Indigenous Languages Bill
Second Reading--Debate Adjourned
May 16, 2019
Moved second reading of Bill C-91, An Act respecting Indigenous languages.
He said: I rise today as the sponsor to Bill C-91, An Act respecting Indigenous languages.
This year, 2019, is being celebrated around the world as the International Year of Indigenous Languages and that is because with 370 million Indigenous people in the world spread among 90 countries with Indigenous communities, over 5,000 different Indigenous cultures — and 2,680 Indigenous languages are in danger.
According to the 2016 Canadian Census data 1,673,785 people identified as Indigenous persons in Canada that year, but only 263,845 said they knew an Indigenous language well enough to speak, just 15.8 per cent.
Languages play an important role in the daily lives of all people. They are an important part of our identity. Canada’s longest-serving French Language Services Commissioner once told me that Indigenous youth were the only Canadians he had ever met who claimed a language as theirs that they could not speak. He related to us at the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that he often heard young Indigenous people asserting, “I want to speak my language,” in reference to their Indigenous ancestry, whereas he did not hear similar sentiments from English youth who wanted to learn French and vice versa. The French and English, he observed, saw each other’s languages as the language of others, not as their language as Canadians, despite years of trying to get them to see otherwise.
But that fact makes an important point for all of us.
Senators, if each you had your child or your grandchild taken away and raised in another language and culture where they were forbidden or even punished if they spoke your tongue, you would well understand how deep their desire and need was to relearn the language of their birth and the language of their parents, their grandparents and their community. Language is about who we are and who we want to be. It is fundamentally about identity.
According to UNESCO, it is through language that we communicate with the world. It is the means by which we speak of our needs and have them fulfilled. It is the manner by which we define our identity, express history and culture, learn, defend our rights and participate in society. It is a means by which we assert ourselves and take up the roles we were taught to do.
But our speaking our language helps others as well. Through language, people preserve a community’s history, its customs, traditions, memory, unique modes of thinking, meaning and expression. We use it to construct our future.
Language is pivotal to self-preservation, the protection of others, good governance, peace building, reconciliation and sustainable development.
Yet from the period of Confederation until the end of 20th century, a period of about 130 years, Canada did all that it could to eliminate Indigenous cultures and languages. Through the use of laws passed by our parliamentary ancestors, cultural practices and large gatherings where languages could be spoken were outlawed, education was taken away and access to justice was denied.
One hundred and fifty thousand children were forcibly removed from their families under threat of prosecution for those parents who resisted and were placed in institutions for the sole purpose of indoctrinating them into Canadian society. Hundreds of thousands more were required by law to go to non-residential schools where they were too forced to stop speaking their language and learn another.
Prime Minister Sir John A. MacDonald not only believed that Indigenous people who practiced their culture and language were savages, but that they needed to have them stripped away. In 1883, in Parliament he stated:
When the school is on the reserve, the child lives with its parent, who are savages, and though he may learn to read and write, his habits and training and mode of thought are Indian. He is simply a savage who can read and write.
The scale and intensity of these schools on the attack of culture and language was such that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission found that Canada had engaged in a process of cultural genocide in contravention of the International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
Canada and its institutions of governance and social influence systematically worked to destroy the structures and practices that allowed the cultural continuity of Indigenous peoples.
Legislation to advance and recognize Indigenous languages as a right was first called for by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples and by the First Nations Confederacy of Cultural Education Centres in the mid-1990s, then subsequently by the Assembly of First Nations in 1998. Federal legislation of this nature and scope was recommended in 2005 by the Indigenous-led federal Task Force on Aboriginal Languages and Cultures before being taken up again by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
The last time I spoke on Indigenous languages in this chamber, it was to a bill that Senator Joyal introduced at the beginning of this session. Senators, this is the third session where our honourable colleague introduced a private member’s bill to advance, recognize and respect Indigenous language rights in Canada.
I want to thank Senator Joyal personally for his efforts as an ally of Indigenous peoples on this important matter.
Over the past two years, government and the three national Indigenous organizations have consulted over 1200 individuals and organizations to develop the bill that is before us today.
The approach used in the development of Bill C-91 departed from the practice that was very much rooted in the past policies of government making unilateral decisions regarding matters impacting the lives of Indigenous people.
This bill is the government response to decades of calls to action from Indigenous governments, researchers and advocates to address the critical state of many Indigenous languages in Canada. It specifically aims to address the TRC Calls to Action 13, 14 and 15.
Bill C-91 was drafted to provide flexibility. It does not prescribe or predetermine how or what Indigenous people must do to revitalize their languages. It is structured to accommodate a multitude of approaches to support the reclamation and maintenance of Indigenous languages — from language master-apprentice approaches to the promotion and use of the language by an Indigenous government and in the media.
