What we Heard Report: Consultations on the Implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act — December 9, 2020 — Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres
Context
The Government of Canada is undertaking a variety of consultation activities across Canada on the implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act, with a focus on the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages and Directors and the Indigenous Languages Funding Model.
These consultation sessions will help the Minister of Canadian Heritage make recommendations to the Governor in Council for the appointment of a Commissioner of Indigenous Languages and up to three Directors. Feedback from these sessions will also inform the development of the Indigenous Languages Funding Model.
For further details and information about the Indigenous Languages Act and current consultations, we invite you to read our Discussion guide: Consultations and Engagement on the Implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act.
A summary of the most recent consultation session is provided below. The summary is not a complete account of the discussions. Instead, it highlights the key themes that emerged from this consultation session. Please visit the online consultation portal and review the discussion guide to share your own and/or additional views.
Participants’ Overall Comments and Suggestions
Office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages
The following considerations and themes were raised during the discussion on the Office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages:
Roles and Responsibilities:
Participants thought that the roles and responsibilities of the Office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages should include:
- Holding government accountable for how it collaborates and co-develops policy with Indigenous groups, including organizations serving urban Indigenous populations, on how to define and measure results in the area of Indigenous language revitalization as an example;
- Advocating for Indigenous people and facilitating their connection to government departments; and
- Being responsive to Indigenous people as a first priority.
Some participants thought that structuring the Office, in particular its Directors, along provincial, territorial, regional lines, or by Indigenous language families, would be better than using a distinctions-based approach.
Plans and Priorities and Early Successes - Office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages:
Participants proposed that the Office focus on the following early priorities:
- Work with Indigenous groups to determine the state of Indigenous languages and Indigenous language programming available in urban areas;
- Build relationships with Indigenous people and organizations in urban areas;
- Establish linkages with provinces to ensure alignment among Indigenous language initiatives and to help address issues in education, training, accreditation, etc.; and
- Ensure any research conducted on Indigenous languages benefits Indigenous people.
Some participants suggested that the Office incorporate the teachings and spirit contained in Indigenous languages into its work.
Selection of a Commissioner and Directors:
Participants thought that appointees to the Office should be knowledgeable about Indigenous languages and that appointments should be non-political.
Indigenous Languages Funding Model
The following considerations and themes were raised during the discussion on the proposed Indigenous Languages Funding Model:
Language Vitality and Governance Capacity:
Participants raised a number of issues to consider during the development of an Indigenous Languages Funding Model, including:
- A funding stream specifically targeted at urban Indigenous populations, with many participants noting that Indigenous people largely live in urban settings;
- Striking a balance between a population-based approach and organizational capacity, in particular taking into account the track record and reach of organizations; and
- Prioritizing endangered Indigenous languages in the funding model.
Participants shared their concerns about being left out of a funding model structured along a distinctions-based approach, and commented that Friendship Centres are in a good position to undertake Indigenous languages revitalization work with urban Indigenous populations.
What to Fund:
Participants thought that funding should be flexible in recognition of the different populations and learning styles involved in Indigenous languages work. Examples of initiatives and efforts that should receive support under the funding model include:
- Full immersion programs, including in urban centres;
- Efforts that reflect lifelong learning and a variety of needs, such as language nests, credentialing speakers, working with parents and adult learners, recoding Indigenous languages, and using a trauma-based approach to Indigenous languages with some learners, including residential school survivors;
- Using technology to learn and teach Indigenous languages without forgoing the importance of a one-on-one approach to language learning, in a relationship context; and
- Indigenous languages infrastructure.
Participants also talked about the strong appetite from young people in urban settings to learn Indigenous languages. Some participants emphasized that the bulk of the funding should support on-the-ground efforts to revitalize and preserve Indigenous languages rather than research.
Funding Process:
According to participants, the funding process should provide for multi-year funding directly to Indigenous organizations and Indigenous communities and ensure accountability.
Defining and Measuring Success:
Participants thought that the following would signal success for Indigenous language revitalization:
- Increased ability for Indigenous people to speak and understand Indigenous languages; and
- Increased community engagement in Indigenous languages – this could include conducting more ceremonies in Indigenous languages and an increased connection to the meaning and teachings contained in Indigenous languages.
Participants suggested it would be worthwhile to consider a peer review process to assess the success of Indigenous languages revitalization initiatives and programs.
Additional Comments
Participants talked about Indigenous languages being alive and representing a way of life and a connection to ceremony and to Mother Earth. Others spoke about access to Indigenous languages education as a human right, and reflected that the vitality of Indigenous languages varies from place to place, with some languages in a critical situation. Although quick action on Indigenous languages is required, there is also an acknowledgment that overall, this will be a long-term effort. Participants also mentioned that for some Indigenous people, Indigenous languages are not always a priority because of poverty and other survival challenges they face.
Participants acknowledged that getting to this point with respect to Indigenous languages is a significant achievement that was a long time in the making. However, many stressed the importance of ensuring that urban Indigenous populations are involved in consultations going forward in order to better reflect the demographic realities of where Indigenous people live. Others commented that the distinctions-based approach to the development and implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act does not adequately involve all Indigenous constituencies, in particular the urban population.
Discussion also included points about Friendship Centres in Ontario, their clientele, and their role as a gathering place for Indigenous culture. Others spoke about the expertise that Friendship Centres have in providing service to urban populations and in Indigenous languages work specifically.
Page details
- Date modified: