Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Social Affairs, Science and Technology
Issue 17 - Evidence - February 8, 2007
OTTAWA, Thursday, February 8, 2007
The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology met this day at 10:45 a.m. to examine the future of literacy programs in Canada, the consolidation of federal funding and the role of literacy organizations in promoting education and employment skills in Canada.
Senator Art Eggleton (Chairman) in the chair.
[English]
The Chairman: I call to order this meeting of the Social Affairs, Science and Technology Committee. Good morning.
[Translation]
Welcome to the second meeting on literacy of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology. Today, we will be hearing three national literacy groups, as well as four people relating their personal experiences.
The first group is the Fédération canadienne pour l'alphabétisation en français, a country-wide organization. Founded in 1991, the federation represents French-speaking groups and associations involved in French-language literacy in Canada.
The federation helps member groups maintain and provide access to literacy services. It informs Canadians and governments to make promotion, research and prevention projects accessible.
[English]
We will then hear from the National Adult Literacy Database, a service that provides complete full-text documents and books as well as a resource catalogue; designs and hosts websites for literacy organizations; researches and organizes educational material found elsewhere on the Web; connects partners with experts in the field; and publicizes literacy-related activities and events.
Finally, we will hear from the Movement for Canadian Literacy, MCL, a national non-profit organization representing literacy coalitions, organizations and individuals from every province and territory. Since 1978, MCL has worked to inform the federal government and the general public about issues related to adult literacy in Canada, has provided a national forum for provincial and territorial literacy organizations to work together to ensure that every Canadian has access to quality literacy education, has strengthened the adult-student learner voice in Canada; and has supported the development of a strong movement of people and organizations involved with adult literacy education.
Welcome to you all.
Wendy DesBrisay, Executive Director, Movement for Canadian Literacy: You have introduced MCL very well already.
As the community has evolved over MCL's 30 years, it has evolved as well into a professional association that provides supports and resources to the provincial organizations, who, in turn, provide that kind of enabling support to the frontline delivery.
I am happy that some members of our learners advisory network are here. They keep our organization grounded and help us work with many other national organizations to ensure that their services are appropriate and are reaching the less literate people in our population.
We were asked to speak about three areas: the future of literacy programs in Canada, the consolidation of the federal funding and the role of literacy organizations in promoting education and employment skills.
The future of literacy programs in Canada right now is looking very bleak, or tenuous at most. There is a danger of going back to the bad old days when programs were isolated, unsupported and not part of any system.
In a nutshell, the cuts and new guidelines, without warning, have pulled the rug out from under networks and organizations, especially the ones that are not working directly with the learners, but those that help promote quality in the system.
I cannot talk in general without telling you about the situation at MCL. The call for proposals for 2006-07, which we would normally hear about in time to apply for April, did not come out until around August last year, with a deadline of September. Two weeks after the call for proposals ended, the cuts were announced. As I understand, new guidelines were being developed, causing more delays. It is now six months since we applied. We did have reserves that we had built up over years that have sustained us until now, but we are at the end of them. All our staff have been laid off and I have been given notice for the end of March. We have barely enough money to pay the obligations to staff and the rent to the end of March. There is no official answer to our proposal.
Many of the provincial and territorial coalitions are in the same boat. Several did receive responses. Most of them have been asked to revise their proposals according to the new guidelines, but some of them, like us, are spending their reserves and are running out of money.
I looked at some of the responses they sent when I asked them if they would lay off staff. Counting us, the staff of those organizations added up to about 38 people over seven organizations. Sixteen people have been laid off. As I say, in our case, 100 per cent of our staff has been laid off. I am not saying MCL is going away, because there is a spirit, and if the coalitions continue to exist, maybe they will be able to reinvent a national network for themselves. However, it is such a waste. I am trying to get rid of computers, desks and all of our things. I have to find a place to put them; we will have to start over later if we do get funding or if we are able to find other sources.
The cuts, as I say, undermine our enabling infrastructure.
With respect to the future of literacy in Canada and the role of literacy organizations, over the years — and especially in recent years, since the federal government started talking about literacy in 2001 — our community mobilized to look at our experience, our expertise and to figure out what needs to be done. We have developed quite comprehensive strategies, from our perspective. We realize we are not the only stakeholders, but we have a vision and a plan.
This is the vision of the literacy community with regard to a national strategy.
Literacy and basic education services are available to any adult who needs them to achieve the goals they set for themselves at work, at home and in the community. At work is important, but there are other reasons as well.
Communities are supported to identify their own literacy needs and define their own solutions. Family and intergenerational literacy programs are widely available to help ensure that both parents and children develop the literacy foundation they need to learn throughout their lives.
This vision includes providing literacy services and training in both English and French and involving Aboriginal governments as well. Policies and programs at national, provincial and local levels are developed and implemented in consultation with the people who carry them out, the learners and the educators, as well as other stakeholders.
The ten-year action plan that we have developed has four strategic pillars, as we call them. One is building a quality system. We have barely started that, in spite of much work over many years, because there has not been the support to make a strong system.
Another is addressing the barriers of learners — some of which you will hear today from the learners who are here — developing partnerships and developing knowledge and transferring it, which again is a big issue.
I would like speak about working with partners. We have worked with the Canadian Public Health Association, CPHA, for years on the link between literacy and health. They have a project right now about preparation for a flu pandemic. They have asked us to help use our channels get information out. When people do not read very well, having information reach them through their literacy programs is crucial, and they will tell their families. We have networks. CPHA can communicate with MCL; MCL will share it out to the coalitions; the coalitions will reach all the delivery agencies in their province or territory. The pandemic flu information will be presented in a way that people can understand.
Each year the community helps tens of thousands of Canadians change their lives. They help build a foundation that people will use for the rest of their lives to keep learning and working. However, hundreds of thousands or millions more need help. We cannot teach huge numbers of people without a system and a strategy. Creating this strategy needs all levels of government. It needs serious investment and it needs to be done with the people on the front lines, who live and work with the problem. The community knows the issues up close and personal, and we know what we need to do the job effectively. We want the federal government to make it a priority and to view us as key partners. Funding is one issue, but another issue is that our proposals have not been discussed with us. We would like to be treated with respect and discuss whether or not our proposal fits with government priorities. We have not yet had the courtesy of such a discussion.
The Chairman: You have been explicit about the ways in which the current situation is affecting you.
[Translation]
Gaétan Cousineau, Executive Director, Fédération canadienne d'alphabétisation en français: Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for having invited me to present our views to you today regarding the future of literacy programs in Canada.
Fifteen years ago, the Fédération canadienne pour l'alphabétisation en français added its voice to the chorus of those encouraging and supporting the efforts of people who want to learn to write and understand the messages of governments and of society.
The federation's members include over 400 organizations dedicated to promoting literacy in all ten of Canada's provinces and two of its three territories. Through these organizations, the federation reaches over 20,000 adult learners who are taking literacy and basic skills training in French. Throughout our 15 years of existence, we have strived to establish the network, strengthen our efforts and equip ourselves with the means of offering these services.
Our ambition is to create a fully literate society in all of Canada's communities where French is the mother tongue. We are passionate about that goal. In our last annual report, our President, Suzanne Benoît, stated that every year thousands of people feel the urge to acquire the basic skills that they need to succeed in life. But the people who take the next step and enrol in training programs are driven by a passion to overcome the obstacles that have prevented them from living a full life.
However, if we are to make those people's dreams come true, we must have the tools to do the job. We must be able to accommodate them when they need these services. We need appropriate tools, and this means that Canada's provincial and territorial French-language literacy organizations must be able to count on stable, long-term funding. At present, they clearly cannot.
Quite often, when I cite statistics, people cannot believe that 9 million Canadians of working age do not have the basic skills needed to meet the requirements of today's complex society.
I would also like to draw your attention to one particular set of statistics, on the literacy gap between the two official language groups: 42 per cent of adult Canadians of working age have the two lowest levels of literacy skills — levels one and two. We know that level three is the minimum required. But among adult Canadians of working age whose mother tongue is French, that percentage is 55 per cent, while among those whose mother tongue is English, it is 39 per cent. In other words, there is a gap of 16 percentage points between the two, and that makes our challenge even more difficult.
In citing these figures, I am not telling you anything you do not already know. We have been following Senate deliberations closely, during the fall and now.
The Honourable Joyce Fairbairn wished to call your attention to the need for us to work together in a concerted manner, because lack of literacy is a daily barrier for adults.
That is what people tell us — they cannot help their young children to learn the language and learn to write. Lack of literacy is an obstacle for workers, for older people with health problems, and for the economy as a whole. If we do not fast-track this process, we will undermine our collective future as Canadians.
You have evoked all aspects of this issue, including the social costs of low literacy and the benefits to be derived from investing in this area. Senator Cochrane vividly described the difficulties that literacy practitioners must overcome. Senator Tardif illustrated the social and economic implications of lack of literacy with the example of a workplace in her province. Just last week, Senator Trenholme Counsell very clearly explained the effects that the recent cuts to literacy funding have had on provincial literacy organizations. Ms. DesBrisay explained what is happening in her sector. We are seeing the same problems. We are all too familiar with the costs associated with low literacy levels in our communities.
You have also described the benefits of a fully literate society. We do not need to convince you that we Canadians can no longer be complacent, as the Canadian Council on Learning pointed out in its very first report on the issue, published in January 2007 and entitled State of Learning in Canada: No Time for Complacency.
What have we done over the past 20 years? We are very familiar with the low-literacy problem, because we have been working on it for two decades.
Allow me to mention some of the studies that provide a good overview of the situation. There are two international surveys: one done in 1994, and the second done in 2003 and published in 2005.
A study on adult literacy skills was conducted by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in 2003. The National Literacy Secretariat has funded a large number of studies, some with the federation. At one point, the federation coordinated a study by researchers from the University of Quebec at Montreal and Statistics Canada on literacy and literacy training in Canada's francophone communities. The results were published in 2002.
In cooperation with the secretariat, we also organized a conference in Montreal, in 1999. The proceedings were published, and are still current, as their title — Pour une société pleinement alphabétisée: Le droit de lire, d'écrire et de communiquer pour tous — indicates. The proceedings were edited by Serge Wagner.
Recently, Statistics Canada published a second study that helped us gain a better understanding of the reasons underpinning low-literacy rates in francophone communities in Canada.
So did we get results or not? Have we failed or not? We are told that we have failed. But when we consider the size of the task and the limited resources with which we have tried to rectify things, the outcome is not surprising. When you get right down to it, few organizations could have performed better with so few resources.
Are there solutions? We believe there are. At the federation, we have defined the main principles of a strategy for raising the average level of literacy in Canada's French-speaking communities. We have identified eight major principles: develop a broader vision of literacy by incorporating it into a vision of life long learning; promote and support literacy; improve quality and equity in basic education; strengthen literacy at home; stimulate literacy in community and cultural life; promote literacy in the workplace and in relation with specific tasks that people perform; improve adults' access to literacy; mobilize and coordinate literacy development efforts by governments and civil society. As you can see, this is quite an ambitious program! Nonetheless, these are the principles that continue to guide and inspire our efforts.
In the federation's view, lack of literacy is a social, not an individual, phenomenon. That is why society as a whole must provide the conditions that enable individuals to become literate. Since literacy development overlaps with so many other areas of human development, the federation has established a network of relationships and partnerships with numerous groups and organizations working in related areas, such as health promotion, employability and early childhood education.
Our efforts have yielded good results. For example, we have established a network of family literacy experts, and have even been asked to take the initiative to Africa. I will talk about that very quickly in a few moments. Our website also receives many visitors every day. Hundreds of people visit the site each week. You may be surprised to hear — as I was — that the people visiting our site are not only from Canada but also from other countries. In January alone, people from 23 other countries visited our site.
Over the past year, as my colleague was saying, we have also developed plans to raise francophone literacy levels in Canada dramatically over the coming decade. The plans contain details and numbers, and explain what efforts are being made and how many people we need to reach in every Canadian province and territory. They are part of a coordinated effort to develop proposals for a strategy to achieve a fully literate society in Canada.
As experts on the subject, we have long wished to see all parties cooperate more closely on defining and developing a pan-Canadian approach to literacy.
We have been asked to talk about organizations like ours, but we believe everyone has a role to play. Every stakeholder has a role, and everyone's role compliments everyone else's. We must always remember that when someone needs to upgrade his or her reading, writing or other basic skills, that process does not take place in a vacuum. The person may also be the parent of a child who attends school, an employee in a company, a member of a social or recreational club, a voting citizen, a patient in a clinic, and so on. If the literacy training is to succeed, it must take place in every setting of that person's life.
Thus, it would be an illusion to think we can solve the problem of low literacy skills by focusing exclusively on one area of intervention while neglecting the others. For some years, we in the community sector have borne a great deal of the burden for providing literacy training, while operating under precarious conditions. What we need now is more stability. We know that we cannot do this job all on our own. That is why we have forged alliances and networks with partners.
We are now seeing provincial governments and private-sector organizations ready to take action. We believe the federal government should play that role. Both labour and capital are highly mobile in Canada, as are corporations. Many francophones are now going off to work in Alberta. We have to follow them, and help them in the communities where they live. That is why we have acknowledged the federal government's role in ensuring a certain degree of equity and equal access in all parts of Canada.
In a knowledge-based economy, a growing number of jobs require higher levels of literacy and education than ever before. If Canada wants to remain competitive in the knowledge economy, we are going to have to raise the literacy levels of all Canadians. In a broader sense, literacy is a fundamental right of every individual. Literacy development is a critical issue for all the peoples of the world, even the poorest ones.
We have played a role internationally. We have taken part in international meetings and conferences. We have been asked to assist countries in Africa, particularly those of French-speaking Africa. In looking outside the country, we have learned that basic skills training is regarded as a very important issue in the most highly developed societies as well. We looked at Australia, the United Kingdom and other countries, and saw examples everywhere. We know what the situation is. It is time to take action, and to unite our strengths in moving towards a common goal.
We would like to make a number of recommendations: the Government of Canada should recognize that all Canadians, whatever their origin or social or economic status, are entitled to basic skills training. In this regard, the Government of Canada should also recognize that all Canadians must have long-life access to literacy training services. The Government of Canada should recognize that literacy development is a democratic, social and economic issue of national importance. Consequently, the Government of Canada should commit itself to adopting a policy whose goal is to achieve a fully literate society. The Government of Canada should also commit itself toward mobilizing civil society to help achieve this goal. The Government of Canada should commit itself to working in partnership with the provincial and territorial governments, as well as with all other literacy stakeholders — including the public and parapublic sectors, the community sector, businesses, labour unions and professional associations — to develop a vision for the future of literacy and a comprehensive strategy for literacy development in Canada. The Government of Canada should recognize the central role of the national, provincial and territorial literacy organizations, by ensuring that they have stable, long-term funding.
[English]
Charles Ramsay, Executive Director, National Adult Literacy Database: Honourable senators, thank you for the invitation to appear here today. Obviously, to us, literacy is a deep and moving issue, and it consumes our lives. On one hand, all the planets seem to be aligned for provinces and territories to come onto the literacy stage where they had tread very reluctantly before, but on the other hand, the climate has deteriorated somewhat federally, and many organizations are suffering from that.
The National Adult Literacy Database, NALD, is a non-traditional literacy organization in the sense that we do not deal directly with learners and we do not provide any training. Our mandate, simply stated, is to use the electronic technology of the Internet and deliver information and resources to the literacy community in Canada.
In 1995, when the Web was becoming available to the average Canadian and citizen of the world, we recognized that it would be a wonderful tool to use to do this kind of distribution. At that time, our funding agency of the day was the National Literacy Secretariat. The director asked us how we knew we would be successful in using this technology to provide resources to the literacy community. If we got 7,000 to 10,000 people a year using our website to access these resources, that would be wonderful. It seemed like an unachievable goal at the time, but we were willing to risk making those kinds of claims.
At the end of the fiscal year, March 31, 2006, in that 12-month period, we had over 9 million users on our website. Those people looked at 32 million pages of HTML information and downloaded 4.4 millions files from us in PDF format. It is an idea that has found its time and place. I would like to be able to claim responsibility for that, but I believe it is the wonder of the Internet that causes this to happen.
Before we did this, anyone in the literacy community in Canada would have had to live near a large university with a large adult education program to access any of these resources. Now, if they have access to the Internet, they have a library sitting on their desks; anytime and any place they can receive the material we have on our servers free of charge, of which they are doing.
As Mr. Cousineau pointed out, there is not only a Canadian response to this need, but also we are used by a group of people worldwide. In the top 20 countries of usage each month, obviously North America — Canada and the United States — lead the way, but France is always third. The other francophone and anglophone nations are fourth, fifth and sixth, but we get countries like Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Mexico, Portugal and Spain, as well as some countries in the third world — not very many as of yet. It is a growing situation and a recognized need.