The bill provides that the Minister of Canadian Heritage may enter into different types of agreements or arrangements in respect of Indigenous languages with Indigenous governments or other Indigenous governing bodies, organizations, communities and people.
The bill also grants federal institutions the discretionary authority to provide translation or interpretation services for Indigenous languages as part of their operations.
Finally, the bill would establish the Office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages and set out its powers, duties and functions.
The preamble acknowledges the importance to this country’s evolution of Indigenous peoples’ linguistic and cultural diversity. Substantive provisions recognize the constitutional status of Indigenous languages related to rights under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, while enabling Indigenous people, with federal assistance, to continue to tackle the various stages of language vitality and the damage to them that has occurred over the past decades.
In addition, Bill C-91 seeks to achieve the objectives of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
For all the efforts that past governments have put into denigrating Indigenous languages, even greater efforts and investments must be made to help revitalize them. Budget 2019 identified an investment of $333 million over the next five years to support this initiative. This is currently being discussed and studied as part of the Budget Implementation Act.
If this bill does not pass, that money will be lost and the state of Indigenous languages will become more vulnerable than they currently are. We cannot and should not allow that to happen. This bill is far from perfect, but it can be the battering ram that busts down the door and gets us into the room where we can do the work that is needed.
I intend to work, for example, with Senator Patterson to bring about amendments to our committee to address the need for access to services in Inuktitut for the Inuit.
The government has acknowledged that this bill is a starting point and included a provision for mandatory five-year reviews when necessary adjustments and improvements can be made as required.
In the absence of a long-term funding commitment and recognizing the critical state of Indigenous languages, I suspect the bill could be improved and strengthened to ensure that a shorter review period be put in place than the five years the bill now calls for. In this early stage of recovery and reclamation, problems and solutions must be identified as they arise.
During the consultation sessions for the 2005 Task Force on Aboriginal Languages and Cultures, it was noted that the urgent call for immediate action is required to stem the loss of languages. That was almost 15 years ago.
In many communities, the situation is critical as the last living fluent speaker may have passed on. The hope of the language being passed on by way of oral tradition to the younger generation is gone. In fact, according to UNESCO, none of the more than 90 Indigenous languages in Canada can be considered safe. If immediate action is not taken, Indigenous peoples, communities and nations stand to lose a most valuable treasure, their first-language speakers.
Over the last two decades, the number of people with the ability to speak an Indigenous language has steadily declined. In 1996, 29 per cent of Indigenous people were able to speak an Indigenous language well enough to conduct a conversation. In 2006, just over 22 per cent of the Indigenous population could converse in an Indigenous language. By 2016, this figure had dropped to 16 per cent.
When an elder dies, “it’s like a whole library is gone,” says language teacher Betsy Kechego.
National Chief Perry Bellegarde provided testimony to the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples and spoke about his support for Bill C-91. He stated:
It has been 20 years since the Assembly of First Nations chiefs in assembly declared a state of emergency regarding First Nations languages.
The situation of their languages has worsened since that declaration. The opportunity to pass this legislation cannot be missed, as the decline in First Nation languages will continue to worsen until concerted efforts are made.
Likewise, President Clément Chartier of the Métis National Council expressed that the Metis Nation is fully supportive and encourages Parliament to enact Bill C-91. He spoke of the urgency to act, as there are fewer than a thousand, perhaps fewer than 700, Michif speakers, all of whom are primarily over the age of 65.
This bill responds to the future of Indigenous peoples as a distinct and unique part of society. As Ellen Gabriel of the Kanehsatà:ke Mohawk Nation, an advocate for the language and culture of her people, stated in her testimony before the committee:
We may call them ancient languages, but they are very much alive today. And I can tell you that, without a doubt, it enriches your life when you learn your own language. . . . When you are with a first-language speaker who thinks in the language, you get the breakdown of what these terms mean.
Allow me to close by recalling that reconciliation is not an end point. It is a mutually respectful relationship maintained and strengthened over time. This legislation has been called for by Indigenous organizations, commissions of inquiry and Indigenous people all across Canada for generations.
Honourable senators, if the preservation of Indigenous languages does not become a priority for us in this chamber, then what the residential schools failed to accomplish will come about through a process of systemic neglect. I urge you all to join me in supporting this bill so that we may see it passed before the end of the parliamentary session. Meegwetch.
Thank you, Senator Sinclair, for your great speech and supporting this important bill. I want to mention that today in the Le Droit Senator Cormier and I co‑signed an op-ed. I want to give you the translation of one of the paragraphs of this op-ed:
We cannot enhance the standing of French in Canada without considering the debate in Parliament on Bill C-91. As we saw in the Official Languages Act, the advancement of French which was made possible by Part 7 of the Official Languages Act played an important role in preserving and enhancing the vitality of French in several parts of Canada. As a linguistic minority, we should join in this fight to preserve Indigenous, Metis and Inuit languages and cultures.
