Part C: Platform Commitments
On this page
- Overview of Platform Commitments: Department of Canadian Heritage
- Towards an Equitable Canadian Broadcasting System
- The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation/ Radio-Canada
- Accountability and transparency of digital intermediaries in Canada
- An Audiovisual Policy Framework for Canada
- Journalism and the News Ecosystem
- Copyright Policy and Creators
- Cultural Diplomacy Framework
- Indigenous Matters at Canadian Heritage
- Implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act
- A National Repatriation Framework for Indigenous Cultural Property and Ancestral Remains
- National Monuments in Canada’s Capital Region
- Modernization of Canada’s Museum Policy
- Developing the RCMP Heritage Centre into Canada’s newest national museum
- Culture Pass
- Grants and Contributions
- Sport Canada’s Funding Allocation
- Increasing Sport Participation
- Safe, Welcoming, and Inclusive Sport
- [REDACTED] Sport Canada’s Hosting Program in [REDACTED]
- Community Sport Infrastructure
- Overview of Platform Commitments: Diversity and Inclusion and Youth
- Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy 2019-22
- Overview of Platform Commitments: Official Languages
- Modernization of the Official Languages Act
- Implementation of the Action Plan for Official Languages 2018-2023
- The Université de l’Ontario français
Overview of Platform Commitments: Department of Canadian Heritage
The Department has monitored the Liberal Party’s election platform commitments that relate to the mandate of Canadian Heritage and its Portfolio organizations. An overview of these commitments is provided below and more information on how to implement these commitments is found in the tabs that follow.
1. Supporting Arts and Culture
- The Liberal Party platform announced new initiatives and investments in order to protect, promote, and strengthen Canada’s vibrant cultural sector and participation in arts and culture in communities across the country, which brings people together and makes Canada strong. Specifically, the platform indicated that $405 million in new funding ($135 million per year over three years) would be directed to more support for arts and culture, beginning in fiscal year 2021-22.
A. Canadian Content on Online Platforms
- The Liberal Party platform included a commitment to “move forward, in our first year, with legislation that will take appropriate measures to ensure that all content providers – including internet giants – offer meaningful levels of Canadian content in their catalogues, contribute to the creation of Canadian content in both official languages, and promote this content and make it easily accessible on their platforms.”
- More information on how to implement this commitment, as part of developing an equitable Canadian broadcasting system, is available at Tab 1.
B. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC)/Radio-Canada
- CBC/Radio-Canada falls within the Canadian Heritage Portfolio and receives its mandate under the Broadcasting Act. The Liberal Party platform included commitments to “strengthen the regional mandate of CBC/Radio-Canada, so that local stations can broadcast more local news; and require CBC/Radio-Canada to open up its digital platform, so that journalism start-ups and community newspapers can access affordable technology to develop and distribute local content.”
- More information on how to implement this commitment is available at Tab 2.
C. Digital Intermediaries
- The Liberal Party platform pledged that: “To help stop the proliferation of violent extremism online, we will move forward with new regulations for social media platforms, starting with a requirement that all platforms remove illegal content, including hate speech, within 24 hours or face significant financial penalties. This will also include other online harms, such as radicalization, incitement to violence, exploitation of children, or creation or distribution of terrorist propaganda.”
- More information on how to implement this commitment is available at Tab 3.
D. Telefilm Canada
- The Liberal Party platform included a commitment to “continue to support Canadian film by increasing annual funding for Telefilm Canada by nearly 50 per cent a year.”
- More information on how to implement this commitment, as part of an audiovisual policy framework for Canada, is available at Tab 4.
E. Cultural Diplomacy
- The Liberal Party platform included a commitment to “introduce a new Cultural Diplomacy strategy, with at least one international mission each year to promote Canadian culture and creators around the world.”
- More information on how to implement this commitment is available at Tab 7.
F. Museums
- The Liberal Party platform included commitments to “review our national museums policy to make sure that people can access Canadian history across the country, with better access to digital collections” as well as to “move forward with making the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Heritage Centre into a national museum.”
- More information is available on Canada’s Museum Policy at Tab 12 and on the RCMP Heritage Centre at Tab 13.
G. Culture Pass
- The Liberal Party platform included a commitment to “introduce the Culture Pass, a $200 credit that every Canadian child will receive when they turn 12, to be used to access theatres, museums, galleries, workshops, and other cultural venues and local Canadian content.”
- More information on how to implement this commitment is available at Tab 14.
2. Building a Better Future with Indigenous Peoples
- The Liberal Party platform committed to a number of initiatives related to Indigenous Peoples.
A. Indigenous Matters
- The Liberal Party platform pledged to “continue work to implement the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls to Action, and the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls’ Calls for Justice, in partnership with First Nations, Inuit, and Métis peoples.”
- The platform also committed to “providing federal support for the celebration of the 150th anniversary of the Métis Nation entering Confederation” in 2020, which is a top priority for the Métis National Council. [REDACTED]
- More information on how to implement these commitments is available at Tab 8.
B. Indigenous Languages
- The Liberal Party platform included commitments to “ensure that the Indigenous Languages Act is fully implemented, in order to preserve, promote, and revitalize Indigenous languages in Canada” as well as to “move forward with long-term, predictable, and sufficient funding to support the full implementation of the Act.”
- More information on how to implement this commitment is available at Tab 9.
C. Indigenous Cultural Property and Ancestral Remains
- The Liberal Party platform included a commitment to “move forward – in partnership with Indigenous Peoples – to develop a framework for repatriating Indigenous cultural property and ancestral remains.”
- More information on how to implement this commitment is available at Tab 10.
Towards an Equitable Canadian Broadcasting System
A. Topic
- [REDACTED]
B. Background and Current Status
- It is a core responsibility of the Department of Canadian Heritage to foster creativity, innovation, growth and employment opportunities in Canada's cultural sector and in the creative economy. The Broadcasting Act (the Act) and its associated regulations and polices play a crucial part in the attainment of these objectives. The Act establishes a “closed” broadcasting system that generally limits access to those who hold a license. The system also seeks to ensure that Canadians see Canadian content and that producers hire Canadian creators for crucial creative positions.
- In 1999, the Canadian Radio-Television Telecommunications Commission (the Commission), the independent administrative tribunal that regulates and supervises broadcasting and telecommunications, made a policy decision to exempt “new media” from licensing and regulatory requirements. Non-Canadian services delivering their content over the Internet have been the main beneficiaries of the exemption. These services have grown to such a degree that they now threaten the established business models of conventional Canadian broadcasters and distributors – entities that play an important role in the attainment of the cultural and economic broadcasting policy objectives through mandated Canadian programming expenditures, exhibition quotas, and contributions to Canadian production funds.
- Several political parties made campaign commitments to remedy the growing disparity outlined above. The Liberal Party of Canada platform contains a commitment to “move forward, in [the] first year, with legislation that will take appropriate measures to ensure that all content providers – including internet giants – offer meaningful levels of Canadian content in their catalogues, contribute to the creation of Canadian content in both official languages, and promote this content and make it easily accessible on their platforms.” The New Democratic Party pledged to ensure that “Netflix, Facebook, Google, and other digital media companies play by the same rules as Canadian broadcasters. That means paying taxes, supporting Canadian content in both official languages, and taking responsibility for what appears on their platforms, just like other media outlets.” Several parties also committed to require multinational e-Commerce companies to make greater contributions to the Canadian economy. The Liberal Party, the Conservative Party, the Green Party, and the Bloc Québécois all committed to enforcing either a sales tax, levy or an additional form of taxation on these companies.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
D. Implementation
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
E. Strategic Considerations
Legislative considerations
- [REDACTED]
FPT considerations
- [REDACTED]
International considerations
- The European Union Audiovisual Service Media Directive requires member states to impose quotas and prominence requirements for European works on Internet broadcasting services. While some European and Canadian policy objectives align, the European Union is a multi-lingual region with unique characteristics that differ from the North American context. The Department of Canadian Heritage will continue to monitor the deployment and implementation of the Audiovisual Service Media Directive in Member States to gauge the reaction and response of those affected.
- Since the 1930’s, the “closed” Canadian system was established as a means to stem the influence of American content. [REDACTED]
Indigenous peoples considerations
- Indigenous stakeholder submissions to the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Legislative Review Panel touched upon the need for additional funding for Indigenous audio and audiovisual content; Indigenous autonomy over funding decisions; Indigenous representation at the Commission; and reviewing the mandate of the public broadcaster. [REDACTED]
Stakeholder perspectives
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
Urban/rural and regional considerations
- Broadcasters and distributors are expected, in the face of declining advertising and subscription revenues, to continue rationalizing their operations. This may disproportionately affect regions with unreliable or slow Internet, particularly rural and remote communities, limiting or eliminating their access to broadcasting services and local news. [REDACTED]
Timing
- Subsequent to the publication of the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Legislative Review Panel report in January 2020, the following timeline could apply:
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
Cost implications
- [REDACTED]
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
- As many Internet broadcasting services are non-Canadian businesses, they are not required to collect or remit federal sales tax. As well, services that do not maintain a physical presence within Canada also do not pay corporate taxes. [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation/ Radio-Canada
A. Topic
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation/Radio-Canada (CBC/Radio-Canada or the Corporation) has recently launched its new three-year strategic plan [REDACTED]
B. Background and Current Status
- CBC/Radio-Canada is Canada’s national public broadcaster and a Crown corporation under the purview of the Minister of Canadian Heritage. The Corporation’s mandate under the Broadcasting Act (Act) is to provide a wide range of services in English and French that inform, enlighten and entertain. CBC/Radio-Canada is responsible for setting its own direction, managing its daily operations, and has journalistic and programming independence.
- CBC/Radio-Canada faces unique challenges to fulfill its legislated mandate, such as providing services in remote communities and in both official languages; and maintaining both linear programming, which serves rural and remote communities, and digital services, which appeal to younger Canadians.
- CBC/Radio-Canada operates in the distinct English and French markets. With respect to news, CBC attracts 32 percent of viewers in the English market, and Radio-Canada attracts 51 percent in the French market. Furthermore, Radio-Canada plays an important role in connecting French-language minority communities across Canada. The Corporation also delivers services in eight Indigenous languages.
- In 2016, the Government invested an additional $675 million in CBC/Radio-Canada over five years, and $150 million per year on an on-going basis to pursue its digital transformation. The Corporation received $1.2 billion in parliamentary appropriations and earned $573 million in self-generated commercial revenues for the year-ending March 31, 2018.
- On April 3, 2018, the Minister of Canadian Heritage announced the appointment of Michael Goldbloom as the Chair of CBC/Radio-Canada’s Board of Directors, and Catherine Tait as the Corporation’s President/Chief Executive Officer.
- In their 2019 election platform, the Liberal Party committed to strengthening the regional mandate of CBC/Radio-Canada so that local stations can broadcast more local news and to requiring CBC/Radio-Canada to open up its digital platform so that journalism start-ups and community newspapers can access affordable technology to develop and distribute local content. The Liberal Party also committed to making Radio-Canada’s mandate for regional news part of the Official Languages Act. The New Democratic Party committed to increasing funding for the public broadcaster. Similarly, the Green Party committed to investing an additional $300 million per year in CBC/Radio Canada until the per-capita level of funding is equal to that of the British Broadcasting Corporation. Although the Conservative Party platform does not make any specific references to CBC/Radio-Canada, Andrew Scheer indicated in public comments that the Conservatives would examine its mandate to ensure that it focused sufficiently on Canadian stories and reporting. Mr. Scheer also indicated that a Conservative government would maintain the Corporation’s funding levels.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
D. Implementation
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
E. Strategic Considerations
Legislative considerations
- [REDACTED] the following amendments to the Corporation’s mandate that have been recommended by the Corporation in its submission to the Panel:
- Enable the provision of programming on any technological platform.
- Allow for deployment of new technologies and innovations.
- Reflect the circumstances and aspirations of Canadians of all ages.
- Contribute to a reflection of the circumstances and aspirations of Indigenous people.
- Promote and make Canadian programming and content available internationally.
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
FPT considerations
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
International considerations
- The amount per capita of public funding for public service broadcasters varies by country – with a high of $196 in Switzerland to a low of $4 in the United States. At approximately $34 per capita, CBC/Radio-Canada ranks 16th amongst Western public broadcasters in terms of public funding.
Indigenous peoples considerations
- Some Indigenous stakeholders consider CBC/Radio-Canada’s Indigenous programming to be colonial, and therefore seek greater support for the Aboriginal Peoples Television Network to provide and distribute Indigenous content. Other Indigenous stakeholders recommend that any activity by the Corporation to reflect Indigenous cultural diversity should be done in partnership with Indigenous communities.
- [REDACTED]
Urban/rural and regional considerations
- According to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Corporation’s 2019 Communications Monitoring Report, in 2017, the availability of high-speed internet in rural and Indigenous communities was comparatively inferior: 37 percent of rural communities and 28 percent of Indigenous reserve areas had access to faster speeds of 50 Mbps, compared to 97 percent of urban homes.