What is needed in determining the future of literacy? I believe the key word is cohesiveness. You will hear that word used frequently. The numbers are there. The ongoing research shows some progress is being made, but it is not happening fast enough to please anybody.
Over the years, when we have had opportunities such as this, under the leadership of organizations such as the Movement for Canadian Literacy and the Fédération canadienne, the literacy community has come together to put together cogent and coherent documents that explain our position and where we feel we need to go. That is to have a pan-Canadian strategy where any citizen in this country, who has a need to further his or her education, can see a recognizable system that is there for his or her need. He or she can step into it, have his or her needs met to move into the workplace or go on to future education or, indeed, to live a better, more enriched and fulfilling life as a parent, citizen, member of a family or user of the health system. That happens in some cases.
In the past, because education falls under provincial and territorial jurisdiction, when we have addressed this issue before federal legislators and federal parliamentarians, there has always been a concern about the legislative responsibility for education, the constitutional responsibility being in the provinces. Indeed, each region of the country has its unique needs, requiring flexibility, but there is a need for some leadership to bring these issues together and to identify the most common and pressing needs in order to have a responsive system to which people can go.
It is a common misunderstanding when those of us in the literacy field talk about the numbers in literacy and the problem of literacy that literacy means people cannot read and write. That may be true in some cases, but, for the vast majority of people who have this as an issue, literacy is not being able to read and write well enough in a context. I just finished reading a book called This is Your Brain on Music by Daniel Levitin, a university professor at McGill, and it was a literacy challenge for me. I had to reread the first three chapters three times in order to get a basic understanding of what happens. I believe we all find ourselves in that situation from time to time. That is common for those who cannot read and write well enough.
I want to address consolidation of funding. Over the years, there has been a wonderful partnership established between the federal, provincial and territorial governments through the National Literacy Secretariat and the provincial and territorial funding delivery stream. That funding has been reduced, much of which was used in the past to deal with local issues. For example, if the people in Regina, who were working with new Canadians, decided they needed a resource to help new Canadians improve their language skills to join the Canadian economy and culture, they could apply to the secretariat for funding to develop a resource to respond to that.
As a result of the work we do, many of those local resources have been lodged in the National Adult Literacy Database library from where they can be downloaded by anyone who cares to look at them, and indeed they were.
Resources that were developed for local needs were available nationally through our distribution system. They became national resources and had a national impact.
Unfortunately, with the recent policy change on funding, those resources will not be as readily available and the great researchers and policy writers will not have the necessary funding to pursue the areas at which they have been so good.
We all recognize the need to be accountable in what we do. We know that we need to run organizations, such as NALD, like a business and that we must respond to the demands that business people make of other business people, that is, we have to be accountable for our funding. However, the funding guidelines have become so constraining that small organizations do not have the wherewithal to respond to this. Many small organizations have been moved out of the field of literacy because the accountability demands are too stringent. Although we all recognize the need to be accountable, there needs to be a lightening of some of the constraints, so that more Canadians can get involved in helping other Canadians.
I have a list of recommendations on funding. There should be more money available to the federal-provincial- territorial funding stream, so that the exemplary partnership that has been in place for years can continue. The wonderful resources written by Canadians for Canadians can continue to be developed and distributed across the country and can be used in a resource-poor literacy community.
Literacy partners and practitioners should be able to access funds more easily. There should be less stringency in reporting requirements. Funding for literacy should be maintained for literacy activities, and literacy funding should be reserved exclusively for literacy organizations. In other words, we need to be careful that funding does not slide off into areas that are marginally responsive to meeting literacy needs.
With regard to the role of literacy organizations in promoting education and employability skills, the issue is not the inability to read and write, but the inability to read and write well enough. In the workplace, there is one of the most insidious barriers that exists in the literacy world: Many people who have those problems do not recognize it, and many employers do not recognize that the problem exists in their workplace.
I am not sure how to address that barrier, but people report literacy does not seem to be an issue in their workplace. For example, many people feel that ``this job is good enough and I am good enough for this job.'' The Canadian nation will suffer in the long term if we fail to bring the workforce with us into the future by ensuring that skills are consistently upgraded to respond to the changes necessary to keep us involved in the global community.
Senator Fairbairn: Welcome to you all. It is wonderful to see you.
One of the most exciting prospects of recent years was the notion — which came not from the literacy community itself, but from business, industry, academia and other places — of a pan-Canadian accord that would provide a wonderful balance and include not only the literacy sector, but also the sectors I mentioned. That was recommended in a House of Commons report a few years ago, and that was a major step ahead.
Yesterday, I tried to find out what had happened to that suggestion, and I did not get any information. Has this idea gone, or is it still out there as something that would bring this country up to a higher level of literacy from coast to coast?
Mr. Cousineau: It still exists among the literacy organizations and those who collaborate and partner with us.
Senator Fairbairn: Does it exist with the provinces?
Mr. Cousineau: Yes. The provinces are now on board and want to be part of this. The federal government is the one that is missing. It needs to say this is the time to do it and get on board to do it with us. Canada is ready. We have all the data and information. It is the willingness that seems to be of concern.
Ms. DesBrisay: We were very excited about that because we felt that we could make a big contribution as a coalition of coalitions. In fact, the work between the coalitions and the provincial and territorial governments continues. I believe the impetus for that will come from the bottom up. However, we would like to be met by the federal government halfway.
Mr. Cousineau referred to the report from the Canadian Council on Learning. It said that the first action should be to establish pan-Canadian goals for literacy and life-long learning, and then we must develop strategies and instruments for learners of all ages.
Senator Fairbairn referred to the committee report. I take some hope from the fact that the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development, Mr. Solberg, was on the parliamentary committee that heard all the witnesses say everything we are saying now.
The Chairman: That was then and this is now.
Senator Fairbairn: I am very glad that you are here and that we can hear what you have done, what you have succeeded with and what you want to do. It is not, however, reassuring to hear that your position for the future is critical. Canada simply cannot let that happen.
Senator Trenholme Counsell: I found out yesterday, to my chagrin, that the budget cuts of $17.7 million represented 17 to 18 per cent of the total cuts of Human Resources and Social Development Canada. I am just astounded by that.
It seems to me that the main impact of these cuts, from my personal involvement and contacts, is on the literacy coalitions provincially. I, personally, believe that these coalitions are very important. Someone called them the glue that holds it together. If all of our good people working in all those various endeavours, their projects and programs, be it Laubach or Frontier College or a little story wagon program in an economically disadvantaged area of Saint John and so forth, cannot come together, share, be inspired by each other and look to the future and plan, then something is really missing. I suspect this is province by province.
For example, I have been told in New Brunswick, the office of the Fédération canadienne d'alphabétisation en français is closed.
[Translation]
For example, the New Brunswick Coalition for Literacy has closed its office. The organization probably continues to operate, but does it without the coordination of an office and a person highly dedicated to literacy.
[English]
I would ask you to comment from your perspective, because you are a national organization, on the impact of this vis-à-vis the coalitions and their role. I also want to ask a question about measurement of their projects, but I do not know whether I will get the time.
Ms. DesBrisay: I would like to speak to that. You are right in how you characterize the coalitions as the glue. They provide coherence within a province. In coming together, we are attempting to provide more coherence across the country, including about measurement. One of the problems, and maybe one of the reasons we are vulnerable, is we have not had frameworks across the country to show the benefits of what we do. It does not all show up every 10 years on a literacy survey.
I want to tell you a certain irony. We and the coalitions were to make a large, in-kind contribution to a national project on accountability that is about to be funded through the literacy funding. The project will be much compromised without the twice-annual meetings that MCL has that brings the coalitions together. They need to examine accountability and measurement issues across the country and start to bring it into a coherent system. It is terrible to have this fall apart at this time, just when we have a plan and are starting to move it ahead.
[Translation]
Mr. Cousineau: I agree with Ms. DesBrisay. This week, I received emails from people in Manitoba. A number of centres have to close. Others are using up all their time in drafting new projects and amending submitted projects in order to comply with the new criteria. They cannot do what they are supposed to do these days, because amending the reports takes all their time.
I have also received emails from people in New Brunswick asking me what the federation is doing. Those people need our support. The situation in New Brunswick is unbelievable. There, 66 per cent of francophones have difficulty reading and writing, and are at levels 1 and 2. New Brunswick is the province with the most serious problem.
