The agreements, while promoting dialogue between the Community and the government authorities, promote a more effective and satisfactory partnership with the Community and the Government. The text defines cooperation beyond the direct financial support of community organizations and defines the responsibilities of both parties. The agreements also address the need to update our governance practices to reflect the results and recommendations of recent evaluation exercises. The revered Mélanie Joly, Minister of Tourism, Official Languages and La Francophonie, announced that $60 million (over four years) has been allocated to increase funding for provinces and territories to support a living and quality education of minority languages, as set out in the 2019 budget. This credit is intended to supplement the more than $235 million of funds already available to the provinces and territories each year to serve the growing number of students from minority language communities. This is the first increase in more than 10 years. This is problematic because provincial and territorial governments depend on census data to determine the budget for minority language education and to determine the need to build new schools. It also impedes the ability of minority language education boards to take appropriate measures to attract potential rights holders and keep students in the system throughout their academic careers. In particular, the agreements aim to ensure that the necessary mechanisms are in place for: the new protocol differs from that of the past, allowing for greater consultation and cooperation with educators and greater transparency in communicating the programme`s results. These measures create the conditions for inclusive and participatory growth in minority communities in the official language.
They will also help Canadians assess and understand how federal government spending strengthens minority communities in the official language and promotes secondary language learning. Annual or multi-year agreements are concluded with provincial and territorial governments for minority language and second language education. The Attorneys General of six other provinces and territories had joined British Columbia on the grounds that economic grounds could justify violations of Section 23. However, the Supreme Court held that these grounds could not justify a violation of education rights if there is a likelihood of assimilation.