- CBC/Radio-Canada needs to maintain both linear services and digital services during a period of transition to be able to serve all Canadians including those in remote communities.
- CBC/Radio-Canada plays an important role in providing free and trusted news to Canadians by reducing information inequality especially to households who cannot afford to pay for other sources of news because of paywalls.
Stakeholder perspectives
- According to an April 2019 Nanos survey, 60 percent of Canadians agree that it is more important to have a strong and independent CBC/Radio-Canada, given the disruption in the newspaper industry and newspaper closures, while 12 percent of Canadians believe it is less important.
- Stakeholders have expressed different perspectives on the appropriate role and mandate of the national public broadcaster. Many media companies, including Corus, Telus, Canadian Association of Broadcasters, Rogers, Québecor Media, and the Globe and Mail) feel the Corporation should be less commercial and compete less with the private sector by focusing on underserved markets. Canadian media companies have also advocated that CBC/Radio-Canada cease its pursuit of advertising on some or all of its platforms.
- Stakeholders, including Telus, Unifor, and the Canadian Media Guild, have advocated for an increase in stable, predictable levels of funding for CBC/Radio-Canada.
Timing
- Winter 2019
- [REDACTED]
- January 31, 2020: Recommendations from the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Legislative Review Panel.
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
Accountability and transparency of digital intermediaries in Canada
A. Topic
- Digital intermediaries that allow individuals to publish content of their choice play an important role in the social, cultural and political life of many Canadians, but their responsibilities to users and society more generally remain largely undefined.
B. Background and current status
- Governments around the world are grappling with the social, cultural, political, economic, and human-rights impacts of multinational technology companies that have come to shape the online flow of information and ideas. These companies now dominate the infrastructure of online speech and information discovery, giving a small number of unaccountable private actors enormous power over fundamental human rights and freedoms in the online environment.
- Digital intermediaries like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are increasingly central to participation in democratic culture and public life, but they are subject to limited scrutiny and are not accountable for the oversight or enforcement of any terms of service or community standards that they may voluntarily adopt. Moreover, the internal rules, systems and operations whereby these intermediaries moderate content on their platforms may be guided less by public-interest objectives or human-rights considerations than by economic incentives to maximize and monetize user engagement.
- Despite their many benefits, such intermediaries can also be abused by bad actors intent on sowing disinformation, inciting hatred and intolerance, promoting violence and extremism, or engaging in other activity that may threaten or undermine democratic norms and social cohesion. The limited data-portability options, lax privacy protections and nonconsensual surveillance of users for the purposes of micro-targeted advertising can also leave individuals exposed to abusive practices, thus further accentuating the power and information asymmetries between platform-owners and platform-users.
- The mandate of the Department of Canadian Heritage includes the promotion of a greater understanding of human rights, fundamental freedoms and related values. In 2019, as a steward of Canada’s information and media ecosystem, Canadian Heritage received $19.4 million over four years to expand its Digital Citizen Initiative to support democracy and social cohesion in Canada by building citizen resilience against online disinformation, establishing partnerships to ensure a healthy information environment, and supporting research, policy development and an international multi-stakeholder engagement strategy on diversity of content online. Further work on the potential roles and responsibilities of digital intermediaries would align with the objectives of the Department’s Digital Citizen Initiative.
- In their 2019 election platform, the Liberal Party committed to introducing new regulations for social media platforms, starting with a requirement that all platforms remove illegal content, including hate speech, within 24 hours. Other online harms in scope include radicalization, incitement to violence, the exploitation of children and the creation or distribution of terrorist propaganda. The Conservative Party committed to introducing legislation to prohibit the use of a phone or the internet to threaten or advocate self-harm. They also committed to establishing regulatory standards for the ethical and secure use of artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things. In their platform, the New Democratic Party committed to convening a national working group to counter online hate, protect public safety and make sure that social media platforms are responsible for removing hateful and extremist content. Finally, the Green Party committed to regulating Facebook, Twitter and other social media platforms to ensure that only people with verifiable identities are able to publish content.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed action and rationale
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
D. Implementation
- [REDACTED]
E. Strategic considerations
Legislative considerations
- [REDACTED]
FPT considerations
- The factors that lead individuals to engage in problematic behaviour online are numerous and complex; [REDACTED]
International considerations
- A number of governments in other jurisdictions have proposed or enacted legislation that imposes obligations on digital intermediaries to restrict certain forms of content. In Germany, social media companies with more than two million registered users in the country must now remove or block access to “unlawful content” within seven days of a complaint (or 24 hours where the content is “manifestly unlawful”). Under a new Australian law, providers of internet, hosting or content services that fail to “expeditiously” remove “abhorrent violent material” could face fines of up to 10 percent of annual corporate revenues. Such initiatives are not always limited to content that is illegal: the United Kingdom has published a white paper on a proposed regulatory framework that would require a range of companies to comply with a new statutory “duty of care” to prevent and address a wide variety of “harms” caused by content or activity on their services – including content and activity not prohibited by domestic law. The French government also recently published an interim report on the creation of a regulatory framework for social media platforms. However, in contrast to the United Kingdom’s harms-based model, the French proposal follows the recommendations of the United Nations’ special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, who has called on states to adopt regulation that “puts human rights at the very centre” and focuses on “ensuring company transparency and remediation to enable the public to make choices about how and whether to engage in online forums.” In the United States, subject to certain express exceptions, section 230 of the Communications Decency Act broadly protects digital intermediaries from liability for transmitting and restricting access to third-party content. It is worth noting that the Canada−United States−Mexico Agreement contains language that is modelled closely on section 230.
- Given the multinational context in which the largest digital intermediaries operate, effective regulation would benefit from – and perhaps demand – a certain degree of international coordination.
Indigenous peoples considerations
- A 2019 poll by Léger Marketing for the Association for Canadian Studies found that 60 percent of Canadians have experienced what they considered to be “hateful or racist speech” online. As in the offline world, Indigenous peoples, visible minorities and other vulnerable populations suffer disproportionately as the targets of abuse and discrimination online.
Stakeholder perspectives
- There is an emerging international consensus amongst lawmakers that attempts by the private sector to self-regulate have been insufficient, but many academics, lawyers, free-speech advocates and civil-society organizations have urged governments to exercise caution and to adhere to the principles of necessity and proportionality in framing any regulatory response. As they point out, given the visceral, emotional reaction that certain abhorrent forms of content and activity can provoke, it is especially important to ensure that any policy interventions are reasoned, justified and evidence-based.
- A 2018 report by the Social Media Lab at Ryerson University found that approximately 94 percent of Canadians use at least one social media platform. However, despite the continuing popularity of such services, public concern about online hate, abuse and disinformation is increasingly widespread. Although certain platform companies have called for greater government oversight, others may resist an obligation to be more transparent based on concerns about data privacy and proprietary business interests.
Timing
- [REDACTED] A provisional timeline would be as follows:
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
Cost implications
- [REDACTED]
F. Alternative approaches or complementary measures
- [REDACTED]
An Audiovisual Policy Framework for Canada
A. Topic
Canada’s federal audiovisual support policies and programs are increasingly out of date and require review and updating to reflect modern and future realities.
B. Background and Current Status
The Canadian content production industry is facing significant disruption: online streaming is shifting audiences, changing the way content is consumed, changing the nature of the broadcasting system, and expanding the competition for audience attention. Existing federal mechanisms to support Canadian content production are increasingly challenged by these disruptions, as they lack a unified direction, were created long before Internet-based business models existed, and are predicated on the assumption of a closed broadcast and distribution environment, which no longer exists in any practical way.
Additionally, while the production industry, as a whole is performing well, reaching $8.92 billion in 2017-2018 and creating a total of 179,000 direct and spin-off full-time equivalent jobs, this growth is attributable to an increase in foreign location service productions (i.e., foreign companies coming to Canada to shoot their films), not Canadian content production – a difference that is exacerbated by revenue declines in the television broadcasting industry, which funds a significant portion of Canadian content production.
Sector stakeholders are calling for immediate action. In response, several political parties made commitments during the 2019 federal election relating to the audiovisual production sector, including increased and/or stabilized funding (Liberals, NDP, Bloc Quebecois, Greens), service standards for funding programs (NDP), and various changes to the relationship between Quebec and federal funding programs and agencies (Greens, NDP). Additionally, the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Legislative Review is exploring these issues from a legislative and regulatory perspective. Equally important, however, is that content production support toolkits respond to the sector’s continuously evolving needs and are able to deliver on our cultural objectives by supporting production across the entire sector.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
The following actions are proposed:
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
In terms of the rationale for action, the Department is responsible, under the Broadcasting Act and as part of its mandate, to ensure Canadians have access to audiovisual content that is reflective of their culture, diversity and voices. A key part of its capacity to meet this obligation is its suite of policies and programs intended to provide financial and other support for relevant audiovisual productions, particularly in cases where they would be at risk of market failure without government intervention. As part of this mandate, the Government of Canada currently subsidizes a significant portion of this content. For example, in the case of Canadian feature film, funding from all levels of governmentFootnote 1 makes up 59 percent of total production financing. For television, it’s 54 percent.
[REDACTED]
D. Implementation
[REDACTED] The proposed sequencing is as follows:
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
E. Strategic Considerations
Legislative considerations
[REDACTED]
FPT considerations
[REDACTED]
International considerations
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
Indigenous peoples considerations
[REDACTED]
Stakeholder perspectives
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
Urban/rural and regional considerations
[REDACTED]
Timing
It is important to note that while this proposal lays out [REDACTED] the recommendations of the Broadcasting and Telecommunications Legislative Review (January 2020) [REDACTED]
Cost implications
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
Machinery of Government considerations
[REDACTED]
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
[REDACTED]
Journalism and the News Ecosystem
A. Topic
- Whether ongoing public support may be necessary to ensure stable and diverse news ecosystems across Canada.
B. Background and current status
- In Canada as around the world, the news industry is experiencing seismic disruption. Since 2006, 88 daily newspapers and 235 community newspapers have closed across the country. Two of the largest newspaper publishers, Postmedia and TorStar, are publicly traded companies and have posted operating losses for several years. During the same time, 94 new outlets have launched, mostly online, with several subsequently closing. In August 2019, Groupe Capitales Médias, which owns five regional newspapers in Quebec and one in Ontario, filed for restructuring under The Companies Creditors’ Arrangement Act as it looked for a buyer for the papers.
- Today, advertisers are following audiences online in order to capitalize on the virtually infinite supply of low-cost advertising inventory and the more sophisticated user-targeting and -tracking capabilities of digital platforms, most notably Google and Facebook. Since 2006, written news media outlets have seen their annual advertising revenues decrease by about $1.7 billion dollars.
- Whether by holding public officials to account, acting as a check on the abuse of power, or providing an antidote to disinformation, civic-function journalism can have a wide range of positive social impacts that benefit those who consume it as well as those who do not.
- Canadian Heritage is mandated with the development and monitoring of public policy and funding support programs relevant to the news industry. This includes legislation that addresses the Canadian broadcasting framework, copyright and foreign investment and incentives to advertise in Canadian media. It also includes programs such as the Canada Periodical Fund and the Local Journalism Initiative. The Canada Periodical Fund provides over $75 million per year to a wide variety of print and digital news providers, while the Local Journalism Initiative provides $10 million per year to support local journalism in underserved communities. As an instrument of public policy that belongs to all Canadians, CBC/Radio-Canada receives an annual Parliamentary appropriation of $1.2 billion to deliver its legislated mandate, which includes an obligation to provide programming that informs Canadians and reflects Canada and its regions to national and regional audiences.
- During the election campaign, political parties made commitments regarding support for news media. For its part, the Liberal Party committed to strengthening the regional mandate of CBC/Radio-Canada, so that local stations can broadcast more local news, and requiring CBC/Radio-Canada to open up its digital platform, so that journalism start-ups and community newspapers can access affordable technology to develop and distribute local content. The Conservative Party committed to not cutting financial support to news media announced in the last federal budget and to create an independent administrative body to distribute the funds announced in support of journalism. The Green Party committed to closing loopholes on taxing advertising and putting Canadian government ads on Canadian platforms only. The Bloc Québécois proposed to apply the GST to online advertising and use the revenues generated this way to create a Written News Media Fund.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- As a steward of Canada’s information and media ecosystem and a policy centre for broadcast regulation, Canadian Heritage has a logical – but by no means exclusive – role to play in supporting sustainable and diverse local and civic-function news. In light of its potential broader social benefits, a shortfall in the production of such news is a legitimate object of public policy that is too important to be left entirely to market forces.
- [REDACTED]
- Whereas newspapers have historically accounted for the majority of original civic-function journalism, broadcast media can extend its reach, amplify its impact, and prolong its useful life. Similarly, whereas broadcast media have been essential to covering breaking events and developments, news publishers often explore their causes and effects in greater depth. [REDACTED]
- Support for journalism is not an exclusive federal jurisdiction. Governments at all levels have a stake in preserving a strong news ecosystem. With the exception of Quebec, provinces and territories have not taken significant measures yet to tackle these challenges. [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
D. Implementation
[REDACTED]
E. Strategic considerations
Legislative considerations
[REDACTED] This last issue is addressed in a separate transition fiche.
FPT considerations
In view of the potential positive social impacts of local and civic-function news, the economic challenges facing the industry are of general concern: an effective response will benefit from – and perhaps demand – greater coordination and collaboration across all levels of government. With the exception of Quebec, most provinces and territories have not yet implemented concrete measures to address the precarious state of local and regional news in their own jurisdictions. [REDACTED]
International considerations
[REDACTED]
Indigenous peoples considerations
The Aboriginal Peoples Television Network provides a range of regional and national television and online news that focuses on Indigenous issues and stories that may be ignored, under-reported, or misrepresented by mainstream media. The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission has also licenced a number of Indigenous radio services, though predominantly in larger urban centres.
[REDACTED]
Stakeholder perspectives
While industry stakeholders do not hold a unanimous position, many – including most news providers, unions, and professional journalists’ associations – advocate in favour of government intervention in the sector. However, some journalists question whether additional government interventions in the news industry may be necessary or justified. The majority of non-digital stakeholders support government intervention, particularly in Quebec. However, a number of media commentators have been critical of government support arguing it risks compromising the independence (or at least perceived independence) of news organizations.
With respect to the role and potential market impacts of the national public broadcaster, a number of news providers have singled out CBC/Radio-Canada as a major competitor, arguing that its ability to run advertising against publicly subsidized content constitutes a significant economic advantage that is further compounding pressure on the industry.
Urban/rural and regional considerations
The structural deterioration of the news industry’s traditional revenue model raises a number of public-policy concerns. The ongoing cuts, closures, and service reductions in many markets across Canada are leading to news poverty or even news deserts in certain regions as coverage becomes increasingly concentrated in larger centres.
Cost implications
The Department of Finance has estimated that the current federal fiscal measures to support journalism will represent a tax expenditure of $595 million over the next five years. Several stakeholders consider that this estimate is too high, especially with regard to amounts allocated for charitable giving incentives under its current formulation. [REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
Copyright Policy and Creators
A. Topic
- The Copyright Act is a legislative framework designed to promote the dissemination of works while providing a just reward for creators. In the context of rapidly evolving technologies, consumption practices and business models in the cultural sector, creators have been vocal that it is increasingly difficult to enforce their rights and be fairly remunerated for their works.
B. Background and Current Status
- Responsibility for copyright policy lies with the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development and the Minister of Canadian Heritage and Multiculturalism, who is responsible for copyright as it pertains to cultural policy.
- Recent and targeted reforms were completed including: term extension for sound recordings (2015); implementation of the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired or Otherwise Print Disabled (2016); prohibition of settlement offers and demand for personal information in the Notice-and-Notice regime (2018); and reforms to improve the efficiency of the Copyright Board of Canada (2018).
Parliamentary Review of the Copyright Act
- In order to keep the Copyright Act responsive to technological changes, 2012 amendments included a requirement that Parliament review the legislative framework every five years.
- In December 2017, the Standing Committee on Innovation, Science and Technology began its review of the Copyright Act. This Committee invited the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage to conduct a study on remuneration models for creators and creative industries.
- The Committees tabled their respective reports in spring 2019. Their reports contain over 50 recommendations combined. The reports themselves illustrate the wide range of opinions and perspectives that exist within the copyright stakeholder community.
Canada – United States – Mexico Agreement
- On November 30, 2018, the Canada – United States – Mexico Agreement was signed, requiring Canada to make some immediate changes to the Copyright Act upon ratification (e.g., extending the term of protection for sound recordings and performances in the sound recordings from 70 years to 75 years from the date of publication). The Canada – United States – Mexico Agreement also requires that Canada change its general term of copyright protection from 50 to 70 years after the life of the author. Should the Agreement be ratified, Canada would benefit from a 30 month implementation period from the date of ratification.
Elements of Electoral Platforms
- The Bloc Québécois is the only political party to include a copyright related element in its electoral platform.
- The Bloc Québécois particularly suggests revising the Copyright Board rules on tariffs of music accessible through streaming platforms (e.g., Spotify) to ensure creators receive fair compensation. The Bloc Québécois would like to request, among other things, a study by the standing Committee on Canadian Heritage in order to come up with solutions for creator remuneration.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- [REDACTED]
- Stakeholder expectations regarding the Parliamentary Review of the Copyright Act have been high. Rights holders and creators viewed the 2012 reforms as a net loss, particularly in Quebec, and had hopes that balance could be restored to the Copyright Act for creators. Stakeholders will expect the Government to be responsive to the review and seriously consider reforms to the Copyright Act.
- There was not sufficient time for the Government to table an official response in the last mandate. Should the Committees retable their reports, the Government would be compelled to respond in 120 days from the date of tabling before the House of Commons.
- Concerns about creator remuneration are longstanding in many cultural industries, and have become pronounced over the last five years, coinciding in the cultural sector with a shift to digital consumption (e.g., Netflix, Spotify, YouTube, etc.) and the concentration of power in the hands of relatively few global technology companies (e.g., Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Google, etc.). In fields such as visual arts, writing and recorded music, stakeholders now report economic inequality and an inability to earn a living off their creative works. For this reason, both Committees’ clearly articulate concern for creator remuneration and the need to address the issues.
- As technology continues to evolve, new modes and trends in piracy continue to surface. While the reforms of 2012 did contain robust enforcement tools to combat piracy, stakeholders continue to raise concerns around piracy linked to streaming (e.g., signal piracy, stream ripping etc.).
D. Implementation
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
E. Strategic Considerations
Legislative considerations
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- The Canada – United States – Mexico Agreement Bill, drafted during the last parliamentary session, would need to be introduced again in the House of Commons, should ratification move forward.
- [REDACTED]
FPT considerations
- Provinces and territories, especially Quebec, have been vocal about the need to address issues in creator remuneration – both in terms of increasing creator remuneration directly (e.g., by recognizing new rights for creators), and indirectly (e.g., by narrowing the availability of exceptions).
- [REDACTED]
International considerations
- At the World Intellectual Property Organization, there have been two decades of negotiations towards a potential treaty on broadcasting designed to protect against online piracy. In 2019, a tentative date for formal negotiations was set for 2020 or 2021, should there be consensus reached on core issues.
- This year, the European Parliament passed the European Union Copyright Directive, to be implemented by European member states by 2021. The Directive contains provisions that could influence how certain copyright issues like creator remuneration and on-line piracy is considered in Canada. Canadian Heritage is currently involved in a policy dialogue and exchange with the European Union related to copyright.
- The United Kingdom and Australia employ injunctive remedies, such as site blocking, to combat online copyright infringement, which has been evolving over the last few years.
- In 2018, the United States passed the Music Modernization Act, a piece of copyright reform that included a wide range of technical fixes to improve licensing and the flow of royalties in the music industry.
Indigenous peoples considerations
- Indigenous peoples benefit from the same rights under Canadian copyright law as other Canadians. Indigenous stakeholders continue to cite gaps in the current Canadian copyright system when it comes to the protection of their traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions. Often, Indigenous proposals involve perpetual protection and collective ownership, conflicting with a Canadian copyright framework premised on a finite term of protection and individual rights holders.
- [REDACTED]
Stakeholder perspectives
- Canadian copyright stakeholders are often broadly characterized as either pro-user, favouring exceptions and limited rights, or as pro-creator, favouring stronger rights and limited exceptions
- Tension aired publicly between the respective Parliamentary Committees about their reports concerning the Review of the Copyright Act [REDACTED]
Urban/rural and regional considerations
- Some copyright related issues may have a direct impact on regions and rural communities. For example, Canadian news publishers have seen their advertising revenues drop, in part because of a certain degree of control over the sharing of online news by technology companies. According to a report from the Public Policy Forum titled, Mind the Gap: Quantifying the Decline of News Coverage in Canada, local news has dropped by 50 percent (downsizing or total closures of local newspapers) in more than 20 Canadian communities. These closures could be at the expense of regional or local news, which is essential to maintaining the public discourse and the health of Canadian democracy.
- Thus, stakeholders from the news publishing industry propose solutions that emanate from copyright (e.g., neighboring right, exclusive right, modify the fair dealing exception) in order to partially offset losses of advertising revenues. [REDACTED] news publishers in Canada often cite the European Copyright Directive as a practical solution to this problem.
Timing
- Stakeholders will expect a reaction to the Parliamentary review, and how the Minister plans to respond, early in the mandate.
- The results of the review of the Broadcasting Act and Telecommunications Act, which may engage aspects of the copyright framework, will be available in January 2020.
- If the Canada – United States – Mexico Agreement is ratified, there will be some obligations that must be implemented immediately. Additionally, there is a 30-month implementation period for the negotiated extension of copyright’s general term of protection, which creates another policy window.
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
Cultural Diplomacy Framework
A. Topic
- An overarching Cultural Diplomacy Framework will allow Canadian Heritage (PCH) and Portfolio organizations to leverage and better coordinate existing international activities, and guide actions on the international stage, helping the Government of Canada to meet its foreign policy and trade objectives.
B. Background and Current Status
- Cultural diplomacy is an approach to international engagement that deploys culture in support of policy objectives and national interest, thus buttressing our international soft power. Canada punches above its weight in terms of cultural output, and is well regarded internationally for its strengths in areas ranging from multiculturalism to diversity and inclusion, which can help build ties and global relationships.
- Yet, according to a 2017 British Council report entitled Soft Power Today, Canada is experiencing a decline in its international status and influence around the world. Its ranking on the soft power index and other indicators are declining steadily and continuously.
- Most of Canada’s like-minded partners (including the United Kingdom, France, Australia and the United States) are using active, coordinated and targeted cultural diplomacy frameworks to strengthen their trade ties, build and maintain relationships with key partners, and strengthen their global influence and commitments. Canada does not use such a cultural diplomacy framework, and is thus missing out on opportunities to cultivate relationships, enhance global stability and advance its international priorities.
- On June 11, 2019, the Senate Standing Committee of Foreign Affairs and International Trade released a report on the impact and use of Canadian culture and arts in Canadian foreign policy and diplomacy, titled Cultural Diplomacy at the Front Stage of Canada’s Foreign Policy.
- The report concludes that “…federal departments involved in cultural diplomacy should adopt a more strategic approach toward cultural diplomacy…” including a comprehensive strategy and policy framework to identify clear objectives and the necessary resources.
- The report also recommends that “federal departments and Crown corporations involved in cultural diplomacy activities develop performance measurement indicators to monitor and assess both the short-term and long-term results of those activities.”
- The report calls on that the Government of Canada to designate Global Affairs Canada (GAC) as the lead department responsible for coordinating and delivering on Canada’s cultural diplomacy, in cooperation with related federal institutions, with roles and responsibilities clearly established in a strategic policy framework. It emphasizes that GAC must cooperate with other federal institutions, including PCH, in light of its mandate and networks.
- The Liberal Party’s electoral platform calls for a cultural diplomacy strategy to promote Canadian culture and creators around the world, including through yearly missions. The Bloc Québécois calls on the government to maintain and index the Canada Council’s budget at a minimum of $300 million, including assistance for international promotion.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- Global instability is on the rise. Traditional governance institutions, both domestic and multilateral, are being challenged, and trade protectionism, misinformation, mistrust, and ethno-nationalism are increasing. This is a critical period to strategically increase Canada’s international engagement, as Canada has traditionally benefitted from a stable, rules-based international order. The proposal for a new cultural diplomacy strategy from the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs speaks to this urgent need. The Liberal party’s electoral platform also underscores the need for a cultural diplomacy strategy to promote Canadian culture and creators around the world, including through yearly missions. In light of this electoral commitment, GAC has initiated analysis and prepared a transition brief on how to potentially implement a federal cultural diplomacy strategy. PCH will work closely with GAC to ensure that the Department’s interests are taken into account.
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
D. Implementation
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
E. Strategic Considerations
FPT considerations
Provinces and Territories (PTs) are active internationally, and culture is a shared jurisdiction. [REDACTED]
International considerations
By equipping itself with a Framework, PCH would strengthen its ability to support Canadian cultural diplomacy and, in so doing, move towards more strategic and efficient methods such as those implemented by like-minded countries, such as Australia, France and the United Kingdom.
[REDACTED]
Indigenous peoples considerations
[REDACTED]
Stakeholder perspectives
Portfolio organizations have consistently sought increased PCH coordination in the area of international engagement. [REDACTED].