That’s a translation of the article.
In your speech, you mentioned the commissioner of indigenous languages position. Have you given some thought to what powers the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages would have?
I realize I have a short time, so I’ll give a short answer. Yes. It’s in the bill. The bill itself contains a description of the powers. Let me point out very clearly that the role of the proposed Commissioner of Indigenous Languages is not anywhere close to the role and the powers that the French Language Services Commissioner has, and that’s one of the issues that Indigenous organizations wish to pursue.
Are you planning to read the forthcoming report of the Official Languages Committee on the role and powers of the Official Languages Commissioner and the limitations on those powers?
Yes, of course, I will. Thank you very much.
Honourable senators, I rise today to add my voice in support of Bill C-91, An Act respecting Indigenous languages.
I want to thank my colleague Senator Sinclair for introducing this important bill in such an informative, eloquent and compelling manner as only he can. Also thank you to Senator Gagné for your interventions.
As some of you know, my early studies were in linguistics and in the field of modern languages. I have also lived and worked in languages other than my own — Setswana in Botswana and Bahasa Indonesia in Indonesia.
When we are immersed in another culture and language, we come to understand the people and how they see the world.
I am proud to live in the territory known as Mikmaqi, the land of our colleagues Senator Christmas and Senator Francis. I am honoured to be a member of the Aboriginal Peoples Committee which completed the pre-study on Bill C-91. Like Senator Patterson, I’m honoured to be a member of the Arctic Committee.
In my remarks, I will touch briefly on the international, mention a beautiful local Nova Scotian example and finish with drawing all of our attention to the unique situation of the Inuit in Canada.
As Senator Sinclair mentioned, this bill is timely. It is coming to us in the International Year of Indigenous Languages, and it is urgent.
The International Year of Indigenous Languages aims to focus attention on the risks — and these are serious risks — confronting Indigenous languages, especially those significant for development, reconciliation, good governance and for peace building.
Award-winning Kenyan writer Ngugi wa Thiong’o said:
Language is a carrier of culture. Culture is a carrier of people’s values. Values are carriers of people’s outlook or conscience and sense of identity. Through language we can deduce the personality and the general perspective of the people. Language portrays people’s identity; therefore, to be without language is to be lost.
Like the Indigenous peoples of Canada, Kenyans have seen languages lost or threatened due to the long and deep effects of harsh colonization.
During the course of our pre-study of Bill C-91, we heard that the vitality of Indigenous languages varies across Canada. We heard of tragic losses of languages and we heard of many innovative, valiant and highly effective efforts of Indigenous peoples across Canada to reclaim, revitalize, promote and protect their precious and sacred languages.
In my own backyard, Mi’kmaw Kina’matnewey, or MK, is an organization that protects and promotes the educational and Mi’kmaq language rights of the Mi’kmaq people.
Earlier this week, I was thrilled to see on my Facebook feed that Public Radio International, PRI, broadcast the story of 16-year-old Eskasoni First Nation resident Emma Stevens singing the Beatles’ song Blackbird in Mi’kmaq — Buleeskeeyetch. Emma recorded the song as part of her school’s effort to celebrate the UN Year of Indigenous Languages. She says in the interview with PRI that the lyrics, “take these broken wings and learn to fly,” resonate with her. She has seen her language slowly diminishing, but singing this song in Mi’kmaq inspires her to learn her language and to show non-Mi’kmaq people the beauty of that language.
It is said that Paul McCartney wrote Blackbird about the civil rights movement in the U.S. People in Eskasoni draw parallels with their own oppression and struggle and also parallels with their strength and pride. I highly recommend you listen to the beautifully sung Mi’kmaq language song. Just Google Blackbird and Emma Stevens and you are in for a treat.
With an estimated 10,000 Mi’kmaq people in Eastern Canada and the Northeastern United States, it is critical to keep the Mi’kmaq language alive. It is also important and enriching for us, the neighbours of the Mi’kmaq people.
I would now like to bring to your attention the voices of some of the people we heard from not at our Aboriginal Peoples Committee but in our Arctic Committee. Our Arctic Committee has been working on a study which looks at the rapid changes in the Arctic and its effects on the people and the land.
Mr. Eirik Sivertsen, representing the county of Nordland in the Norwegian Parliament, said:
. . . we create and understand our world through the language we use, And, therefore, the language is the most important part of preserving or developing the culture of a people. If you don’t have your own language, your culture cannot survive. One of the main tasks must be to support Indigenous people with small and threatened languages to help them preserve and to develop their language in the modern world.