Partners are calling us as well. Yesterday, I received a call from CELF. In conjunction with the centre, we invite new learners to enhance their sense of self-worth by writing a story, and we award a Francophonie prize. We still have not received an answer on the contribution for the Francophonie award.
Generally, at this point, we would be starting our planning for Literacy Week. To date, however, we have received no information so that we can set up the tools we need. Do we get things going or let things drop? We have had no answer.
Those are the problems and delays we have to face. We at the federation are also waiting for answers on our own projects. We have made the changes needed and hope that they will be considered eligible. That is the great challenge these days.
[English]
Charles Ramsay: I can speak from a slightly different perspective. After about a year of consultations held by HRSDC, and then a year in which we put together a proposal, we were given funding to establish a workplace and workforce version of what we have with our regular National Adult Literacy Database. Our funding and our size about doubled at the same time as the cuts were applied in other segments of the literacy community. The cuts did not influence what happened to us. In fact, we did pretty well, and we were happy about that. However, it is hard to be happy when there is devastation around us. The organizations that Mr. Cousineau and Ms. DesBrisay represent, and those organizations that are in the provinces and territories, bring a certain focus to the literacy field and clarify issues and direct activities. All together they create that cohesiveness of which you speak.
Even an organization like mine, where we did not suffer from the cuts as others did, we suffer because the cohesiveness is not there that helps us do the things we do. It influences us as well as it does those organizations.
[Translation]
Senator Pépin: Ms. DesBrisay, you talked about cuts that have been announced, and the new guidelines. Before the new budget was announced, were your organizations consulted on the new guidelines, and on new procedures? Would it not have been better for the guidelines to come from the bottom up, as it were, rather than learning about new standards and receiving new guidelines from the top down?
[English]
Ms. DesBrisay: We had no warning of the cuts. In fact, we were not consulted. Our organization has not been cut; we just have waited six months for an answer and we are dying by degrees. No one has given us any feedback on our proposal, but we have heard, unofficially, that new rules have been created without consultation. It is hard, because we have been consulted a lot in the past few years. We have expertise, but we had pulled it together so that we were ready to speak with the government, to work with them, put our heads together and try to solve our issues. Thus far, we cannot get anyone to talk to us.
[Translation]
Senator Pépin: Mr. Cousineau, you mentioned stable, long-term funding. Your funding is for two years at present?
Mr. Cousineau: We can submit a few multi-year projects. We would like things to extend over a longer period. Most of our projects are for only one year or less. We always have to start everything all over again, and are always waiting. That is why we have so many difficulties now. People wait for answers, do not know what is going on, and the funding ends. How can we set things up in the meantime, while we are waiting for answers?
Senator Pépin: I thought funding was for two-year periods.
Mr. Cousineau: At the federation, some projects extend over more than one year. Therefore, we do suffer less from this than Ms. DesBrisay's organization. Some of our projects are already approved, and are still underway.
Senator Pépin: What kind of long-term or renewable funding would you like to see?
Mr. Cousineau: We have prepared detailed plans for catch-up measures extending over ten years.
We need a ten-year vision to make substantial changes to the current situation. We need sustained effort, consistency and permanence. Otherwise, we spend a lot of time demonstrating the value of what we have achieved, and convincing the authorities that we need to do more to continue what we have begun. We are ready to be accountable.
[English]
We are ready to be accountable. We are willing to give out the details of the key indicators, monitor ourselves and prove that we have done that. At the federation, we have the tools.
[Translation]
We are going to try to teach our players that as well so they can have the tools they need. It is important for taxpayers' money to be well spent and that's what we expect as well.
Senator Pépin: You say that the percentage of francophones that are illiterate is 55 per cent compared with 39 per cent of anglophones. In remote regions, in Manitoba and in New Brunswick, you say that programs have been cut. Is there a reason for that?
Mr. Cousineau: There are several. Setting aside Quebec for the moment, when you are dealing with a minority language, the efforts required and the challenges are greater. Many things can be explained historically. When French- language schooling and francophone school boards are unavailable, and when French-language immersion programs in English schools fail, there is some catching up to do. The focus is on re-francization, not necessarily on literacy. You have to revitalize the community. That may serve to explain many things, but not everything.
However, we do see some improvements. We have been told we failed, but if you consider the statistics, some people went from a level 1 to a level 2, which shows progress. You have to look at reality. Some people went from level 3 to 4 or 5. The improvement was due to mandatory education until the age of 16 in Quebec, for instance. We realize that when it comes to the francophonie, despite that, there are still many things that need to be clarified. Why do educated francophones read less? Why do they not buy or own books? That is true throughout Canada, even in Quebec.
In New Brunswick, there are other explanations. It is tempting for a young person to drop out after secondary II or III. He has got a job that he finds pays relatively well, but he has low literacy skills. If he loses his job, he will not be well equipped.
When it comes to workplace literacy, the most literate people tend to seek out the programs. They know what they have got, want to improve and do not want to lose what they have. Less literate people may not feel comfortable stepping up. There are many workplace solutions we need to come up with. That is one of the major factors in New Brunswick and elsewhere in Canada.
[English]
The Chairman: I will inject a supplementary to Ms. DesBrisay.
You said, in answer to Senator Pépin's question, that you have been waiting six months to get an answer on your funding application and you have not got it as yet. In the past, how long would this process usually take?
Ms. DesBrisay: It could be as little as a month in the past. The fiscal year will be over in another month. They will have missed us altogether this year.
Senator Callbeck: Thank you for coming and for the great work you are doing in literacy.
I have a question for Ms. DesBrisay. You talked about your organization and that you have helped thousands of Canadians change their lives. You are to be commended for that. We hope that the funding will come through and that you will be able to continue.
You mentioned that the new guidelines had pulled the rug from many organizations. How did these guidelines change for provincial coalitions?
Ms. DesBrisay: When I said we have helped hundreds of thousands of Canadians change their lives, I meant that the whole community has helped. The guidelines have changed in that one of the new guidelines is that the project must have a beginning, middle and an end, so it is a time-limited process; and it must provide tangible, measurable benefits to individual learners.
It is difficult for a national organization to prove the tangible benefits it has provided to learners on the frontlines. When we are working on a national organization, we try to enable the coalitions. We prepare material, for example, to communicate the information about the international literacy survey. We prepare a template and give it to all the coalitions. They do not need to do much work to fix it. They send it to their members, who add their local information. That is an example. That is one guideline where it is hard for an umbrella group to show how, in one year, they will change an individual's life. A frontline program can do that.
I am not sure how this fits in the guideline; I imagine it has to do with that individual learner part. One of the coalition's proposals was to provide professional development to teachers in their province. That one they are working on. They will probably get funding for that. Another proposal they had was to provide professional development for the boards of directors of literacy agencies. That was turned down flat. Boards of directors of the literary agencies, which are volunteers in a community — and this is a kind of have-not province — make a difference to the learners. Projects such as those that have to do with building organizations are being ruled out.
Senator Callbeck: You submitted in August and you have not had any word. Have you tried to contact them?
Ms. DesBrisay: Yes.
Senator Callbeck: Will no one return your calls?
Ms. DesBrisay: I have talked to some. I have even talked to the director, the director general, the deputy minister and the associate deputy minister. All of them have said, ``I will try to find out.'' They have all got back to me and said, ``I could not find out.''
I believe they do not know what to do with our proposal. Anyway, it is not that we have not asked; we have asked every few weeks.
Senator Munson: I was intrigued, Mr. Ramsay, by your statement, ``not being able to read and write well enough.'' I am curious: Are there any statistics, such as high school graduates going into first-year university, with regard to not being able to read well enough? I do not want to get too personal about my own family, but the feedback I get through a few students at the University of Ottawa and other universities is that there are some who are not able to read well enough and do not grasp what they are being taught. If they are not able to read and write well enough, are there programs in the literacy movement to help them?
We have heard the Jacques Demers story. That is a different story. There is a different kind of stigma because a person believes academically that he or she is smart and all of a sudden finds he or she is not because that person cannot read and write well enough.
Mr. Ramsay: Senator, I do not know about the statistics, but perhaps Mr. Cousineau or Ms. DesBrisay will be able to help with that. Certainly, some people find their way through the formal education systems, but find themselves in a situation where a judgment is placed upon them by someone such as their employer, who decides that their reading and writing skills are not good enough for where they find themselves.