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
Urban/rural and regional considerations
[REDACTED]
Timing
[REDACTED]
Cost implications
[REDACTED]
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
[REDACTED]
Indigenous Matters at Canadian Heritage
A. Introduction
Canadian Heritage’s mandate positions the Minister and the Department to contribute meaningfully to federal policy initiatives aiming to promote greater respect and equity for Indigenous peoples in Canada. The Department’s policies, programs and levers can be used to increase Canadians’ understanding of Indigenous realities, counter stereotypes and reflect Indigenous peoples as diverse, modern and creative people. This paper outlines the federal Indigenous policy context and the role Canadian Heritage plays within it, both in terms of present activities and potential future action.
B. Policy Context
There are three distinct, constitutionally-recognized groups of Indigenous peoples in Canada: First Nations, Inuit and Métis.Footnote 2 Within these three large groupings, diversity is the rule, and each Indigenous community has its own distinct history and unique relationship with Canada (e.g., the First Nations group includes more than 600 individual communities, possessing nearly 90 distinct languages). The reality of Indigenous diversity presents challenges to creating policy at the federal level that is responsive to Indigenous needs, because these are almost always conditioned by local factors. Since the 1960s, the Government has attempted to gather Indigenous perspectives on policy by collaborating with national and regional Indigenous representative organizations. These organizations have been instrumental in that regard, but they do not replace Indigenous governments, and to ensure its policies and programs respond to local conditions, Canada has taken steps to engage directly with Indigenous peoples.
Despite recent improvements to some baseline indicators, the gap between Indigenous socio-economic conditions in Canada and those of Canadians as a whole has not diminished. Statistics Canada census data collected in 2016 indicates: one in five Indigenous Canadians lived in a dwelling that required major repairs; nearly one in five of Indigenous people lived in crowded housing; Indigenous children made up half of the children in foster care in Canada; Indigenous employment rates have not increased since 2006; and mental health challenges, suicide rates, food insecurity, victimization, and incarceration rates were all well above national averages for Indigenous peoples. These are the outcomes of national policy and legislation that sought to eliminate Indigenous peoples by assimilating them into the broader Canadian society, as reflected in: the Indian Act; the establishment and maintenance of the Indian residential schools system; the “Sixties Scoop” of Indigenous children from the families and communities; the repression of traditional governance systems, languages and other cultural practices; the continuing erosion of the Indigenous land base and resources; forced relocations of communities; inadequate responses by authorities to missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls; critically sub-standard housing and social infrastructure; and many other examples.
Since 1990, the Government of Canada has undertaken two major commissions and one major inquiry to examine the plight of Indigenous peoples in Canada. The first of these was the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (commonly known as RCAP), established in 1991 to investigate and propose solutions to the fractured relationship between Indigenous peoples, the Government of Canada and Canadian society as a whole. RCAP produced a five-volume, 4,000-page report in 1996, containing 440 recommendations. Though many years have passed, many of its recommendations have not been addressed.
The second was the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The commission was established as part of the Indian Residential School Settlement Agreement, reached between the Government of Canada, residential school Survivors, Indigenous organizations and the implicated churches – the largest class action suit in Canadian history. The commission delivered its final report in December 2015, with 94 Calls to Action organized under 22 thematic headings. At the time of its release, the government committed to implement each call to action under federal jurisdiction, assigning each call to action to departments with responsive mandates, and communicating progress to Canadians through an on-line tracker. For a detailed list of the Calls to Action for which Canadian Heritage is responsible, and their completion status, please see Annex A. Note that the Government reports publicly via the CIRNAC website on its progress in implementing the Calls to Action, including those for which Canadian Heritage is responsible.
Finally, in 2016, the Government of Canada, along with the provinces and territories, launched the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls to “report on the systemic causes of all forms of violence against Indigenous women and girls, including sexual violence.” The inquiry concluded that persistent colonial structures and policies in Canada are among the root causes and argued that Canada’s policies, omissions and actions respecting violence against Indigenous women and girls amount to genocide. The final report contained 231 Calls for Justice directed towards governments, industry, the health and justice systems, the media, and all Canadians. A number of these Calls for Justice impact Canadian Heritage, which will be addressed below. For a list of the Calls for Justice for which Canadian Heritage is responsible, please see Annex B. The Québec provincial government undertook a separate inquiry related to the practices of provincial services in relation to disappearances and maltreatment of Indigenous women and girls. In 2019, the Public Inquiry Commission on Relations Between Indigenous Peoples and Certain Public Services in Québec: Listening, Reconciliation and Progress (Viens Commission) concluded, and proposed 142 Calls for Action to reform the delivery of provincial public and social services.
Indigenous peoples have also engaged international bodies on their relationships with Canada, notably the United Nations. In 2007, the United Nations adopted the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (commonly known as UNDRIP, or the Declaration). Canada expressed support for the Declaration in 2010 and announced its unqualified support in 2016. The Declaration consists of 46 articles that address a wide variety of individual and collective rights of Indigenous peoples on such matters as culture, identity, religion, language, health, education, and community. Private Member’s Bill C-262 (introduced by NDP Member of Parliament Romeo Saganash) sought to ensure that Canada’s laws would be harmonized with the Declaration; C-262 died on the Senate order paper in 2019. In October 2019, the provincial government in British Columbia tabled a bill meant to create a legal requirement and provide a framework for the province to align its laws with the standards of the Declaration; and in September 2019, the Viens Commission recommended that the National Assembly adopt a motion to recognize and implement UNDRIP in Québec.
RCAP, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, and the Declaration have raised awareness in Canada regarding Indigenous rights. Each of these bodies underlined the importance of supporting language, culture, and artistic expression to ensure Indigenous perspectives are recognized and respected. An Environics public opinion survey in 2016 indicates that most Canadians have positive views of Indigenous peoples and are supportive of efforts to promote reconciliation with Indigenous peoples and improve socio-economic conditions. Support varied by region, however, and there is the potential that Canadians could find the level of financial investment required to achieve substantive progress difficult to comprehend and accept. Implementation in whole or in part of RCAP, of the articles of the Declaration, and of the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls would require concerted investment and effort by many federal governments, coordinated with other orders of government in Canada, including Indigenous governments.
Under section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867, responsibility for “Indians, and lands reserved for Indians” was assigned to the federal government, which includes First Nations, Inuit, and Métis and Non-Status Indians. On the other hand, provinces have jurisdictional authority over health, education, and social services, though the federal government provides certain programs and services in these areas. Moreover, the federal government can and does provide supports and services to Indigenous peoples living in urban areas. The jurisdictional overlap creates a complex landscape of inconsistent program eligibility and delivery that can lead to uneven outcomes. In an effort to correct this situation and to bring decision-making closer to communities, the federal government has increasingly cooperated and entered into agreements with provincial and territorial governments, and Indigenous governments and governing bodies to deliver services to Indigenous communities (the new Indigenous Languages Act, for which Canadian Heritage is responsible, continues the trend). Additionally, orders of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal since 2016 require that Canadian governments work through the jurisdictional challenges to ensure that First Nations children have equitable access to government services that other Canadians take for granted. Ensuring equal access to quality services for Indigenous peoples over the long term requires the commitment of all orders of government.
Currently, there are two federal departments with primary responsibility for Indigenous relationships, policy and services: Indigenous Services Canada (ISC), which is focused on improving access to high quality services including the eventual transfer of administration to Indigenous governments, and Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC), which is focused on the renewal and strengthening of relationships between Indigenous peoples and Canada, as well as matters related to the North.
Besides CIRNAC and ISC, there are 32 other federal departments and agencies that have responsibilities to meet Canada’s obligations and commitments to Indigenous peoples. As examples, Justice Canada administers the Indigenous Justice Program, which supports community-based justice programs as potential alternatives to mainstream justice processes; and Environment and Climate Change Canada administers the Indigenous Guardians Pilot Program, which provides Indigenous peoples with greater opportunities to exercise responsibility in the stewardship of traditional lands, water and ice.
Even in the absence of specific administrative responsibilities for targeted programs, all departments may contribute to advancing reconciliation by increasing the participation of Indigenous peoples in federal policy and programs, ensuring policy and programs are inclusive and do not discriminate against Indigenous peoples, and contributing to improving outcomes for Indigenous peoples in areas related to their mandates.
C. Role of Canadian Heritage
The Department of Canadian Heritage is positioned to fill leadership and support roles in the Indigenous policy space, delivering on Canada’s obligations and commitments. The arts, culture, diversity and language – cornerstones of the Department’s mandate – are powerful avenues to inclusion and understanding, connecting communities, and enriching the lives of Canadians.
Current obligations and commitments for the Minister and the Department that connect to the Indigenous policy space include implementation of the new Indigenous Languages Act, supporting Indigenous broadcasting, leading Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy, managing cultural heritage policy and funding cultural institutions, funding safe and inclusive sport, and supporting journalism and broadcasting.
As a funding body, Canadian Heritage has considerable experience collaborating with other orders of government and arm’s length organizations on the delivery of cultural services. As the federal lead on anti-racism, the Department is mandated to positively influence social change and promote diversity and inclusion. As the federal lead on museums and archives, the Department can take steps to ensure that Indigenous peoples are presented as living, diverse, modern, and creative individuals, and that Indigenous artifacts taken without permission are appropriately and respectfully repatriated to their communities. As the federal lead on national celebrations and events in the National Capital, and in its role as funder of heritage, art, and culture organizations, Canadian Heritage can support the articulation of an inclusive national narrative that reflects the history and realities of Indigenous peoples in Canada. Initiatives to inform and engage non-Indigenous Canadians on Indigenous matters fit squarely within Canadian Heritage’s mandate and are essential to managing productive and respectful relationships with Indigenous peoples.
While there are many ways the Department’s existing work advances the objectives above, there are opportunities for the Department to take a more targeted approach to further the discussion around the shared history of Indigenous peoples and non-Indigenous Canadians, and address misconceptions and racist assumptions while building a more inclusive and common path forward for Canadian identity. In particular, there are opportunities to leverage strong relationships and networks of partners in the media, cultural organizations, schools, and portfolio organizations for improvements that would enhance Canadians’ understanding and appreciation for Indigenous cultures and histories. [REDACTED]
There are two Indigenous files of primary importance for Canadian Heritage: implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act, and a proposed framework for repatriation of Indigenous cultural property and ancestral remains. Advice on these is contained in more detailed individual fiches.
In addition to these, there are several other Indigenous topics relating to Canadian Heritage’s mandate. More detailed briefings on these are available at your request.
