What we Heard Report: Consultations on the Implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act — October 9, 2020 — British Colombia

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 indicated that it was important that the Office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages:

• Build sustained and community-held infrastructure for the reclamation, revitalization, maintenance and strengthening of Indigenous languages;
• Gather existing information on Indigenous languages and facilitate information-sharing and the sharing of best practices;
• Recognize that Indigenous language communities need to be the starting point; and
• Act with integrity and build mutually trusting relationships with / advocate for / and support those who have the expertise in Indigenous languages at the community level.

Participants wondered if the Office would be able to represent adequately all Indigenous language groups. Some thought that a more regionalized structure or a structure based on language groups or the state of languages may be better than a distinctions-based structure.

Plans and Priorities and Early Successes - Office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages:

The discussion on key plans and priorities revealed that early successes for the Office could include the:

• Development of a plan for immediate action; and
• Creation of networks to connect people working on Indigenous language revitalization.

A common theme throughout the session was that urgent action on Indigenous languages is required. Many participants stated that the Office should focus on immediate action, rather than further research.

Selection of a Commissioner and Directors:

Participants proposed that the Commissioner and Directors should be Indigenous and deeply knowledgeable about the work of Indigenous language revitalization (e.g. its context and history, both from a practical and theoretical perspective).

Some participants voiced concern about the possibility that appointments to the Office would be political or bureaucratic, and thought that the Commissioner and Directors should be able to move to action right away.

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:

According to participants, the Indigenous Languages Funding Model should:

• Take into account a whole-of-government approach as other areas of the federal government have a role to play in Indigenous language revitalization; and
• Be future looking and make space for additional investments.

Participants also suggested that funding could be allocated by Nation, including on and off reserve populations, rather than along provincial/territorial lines or by distinctions. This would enhance Nation rebuilding.

What to Fund:

Many participants emphasized that a funding model needs to be flexible as there is no one way of revitalizing Indigenous languages, and that many approaches and people need to be involved, including:

• Indigenous language revitalization activities in schools and homes or on the land and water;
• Teacher training, digital infrastructure, language champions at the community level, adult learners, silent speakers, innovation, and new and emerging technologies; and
• The development of community-based language plans and strategies.

Participants also highlighted the need to think outside the European way of teaching, and to incorporate Indigenous ways of knowing and learning, and cultural teachings into curricula that goes beyond the school setting.

Participants indicated that current funding is inadequate and that some communities may require additional capacity support.

Funding Process:

According to participants, the funding process should:

• Prioritize effective programming and expertise at the community level;
• Fund grassroots efforts at the community-level directly without having to go through other entities or structures; and
• Immediately change from the current year-over-year approach to a minimum of 3 to 5-year funding arrangements.

Defining and Measuring Success:

Participants indicated that communities ought to define success for themselves, and suggested that success could include:

• Increasing the number of speakers who are fluent and actually using the language;
• Working together at the community level on Indigenous language and cultural revitalization, and increasing connections within the community and in the level of community involvement;
• Gradual increasing the proficiency of learners, including levels of understanding, spoken fluency and literacy; and
• Developing a language plan or strategy for each language community.

Additional Comments

Participants raised a number of other considerations, including:

• The loss of Indigenous languages is part of the colonial struggle and has emotional and wellness implications;
• Indigenous languages are holistic, connected to the land, and belong in the hearts and minds;
• International cross-border challenges need to be resolved in order to continue vital Indigenous languages work; and
• The Indigenous Languages Act doesn’t go far enough in that it doesn’t specify rights or impose obligations.