Evidence of meeting #99 for Procedure and House Affairs in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was languages.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Arok Wolvengrey  Professor, Algonquian Languages and Linguistics, Department of Indigenous Languages, Arts and Cultures, First Nations University of Canada
Ellen Gabriel  As an Individual
Chief Perry Bellegarde  National Chief, Assembly of First Nations
Roger Jones  Special Advisor to the National Chief, Assembly of First Nations

12:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Thank you. Meegwetch.

We'll now go to Mr. Saganash.

April 26th, 2018 / 12:45 p.m.

NDP

Romeo Saganash NDP Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC

[Member speaks in Cree, interpreted as follows:]

Of all the things that are talked about, this means a lot, the way I see these things today. I thank all of you who have come here.

[English]

Ellen, it's good to see you. It hasn't even been 12 hours since the last time I saw you, in Montreal last night, but it's always a pleasure to have you in our different committees here in Ottawa.

I'll start with what I think is an easy question, for both of you.

National Chief Bellegarde, you talked about this indigenous languages act, which should be introduced, as you say, perhaps sometime this fall. I share that wish. You talked about co-development. I make a distinction between co-development and co-drafting. I'd like you to explain exactly where things are with that proposed act, because I hadn't been consulted on it until sometime last week.

Ellen, I'll address the same question to you. What has been your role in the development of the proposed indigenous languages act? Beyond the funding that you mentioned in your presentation, what other aspects would you like to see in the act? For instance, should this act recognize indigenous languages in this country as official languages? Both of you have talked about the founding languages, but I make a distinction between a founding language and recognition of an official language in constitutional terms.

National Chief, maybe you could start.

12:50 p.m.

National Chief, Assembly of First Nations

National Chief Perry Bellegarde

[Witness speaks in Cree]

Thank you so much, my friend, for the question about the difference between co-development and co-drafting.

Mr. Roger Jones sits at that table. He's also legal counsel. He's an individual who helped, for example, with co-developing or co-drafting the specific claims independent tribunal a few years back. We wanted someone with experience. I'm going to ask him to make some comments in response to that very good question from Romeo about how we are working with the Department of Canadian Heritage in getting this difficult task of indigenous language legislation done.

[Witness speaks in Cree]

He's a fluent Ojibwa speaker, too, but he's not too shabby for Anishnaabe, as we say.

12:50 p.m.

Roger Jones Special Advisor to the National Chief, Assembly of First Nations

Thank you, National Chief and members.

I'm pleased to be here and accompanying the national chief in his appearance on this critical issue. For us, at least through the Assembly of First Nations, it's been almost a year since we began focusing on this co-development exercise, which is defined by a certain set of principles that were adopted by all the parties last June.

It is a work in progress, there's no doubt about it, because this is generally something that doesn't happen regularly. There are also the rules around confidentiality, the parliamentary privilege right, and the reality that parliamentarians are the ones who normally see the first version of draft legislation, aside from the executive. We grapple with those kinds of issues. We'll figure them out as we get to that bridge.

What we've done to this point is that, based on the work that the Assembly of First Nations did in going out and engaging with our people to receive direction and instruction on what people expect should be in the legislation, we have moved that forward in the form of principles that we have worked out together with the Métis representation on our working group, with the Inuit representation, and with Canada's representation. We have four parties in this working group process. We're being methodical about how to move this all forward in order to really capture a consensus, as much as possible, among all parties.

We're at a point where we have agreed on a set of principles that should guide the preparation of the legislation. We need to transform those at some point into something that begins to take shape as legislative content. Ultimately, there will be a stage where there's drafting. We don't anticipate that it's going to happen for maybe three to four months. What we have discussed by way of the working group is that we have to facilitate a way in which the non-governmental parties—the Assembly of First Nations, the Métis, and the Inuit—can actually be included together with the federal government's drafting people, who normally come out of the Department of Justice.

We will obviously need, or the government will need, authorization from the executive in order to facilitate that process. In anticipation of doing that, we are trying to figure out what is the best way to be able to actually achieve really that co-drafting. One thing that I think we will also have worked on prior to that actual drafting exercise is that normally the drafting exercise is informed by drafting instructions, as we know. That will also have a role in setting out for the executive's consideration an approval to move that process forward.

I hope that answers your question.

12:55 p.m.

NDP

Romeo Saganash NDP Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC

I know my time is up, Chair.

12:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Ms. Gabriel, did you want to comment on that?

12:55 p.m.

As an Individual

Ellen Gabriel

Yes. I think it's an important question on the role that I've been involved in.

Romeo, it's good to see you within a span of 12 hours as well. It's always a pleasure.

One of the things that I think is really important to know is that I was involved in the engagement sessions. I finally got a look at the report. I think that one of the things that legislation needs to acknowledge is the ongoing assimilation of English and French in the schools and the serious damage that it's done. Andrea Bear Nicholas talks about the report and that the legislation should not be based solely on the sessions, but on existing documentation. She quotes Tove Skutnabb-Kangas' work, that there are these subtleties about the language that is being used and that indigenous languages are to be funded and available to all.

I think what really needs to be done is immersion so that all indigenous children have the ability to access their languages from preschool to grade 6. There's a wealth of English and French sources in popular culture that they can use. There can be after-school activities for learning how to write English and French, but it's important that children be able to speak that language. That needs to be considered when it comes to the funding of indigenous languages and the maintenance of indigenous languages, because English and French are still going to be impacting any kind of work that is done in the communities. It should be first and primarily for indigenous communities.