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
Annex A
CTA | Progress to Date/ Current Status (complete, well underway or early planning) | Next Steps for Implementation |
---|---|---|
13. Call upon the federal government to acknowledge that Aboriginal rights include Aboriginal language rights. Lead: PCH | Complete | N/A |
14. Call upon the federal government to enact an Aboriginal Languages Act. Lead: PCH | Complete | N/A |
15. Call upon the federal government to appoint, in consultation with Aboriginal groups, an Aboriginal Languages Commissioner. Lead: PCH |
Well Underway Progress to date: A Coming Into Force Order brought the following sections of the Indigenous Languages Act into effect on August 29, 2019: Short Title (Section 1); Interpretation (Sections 2 – 4); Purposes of the Act (Section 5); Rights Related to Indigenous Languages (Section 6); Powers, Duties and Functions of the Minister (Sections 7 – 10); Federal Institutions (Sections 10.1 – 11); Office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages (Sections 13, 13.1, 15, 16, 19) |
|
67. Call upon the federal government to provide funding to the Canadian Museums Association to undertake, in collaboration with Aboriginal peoples, a national review of museum policies and best practices to determine the level of compliance with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and to make recommendations. Lead: PCH | Complete | N/A |
68. Call upon the federal government, in collaboration with Aboriginal peoples, and the Canadian Museums Association to mark the 150th anniversary of Canadian Confederation in 2017 by establishing a dedicated national funding program for commemoration projects on the theme of reconciliation. Lead: PCH | Complete | N/A |
69. Call upon Library and Archives Canada to:
|
Status: Well underway Progress to Date: As part of Budget 2017, LAC received $14.9 million to support the digitization of existing Indigenous language and cultural materials and to support an oral testimonies project to document Indigenous heritage. As a result, LAC created the Indigenous Documentary Heritage Initiatives: (1) We Are Here: Sharing Stories: digitizes Indigenous-related content in LAC’s collection to increase online access to these materials; and (2) Listen, Hear Our Voices: provides free digitization services for Indigenous communities to have their audiovisual recordings converted to digital files. LAC also established an Indigenous Advisory Circle to ensure meaningful consultations with Indigenous partners for providing advice, as LAC’s five-year Indigenous Heritage Action Plan. |
|
70. Call upon the federal government to provide funding to the Canadian Association of Archivists. Lead: PCH |
Status: Well underway Progress to date: In 2016, a non-governmental committee called the Standing Committee on Canada's Archives was established, in part, to oversee the implementation of Call to Action 70. The Standing Committee will receive and review a final report by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission Report Response Task Force (TRC TF), which is an independent body of which Library and Archives Canada is a member. The TRC TF’s preliminary data collected through primary research methods (survey, outreach interviews, etc.) was released in March 2019 in a draft “Indigenous Outreach Summary Report”. |
|
80. Call upon the federal government, in collaboration with Aboriginal peoples, to establish, as a statutory holiday, a National Day for Truth and Reconciliation. Lead: PCO |
Status: Early planning Progress to date: In 2017, a private member's bill introduced by NDP MP Georgina Jolibois (Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River), Bill C-369, was introduced, which addressed Call to Action 80. The Government supported this bill with proposed amendments to establish a statutory holiday on September 30 as the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation. The bill failed to pass because Parliament dissolved for the 2019 fall federal election, while it was still in the Senate. |
|
81. Call upon the federal government, in collaboration with Survivors and their organizations, and other parties to the Settlement Agreement, to commission and install a publicly accessible, highly visible, Residential Schools National Monument in the city of Ottawa. Lead: PCH | Early planning |
|
83. Call upon the Canada Council for the Arts to establish, as a funding priority, a strategy for Indigenous and non-Indigenous artists to undertake collaborative projects and produce works that contribute to the reconciliation process. Lead: PCH | Complete | N/A |
84. Call upon the federal government to restore and increase funding to the CBC/Radio-Canada. Lead: PCH | Complete | N/A |
87. Call upon all levels of government, in collaboration with Aboriginal peoples, sports halls of fame, and other relevant organizations, to provide public education that tells the national story of Aboriginal athletes in history. Lead: PCH |
Complete/ Ongoing component Progress to Date: In 2017, Sport Canada provided funding to the Aboriginal Sport Circle (ASC), to relaunch the Tom Longboat Awards. This program honours Indigenous athletes for their outstanding contributions to sport in Canada. On October 18, 2018, the two national recipients, Michael Linklater (Saskatchewan) and Jocelyne Larocque (Manitoba), were honoured at Canada’s Sports Hall of Fame Induction Ceremony at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre. Sport Canada will continue to work in collaboration with the Aboriginal Sport Circle to identify opportunities to tell the national story of Indigenous athletes. The National Coaching Awards for Indigenous Excellence was presented to the Aboriginal Sport Circle, in partnership with the Coaching Association of Canada, to a female and a male Indigenous coach at the Petro Canada Sport Leadership Awards Gala on November 9, 2019 in Richmond, British Columbia. |
|
88. Call upon all levels of government to take action to ensure long-term Aboriginal athlete development and growth, and continued support for the North American Indigenous Games, including funding to host the games and for provincial and territorial team preparation and travel. Lead: PCH |
Complete/ Ongoing Component Progress to Date: In Budget 2017, the Government invested $18.9 million over five years, starting in fiscal year 2017 to 2018, and ongoing funding of $5.5 million every four years thereafter, to support Indigenous youth through sport initiatives, including:
As this initiative is implemented, the government will look for opportunities to profile excellence among Indigenous youth in sport. In Budget 2018, the Government invested $47.5 million over five years and $9.5 million per year ongoing, to expand the use of sport for social development in more than 300 Indigenous communities. |
|
89. Call upon the federal government to amend the Physical Activity and Sport Act. Lead: PCH |
Early planning Progress to Date: Call to Action 89 is a longer-term deliverable given changes to the legislation will require consultation with other federal government departments in collaboration with the Aboriginal Sport Circle. The ongoing work in other areas related to Indigenous sport development will lay the foundation for the future amendment of the Physical Activity and Sport Act. |
|
90. Call upon the federal government to ensure that national sports policies, programs, and initiatives are inclusive of Aboriginal peoples. Lead: PCH |
Progress to Date: In Budget 2017, the Government invested $18.9 million over 5 years, starting in fiscal year 2017 to 2018, and ongoing funding of $5.5 million every 4 years thereafter, to support Indigenous youth and sport initiatives. In Budget 2018: The Government invested $47.5 million over five years and $9.5 million per year ongoing, to expand the use of sport for social development in more than 300 Indigenous communities. |
|
91. Call upon the officials and host countries of international sporting events such as the Olympics, Pan Am, and Commonwealth games to ensure that Indigenous peoples' territorial protocols are respected. Lead: PCH |
Well Underway Progress to Date: Sport Canada is reviewing the engagement process of Indigenous groups regarding the planning and delivery of the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games and the Toronto 2015 Pan and Parapan American Games for determining how to entrench CTA 91 into Hosting Program documents. In addition, Sport Canada will work in close collaboration with the organizing committees of International Major Multisport Games to ensure they are aware of and acting upon this Call to Action. |
|
*Abridged version
Annex B – National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls – Calls for Justice within PCH’s Mandate
The National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls was launched by the federal government, along with the provinces and territories, on September 1, 2016, in response to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Call to Action #41. The Inquiry conducted in-depth study and analysis on the issue of missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls, collecting information from community and institutional hearings; past and current research; collaborating with Elders and Knowledge Keepers; and conducting forensic analysis of police records.
The Inquiry’s Final Report, “Reclaiming Power and Place,” was released on June 3, 2019. The Final Report delivered 231 Calls for Justice, identifying the need for transformative legal and social change to address the circumstances resulting in the crisis of violence against Indigenous women and girls.
- Many of the Inquiry’s Calls for Justice are directly relevant to PCH’s mandate and those of its Portfolio organizations, particularly with respect to Indigenous languages, diversity and inclusion, and in combatting racism and discrimination. Call for Justice 1.11 calls upon the federal government to maintain and to make easily accessible the National Inquiry’s public record and website;
- Call for Justice 2.4 calls upon all governments to provide the necessary resources and permanent funds required to preserve knowledge by digitizing interviews with Knowledge Keepers and language speakers. It further calls upon all governments to support grassroots and community-led Indigenous language and cultural programs that restore identity, place, and belonging within First Nations, Inuit, and Métis communities through permanent, no-barrier funding and resources;
- Call for Justice 2.6 calls upon all governments to educate their citizens about, and to confront and eliminate racism, sexism and transphobia;
- Call for Justice 2.7 calls upon all governments to adequately fund and support Indigenous-led initiatives to improve the representation of Indigenous peoples in media and pop culture;
- Call for Justice 6.1 calls upon all media, news corporations, and outlets, and, in particular, government-funded corporations and outlets; media unions, associations, and guilds; academic institutions teaching journalism or media courses; governments that fund such corporations, outlets and academic institutions; and journalists, reporters, bloggers, film producers, writers, musicians, music producers, and, more generally, people working in the entertainment industry to take decolonizing approaches to their work and publications in order to educate all Canadians about Indigenous women, girls and two-spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, questioning, intersex and asexual (2SLGBTQQIA) people;
- Call for Justice 15.2 calls upon all Canadians to decolonize by learning the true history of Canada and Indigenous history in your local area, including learning about and celebrate Indigenous Peoples’ history, cultures, pride, and diversity, and acknowledging the land we live on and its importance to local Indigenous communities, both historically and today;
- Call for Justice 16.2 calls upon all governments to create laws and services and ensure the protection and revitalization of Inuit culture and language. All Inuit, including those living outside of Inuit Nunangat, must have equitable access to culture and language programs. It is essential that Elders are included in the development and delivery of these programs; and
- Call for Justice 17.7 calls upon all governments to fund and to support culturally appropriate programs and services for Métis people living in urban centers, including those that respect the internal diversity of Métis communities with regards to spirituality, gender identity, and cultural identity.
Implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act
A. Topic
- The reclamation, revitalization, maintenance and strengthening of Indigenous languages is an important cornerstone of reconciliation with Indigenous peoples in Canada.
B. Background and Current Status
On June 21, 2019, the Indigenous Languages Act received Royal Assent. Funding over five years and ongoing to implement the Act was approved in 2019. The Act aims to reverse the impact of colonial policies that sought to eliminate Indigenous languages. The residential schools system, forced relocations, the Sixties Scoop, and other such policies have so eroded Indigenous languages that today only 15.6% of Indigenous peoples in Canada can converse in an Indigenous language. In fact, UNESCO classifies 75% of the approximately 90 different living Indigenous languages in Canada as endangered, and no Indigenous language is considered “safe”.
The Act was developed following extensive engagement with Indigenous peoples and collaborative development work with Indigenous partners. It includes mechanisms to support and promote the use of Indigenous languages; support efforts to reclaim, revitalize, maintain and strengthen Indigenous languages; facilitate the effective exercise of the rights of Indigenous peoples; facilitate cooperation of other orders of government and third parties; facilitate collaborative policy development related to the Act; and, facilitate adequate, sustainable and long-term funding for Indigenous languages. The Act also describes the conditions and mechanisms under which federal institutions may provide access to services in Indigenous languages.
The Act establishes an Office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages (OCIL), with a Commissioner and up to three directors appointed by the Governor in Council, based on the recommendation of the Minister. The OCIL is intended to be an arm’s-length, independent institution, and neither it, nor its Governor in Council appointees and staff, will be part of the federal administration. The Minister may establish an advisory committee to obtain advice on the appointment of the Commissioner.
Once established, the OCIL would support the efforts of Indigenous peoples to reclaim, revitalize, maintain and strengthen Indigenous languages, promote public awareness and understanding in respect to Indigenous languages in Canada, and undertake research or studies in respect to the use of Indigenous languages. Additionally, it would provide services to facilitate the resolution of disputes related to negotiated agreements and other obligations under the Act, or federal policies and programs pertaining to Indigenous languages.
The Act contains a number of obligations for the Minister: consult with Indigenous peoples on funding for Indigenous languages, on appointments to the OCIL, and on the development of regulations; receive annual business plans, audited statements, and annual reports from the OCIL; cause the OCIL’s annual reports to be tabled in Parliament; and, cause an independent review to be conducted within five years of the Act coming into force.
The Minister is authorized to cooperate with other orders of government and third parties to efficiently and effectively support Indigenous languages in Canada, including by entering into agreements and arrangements with them respecting programs and services in relation to education, health and the administration of justice. The Minister may also enter into other types of agreements and arrangements to further the purposes of the Act. Finally, as required, the Minister may cause the OCIL to carry out a special examination to assess the adequacy of its books, records, systems and practices.
The legislation was enacted with all-party support in the House of Commons and unanimously supported by Senators during the Senate committee stage. In its election platform, the Liberal Party of Canada committed to ensure the Indigenous Languages Act is fully implemented, and to “long-term, predictable, and sufficient funding” to support its full implementation. The New Democratic Party platform, released prior to the Act receiving Royal Assent, committed to “new legislation and stable funding” developed in partnership with Indigenous peoples. The platforms of neither the Conservative Party of Canada nor the Bloc Québécois contained explicit commitments regarding Indigenous languages, though the Bloc Québécois did indicate its support for the “autonomie administrative” of Indigenous communities, in particular in the areas of education, justice and culture. The Green Party platform indicated the party would support Indigenous cultural curricula; “support and sustain the transmission, proliferation, and regeneration of Indigenous cultural works and languages”; and ensure funding to protect Indigenous languages at risk of disappearing.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
D. Implementation
As a transition from the Aboriginal Languages Initiative, investments in 2019-20 and 2020-21 are being made through the new Indigenous Languages and Cultures Program, with more flexible terms and conditions.
Canadian Heritage is also negotiating two pathfinder agreements under the Act: up to $6 million over six years with the Nisga’a Nation to implement its strategic language plan; and up to $42 million over five years with Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated and the Government of Nunavut [REDACTED]
Once established, the Minister’s ability to shape operations of the OCIL will be largely limited to: recommendations on appointments of the Commissioner and directors; allocation of OCIL funding; receipt of the Commissioner’s annual reports; and, periodic Parliamentary and Independent reviews.
[REDACTED]
Under the Act, federal institutions may provide access to services in Indigenous languages where there is capacity to do so and there is sufficient demand. [REDACTED]
E. Strategic Considerations
Legislative considerations
Under the Act, the Governor in Council may make regulations pertaining to: the Commissioner’s review of complaints; procedures for consultations and negotiating agreements and arrangement under the Act; access to federal services in Indigenous languages; additional information to be included in the Commissioner’s annual reports; and, generally, for carrying out the purposes and provisions of the Act. [REDACTED]
A Parliamentary Review is required every three years after the Act comes fully into force; an Independent Review is required every five years after the Act comes fully into force.
FPT considerations
[REDACTED] To that end, the Act authorizes the Minister and an appropriate Minister to enter into agreements or arrangements with other orders of government and third parties to further the purposes of the Act and to ensure jurisdictional responsibilities are respected. A number of provinces and territories indicated a desire to work collaboratively.