Aluki Kotierk, President of Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, was also clear in her presentation to our Arctic Committee. A fierce champion of the Inuktut language, she said — and she has taught us a lot about some of our historical commitments here. It’s important to listen to what has happened since Nunavut was created. She said:
I am here from Nunavut, the only jurisdiction in Canada where the Indigenous population is the majority. Spread over 25 communities, all fly-in communities, Inuit make up 85 per cent of the population. Roughly half of the Inuit are under the age of 25 years old. The first language of the majority of Inuit in Nunavut is still Inuktitut. Both French and English are minority languages.
She continued:
. . . I am sure that you are all very well versed on the legacy of colonialism and residential schools.
We heard our colleagues speak about this.
You are aware of the concerted efforts through assimilation policies that tried to strip us away from our language and our culture. Part of the reason why Inuit worked so tirelessly to settle the Nunavut Agreement was so that, as Inuit, we could continue to assert our self-determination and we could continue to have our Inuit culture and language thrive.
When we entered into our Nunavut Agreement with Canada, we had a healthy Inuktitut language. Our language is dying at 1 per cent per year.
On July 14, 1998, the then Finance Minister Paul Martin and his officials informed a federally appointed interim commissioner for Nunavut that Inuit would not receive federal funding for Inuktitut as the working language of the territorial government. Instead it was stated that Inuktitut would be addressed at a later date.
So the promise of it being addressed at a later date.
In 2001, the first data set was gathered after Canada decided to postpone funding Inuktitut for our government services. At that time, 85 per cent of Inuit in Nunavut still declared Inuktitut as their mother tongue, but more importantly, 68 per cent of Inuit said it was still the main language used in our homes. This, despite the efforts that were made to make people speak English.
As of 2016 [15 years later] these numbers have dropped by 20 per cent. Mother tongue Inuktitut is now 63 per cent. Home language Inuktitut is 49.7 per cent. It is 20 years since the Liberal government at the time said they would address Inuktitut as the working language of our government at a later date, and 20 per cent of our language is gone.
This is significant.
According to Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms, all Canadians are entitled to essential public services of a reasonable quality. Inuit are not receiving essential public services of a reasonable quality because they are not being delivered in Inuktitut. . . .
Inuit lives should not be put at risk because they are not able to receive appropriate health services in Inuktitut.
She continued:
The federal government has committed to developing an Indigenous language legislation.
It is the bill we are discussing today.
This is a good initiative. In Nunavut, Inuktitut is already recognized as an official language territorially. What we need is for the federal government to recognize that Inuktitut is an official founding language of the Nunavut territory. Maybe only then would Nunavut Inuit be able to reasonably expect quality essential services delivered in Nunavut.
Then I go on to just two more people, and I’m using their voices because they are powerful and they should be amplified in this chamber.
The President of Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, Natan Obed, also addressed our committee on this bill:
On the First Nations Inuit and Metis languages act, we’ve worked with this government, from its inception, on the ambition of an Indigenous languages bill. The level of ambition was something that was basically unfettered until recently. We had hoped to have official language status for Inuktitut in Inuit Nunangat, and we still do. We hoped to have service delivery rights in relation to Inuktitut in league with the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and its implementation in this country and the rights we have as Indigenous peoples globally beyond that declaration.
It is appropriate, colleagues, that today we have both Bill C-91, the Indigenous languages legislation, and Bill C-262, An Act to ensure that the laws of Canada are in harmony with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
And the final voice that I will amplify here is that of Paul Quassa, Premier of Nunavut. Mr. Quassa said:
. . . the lives of the Inuit were forever changed by the policies and programs that took Inuit from their homes, denying them their language and culture, placing them in unfamiliar lands and communities, and separating them from a way of life they had always known. Many of us lost our language, our culture, our traditions, which is, of course, our identity.
Many struggled with trying to reconcile the ways of the past and their present. Many turned to alcohol and drugs, to violence or to suicide and have been profoundly impacted by these actions, and many today are still struggling in these ways.
Reclaiming our Inuit language, culture and agency is necessary to right these historical wrongs.
Colleagues, Mr. Quassa speaks of that imperative of reclaiming Inuit language, culture and agency. These three items are inextricably connected.
Bill C-91 is about Indigenous languages, and it is about so much more. Mr. Quassa speaks of agency. Ms. Kotierk and others speak of self-determination.
For a person to have agency means they will have the will, the power and the capacity to act.
We have heard loudly and clearly from these committed Inuit leaders and from their First Nations and Metis counterparts that their languages are essential to having the capacity to lead and develop the strong, healthy and proud societies and communities they want and of which they were deprived for far too long.
Honourable senators, I hope we can send Bill C-91 to committee soon so we can ensure that this historically significant piece of legislation can be given the consideration it deserves. Thank you. Welalioq.