In everything that I've seen in grants by the Government of Quebec and the Government of Canada, it always needs to be accessed by the public. I agree that perhaps we should go outside our communities to have people speaking our language, which is fine, but if we look at the state of it and why it's endangered, we know those first language speakers are tired now. We need those young people to step up to the plate. The only way we're going to do it is if we're able to focus primarily on that recruitment and the activities of recruitment for those young speakers. They're asking too much. We're not at the stage of French and English. As Chief Bellegarde mentioned, there's no country to go to. For French and English, you can go to Europe to find it or you can go south of the border, but for us, our languages are alive in our community through those first language speakers. We need to make sure that it is protected and that it is provided the needed support so that eventually, we can open it to the public.

We have two non-indigenous people coming to our classes. We've opened it up to people from outside of the community, but I can't stress enough the challenges and the hardship we face because of project funding and Indian residential school mentality within the communities. I was told that Canadian Heritage would be doing engagement sessions, not consultations. I made that clear to Minister Joly. When they start in June, are these going to be consultations? She said no, that they are going to be engagement. That means they don't have to accommodate our concerns.

That's where I have serious concerns in regard to how this is being developed. Yes, there are four parties, but who is really representing the cultural centres in this? Who is really representing those first language speakers, and the women, and some of the men, who have been nickel-and-diming the language revitalization in our communities for decades? That's where I think that, if it's really co-development, you need to include those people who have been at the front lines all this time.

[Witness speaks in Mohawk]

Thank you very much.

1 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Our time is up, but I'll ask our witnesses if they'd like to make any closing comments.

Go ahead, Chief Bellegarde.

1 p.m.

National Chief, Assembly of First Nations

National Chief Perry Bellegarde

Again, thanks for the opportunity. I know we got off track a little, but we want to see interpreters in the House of Commons. For sure, that will send a strong statement and a strong message.

There are something like 338 members, so eventually you might get more MPs who speak more than just Dene, Cree, Mi'kmaq, and Mohawk, and that should be accommodated. That would send a strong statement about reconciliation. I don't think that's an insurmountable task at all. We have the resources. We have people who can provide that skill to the House of Commons.

I just want to say as well that Tracey Herbert at the First Peoples' Cultural Council in British Columbia has a good model. Out of the 58 plus indigenous languages, 34 are in British Columbia. They have a good model for revitalization that should be looked upon to learn from.

For the lobbying, it's not just the feds. The B.C. government put $50 million in its provincial budget for language promotion and revitalization. Each province can do things too.

I just want to thank you for this opportunity. Please read this report. We want to get the legislation done properly by the fall so it meets the proper time frames to get this done.

[Witness speaks in Cree]

1 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Merci.

Ms. Gabriel.

1 p.m.

As an Individual

Ellen Gabriel

I don't know if I can really add to anything that's been said in this period. I want to salute Chief Bellegarde.

[Witness speaks in Mohawk]

It's nice to see you, if only virtually. Thank you.

Really, as Mr. Bellegarde said, we might be a bit off track, but it's really important for a policy to be created to provide simultaneous translation to any person of indigenous ancestry, to give them the ability to speak in their first language. The opportunity to express their subtle and complex ways and cosmovision within Canada's Parliament is not just part of reconciliation, it is part of decolonization.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

1 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Ms. Sahota.

1 p.m.

Liberal

Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON

I have one quick question for you, Chief.

I can't leave today without really understanding properly why this next meeting you are having is going to be the first where you're using translation for the indigenous languages.

Why hasn't it happened yet? We're having this discussion about the practicality of doing it here in the House of Commons, and I want to know if that is one of the reasons you have not done it thus far.

1 p.m.

National Chief, Assembly of First Nations

National Chief Perry Bellegarde

Yes, that's part of it. Out of the 634 first nations across Canada, for example, we have 58 different nations and tribes. It's very complex. We have one Lakota first nation out of those 634. Did you see Dances with Wolves? They're speaking Lakota. If the chief from that community and that first nation wants to speak Lakota, that's their nation; that's their tribe.

In many cases, though, because of colonization and the residential schools, many of the chiefs' first language is not their language. That's what we see. That's how far that residential school system has hurt our languages: even our elected chiefs don't have that first nations language as their first language. Our AFN is an assembly of chiefs, but a lot of them don't speak their first language. That's why.

We're doing it for the first time now because we are trying to educate people that at least we can do it in the Assembly of First Nations. We're supposed to be an assembly of first nations—indigenous nations, not Indian Act bands. We're trying to wake ourselves up to get back to our identity and our language.

That's why it's the first time we're doing it, and we want to keep doing it so that eventually there will be nothing but indigenous languages spoken, and you'll have 58 knobs on your earphone. That's the goal.

1 p.m.

Voices

Oh, oh!

1:05 p.m.

Liberal

Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON

I hope so. Good luck.

1:05 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Larry Bagnell

Thank you, everyone.

For committee members who weren't at the last meeting, remember that on May 8, we're doing our recommendations on electronic petitions.

Thank you to the interpreter, Kevin Lewis.

The meeting is adjourned.