Territorial Language Accords with Nunavut and Northwest Territories expire in March 2020. Both governments have expressed concern that the agreements have not yet been renewed. [REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
International considerations
Significant international attention was brought to the issue during the United Nations International Year of Indigenous Languages in 2019. Canadian Heritage will be expected to participate in developing the Government of Canada’s position on a strategic outcome document related to this initiative during the November 2019 UNESCO General Conference. The Department will also be expected to participate in an event at the United Nations scheduled for December 17, 2019, to wrap up the year’s activities.
Additionally, a draft UN General Assembly Resolution, co-sponsored by Canada, seeks to proclaim 2022-2032 the International Decade of Indigenous Languages. [REDACTED]
Indigenous peoples considerations
The Assembly of First Nations, the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, and the Métis National Council were partners in the development of the Act, and continue to be involved in implementation. [REDACTED]
Initially, the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami supported the legislation and worked with Canadian Heritage on its development. However, it withdrew its support of the Bill during the Parliamentary process and has requested that Inuktut be granted official language status in Inuit Nunangat.
Stakeholder perspectives
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
Urban/rural and regional considerations
Canada has a complex linguistic landscape with 90 living Indigenous languages spread across communities with varying degrees of language endangerment and capacity for reclamation or revitalization. Place of residence can impede language revitalization in different ways (e.g. challenge to recruit and retain fluent teachers to rural and remote areas; uneven access to teaching and learning resources; and, pressure from other pressing socio-economic issues, such as housing, health care, safe water, and employment).
The ongoing urbanization of Indigenous peoples is also important. Although this demographic trend leads to a greater diversity of Indigenous languages in large urban centres, the transmission of an Indigenous language as a mother tongue tends to decrease in urban centres. [REDACTED]
Timing
Implementation of the Act will be rolled out over several years, with key milestones in the next three years. These are:
- Coming into force of the Act: [REDACTED]
- Implementation of an investment framework: [REDACTED]
- Appointment of a Commissioner and up to three directors: [REDACTED]
- Establishment of the OCIL: [REDACTED]
- Development of regulations: [REDACTED]
Cost implications
[REDACTED]
Currently, the Department is discussing funding methodologies for the provision of adequate, sustainable and long-term funding with three Indigenous groups: National Indigenous Organizations, self-governing Indigenous groups, and the Inuit-Crown Partnership Committee.
Machinery of Government considerations
There are Machinery of Government considerations related to the establishment of the OCIL as an independent, arms-length organization. Such matters are at the prerogative of the Prime Minister.
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
The Department administers the Indigenous Languages and Cultures Program, formerly the Aboriginal Peoples’ Program (prior to June 2019). The program includes funding for the revitalization of Indigenous languages; Northern Aboriginal Broadcasting; and the Canada-Territorial Language Cooperation Agreements with the Northwest Territories, Nunavut and Yukon First Nations.
For complementary measures, funding approved in 2019 for the Act complements federal funding delivered through Indigenous Services Canada for Indigenous language education from kindergarten to grade 12 on reserve, and for language teaching projects in urban centres. At Canadian Heritage, work is also being done to increase Indigenous content in the arts and culture sector.
A National Repatriation Framework for Indigenous Cultural Property and Ancestral Remains
A. Topic
- A national repatriation framework for Indigenous cultural property and ancestral remains has the potential to advance reconciliation and build a new relationship with Indigenous Peoples while contributing to the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
B. Background and Current Status
- The 2015 report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission includes a recommendation that Canada should fully adopt and implement the principles of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and that the Government of Canada should use the Declaration as a framework for reconciliation.
- Article 11 and Article 12 of the Declaration refer specifically to cultural property and the repatriation of human remains. While the Declaration is aimed at the conduct of United Nations member states, the report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission also sets out expectations for organizations including museums and archives.
- A national strategy on repatriation would contribute to the implementation of Article 12 of the United Nations Declaration.
- The Truth and Reconciliation Commission report also recommended funding for a national review of museum policies and practices, but did not make any specific recommendation concerning repatriation. The current national review of museum policies is being conducted by the Canadian Museums Association and is expected to be completed by 2022.
- In February 2018, Liberal Member of Parliament Bill Casey (Cumberland-Colchester) tabled Private Member’s Bill C-391, An Act Respecting a National Strategy for the Repatriation of Aboriginal Cultural Property. The Bill would have required the Government of Canada to develop and implement a national strategy for the repatriation of Indigenous cultural property and tasked the Minister of Canadian Heritage as the responsible minister. Bill C-391 was supported by all parties (with amendments) and it was adopted by the House of Commons. However, the Bill did not pass Second Reading in the Senate and it died on the Order Paper when Parliament was dissolved in September 2019.
- In 2019, the Liberal Party electoral platform stated: “We will move forward – in partnership with Indigenous Peoples – to develop a framework for repatriating Indigenous cultural property and ancestral remains.”
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- Almost one-third of heritage institutions in Canada have collections that include Indigenous cultural property or ancestral remains that are associated with Indigenous Peoples of Canada. This equates to over 6.5 million artifacts and approximately 2,000 full or partial remains.
- A national repatriation framework that applies to museums and heritage institutions across Canada would be an important measure to move forward with reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples.
- Bill C-391, which was supported by all parties, created an expectation of a national repatriation strategy among Indigenous Peoples. The commitment to develop a repatriation strategy for Indigenous cultural property an ancestral remains was reiterated in the Liberal Party of Canada election platform.
- Legislation, such as that proposed by Member of Parliament Bill Casey, is not required in order for the Department of Canadian Heritage to develop and implement a national strategy for the repatriation of Indigenous cultural property and ancestral remains.
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
D. Implementation
Developing a repatriation framework would include the following steps:
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
E. Strategic Considerations
Legislative considerations
Legislative considerations associated with the development of a framework to repatriate Indigenous cultural property and ancestral remains will depend on the approach developed.
FPT considerations
[REDACTED]
International considerations
The repatriation of cultural property removed during the colonial era has recently been the subject of significant international attention. In 2017, the President of France, Emmanuel Macron, called for the repatriation of African cultural property held in French museums. Since then, other nations, including the Netherlands and Germany, have also worked to develop repatriation frameworks. Australia has a framework for the repatriation of Aboriginal sacred objects and ancestral remains, and New Zealand’s national museum has its own repatriation framework for Maori cultural property and ancestral remains.
The cultural property and ancestral remains of the Indigenous Peoples of Canada are also housed in museums and other institutions around the world. [REDACTED]
There are no binding international treaties that require the repatriation of Indigenous cultural property and ancestral remains. [REDACTED]
Indigenous Peoples considerations
[REDACTED]
Stakeholder perspectives
As Bill C-391 was not a government bill, there were no formal consultations with respect to the repatriation of Indigenous cultural property and ancestral remains. However, witness testimony from the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage’s study of Bill C-391 revealed the following key points of concern from Indigenous communities and museums:
- The physical return of Indigenous cultural property is one of several successful outcomes from repatriation negotiations. Alternate outcomes, such as co-management agreements, should be factored into the development of a framework.
- Repatriation requires a great deal of research to identify where material from a particular community is held, as well as detailed research on the provenance of human remains and Indigenous cultural property currently in museum collections. Both Indigenous communities and museums indicated requiring support in order to undertake this research.
- Indigenous communities and representatives indicated that significant funding would be required to effectively enable repatriation given the costs reported by communities such as the Haida Gwaii. The Haida Gwaii Museum reports having spent over $1 million over the last 20 years in order to repatriate the remains of 500 ancestors.
- A repatriation strategy for Indigenous cultural property and ancestral remains should address capacity-building with respect to training required for Indigenous communities on how to ensure the long term preservation of their cultural property.
- Indigenous representatives also raised the issue that infrastructure funding could be required in order to house the cultural property returned to communities.
Urban/rural and regional considerations
[REDACTED]
Timing
[REDACTED]
Cost implications
Unable to assess at this time, as costs would depend on the scope and approach of the consultation, and whether the framework proposes new programs or expands existing programs to build capacity and support.
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
National Monuments in Canada’s Capital Region
A. Topic
- The Department of Canadian Heritage is currently developing several nationally significant monuments in Canada’s Capital Region, including the National Monument to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan.
B. Background and Current Status
- The Government of Canada’s Policy on National Commemorative Monuments on Federal Lands in Canada's Capital Region provides a systematic approach for the development of monuments in Canada's Capital Region, and ensures that monuments reflect the rich and diverse history and accomplishments of the people of Canada and Canada's national identity.
- Canadian Heritage leads the development of new national monuments on federal lands in Canada’s Capital Region, working closely with the National Capital Commission, other departments and external proponents. The National Capital Commission has responsibility for Federal Land Use and Design Approval as per the National Capital Act, is responsible for construction of monuments and assumes ownership once completed.
- In addition to responsibility for overall project management and coordination, Canadian Heritage manages the design competition process and all on-site interpretation, as well as assuming responsibility for communications and events for certain monument projects.
- Canadian Heritage is facilitating the development of the following high-profile national monuments:
- National Monument to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan
- Memorial to the Victims of Communism – Canada, a Land of Refuge
- LGBT Purge National Monument
- Residential Schools National Monument
- Although it is possible for a monument to be initiated by an Act of Parliament, this does not apply for current monument projects. These monuments are the result of government initiatives (National Monument to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan, Residential Schools National Monument), proposals from third-party proponents (Memorial to the Victims of Communism) or as part of a legal settlement agreement (LGBT Purge National Monument).
- The National Monument to Canada's Mission in Afghanistan is a joint Government effort, primarily involving three organizations: Veterans Affairs Canada, Canadian Heritage and the National Capital Commission. The Monument will recognize an important chapter in Canada’s history and pay tribute to the commitment and sacrifice of Canadians in helping to rebuild Afghanistan.
- The monument projects are currently at varying stages of development:
- National Monument to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan
- The monument was announced by the Government of Canada on May 8, 2014, the eve of the National Day of Honour recognizing the end of Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan.
- The National Capital Commission approved the monument site in LeBreton Flats across from the Canadian War Museum in downtown Ottawa; the first phase of a national design competition was launched in August 2019 and will close in January 2020.
- Memorial to the Victims of Communism
- Tribute to Liberty, a non-profit organization, was set up in 2008 to establish the Memorial. In 2009, the National Capital Commission granted approval of the proposed project. The project also obtained federal support in 2010 and 2013.
- The Memorial will be located in the Garden of the Provinces and Territories across from the Library and Archives Building in downtown Ottawa.
- Tribute to Liberty is the external proponent and has fully met its financial commitment of $1.5 million. The Government’s commitment of $1.5 million was transferred to the National Capital Commission to cover all costs associated with site work and construction.
- The Memorial has received large donations (of up to $100,000) from several governments of foreign countries affected by communism.
- LGBT Purge National Monument
- This monument is being developed as a result of the settlement of a class action lawsuit between the Government of Canada and members of the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) community who were employed by the Canadian Armed Forces, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and the federal public service.
- Canadian Heritage is developing this monument with the LGBT Purge Fund, a non-profit corporation established to realize a number of objectives, one of which is the creation of a national monument in Canada’s Capital Region.
- Funding of $8 million is available for this commemoration project.
- Residential Schools National Monument
- This proposed monument responds to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Call to Action 81, which calls “upon the federal government, in collaboration with Survivors and their organizations, and other parties to the Settlement Agreement, to commission and install a publicly accessible, highly visible, Residential Schools National Monument in the city of Ottawa to honour Survivors and all the children who were lost to their families and communities.”
- Canadian Heritage began engagement on the monument in fall 2019.
- No budget or timelines have been set for this monument.
- National Monument to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan
- Three parties have stated their support for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s final calls to action:
- The Liberal Party platform includes a commitment to continue “to work with First Nations to implement the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls to Action, and the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls’ Calls for Justice.”
- The New Democratic Party platform commits to “fully implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s 94 Calls to Action […].”
- The Green Party of Canada’s Vision commits to “fully conform to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, implement the calls to action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the calls of the report from the Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women.”
- The Conservative Party platform states: “To honour the sacrifice of our military heroes, we will put vital commemoration projects, like the National Memorial for Canada’s War in Afghanistan, back on track. All military heroes – the veterans of the vanishing generations of heroes who served in World War II and the Korean War, the men and women who have been to Afghanistan or conflict zones around the world – should be commemorated.”
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- Proposed next steps for the monument projects are outlined below:
- National Monument to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan:
- [REDACTED]
- Residential Schools National Monument:
- [REDACTED]
- Memorial to the Victims of Communism:
- [REDACTED]
- LGBT Purge National Monument:
- [REDACTED]
- National Monument to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan:
D. Implementation
The monument projects are at varying stages of implementation: the Memorial to the Victims of Communism is in the construction phase, the National Monument to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan is at the design competition phase of implementation, while the other projects are in preliminary planning.
E. Strategic Considerations
Indigenous peoples considerations
Discussions are held with local Indigenous communities (Algonquin Anishinabeg) about site use and Indigenous peoples are part of monument ceremonies and events.
The following projects entail further Indigenous engagement:
- National Monument to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan: Veterans Affairs Canada is leading on engagement with the public and Indigenous veterans on monument design considerations and final design proposals.
- Residential Schools National Monument: A visioning workshop with Survivors took place in October 2019; further engagement is pending.
- LGBT Purge National Monument: The proponent, the LGBT Fund, has engaged with local Indigenous communities and Two-Spirit individuals about the monument vision and site. No government engagement is expected in this area for this monument project.
Stakeholder perspectives
National Monument to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan: The project stakeholders are National Defence along with Veterans of the Mission and the families of those who served in Afghanistan. Although the project was announced in 2014, site selection was only finalized in June 2019. Recent coverage of the re-dedication of the Kandahar Cenotaph has renewed interest in the monument. Veterans Affairs Canada will ensure the involvement of those who served and their families throughout the duration of the project.
Memorial to the Victims of Communism – Canada, a Land of Refuge: Project stakeholders are communities affected by communism, both in Canada and abroad.
LGBT Purge National Monument: Stakeholders include the participants of the settlement agreement and the larger LGBTQ2IA+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Questioning, Two-Spirit, Intersex, Asexual and other identities) community. Given the diversity of the stakeholder groups, the LGBT Purge Fund will be conducting its own engagement exercise for the monument vision and site. As the LGBT Purge settlement is schedule to wind up on December 30, 2021, the LGBT Purge fund will be looking to advance this project as quickly as possible, recognizing that an extension will likely be necessary.
Timing
National monument projects managed by Canadian Heritage generally take five years from project initiation to monument inauguration, but can vary depending on scale, complexity, and required engagement. The current projected timelines and inauguration timings are as follows:
- National Monument to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan:
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- Memorial to the Victims of Communism – Canada, a Land of Refuge: [REDACTED]
- LGBT Purge National Monument: [REDACTED]
- Residential Schools National Monument: [REDACTED]
Cost implications
- National Monument to Canada’s Mission in Afghanistan: $5 million, fully funded by Veterans Affairs Canada. Canadian Heritage is not contributing financially to this project.
- Memorial to the Victims of Communism–Canada, a Land of Refuge: $3 million–the Government’s contribution (Canadian Heritage and Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada) is $1.5 million and Tribute to Liberty has raised the other $1.5 million. Design competition costs were absorbed by Canadian Heritage due to the decision to change the site and relaunch the design process.
- LGBT Purge National Monument: $8 million, fully funded by the settlement of the class action; Canadian Heritage is not contributing financially to this project.
- Residential Schools National Monument: [REDACTED]
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
The federal monument development process aligns with international best practices for major monuments. Canadian Heritage recognizes that the Residential Schools National Monument may call for a different approach.
Modernization of Canada’s Museum Policy
A. Topic
- The Government has not articulated the policy and objectives that guide its actions to support Canada’s museums for almost 30 years. Modernization of Canada’s Museum Policy would establish a new vision for federal engagement with museums to guide future decision-making in order to better achieve Government goals and ensure that federal engagement responds to the needs of museums and Canadians.
B. Background and Current Status
- The current Museum Policy dates to 1990. For many years the museum community and provincial and territorial governments have urged the Government to update its policy and investments to better respond to the challenges facing museums in preserving and providing access to heritage for the public.
- In recent years, federal investment has focused on the national museums – their sustainability, and expanding the suite of national museums beyond the National Capital Region – and in two areas for the larger museum community: youth employment and infrastructure.
- In 2016, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage launched a study on the state of Canada’s museums. In its September 2018 report, the Committee recommended that the Government review and modernize the Museum Policy. In its response to the Committee, in January 2019, the Government agreed with that recommendation. It noted that among the objectives of the 1990 Policy, preservation and access continue to be relevant, because they represent core museum functions, but that the way in which museums undertake those efforts has evolved, particularly in the digital age.
- No commitment of new funding or timelines were signaled by the Government in its response, which indicated that the outcome of the proposed effort could be a policy statement that would be used to guide future decision-making. The Government also noted that a significant amount of stakeholder input has been received over the past several years, and that this input would be reviewed to determine what additional consultations might be warranted.
- In their 2019 election platform, the Liberal Party of Canada made a commitment to “…review our national museums policy to make sure that people can access Canadian history across the country, with better access to digital collections.”
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- The Standing Committee’s study and recommendations have fueled significant expectations in Canada’s museum community, which views modernization of federal policy and programs to be long overdue. Stakeholders, including the Canadian Museums Association, are actively calling for a modernized policy.
- There are an estimated 2300 not-for-profit heritage institutions that would be considered stakeholders of a “museum” policy: museums, art galleries, historic site interpretive centres, and zoos and botanical gardens. These institutions are located in communities in all regions of Canada. Approximately 44% of these heritage institutions are not eligible for the Government’s hallmark funding program for the sector, the Museums Assistance Program because they are small, seasonal, volunteer run organizations.
- [REDACTED]
- The existing policy predates online and digital communications, and no federal funding is available to allow museums to digitize their collections. Despite over 203 million online visits to heritage institutions annually, institutions have converted an average of only 16.4% of their holdings to digital format.
- Museums are uniquely placed to play a role in larger social issues that are important to Canada and Canadians, such as diversity and inclusion. More than 80% of Canadians feel that visiting a museum or other heritage institution increases an individual’s feeling of attachment to Canada. Foreign-born Canadians are more likely (84%) to visit a heritage institution than Canadians born in Canada (79%).
- Canada’s museums are especially well-placed to foster reconciliation with Indigenous peoples. The Government provides only marginal funding to support museums and Indigenous communities to work together in this area.
D. Implementation
The following framework could form the basis for a new federal vision for museums through a modernized Museum Policy, with four objectives:
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
The Government already engages to some degree in all four areas, and a range of financial and non-financial options could be considered to implement a Museum Policy. The following new federal engagement options are based on an analysis of stakeholder input heard over several years and are designed to respond to the range of issues that have been most consistently raised by them.
POLICY OBJECTIVE | POTENTIAL NEW FEDERAL ENGAGEMENT |
---|---|
[REDACTED] | [REDACTED] |
[REDACTED] | |
[REDACTED] |
[REDACTED] [REDACTED] |
[REDACTED] | |
[REDACTED] | |
[REDACTED] |
[REDACTED] [REDACTED] |
[REDACTED] | |
[REDACTED] |
[REDACTED] [REDACTED] |
[REDACTED] |
E. Strategic Considerations
Legislative considerations
[REDACTED]
FPT considerations
[REDACTED]
Indigenous peoples considerations
A legal duty to consult on an initiative such as modernization of the Museum Policy has been established with a number of First Nations through Final Agreements. [REDACTED]
Stakeholder perspectives
Objectives and options outlined herein have been developed as a direct result of stakeholder input. [REDACTED]
Urban/rural and regional considerations
Heritage institutions are located in all regions of Canada and approximately 40% of are located in rural areas. The impact of the Museums Assistance Program extends equally between urban centres and rural communities, with a slightly lesser impact in medium sized centres.
Timing
[REDACTED]
Cost implications
Short-term: [REDACTED] Similarly, long-term costs of implementing a modernized Museum Policy [REDACTED]
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
[REDACTED]
Developing the RCMP Heritage Centre into Canada’s newest national museum
A. Topic
- National museums have an iconic presence as the public face of Canada’s collective memory, value and aspirations. Developing the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) Heritage Centre in Regina, Saskatchewan into a new national museum is a platform commitment to ensure that the story of the RCMP is accessible to all Canadians.
B. Background and Current Status
- National museums are federal Crown corporations, established under the Museums Act. National museums may also have affiliate museums, which share national status but do not have their own Board of Trustees. All national museums receive annual parliamentary appropriations to cover the majority of their operating costs, including those of any affiliate museums.
- The Museums Act establishes national museums and defines their mandates, powers and governance. It was enacted in 1990 with the purpose of creating the existing four national museums as individual Crown corporations.
- There are currently six national museums, three of which have affiliate museums: the National Gallery of Canada (affiliate is the Canadian Museum of Contemporary Photography), the Canadian Museum of Nature, Canadian Museum of History (affiliate is the Canadian War Museum), and the National Museum of Science and Technology (Ingenium, with affiliates the Canada Agriculture and Food Museum and the Canada Aviation and Space Museum). In addition, there is the Canadian Museum for Human Rights in Winnipeg, Manitoba and the Canadian Museum of Immigration at Pier 21 in Halifax, Nova Scotia.
- The RCMP established a museum in Saskatchewan in 1933. In 1973, the museum moved to a new building to commemorate the RCMP centennial.
- In 2001, the Mounted Police Heritage Centre Inc., a non-profit corporation, was established to operate the museum and run programs.
- In 2007, a new RCMP Heritage Centre building opened. It was designed by world-renowned Canadian architect Arthur Erikson. The Government of Canada contributed $23.5 million towards this project. The Government of Saskatchewan contributed $3.5 million and $2.5 million came from private donors. The RCMP Heritage Centre building is owned and operated by the Mounted Policy Heritage Centre Inc.
- In 2011, Western Economic Diversification Canada provided $2.1 million over two years to the RCMP Heritage Centre, indicating that the support would allow the centre to develop a longer term strategy that would ensure its continued operation and success in the future.
- The mission of the RCMP Heritage Centre is to serve as an education centre for Canadians about the historic and modern role of the RCMP. The RCMP Heritage Centre is a tourist attraction for Regina and Saskatchewan and receives approximately 20,000 visitors per year.
- In their 2019 election platform, the Liberal Party of Canada made a commitment to “move forward with making the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Heritage Centre into a national museum.” The Conservative Party of Canada also made the same commitment: “We will also designate the RCMP Heritage Centre in Saskatchewan as a national museum. There are national museums in Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, and Nova Scotia.”
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- [REDACTED]
- Canadian Heritage does not have a program to provide operating funding to Canadian museums. The Government only provides operating funding to its national museums through parliamentary appropriations.
D. Implementation
[REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
E. Strategic Considerations
Legislative considerations
Amendments to the Museums Act are required to create a new national museum.
FPT considerations
[REDACTED]
Indigenous peoples considerations
[REDACTED]
Stakeholder perspectives
In a July 2019 letter to the Honourable Ralph Goodale, Minister of Public Safety, the Commissioner of the RCMP, Brenda Lucki, expressed her support for the RCMP Heritage Centre, stating that it a “unique facility with profound national significance.”
There are several other museums across Canada, [REDACTED], which have expressed a desire to become a national museum. [REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
Urban/rural and regional considerations
The creation of a new national museum will expand the network of existing national museums and continue the pattern of establishing national museums outside of the National Capital Region.
Timing
[REDACTED]
Cost implications
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
[REDACTED]
Culture Pass
A. Topic
- As part of its electoral platform commitment, the Liberal Party of Canada proposes the introduction of the Culture Pass credit, which is intended to enable greater arts participation by Canadian children.
B. Background and Current Status
- The Government of Canada has an established role in supporting the cultural sector, however its current interventions focus on supporting professional arts production (primarily through the Canada Council for the Arts) and access to the arts (through the Department’s programs that support presentation, arts training, arts investment and infrastructure) through grants and contributions to not-for-profit organizations.
- International research suggests that early exposure to the arts and culture cultivates future audiences and has positive social impacts, notably in terms of educational outcomes and inclusion.
- As part of its platform commitment, the Liberal Party of Canada proposes to “introduce the Culture Pass, a $200 credit that every Canadian child will receive when they turn 12, to be used to access theatres, museums, galleries, workshops, and other cultural venues and local Canadian content.”
- It is anticipated that approximately 400,000 Canadian children per year would be eligible to receive the Culture Pass credit.
- This proposal resembles the pass Culture, a similar scheme currently being piloted in France, which aims to strengthen and diversify the cultural engagement of young people by providing subsidized cultural access of up to 500 € to 18 year olds.
- In the same spirit of increasing young peoples’ access to cultural activities, the Conservative Party of Canada’s election platform included two proposals: a refundable Children’s Arts and Learning Tax Credit, which would allow parents to claim up to $500 per child for expenses related to arts and educational activities; and removal of admission fees from Canada’s national museums, in order to encourage more Canadians to celebrate our shared heritage. Free admission would apply to museum visitors of all ages, including tourists visiting from elsewhere in Canada and from abroad.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
D. Implementation
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED] Based on these assumptions, three options for the delivery of the Culture Pass are:
- [REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED] - [REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED] - [REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
E. Strategic Considerations
FPT considerations
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
Indigenous peoples considerations
- [REDACTED]
Stakeholder perspectives
- [REDACTED]
Urban/rural and regional considerations
- [REDACTED]
Timing
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
Cost implications
- [REDACTED]
- Insufficient information is available at this time to approximate costs for the other options.
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
Grants and Contributions
A. Background
- Grants and contributions are the mechanisms for transferring government funding to a recipient to support activities that help to meet government objectives.
