley Howard Knowles (N.D.P. House Leader)

New Democratic Party

Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. On page vi of the notice paper attached to today's order paper there appears an indication of the introduction of a bill entitled "An Act to Amend the Veterans Land Act." According to the notice paper it is to be introduced by the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Sharp). Mr. Speaker, there are a number of instances of ministers intruding into portfolios other than their own, but I hope that in this case this bill can be presented to the House by the distinguished Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. MacDonald).

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   AGRICULTURE
Sub-subtopic:   SUBSIDY TO BEEF PRODUCERS-REQUEST FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO MOVE MOTION
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear!

902

March 27, 1974

Railway Car Shortage

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   AGRICULTURE
Sub-subtopic:   SUBSIDY TO BEEF PRODUCERS-REQUEST FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO MOVE MOTION
Permalink
NONE

Lucien Lamoureux (Speaker of the House of Commons)

No affiliation

Mr. Speaker:

The point raised by the hon. member is well taken. Although the notice was signed by the Secretary of State for External Affairs, possibly in his capacity as Acting Prime Minister, it was a faulty entry, and the bill will appear in tomorrow's order paper as being sponsored by the honourable and gallant Minister of Veterans Affairs.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   AGRICULTURE
Sub-subtopic:   SUBSIDY TO BEEF PRODUCERS-REQUEST FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO MOVE MOTION
Permalink

FISHERIES

PC

Jack Marshall

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Jack Marshall (Humber-St. George's-St. Barbe):

Mr. Speaker, I wish to move a motion under the terms of Standing Order 43 on a matter of urgency. Representation by concerned western Newfoundland fishermen, supported by the provincial government, urges protection for inshore fishermen against gill-net operators on the west coast of Newfoundland who tend to destroy our marine resources. Since the situation can reach emergency proportions I move, seconded by the hon. member for St. John's East (Mr. McGrath):

That this House urges an immediate investigation by the Minister of Fisheries and that the matter be immediately referred to the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Forestry.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   FISHERIES
Sub-subtopic:   PROTECTION OF NEWFOUNDLAND INSHORE FISHERMEN AGAINST GILL-NET OPERATIONS-REQUEST FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO MOVE MOTION
Permalink
NONE

Lucien Lamoureux (Speaker of the House of Commons)

No affiliation

Mr. Speaker:

The House has heard the motion of the hon. member. Pursuant to the provisions of Standing Order 43, this motion requires the unanimous consent of the House. Is there unanimous consent?

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   FISHERIES
Sub-subtopic:   PROTECTION OF NEWFOUNDLAND INSHORE FISHERMEN AGAINST GILL-NET OPERATIONS-REQUEST FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO MOVE MOTION
Permalink

March 27, 1974