I am not aware of a consistent program where people, who have such problems, can have their skills upgraded. There is such a stigma attached to exposing oneself when one carries a university degree under ones arm that people often do not seek help when confronted with such a situation.
This is a little less mainstream, but research is being done in the early school grades to determine the differences between the ways in which boys and girls read and their reading habits, and why these differences exist. Findings show young boys learn the kinds of skills usually learned by reading from other activities, such as playing computer games and other technological toys. It does not give them the same kind of fluidity in their reading skills, but does give them the kinds of skills that they need to do certain types of problem solving required in some jobs.
My son was like that. When he went to the University of New Brunswick, he had to take a literacy test. I was absolutely amazed that he passed it; and he has been very successful since then.
I believe that he learned to read through various other activities that he was involved in, because they taught him the end results from being able to read well, without having the love of reading that I have, for example.
Senator Munson: Are some people slipping through the cracks and finding that they have nowhere to go to upgrade their literacy skills even though they might be smart? Perhaps the literacy movement could help to fill such a vacuum.
Mr. Cousineau: I do not have any statistics. Our role is in the area of non-formal education — prior to attending school and after the school years. We take over at the level achieved when they leave school, and we try to help thereafter throughout their lives. As an organization, we have learned through research, funding and our partnerships that it is important for a child to start learning to communicate not only orally, but also in writing as young as possible in order to learn the language.
[Translation]
Early childhood, from birth to five years of age, is a very important period, because that is when children are able to learn languages. The great challenge, for francophones in a minority setting, is for parents to speak French to their children as often as possible and for the children to go to francophone day cares. People should not be afraid of losing their first language because of bilingualism. There are plenty of myths that need to be dispelled about learning.
[English]
Learning a language and learning to enjoy reading is developed in early childhood with the parents. This is what we try to do, and if we are successful, they will be better in school; and we know that. Even if the schools fail, students can continue and attend university. I saw my daughter doing a doctorate and, although I thought she was not so good in reading and writing, she received a prize at the end of her studies. While they are still in school, changes can happen, so do not give up on them. However, if they leave school, depending on what level they drop out or leave, then we might need to help them out. That is why education and continuous learning is important.
Senator Cochrane: I will ask Ms. DesBrisay about the IALS survey. Did you read the contents of the survey? Did you try to assess the statistics? The figures are alarming: 42 per cent of Canadians have low literacy skills.
Ms. DesBrisay: If you are referring to the questions, no. There are sample questions throughout the survey. It is important to know that between levels 1 and 2 is a huge range people from those who are unable to read and write at all, to those who can read and write to a certain skill level. I know that to be at a level, one has to get 80 per cent of those questions right. If one got 79 per cent of the level 3 questions right, one was put in level 2. The bar is quite high. Many people at the upper end of level 2, which is still considered insufficient, would be quite ordinary people. Perhaps they simply do not read a lot in their daily lives.
Society demands a high level of skill in manipulating, synthesizing and disseminating information. When people say that 42 per cent of the population is functionally illiterate, that is a big exaggeration. Many of the people at the upper end of level 2 might be university students, who could upgrade their skills quickly by taking a special course. People can upgrade their skills in the workplace by attending courses that focus on specific tasks in the workplace. Keep in mind that there is a huge range between levels. I hope that answers your question.
Senator Cochrane: Yes. Mr. Ramsay, could you tell the committee how many people use your Internet program? I know that the numbers have increased, but that could input from other countries, could it not?
Charles Ramsay: Yes.
Senator Cochrane: Could you give us an idea of the kinds of materials on your Internet program?
Charles Ramsay: We have a set-up that is similar to a library, where people take books out in a physical format. We have a collection of research materials that might include opinion pieces by people on what should be done or anecdotal information on various activities or the rigid kind of academic research. We also have a collection of learning materials for use by teachers in a classroom, tutors in private classes, or by learners themselves to upgrade their skills. Those materials are available to download and print for free.
We have an annotated bibliography of materials available commercially — which, for copywriting purposes, we cannot add to our libraries — so that people are informed. They can search through our catalogue and find those resources. We have a large collection of learner writing. For 12 years, we have published a learner story of the week every Monday morning in English and in French. Many learners look to see what other learners are saying across the country.
Senator Cochrane: Is this program based on people who can already read?
Charles Ramsay: Our program is directed mainly at practitioners, teachers, researchers and policy-makers.
Senator Keon: I congratulate you, Mr. Ramsay. This website sounds terrific. Too many databases are not information mines. In other words, they do not have the critical information that people need to drill down and assess the programs to determine what is right and wrong, what works and does not work and to implement the necessary corrections. As I listen to this, I conclude that this is what is wrong. Yesterday, I was convinced at the end of the day that I knew what is wrong: that no one is measuring this stuff and no one knows how to make the necessary changes and adaptations.
You have accomplished a tremendous amount and I congratulate you.
Can you see daylight to get at the kind of resources that are necessary to compare programs, to give policy makers and teachers and so forth the tools they need to make the necessary measurements and change?
Mr. Ramsay: The role we play is as a deliverer of resources. We do not create most of these resources ourselves. We get the ones that other Canadians create.
However, Allan Quigley, a professor at St. Francis Xavier University in Antigonish, in a paper he wrote on the state of the field of literacy in Canada, referred to much of the research done as counts and amounts. We know how much, but we do not know what makes the difference. There needs to be a focus to reach into the research that is done and bring out the nuggets that will teach us how to move the markers.
Ms. DesBrisay: Looking at what the job is now, what we need to do, was part of our proposal. You are absolutely right that this has been a field with no funding, project to project with a lot of volunteers, so the masterminding of a system to evaluate and measure is still to be done. It has been identified in our plan. We know that provincial governments are working on this as well. Now, we need the commitment and resources to move ahead with that kind of framework and measurement.
Mr. Cousineau: We were in Toronto for two and a half days, just getting back last night, with a network called clearnet. It is regrouping everyone interested in literacy — researchers, organizations such as ours, those who do the training, people in health and education. Everyone was there. These people know about the information. With all of us being together, we know what works and does not. We have not been able to — because we do not have the resources — bring it down to the provincial and territorial organizations to show them what really works with preschoolers and what works best with adults. We have learned a lot in the last 20 years. Now, we have the tools and need a national approach to get what works and use it as best we can to have the market change, then, in another five years, do another statistics survey.
We have increased in the past. I do not agree when people say this has been a failure. It has not been a failure, but we need more resources to make it better.
[Translation]
Senator Chaput: Ms. DesBrisay, you referred to seven organizations. You said that of the 38 people who worked there, 16 had to be laid off.
[English]
Ms. DesBrisay: No. I was saying that we are an umbrella over 13 organizations. Six of them, plus ours, have laid off staff. When I say 16 people lost their jobs, if it was out of hundreds, it would be very little, but in those six organizations, plus us, there were 38 staff and now there are 22 staff remaining.
[Translation]
Senator Chaput: The exact figures do not matter to me for now. We are being told that budget cuts did not and will not take place. Yet, the reason why these people were dismissed may have been due, for instance, to the fact that the funding ran out at the end of March 2006. Projects had to be changed because of new criteria, and the organizations have yet to receive responses to their queries. So, because of a lack of resources and funding, they had to shut down. Is that an accurate analysis of the situation?
[English]
Ms. DesBrisay: Yes.
The Chairman: Thank you very much to our three panellists.
The second panel we have today is comprised of four individuals here to tell us their personal stories. I will introduce them one at a time as they speak.
The first one who will speak will be Ms. Cadieux. She has been a learner for the past four years and benefits from services received in French from Centre à la page from Alexandria, which is a member of the Coalition francophone pour alphabétisation. Françoise was chosen among the learners of her province of Ontario to sit as a member of the Réseau permanent des apprenants of the Canadian literacy coalition and has also been designated to sit as a member of the board of Fédération canadienne d'alphabétisation, which is the organization we heard from in the last panel.
[Translation]
Françoise Cadieux, as an individual: I have five minutes? That is not a lot of time. I could write a book on this. Since you have received all our documents, I can summarize. I will start by telling you that I am an adult learner. I represent all the provinces in Canada. There is a learner in each province who belongs to the federation and I am in charge of them. When people have a question, they call me. On a personal note, I was shut in my entire life. My children have known for about four years that I did not know how to read and write. I felt like a prisoner. My health was all over the map. People cannot understand what I went through. Some people know how to read and other people do not. It is easy to get depressed. You try to be strong for the children and so forth, but it is not easy. I could cry, but I will try to stay calm.
