Canadian Heritage Committee on Feb. 20th, 2019

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Then why not use the word “variety”?

[Prof. Dwight Newman]

—but there could be more clarity there too.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Good. Thank you.

Would you submit possible suggestions for those two wording things, because funding is critical? Would you submit that?

[Prof. Dwight Newman]

I would be pleased to submit some written materials. I didn't think I could in advance of this session—ironically due to language rules, because if there weren't time for it to be translated, it wouldn't make its way to the committee anyway.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

I'd appreciate it if you would do that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Thank you very much.

In that sense, to all of the witnesses, you can all provide written materials afterwards if there are additional things you would like to add.

Mr. Nantel, you have five minutes.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Newman, Mr. Marceau and Ms. Grant, thank you very much for being here today.

My first question is for the people from the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs.

You established a parallel by talking about Israel's rich television production, which is all related to the use of Hebrew. I think Quebec also has a rich television production. The parallel between those two societies may appear strange, but both have that will to promote the country's difference and distinction. In that context, you are right to say that it is promising for the future of all first nations languages in Canada.

I know there are many differences between Israel's reality and that of all these nations in Canada, but who should be entrusted with determining which representative organizations could manage the application of our societal choices?

[Richard Marceau]

Thank you for your question, Mr. Nantel.

Like Quebec, Israel is a very rich society in terms of culture. That may be due to the fact that those two societies are surrounded by different cultural and linguistic groups. There is also a will to affirm their difference.

You are asking me what organizations should be selected. When it comes to Canada's indigenous peoples, it is very difficult to see a single solution. The situation in Nunavut is very different from that in a small community or a small reserve in British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Quebec or Ontario.

One of the bill's benefits is the flexibility provided not only to the government, but also to the indigenous languages commissioner to adapt their actions to communities' needs. The federal government has a role to play in terms of providing support and receiving requests from communities. I think that is why the Assembly of First Nations is so in favour of the bill.

It is up to first nations and indigenous peoples to define their objectives. The federal government and, I hope, other levels of government—one of your colleagues mentioned this earlier—will support those objectives.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you.

If possible, I would like to hear your comments, Mr. Newman. You mentioned the participation of provinces. Do you think something should be set out to guarantee that participation? In terms of education, this is after all an important phase of the potential implementation.

[Prof. Dwight Newman]

Certainly clause 8 speaks to the possibility of co-operation with the provinces, which I think is very constructive.

I'm not sure that other means are to be found in the legislation itself so much as in constructive dialogue with the provinces to bring them on board, and that's an important ongoing initiative to engage in. We do live in a federation, and it's not the place of the federal government to legislate requirements on the provinces. To the extent that clause 6 appears even in the slightest to do that, there's a potential obstacle to federal-provincial co-operation if the federal government interprets the Constitution in a way that provinces disagree with.

I would hope that all provinces would enter into constructive dialogue and that there would be co-operation among federal, provincial, territorial, and other governments, including indigenous governments.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Do you think the bill should necessarily contain a clear reference to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples?

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

You have about 20 seconds.

[Prof. Dwight Newman]

I think that reference to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is very appropriate. I think there are clear references to that. For example, paragraph 5(g) speaks to a purpose of the bill in advancing the achievement of the objectives of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as it relates to indigenous languages. That's an important reference and I think a very appropriate sort of reference.

The United Nations declaration provisions on languages are more limited than those in some other indigenous rights instruments. I mentioned the American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, a document recently adopted in the Organization of American States. Just in the last year or two Canada took a non-position on that declaration. It's interesting that it didn't go further in support of that declaration.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

That would be done in specific provisions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

I'm going to have to cut it there because we're already over time.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Okay.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

I wanted to make sure that we have time for Mr. Tootoo, so we will be going to him for five minutes, please.

[Hunter Tootoo, Independent, Nunavut, NU]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and everyone, for allowing me to ask some questions.

I know I probably surprised a few people today. I'm very confident that through this committee process and my discussion with the minister that, with some amendments, including with the Inuit, we will be able to come to some common ground so that we will have unanimous support at third reading. I want to make that very clear right off the bat. Those are topics for another meeting.

Professor Newman, while looking at the different clauses, I noticed that clauses 5 and 8, for instance, talk about co-operation with provincial governments. Provincial and indigenous governments are mentioned throughout the bill. From your point of view, would that include territorial governments, or are they excluded by their not being named here?

Thank you.

[Prof. Dwight Newman]

It would be preferable to specifically enumerate territorial governments within the bill as well.

[Hunter Tootoo, Independent, Nunavut, NU]

Okay. Thank you.

Again, Mr. Newman, I'm not sure if you're familiar with the Nunavut Agreement and the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement. It's an anomaly; it's unique. It's a land claims agreement with Inuit that instead of choosing to go to self-government, as in Nunatsiavut where a lot of these things are geared toward, they chose to have a public government to administer all of the programs and services.

In the beginning of the bill, in the definitions where it talks about “indigenous governing body”, the unique situation of Nunavut, where the land claims agreement chose to have a public government to administer the territory, should be included because if I read this “indigenous governing body” wouldn't cover the territorial government that has the responsibility for delivering programs and services, especially with the languages as well.

Thank you.

[Prof. Dwight Newman]

I agree that it would be preferable to include a specific reference to territorial governments. It may be necessary to refer to Nunavut differently from the other two territorial governments, even though that would require further thought. As you highlight, it arises as a public government in response to a modern treaty, and has a bit of a different relationship to the country than the other two territories. It is ultimately public government. Territorial governments are not listed or enumerated in the act, and they should be.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Thank you very much.

We will now go to Mr. Badawey for the final five minutes.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

I'm going to ask some of the same questions I asked the previous presenters, with respect to some of the programs we're already starting on in our part of the world. Down in Niagara, we're putting together, for lack of a better word, a “platform” that would really promote indigenous languages and indigenous education. With what you're doing in your area of expertise, how would you move forward with the different platforms we have put together locally and promoted? How would you actually move forward in some of those programs? What are you trying to do in your different areas, as well as with different languages?

[Richard Marceau]

Is the question for the professor or for us?

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

It is for all three of you.

That's a good point.