Evidence of meeting #144 for Canadian Heritage in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was language.
A video is available from Parliament.
3:45 p.m.
Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, CPC
Thank you.
Ms. Gould, let me congratulate you on teaching your children the Mi'kmaq language. I see you have a number of initiatives. At the community level, how do you see the impact of the legislation and its impact on promoting the Mi'kmaq language?
3:45 p.m.
Director of Programs and Services, Mi'kmaw Kina'matnewey
Thank you.
What I see the impact being is that we're ready.... In terms of readiness, over the past 18 months, we have been developing language plans for all of our 13 communities in Nova Scotia. In terms of planning, there is no one-size-fits-all model for language reclamation. You don't start at one point and end up somewhere else. It's not an approach that will work for everybody, and so there is a customization approach to every single community, depending on its total population of speakers and what resources are available to them.
In terms of readiness, I state here today that Nova Scotia has developed our plans. We have looked forward, and we're constantly remeasuring and revising our plans to fit the needs of today. We're looking at all populations of speakers, not only our older generation of speakers, but definitely focusing more specifically on the emergent speakers and developing new speakers.
3:45 p.m.
Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, CPC
Okay.
I also want to thank you for your recommendations. You have submitted suggestions in writing, particularly on section 24, which deals with research. Your comment has been clearly heard. We had representatives from the Assembly of First Nations tell us that it is important that the research be done in partnership. Your point on intellectual property is well noted.
In closing, Ms. Onowa, do you have another recommendation? Is there anything in the legislation that you think is important? You mentioned rights.
I may be running out of time.
3:45 p.m.
Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, CPC
Ms. Onowa, do you have another recommendation or amendment to the bill to improve it?
3:45 p.m.
Associate Professor, Indigenous Education, University of Victoria, As an Individual
Is that regarding clause 24?
3:45 p.m.
Associate Professor, Indigenous Education, University of Victoria, As an Individual
It's the recommendations that I put in my notes about “by and with”. And if you've heard from NSERC, I hope that this would support the whole tri-council's approach at this point.
I strongly support Blaire's position and any indigenous community's position, who are better positioned to also put forward the argument for stronger language around intellectual property rights.
I don't see the clause that speaks to that specifically, but I could do a subsequent submission regarding that if I can find it later.
3:45 p.m.
Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, CPC
Okay, first nation-led and intellectual property for research....
Thank you.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Julie Dabrusin
In fact, it's open to all of the witnesses to provide submissions if you have extra information that you want to submit to us after you've provided your testimony.
We are now going to Ms. Jolibois, for seven minutes, please.
February 21st, 2019 / 3:45 p.m.
NDP
Georgina Jolibois NDP Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
Thank you very much. Masi cho.
It's nice to hear these presentations and get really clear perspectives. The input is tremendous.
I appreciate the witnesses who have come forward and who continue to come forward. I recognize the importance of our language being secured and safe for future generations. Since the committee started hearing from witnesses, there were some pieces where I've felt nervous, and I am encouraged by hearing various presentations.
As we know, in Saskatchewan, and I'm sure in other provinces, education is a provincial responsibility. However, the number of children—first nations, Métis and Inuit—we send to provincially run public or private school systems.... If we did the research, I'm assuming that number would be very high. I'm hearing in these hearings that the provincially responsible systems won't necessarily be a part of funding processes or be included in this bill. I worry about that.
Without provincial, territorial and federal agreements, do you think this bill will ensure inclusion of indigenous languages in education?
This is for both, if you have the chance to take a look at that.
3:50 p.m.
Associate Professor, Indigenous Education, University of Victoria, As an Individual
I appreciate the question. That's why I spent the majority of my speaking time on the issue. It's probably the biggest issue that I have with the bill. This is one of my areas of scholarly research, and the concern that I have is that at this time we have no comprehensive support system in Canada to develop, implement and support immersion education from preschool to grade 12. Every immersion school or preschool that exists in Canada right now has been done absolutely by bootstraps, by the hard work, blood, sweat and tears, and by the sheer will of those communities, and sometimes by working around very difficult existing policies.
That's why I brought forward Jordan's principle. It might be controversial, but I stand by the comparison with Jordan's principle. I think we have the same issue in education. We have a jurisdictional overlap and complexities that indigenous children's rights should supersede. We need a more comprehensive support system for indigenous communities to ensure the right to educate our children in their languages.
I found the bill to be quite silent on that issue. In the couple of clauses that I picked up on I'm just concerned that the bill has this equation between indigenous rights and complying with provincial jurisdictions, which in regard to indigenous language education has gotten us nowhere, and in fact has been a huge hindrance. I could speak to you after this session for a long time about how that has been the case province by territory.
3:50 p.m.
NDP
Georgina Jolibois NDP Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
That will be very helpful, and I will take you up on that offer. My office will get in touch with you.
Blaire.
3:50 p.m.
Director of Programs and Services, Mi'kmaw Kina'matnewey
You talked about provinces and territories. I cannot speak to that in Saskatchewan, but in Nova Scotia we have a good foundational working relationship with the province. We are in the process of developing our own legislation specific to Mi'kmaw people as we are one language group in Nova Scotia.
In terms of educational rights, in the interests of education our children do attend provincial schools. However, we do have an authority, Mi'kmaw Kina'matnewey, where our communities have the jurisdiction over education through self-governance. Further to that, it does not displace the need. I think the needs are there. I would want to allow nations to decide for themselves and in their respective provinces and territories to create those regulations and standards of what that working relationship looks like in indigenous languages, because they vary from province to province.
3:50 p.m.
NDP
Georgina Jolibois NDP Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
Thank you very much.
Back to the legislation.... Since we have two minutes, can both of you re-emphasize how we can make improvements in these areas, and how we can help strengthen the legislation?
3:50 p.m.
Associate Professor, Indigenous Education, University of Victoria, As an Individual
My main recommendation was around adding a clause to recognize UNDRIP and particularly article 14, which speaks directly to our right to educate our children in our languages, and also to strengthen the language around indigenous rights over provincial jurisdictions. As Blaire just said, and maybe she can speak to this, maybe another clause needs to be added about how we're going to strengthen creating those agreements for education federally and provincially.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Pierre Nantel NDP Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
You're referring to the UNDRIP article. In my notes.... It could have been appropriate to refer to articles 11 to 16 explicitly.
3:55 p.m.
Associate Professor, Indigenous Education, University of Victoria, As an Individual
It could be. I was pointing to articles 13 and 14 as the ones that are specific to language, and particularly article 14, around education, is the one we're discussing now.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Pierre Nantel NDP Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC
Could you please reiterate how important...? Oh, I'm done. I'm sorry about that.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
Gordie Hogg Liberal South Surrey—White Rock, BC
Thank you.
Ms. McIvor, you outlined the principle with respect to education. You referred to indigenous people and how any research should be by and for indigenous people. I guess some of us here feel a little uncomfortable with the irony of our being able to provide some direction with respect to this legislation and that if that principle were to be carried out, we would have constitutional responsibility, obviously, for being able to put a framework in place.
My belief is that we should be laying out the values that reflect the kinds of comments you made. Subsequent to that, hopefully the commissioner and the directors, who we believe will be indigenous people, will be the ones who will actually operationalize these issues. Therefore, the operationalization would be carried out by indigenous people, for indigenous people, consistent with the principle you highlighted with regard to research.
You made reference to a national body and regional hubs. Certainly, the reports that we had said that there was some debate in terms of who would be the directors with respect to the commissioner: whether it should be regional representation or whether it should represent different indigenous bodies.
Could you talk a little more about that and how you would see that being best carried out?