Today, however, I am happy, really happy. Now, I am going to teach. It just goes to show you. I will be teaching from junior kindergarten to Grade 3 at the Saint-Bernard School. I tell them stories and I ask the little kids their colours, numbers, and those kinds of things. I am happy to teach them these things because I missed doing that with my children. Sometimes, my kids would come home with letters and I would say: Read it to me. I want to see what level you are at and how good you are. They would ask me things: Mom, what does this mean? They always told me that everything was in the dictionary. So I would tell them to go and look in the dictionary; you will remember better. I had all kinds of tricks. But, often, those things made me depressed. I did not want to tell them because I was afraid they would say to me: ``Mom, you are stupid, you have never been to school. Why are you trying to teach me anything.'' I never wanted to admit it. I finally told my secret four years ago, and I am happy, although perhaps I should have said it sooner, but I could not. My husband knows but it was lucky that I had a good husband and that he was very patient.
There is something else I want to tell you, although I do not know if it will help you; however, seven years ago, my brother killed himself. Why? Because his wife, who had depended on him her entire life, was no longer there. He gave up and shot himself. This also shocked me. I thought: ``Listen! I have also been depressed about this and I have taken pills but today no way, I will not do it again.'' When you do not know how to read and you try to help others, they too have to go through what you have gone through. But since I learned to read — although not well enough yet — I can now go to Cornwall — I can figure out where I am going, but before, I could not.
Wait, there is one other thing I want to tell you. I took the Internet course before Christmas. Since my son moved to Vancouver, a year and a half ago, I have not seen my grandchildren. Since taking the course before the holidays, I am now able to see my grandchildren. You can not know what it is like to have grandchildren who live so far away and not be able to see them. I am happy when I see them playing in their house. There is so much to tell you.
A school like mine knows how to deal with us. The first time I went, I was met at the door, a door I did not want to go through. I was afraid of going in. They are there, and sometimes, we get a little depressed and they encourage us. But the learners are really afraid as a result of the cuts. I cannot tell you how many calls I have gotten about this. I tell them: wait, it is not over. I know that people are afraid, but the school has also tried to figure out how to save money. Before, they gave me homework to take home and now we cannot use the printer, just to try to cut costs, because the paper is expensive. You know sometimes I get up at 2 a.m., if I have homework to do, because that is my time or if something is bothering me, then I do homework. Not being able to do our homework at home is hard for me. That is because I cannot go to school seven days a week, although I would like to, but I do what I can.
The school understands us. They take the time; I like that. Without that, I would not be there.
[English]
The Chairman: Our next speaker is Dianne Smith, who left school in Grade 9, but then resumed her studies many years later and, in fact, graduated the eve of her fiftieth birthday. I do not know if I should mention ages here. She is the owner and operator of a community care facility, Smith Lodge, in Charlottetown. Last September, she was the first-ever recipient of the Council of the Federation Literacy Award for Prince Edward Island. She was singled out as an adult learner, who has made great progress in her own learning and has inspired many others to do the same.
Dianne C. Smith, as an individual: Thank you for allowing me to speak today. Years ago, I never would have guessed or believed that one day, after 35 years of working in jobs that some people might not choose to do, that I would be called a successful entrepreneur sitting here today. I had determination to make changes and to be able to provide more security for my children and myself and, most important, to be a role model for my children. They know how hard I worked to get my education and they know how valuable an education is today. I knew I had to do something to get more education, and I also knew the clock was ticking.
When people talk about people in Prince Edward Island, who were held back because of low literacy skills, they are talking about me. For many reasons, I did not get the skills I needed as a youngster. As I was raising my children, I knew I had to get better work and better security for my family. I knew I had to work smarter, not harder.
First, I had to learn to read better. To do that, I relied on the community. First, volunteer tutors helped me with my reading. Then I knew I could get started on getting my Grade 12. I took advantage of going to Holland College to take the GED preparation program. This was a free program funded by the government.
Along the way, I won two $500 bursaries from the Prince Edward Island Literacy Alliance. That helped me pay for phonics training. I got my Grade 12 the day before my fiftieth birthday.
Once I got my Grade 12, I was ready to get into business. I was lucky. Lots of business people shared their advice. I am now the proud owner of a top quality 27-bed licensed community care facility in Charlottetown. I employ 15 people including resident care workers, workers, an RN supervisor, chefs and tradespeople as needed.
I am someone who has come a long way, with help from the community, government and business. This is what I feel would make literacy programs better, so people will come to them and get the help they need: First, there needs to be more free adult programs available with support, such as daycare and counselling. Often adult learners have coping with low self-esteem and other personal issues that may get in the way of their learning. They need lots of encouragement and they often need a few second chances, especially after a lifetime of low self-esteem, putdowns and being in dead-end jobs.
Second, there needs to be more assessments available for adults, so they can be placed in the proper level. Reading is the first step to learning and studying. If we cannot read, we cannot study. We all need the basics, but we also need to start at a level that is right for the individual. Otherwise, it is not as easy. It is easier to give up.
Third, there needs to be aptitude tests, so adults can target their learning toward something that is right for them. People are more motivated when they can see a future for themselves. We need to encourage people in trades and other skills and not just get ready for more low-end possibilities.
Fourth, there needs to be adult learners involved in creating a good literacy system, especially some kind of learners groups, so that individuals, businesses and other organizations can obtain more information directly from adults who have literacy or learning challenges.
We have many good ideas. In fact, a friend of mine, a Canadian learner, was recently elected to the International Council for Adult Education because they believe in the importance of the voice of the learners.
The bottom line is, if we help an adult to improve himself or herself, it has many positive effects. It gives the children at home a good example. There is also a positive effect in the community and across the country.
In my own situation, both my children have gone on to higher education. I have a good job and I create jobs for other people, but I give back to society with all the volunteer work I do. As a friend of mine says, what goes into your mind now comes out over a lifetime. Those are powerful words.
Let me tell you that there is no better feeling than knowing I can support myself and have the independence and freedom to do what I want and not be beholden to anyone.
Literacy programs have helped me and I know they have helped hundreds of other people. Still, many others need help. Let us work together to build the literacy system in this country. More important, we can make all others help society.
I was talking to a government agent yesterday, and I was telling him about the trip up here. I was bragging to everybody. He said, ``You would be surprised about the people in this office who have low literacy skills.'' I nearly fell through the floor. I know it is there, but people are beginning to recognize it.
We can help educate people in these positions, so that they are not scared about losing their jobs or the risk of embarrassment. That is very important.
We also need parenting, coping and nutritional skills for people, how to buy groceries and clothing on a fixed income, how to deal with health issues, and opportunities to enhance their lives.
There is no face to illiteracy: illiterate people can be poor or rich; they can be people in an office, who can hide the difficulties they are having.
There can be low literacy skills at home. It is very important to bring up the adult as well as the child, because that child will not go any higher than the example he or she has at home. That is why I stress that examples must come from the bottom and the top.
There are seven of us in the learners' advisers network. We have done work with Helen Simpson, Sue Nielson and others, and with focus groups. We have a lady who has just come back from world health and literacy in Africa. We are full of knowledge. We are only too glad to help when we can.
The Chairman: Our next panellist is Richard Miller, who is from Clarenville, Newfoundland. He goes to the Marine Institute affiliated with Memorial University. He is married, with a son and daughter.
Richard Miller, as an individual: It is a pleasure to have the honour to be here in Ottawa today. I want to thank Senator Fairbairn for giving me the opportunity to come here, as well as the committee.
I would like to talk about the importance of literacy and education. Before I came back to education, I hid my inability to read and write; even my own wife did not know for many years. There were struggles in my life that finally brought me to literacy.
One of these was working on oil barges as a deck hand. In that job, you take chances not knowing how to read. Fortunately, I was lucky there were no accidents as a result of my not knowing how to read.
I was 27 years old when I took the first step toward an education. I left school at a very young age to go fishing and to work in the woods. I did not know how to read or write. I had covered up the fact I could not read or write. I guess my wakeup call came one summer afternoon when my son was playing in the backyard. He cut his little finger and came running into the house. I had to call for help. I could not find a phone number in the phone book. I did not know what to do. My son was young and the cut was deep. It was only luck that a friend came in at the time of the accident, called the doctor and took us to the clinic.
That night, I took a long walk and was thinking how helpless I was. I could not even help my son.
The next morning, I told my wife I had to do something. She told me to try to get into school. She called the college and an instructor told her to tell me to come in. I went in for a test to see what level to start on. I could not even do the first question.
