Bouchard-Taylor Commission - The linguistic analysis is misleading
Unofficial translation of Commission Bouchard-Taylor - L'analyse linguistique est trompeuse by Charles Castonguay in Le Devoir, December 4, 2007
By Charles Castonguay,
retired professor of Mathematics, University of Ottawa
The uncertain integration of immigrants to the francophone majority is evaded
One sometimes too quickly point the finger at those who are concerned with francization of immigrants. Messrs Gérard Bouchard and Charles Taylor chose to widen the path: in the consultation document that they proposed us, they mention the persistent feeling of brittleness which feel a founding people, anxious for the conservation of their heritage, and which continues to nourish a certain concern for their future. They ask themselves -- and ask us -- to what extent this fear for the collective cohesion of the Quebec society and the cultural and linguistic survival of the French-speaking majority is founded.
The commissaries were right to raise this question. If the linguistic assimilation of the allophones followed the demographic weight of French and English in Quebec, the future of its French-speaking majority would be assured. For each allophone who would make of English his/her new language of use at home, nine would choose French. And the majority would welcome immigration with confidence and eagerness.
However, the power of attraction of French is not there. It is perhaps the principal reason of the unrest at the origin of this commission. Alas! as soon as the question is asked, the commissaries dodge the problem which raised by the uncertain integration of the immigrants to the French-speaking majority. They present, on the contrary, a portrait of francization which to me appears as jovialist as other assessments drawned up since 1995.
A well-founded concern?
Their document of consultation does not contain any data attesting the cogency of the current concern regarding the insufficient integration of the new immigrants as part of the French-speaking majority. This problem is dealt with as if it existed only in the collective imaginary of the majority, which it would suffice to just cure. They devote but one paragraph to the analysis of francization, where they limit themselves to showing reassuring statistics on the knowledge of French. The commissaries then insist "on the fact that important francization indicators are on the rise and that the Quebec francophony shows great vitality".
For the analysis of such a fundamental question, it is quite thin, if not misleading. What are these important indicator on the rise? No study of the Office nor of the Conseil de la langue française reveals any recent progression of French as a language of work. Rather, the 2001 census shows us that, among newcomers, the allophones who work in English in Quebec are as numerous as those who work in French. And that on the island of Montreal, similar equality between English and French applies to the whole of the working allophone population.
No study shows any significant rise of the share of French in the choice of a new language of use at home among the allophones who arrived in Quebec since 1976. In fact, since 1978, the selection of a part of the immigrants according to a preliminary knowledge of French proves to be the principal factor having played to the advantage of French. Because at least half of the linguistic assimilation observed among the new allophones was achieved before their arrival in Quebec.
If one takes into consideration this factor with others, one is led to conclude that with regard to the cases of adoption of a new language of use at home which took place on Quebec territory, there were many more case of anglicisation than of francization since 1971. Approximately, 75 000 cases of anglicisation in Quebec between 1971 and 2001, against 30 000 cases of francization.
Nothing reassuring
The main determinants of the future of French in Quebec, which are the linguistic behaviors at work and at home, are therefore hardly reassuring. By comparison, the census statistics on the knowledge of the languages to which the commissaries refer provide a less reliable indication of the linguistic future. To know French does not mean that one uses it as a main language.
Besides, we very well know that the majority of our anglophone and allophones fellow-citizens know French now. Bill 101 ensures a good command of French to the immigrants who arrive in Quebec at the school or pre-school age. A considerable number of adult immigrants also have a command of French as of their arrival. Quebec precisely selected for this reason.
However, the learning of French among those who are unaware of this language at their arrival still constitutes a problem. According to a recent study by Statistics Canada, four years after their arrival, two thirds of them still do not know French very well. The censuses offer equivalent information to us. Half of the adult immigrants who arrive in Montreal without knowing French never learn it well enough to sustain a conversation. It is unacceptable, but the document of the commissaries does not say anything of it.
Their document shows other similar weaknesses. In its chapter on the demographic profile of Quebec, it states that the Quebecers whose ethnic origin is other than French or British represented more than 22% of the population in 1991. However the percentage for this census year was actually 15%. The document adds that the current proportion would be 25%. This is delirious. If that were true, the majority of the population of the island of Montreal would have been of an origin other than French or British a long time ago.
Weak comparison
Cette inflation de la population d'origine autre est aussitôt accompagnée de propos rassurants sur la stabilité de la proportion de Québécois de langue maternelle française. Pour le démontrer, le document compare le poids de la population francophone au recensement de 1986 à celui de 2001. Statistique Canada a pourtant averti que les changements majeurs apportés au questionnaire en 1991 rendent fort complexe la tâche de comparer les données de 1991 sur la langue maternelle à celles de 1986. Autrement dit, mieux vaut ne comparer que les données de 1991 et 2001, recueillies à l'aide d'un questionnaire à peu près inchangé. On constate alors que le poids des francophones au Québec a chuté de près d'un point de pourcentage au cours de ces dix dernières années.
L'analyse de la situation linguistique que nous présentent les commissaires laisse ainsi nettement à désirer. Leur façon de traiter la question paraît viser avant tout à passer le message qu'il n'y a pas lieu pour la majorité francophone de s'inquiéter, quelle que soit la rapidité de croissance de la population d'origine autre. Les commissaires semblent avoir leur idée faite là-dessus. Ce serait dommage. Car sans un constat objectif et adéquat de la situation linguistique qui prévaut actuellement au Québec, la commission risque fort de rater son but.
C'est la faiblesse du document de consultation en cette matière qui m'a poussé dès le début des audiences publiques à suggérer aux commissaires de divulguer, au fur et à mesure qu'ils les reçoivent, les études qu'ils ont commandées à des experts pour nourrir leur réflexion, notamment celles portant sur le profil démographique du Québec et sur les indicateurs d'intégration collective. Leurs concitoyens auraient alors pu en profiter aussi ou, le cas échéant, relever les inexactitudes qui pourraient s'y trouver. Les commissaires ont préféré garder ces études secrètes jusqu'au moment de déposer leur rapport final. Cela demeure regrettable. [...]