The next step for me was to call Laubach Literacy. I was told by a friend that these people could help me. They asked me to talk to Ms. Myrtle Elliott. She helped me to learn to read and write, and I worked four hours a week one- on-one for six months. I then moved on to a reading course. I was now reading books, and words were slowly coming together. I started off in a level 1 course with Mr. Nick Donovan. He helped me with my reading and gave me the support to keep going. He was there to help me. He put in a lot of time working with me. There was no way he was going to give up on me.
I had many setbacks that caused me to give up, but then I would start again. It was when I started going to the Laubach Literacy council meetings and went to the AGM that I had a chance to meet learners like myself. I kept going. New doors were opening to me. My reading got better and soon I was talking out loud to whoever would listen.
Then I went back to the College of the North Atlantic. With the help of Mr. Donovan, my instructor, I was on my way to an education. From then on I kept thinking positively, and I set small goals at a time.
I am now finishing up my bridge watchman academic courses at the Marine Institute of Memorial University. I will shortly be leaving for a 60-day, on-the-job training on an oil tanker that will take me to many different parts of the world.
Knowing what I know now about safety, if someone offered me $50,000 a year to work on a ship and I did not know how to read, I would not take it. I would be taking my life and that of all the others on the ship into my hands.
Think about it: If someone could not read labels and put fuel in the wrong tanks or hit the wrong button, the whole ship could blow up in seconds. We would not even have time to get out of our bunks.
It is all so important, what we are learning. We must have safety backgrounds. Years ago, we could get by on the buddy system or take crazy chances. That does not work anymore.
I would be surprised to meet anyone on these tankers who could not read.
I may continue with my education or may never go further; it is only months down the road to a good paycheque. I feel as if I just want to work at my trade after this and support my family, after all the support they have shown me.
I am grateful for the opportunities I have now. There have been so many people in my life who have helped me. Without the support of my wife and my daughter, Natasha, and my son, Adam, I might not have made it this far.
It is important to educate the workforce. For example, I recall one time working on the barge. I had just come off my shift and had marked my tanks with tape, so I could verify what fuel was in each tank. When I came off my watch, someone had removed the tape. When I went back on my watch the next morning, at 4:00, I had turned on the valves, took a chance and was about to put jet fuel into a stove tank when a co-worker noticed what I was doing and he turned the valve off. It could have been a bad accident. I could have blown the whole works up in a few seconds.
That is one of the points that shows how important it is today to be educated in the field; even with my job coming up now, working on tankers, on chemicals and all kinds of different liquid gases that these tankers will be carrying. It would be almost impossible to work on board these ships; you would not get aboard without having an education today.
Literacy and education have changed my life and my heart is there. It will always be there. I thank the committee very much for giving me the opportunity to come here today and speak on behalf of literacy.
The Chairman: Our fourth and final panellist is Daniel Haines, who was born in Quebec, but has lived in Edmonton, Alberta for the last 30 years. He works for the Edmonton Food Bank, he is married with three children, and he has been a student with the Project Adult Literacy Society, PALS, for almost four years.
Daniel Haines, as an individual: Thank you very much for inviting me here today. I would like to tell you a little about myself and why adult literacy has become such an important issue to me.
When I started with PALS, my reading was at about Grade 7 level and my spelling was only at a Grade 2 or Grade 3 level. How can you spend 30 years in the same career, buy houses, raise a family, and not be able to read or write, and have no one find out? Here is my story:
From the time we were little, my brother and I were always getting into trouble. We were sent to reform school and then to a boys' farm. Shortly after that, we ran away. Although I do not recommend this for most people, if we had gone back home I know that sooner or later we would have ended up in prison or worse. Instead, when I was 15, my brother and I ran away to the United States and joined the circus. Yes, we really joined the circus.
That is where I spent the next 12 years. It was one of the greatest adventures of my life. I do not know if I can really explain how much that time meant to me. With the skills I learned from my circus days, I switched to the sign business fairly easily.
In those days, people were willing to hire me whether I had finished high school or not. I spent 30 years in the sign business and everyone just assumed that I could read and write. I was not going to tell them any different. I knew all the tricks to fool everyone. If there was any paperwork, suddenly I was too busy. That way I could take them home. If it was something I could not take home, I had cheat sheets around, so I could look up the words I needed. I would always do it when no one was around. If the kids needed help with their homework, I was too tired and got them to ask their mother instead.
Over the years, I have been a coach, the president of sports leagues and on local and provincial boards — and no one even knew. Then, a few years ago an injury forced me to make some changes in my life. For years, I struggled with an addiction and I finally realized that if I was to survive, I needed to join a recovery program; but to be successful, I knew I had to read better.
That is when I came to PALS. I would have never got up in public and talked about my weaknesses, and I admit I am still using tricks. There is no way I could write this on my own — not yet, anyway. I have two learning devices that I rely on. One is my tape recorder and the other is an assistant, usually my wife.
Most people can probably write a short speech or report in a few hours or maybe a day. I need at least a week. First, I take some time just to think about what I want to say. Then I put my ideas on tape. When I have enough material, my wife and I start to put it on paper. Once the final changes have been made, she will type it up for me and record it. That way I can listen and read along. I will do this for several days, until I am comfortable enough to read it out loud. We go through the same process for a report for a board meeting, a speech or even a letter.
I would not be where I am today without help. First, my wife, talked me into going to PALS, where I was paired up with a great tutor. This one-on-one learning was just what I was looking for. Soon, I wanted to get more involved. I wanted to give something back. I started by joining a student committee at PALS. Then, two years ago, I was elected to Literacy Alberta as a student director. I am also the Alberta Learner Representative on the national MCL board, the Movement for Canadian Literacy, and I have been to Ottawa twice for Literacy Action Day.
I do not know if I can explain how important these organizations are and how much they have helped me. This summer, all of the learner representatives from across Canada were invited to the summit held by the National Library of Canada here in Ottawa, to be part of their focus group. This fall, I organized a focus group in Edmonton that was part of a national survey on literacy and health. Without the MCL and government funding, I know I would not have had these opportunities.
Since the cuts in funding, Literacy Alberta had to lay off several staff members, cut programs and we will probably have to cancel our provincial workshop. The MCL is all but gone. They are down to one staff member. It is pretty hard to organize something like the conference I went to this summer with one person in the office and no money.
Four years ago, I was desperate and needed help. If groups like PALS, Literacy Alberta and the MCL were not there, I am positive I would not have made it through the recovery program. They literally saved my life. With the support of my family and the encouragement of the people at PALS, I have accomplished more than I ever dreamed was possible. They have made it easy for me to be able to look at myself without being embarrassed and to share my story. If our message of improving our own literacy can reach others and help them to help themselves, then we have all become part of the solution. I really believe that one person can make a difference. Thank you.
The Chairman: Thank you very much. Well done to all of you. Congratulations for the great progress you have made. Thank you for sharing those personal stories with us.
Senator Cochrane: I do not really have questions. I feel your stories tell the whole story, so there is no worry.
I must tell you — for some of those people who did not hear my address in the chamber — I did visit Ms. Smith's facility, and I was with her for a whole day. I had lunch at her facility. It is first class, and I must commend you.
I do have a question for Mr. Haines. Have programs been cut in Alberta?
Mr. Haines: Yes, they have. We have lost practitioners and a couple of secretaries. We even lost a treasurer. There is not enough money in the office to run everything. We are hoping for casinos, which is terrible.
Senator Cochrane: Is it their money that has been cut, or has the funding for that program been eliminated?
Mr. Haines: I am a student on the board. I guess you are right. The whole program has been cut, yes, the funding for that program in particular. It is hard for me to put it in words.
Senator Cochrane: I believe that you are all very smart people. It was worth the effort to come here.
Senator Fairbairn: I do not have a question, but I would like to say how proud I am of all four of you. Parliament Hill is a place for a lot of talk, and I wish that this could be heard within the House of Commons and the Senate, because no one can make the case better than your stories and the courage and skill that each one of you has had. You have given our committee, as far as literacy is concerned, the best study anyone could have given. I know it is not easy, but you are doing great work. You are teaching others as well in the process. I cannot think of anything better. We will, collectively, do everything we can to ensure that your programs are still there or, indeed, able to be brought back.
The Chairman: I might add, if you did not know already, that this is being broadcast. We can see the TV cameras around here. It is internally in the system, and eventually it will get out through CPAC onto their broadcasts as well. Other people will be able to see these people tell their stories.
[Translation]
Senator Chaput: Ms. Cadieux, I have heard you speak before. What was it that made you decide to make public the fact that you could not read?
Ms. Cadieux: It was because I only had five minutes, I panicked! I had to rush through it.
Senator Chaput: What was it exactly?
Ms. Cadieux: It was because my son moved. There was no work here so he moved to Vancouver. He had lent me his computer. We called each other, but, since we live off a modest pension, I said. . . I cannot talk long, Pat, because it is costing me too much. He said, ``Mom, I gave you my computer when I finished college, why do you not use it?'' I did not want to tell him that I could not read or write. I was afraid that he would say, ``Mom. . .'' that was the thing. So, after, I met a friend who got me into the school.
Senator Chaput: My question to all four witnesses is this: Had it not been for a major incident in your lives — for one person, it was her son, for another it was an accident and for someone else, it was something else — would you have had the courage to admit that you could not function like other people? Does there have to be a trigger?
Ms. Cadieux: I do not know. It is also the fact that you get tired of lying. You go to see the doctor, you have to take off your glasses and then you know that you are going to have to fill out some blasted paperwork. That was the worst part of not being able to read. You do not want to look like an idiot.
[English]
Ms. Smith: I mentioned people with low self-esteem, which we have. I had a booth at the farmers market for 17 years, and one day a judge's wife came up, Linda Fitzgerald, and she hugged me and told me how proud she was of me and how much she admired me. No one ever told me they were proud of me in my life. I undertook to tell her about my low literacy skills, and that is how I got started. Here I am today, less than ten years later. It just took a hug. It is the power of one person; it only takes one person to make a difference in someone else's life.
Mr. Miller: I am not sure what I would have done. I think the wake-up call, like I said, was my son's accident. At that time, I was feeling that I was pretty smart. I had a good paycheque coming in and a mortgage at the time, and everything was going good. I was pretty good at hiding the truth and keeping my secret. I do not know where my life would have ended up.
Mr. Haines: My situation is probably the same as Mr. Miller's. If I did not have my disease and if I did not want to straighten out my life, would I have changed? I really do not know. I am an alcoholic. I got lucky when I was bowling one day. I met my wife, and she is a proofreader. It was fate.
Senator Callbeck: Thank you for coming today. Certainly, your stories are an inspiration to us and to the public viewing these proceedings on television. I commend you for what you have accomplished in your lives; it is marvellous. No doubt that will encourage many others to come forward.
I want to ask about the stigma around this. How can we encourage more people to become involved in literacy programs? What can we do about this stigma?
Mr. Haines: You have to get people like us, so that people can see that others face this same problem. Someone will not climb out of the closet if he or she does not have to, but if they see other people, who have met with success because they have opened up, then maybe they will come forward.
Ms. Smith: My reply is the same as Mr. Haines'. Local recognition is important. Get out there and promote by talking to schools, public groups or to anyone else. Stick your face out there and make yourselves heard. When they see that you did it, then they know that they can do it too. There should be short skits in the paper each week of someone who has met with success. It could even be on the news or different areas to promote someone. People might say, ``If he or she can do it, then maybe I can do it too.''
Mr. Miller: I do a lot of public speaking to children, encouraging them to stay in school, and having an 11-year-old daughter is a bonus. Having a second language, such as French, is good. My daughter is really good in French, and I encourage her learning.
The young generation need to be encouraged to stay in school and to build their confidence and self-esteem, so they can go forward in life with a solid, family-based foundation. My wife was always an encouraging person. She encouraged me and the children to stay in school. It is very important to continue the encouragement.
[Translation]
Ms. Cadieux: I am a grandmother with ten grandchildren, one of whom is 17 and dropped out last year. Because I talked to him repeatedly and told him, ``Look, do you want to be going back to school at my age?'' he went back to school. So I am happy. He learned from my experience. It is a good idea to go into the schools and tell kids this because young people do not understand this. When they see what someone has experienced, they understand. You have to cross the ``t''s and dot the ``i''s for them. And I have other grandchildren who are also growing up.
[English]
Senator Trenholme Counsell: This has been another experience of a lifetime and we appreciate your presence today. You have been the real teachers and motivators and an inspiration for us. We know about the cuts to literacy. I have listened carefully to the stories and, even before you received the call to testify today, you knew about these cuts. How widespread do you believe the awareness, concern and fear is regarding the cuts to literacy in Canada?
[Translation]
Ms. Cadieux: A lot of people have talked about this in the press. The cuts spread fear among learners. When we heard on the radio about $17 million in cuts, we thought, ``What is going to happen?'' This is something that has made learners afraid.
[English]
Ms. Smith: When you think that 42 per cent of the people have literacy problems, it is scary and something has to be done. Yes, we are scared. Some of us are working our way up the ladder, but what about all the rest that are not doing that? They need a chance, because it will only get worse if they do not have a chance. That is why there are so many accidents in the workforce — people cannot read the directions. People are getting killed; people are not able to make a living. Unless we help them, they will be in the system the rest of their lives. Let us give them a hand up instead of a handout. Provide for the families and be proud.
Senator Munson: With that, what is your single message to government today?
[Translation]
Ms. Cadieux: We need a little more money to use the printer that I want and to be able to do homework at home, we need more money. Thank you for having invited me.
[English]
Ms. Smith: We need the funding restored to support all the literacy programs and to get Canada up and running again with literacy. We need the help.
Mr. Miller: In our province of Newfoundland and Labrador and throughout Canada, we need these programs. It is important for government to see the importance of literacy and keeping people in the system.
Mr. Haines: It is very important to get the funding back. We do not want to lose any more people than we have already lost.
Senator Cook: I congratulate you. You have made your own way by walking it, and you have done a commendable job. Mr. Haines, you are doing on-the-job training on an oil tanker. What are you doing exactly?
Mr. Miller: It is a bridge watchman's course, which will qualify me to work on the bridge of a ship.
Senator Cook: Through the eyes and ears of the captain, you have come a long way. I am from Newfoundland. I am known for my forthrightness.
There was great concern in my province when the announcement came. My premier put funding into place for the existing programs. I have not heard anything since. Senator Cochrane is a Newfoundlander also. I was thought, at the time, that it was temporary. For me to understand that the program money was being reallocated, messages are not always clear. The result was cuts. That was not the first message I heard. Rather, I heard that it would be done differently, but that is not to be so. Therefore, I am learning just as you are learning.
What message would you have? Are you content with the path that brought you to your literacy? Was it the right one, or is there always another way to achieve your goal? Are you comfortable with the stream in which you found yourself?
Mr. Miller went to the school and then moved on to the College of the North Atlantic. Were you comfortable in your stream? Maybe, Ms. Smith, would there have been another way? Have you thought about that?
Ms. Smith: We must encourage people at a much younger age to do better with their lives and they will not be in my situation. I am one of the lucky ones, but I had the drive, determination and stubbornness.
I have been a single parent for 21 years and when raising my family, I had to put bread and butter on the table. That is what I did. I was not in any system. I was making bread and butter. I did not have time to think of an education until my kids got older and independent. Then I could start on myself.
We must make help accessible to parents at a younger age, so they can work with their children and come up through the stream with them, not wait until those parents are 49 or 50, like I did.
Senator Cook: Do you see this funding cost as a deterrent to that?
Ms. Smith: Yes. We have to see more support.
Senator Keon: You are four very unusual people, but there must be large numbers of people out there, who are not even aware of the programs you have tapped. Do you feel there is a need for promotional programs, particularly on television, since that is the way to reach people who cannot read?
Ms. Smith: Yes, especially on the news where more people are watching, and also on radios. Sometimes in corners of the mall, if you put a television office on a private corner with a tape playing all the time people would see it because people are hanging around the malls.
[Translation]
Ms. Cadieux: I think it would be a great idea what the gentleman talked about, to spread the word on TV, because there are many people who do not know how to read or write. Enough with the fancy words, we cannot understand them. But if there was a program to get people to call, I think that if I had had that, if I had seen someone on TV, perhaps I would have moved forward much faster.
[English]
The Chairman: Again, to all four of you, thank you very much for sharing your stories with us today. Congratulations for all of the accomplishments that you have personally made and the fact you are helping others in the community. We appreciate that.
I remind members of the committee that we have one more segment, in terms of literacy, scheduled for Friday, February 16, from 9 a.m. until 1 p.m. Provincial coordinating entities from across the country will attend.
The committee adjourned.