- Canadian Heritage accomplishes its mandate primarily through the delivery of grants and contributions, with 30 programs delivering more than $1.2 billion in funding annually to more than 9,000 recipients each year.
- The scope of these programs cover:
- Official Languages ($415M);
- Creativity, Arts and Culture ($430M);
- Heritage and Celebration ($55M);
- Sport ($218M); and
- Diversity and Inclusion ($83M).
- Approximately 90% of the funding awarded each year is in amounts under $100,000, and the vast majority of files that the department reviews are considered low-risk. In any given year, approximately 60% of the funding recipients are repeat clients seeking support for activities that the department has previously funded.
- Recipients include provinces, territories and municipalities, non-governmental organizations (community, regional, national), private sector firms (cultural industries), and individuals (high-performance athletes, youth, students and teachers of history). Funding is allocated for projects or programming and is disbursed through a competitive call for proposals, resulting in funding agreements between the Department and a recipient that cover a period of one to five years.
- These funding approaches provide an opportunity to advance Government priorities, which in recent years have included supporting LGBTQ2 communities, addressing racism and systemic discrimination, supporting women and girls and advancing gender equality, and reconciliation with Indigenous peoples.
- The Minister plays an important role in setting program policy directions for the administration of grants and contributions, and is involved in many ways, including:
- setting funding program parameters in Terms and Conditions, which outline who can apply and the types of eligible projects that could be funded by the Department;
- establishing annual funding priorities, which could reflect government-wide and/or Ministerial priorities;
- shaping the announcements of funding awarded to recipients;
- making decisions in specific program areas; and
- making decisions on individual funding files.
- Transfer payment programs will play an important role in delivering on some of the commitments in the platform for the Liberal Party. For example, the Liberal Party committed to:
- increase funding for the arts and culture sector, ensuring Canadians can access Canadian history across the country through investments in our portfolio agencies and our national museums;
- double funding for Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy and provide funding for community-led investments such as the support for 150th Anniversary of Metis Nation Entering Confederation as well as other initiatives that promote diversity, anti-racism and multiculturalism initiatives;
- provide new investments that strengthen and promote bilingualism in Canada, including the establishment of the Université de l’Ontario français; and
- provide long-term funding to support the implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act.
- The platforms released from the other parties also included initiatives that may require the use of a transfer payment program to achieve the expected outcomes.
- The Conservative Party platform indicated that they would provide funding to support the Building Communities through Arts and Heritage program, the Université de l’Ontario français as well as official language rights.
- The New Democratic Party platform indicated that they would provide funding to support the digital transition of Canadian media, an anti-racism strategy, Indigenous languages and culture, and after-school sport programs to tackle gang violence.
- The Green Party platform indicated that they would increase funding for the arts and culture as well as Indigenous languages.
- The Bloc Québécois indicated that they would increase funding to some of our portfolio agencies, including the Canada Council for the Arts and Telefilm Canada.
- Departmental officials are responsible for administering the delivery of grants and contributions programs, ensuring that applications meet established eligibility criteria, and for conducting a thorough review and assessment of applications to support a recommendation to yourself, or to an authority to whom you choose to delegate funding decisions to (e.g. Director General of the program).
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
B. Strategic Considerations
- The Liberal platform indicated that you intend to increase funding for the arts and culture, for community-led investments that promote inclusion and combat racism, as well as provide new investments that promote bilingualism.
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
Sport Canada’s Funding Allocation
A. Topic
- [REDACTED]
B. Background and Current Status
- The existing Sport Funding and Accountability Framework was first introduced in 1996, initially for National Sport Organizations (which represent individual sports at the national level, such as Alpine Canada). Since 2006, it has included Multisport Service Organizations (organizations that perform various services for the sport community) and the Canadian Olympic and Paralympic Sport Institute Network.
- The Sport Funding and Accountability Framework has been the major instrument used by Sport Canada to influence the development of the Canadian sport system through contribution agreements with funding recipients. It has become the primary mechanism for incentivizing national organizations to advance Federal Government objectives, including goals of the Canadian Sport Policy where appropriate.
- Over the past three years, review and consultation have been conducted on the benefits and drawbacks of the current approach to funding allocation. In response to these consultations as well as the emergence of new government policies and direction, [REDACTED]
- At the same time, there is ongoing pressure to fund a broader range of sport organizations as new sports are added to the Olympic and Paralympic programs, together with the expansion of the number of sport disciplines added to competitions. In addition, there is increased demand to fund mass participation sports.
- Although sport organizations are receiving additional funding over the next three years to help prevent abuse, discrimination, harassment, maltreatment, and concussion in sport, and to increase gender equity, the overall funding envelope for the Canadian sport system has remained relatively unchanged since 2005.
- Over the last year a new mechanism was developed to gather baseline data and monitor the progress of Canadian sport organizations in meeting the requirements of new government policies and direction. This approach includes the implementation of a Report Card whose initial rollout has focused on gathering data linked to safe sport and diversity and inclusion.
- The second and third phases of the Report Card will focus on good governance practices and sport technical elements, respectively, and will be implemented over the next two years.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
D. Implementation
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
E. Strategic Considerations
FPT considerations
The alignment of funding frameworks across jurisdictions has been a long-standing priority for the F-P/T Sport Committee. [REDACTED]
Indigenous peoples considerations
[REDACTED]
Stakeholder perspectives
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
Timing
[REDACTED]
Cost implications
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
[REDACTED]
Increasing Sport Participation
A. Topic
- Sport Canada sees an opportunity to take stronger action to reverse the trend of falling participation rates of Canadians across all demographic areas of sport. Action to increase participation would also improve results on the objective of the Physical Activity and Sport Act related to increasing sport participation.
B. Background and Current Status
- The Physical Activity and Sport Act identifies the federal government’s sport policy objectives as “(a) to increase participation in the practice of sport and support the pursuit of excellence in sport; and (b) to build capacity in the Canadian sport system.”
- The Sport Canada Branch of the Department of Canadian Heritage provides direct financial support to high-performance athletes through the Athlete Assistance Program. This support is designed to sustain participation and retention of approximately 3,000 high-performance athletes annually.
- The Sport Support Program, delivered by Sport Canada, has a dual focus on increasing the opportunities to participate in quality sport activities for all Canadians and to increase the capacity of the Canadian sport system to achieve world-class results at the highest international competitions.
- Sport can be a powerful mechanism to achieve social benefits, including improving health, keeping youth in school and providing teamwork and leadership skills which lead to improved employability and social inclusion. Sport Canada has recently launched a Sport for Social Development in Indigenous Communities initiative.
- Sport, particularly team sport, can bring together people from diverse social and cultural backgrounds around a common goal. Therefore, many social development goals can be targeted through the practice of sport. This could include contributing to Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy or contributing to integrate new Canadians.
- Sport Canada has historically placed a primary focus on high-performance sport, as the financial support of national teams and international competitions as well as support for national sport organizations were an urgent need when the office was formed in the early 1970s. The Physical Activity and Sport Act includes the objective “to increase participation in the practice of sport,” for which Sport Canada has no dedicated funding programs and otherwise directs limited resources.
- High-performance sport is a source of national pride and contributes to Canadian identity as Canadians rally around their athletes and see them as inspirational role models. Success in high-performance sport, however, has not led to sustained increased participation of Canadians in sport.
- In 2016, only 26% of Canadians aged 15 and older regularly participated in sport. This participation rate represents a 17% decline over the previous 18 years. (General Social Survey: StatCan 2016 and 1998)
- Canadian women and girls consistently participate in sport at lower rates than men and boys. Between 2005 and 2010, the participation rate of men in sport remained relatively stable at 35% while women’s participation rate dropped from 20% to 16%. Boys’ participation in organized sports has declined in all age groups since 1992. (Women in Sport: Fueling a Lifetime of Participation, Canadian Association for the Advancement of Women in Sport and Physical Activity, 2016)
- The federal-provincial/territorial Ministers responsible for Sport, Physical Activity and Recreation approved and issued the Common Vision for Increasing Physical Activity and Reducing Sedentary Living in Canada in 2018. The document states that “Leadership will be essential in getting the country moving. The Government plays a key policy role in setting the stage for enabling and encouraging Canadians to move more and sit less. It is in this context that federal, provincial and territorial governments are committed to helping build, broker and convene organizations, communities and leaders across all relevant policy domains.”
- Sport Canada received funding between 2017 and 2019 to undertake innovation projects and related research and data initiatives in the area of gender equity to determine how sport can be made more safe and welcoming for women and girls and seek longer-term solutions to increase participation. The Athlete Assistance Program was adjusted to increase overall funding support to athletes and included changes to some components of the program to help athletes stay in competitive sport, including initiatives directed at female athletes.
- The 2019 election platform of the Conservative Party of Canada promised changes to the tax code that would allow parents to claim up to $1,000 per child for expenses related to fitness or sport activities. This credit would be refundable so low-income Canadians could get more money back. Parents with children with disabilities could claim an additional $500 per child, per year. In addition, the Children’s Fitness Tax Credit could benefit parents up to $150 per child per year.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- Data showing trends toward reduced sport participation in youth and adult populations or static low participation rates is seen across all demographic data segments. [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
D. Implementation
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
E. Strategic Considerations
FPT considerations
- The federal government has an existing partnership with provinces and territories in the area of sport. [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
Indigenous peoples considerations
- Sport Canada has recently launched the Sport for Social Development in Indigenous Communities Initiative. Many of the Provincial/Territorial Aboriginal Sport Bodies had wished to have additional funding which could be used to enhance sport participation in Indigenous communities as well as the funding of sport for social development goals. Increased attention to expanding participation within the areas of introductory and recreational sport would likely receive the support of Indigenous stakeholders, particularly if funding was specifically identified for Indigenous communities and sports.
Stakeholder perspectives
- Stakeholders recognize the importance of having strong participation in all aspects of sport. For example, high-performance national teams rely on a strong pool of athletes from which to draw. If introductory sport is poorly managed/funded/attended today, there will be fewer high-performance athletes in the future.
- Sport Canada has developed strong relationships with stakeholders through the sport community and it is anticipated that other actors would welcome greater leadership for Sport Canada in sport community.
Urban/rural and regional considerations
- [REDACTED]
Timing
- [REDACTED]
Cost implications
- [REDACTED]
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
[REDACTED]
Safe, Welcoming, and Inclusive Sport
A. Topic
- All Canadians should have the opportunity to participate and excel in sport, regardless of gender identity, age, sexual orientation, race or socioeconomic status. Canadians should be able to participate in a safe environment that minimizes the risk of injury, including concussion, and is free from harassment, abuse, discrimination and of all forms of maltreatment.
B. Background and Current Status
- Safety, inclusion and accessibility, respect, fair play and ethical behavior are all stated as values of the Canadian Sport Policy (2012), which was endorsed by the Minister of Sport in 2012. The Physical Activity and Sport Act states that sport is founded on the treatment of all persons with fairness and respect.
- Sport Canada has focused on supporting a culture shift in Canadian sport, and raising the standards and expectations of funded sport organizations to take all measures necessary to prevent concussions, as well as incidents of harassment, abuse and discrimination from happening, and provide fair, transparent recourse support to individuals when incidents do occur.
- In regards to the goal to eliminate harassment, abuse, and discrimination and achieve gender equity in Canadian sport, a range of significant initiatives are being undertaken and supported by Sport Canada (the Department of Canadian Heritage) in collaboration with provincial and territorial governments and the sport community. This agreement was highlighted in the 2019 Red Deer Declaration endorsed by federal, provincial and territorial ministers.
- Sport initiatives aimed at reduction of harassment, abuse and discrimination have included: the implementation of a National Sport Helpline pilot project for victims and witnesses of abuse in sport; the establishment of an independent pilot-project investigation service to help organizations manage abuse allegations was established; and support that was provided for a study to examine the prevalence of maltreatment among national-level athletes. Recent work also saw the sport community’s development and nation-wide consultation toward creating a Universal Code of Conduct with financial support from Sport Canada.
- To address welcoming and inclusive sport, a commitment to gender equality in sport for women and girls by 2035 was made by the Government following the 2017 Report on Women and Girls in Sport of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.
- In April 2018, the Minister of Sport established the Working Group on Gender Equity in Sport, comprised of 12 leaders in the sport community. Through that platform, members shared their experiences, perspectives and insights by discussing ideas and options on how to increase the representation of women in all facets of sport, and helped identify additional measures to address the issues of harassment, abuse and discrimination in sport.
- Sport Canada officials contributed to the Federal-Provincial/Territorial Work Group on Women and Girls in Sport that was established to provide recommendations on initiatives aimed at increasing the participation of women and girls in all facets of sport. Three years of work by this group culminated with Federal-Provincial/Territorial Ministers responsible for sport, physical activity and recreation accepting the majority of the recommendations made in the work group’s Recommendation Report at the meeting in Red Deer, Alberta, on February 14 and 15, 2019.
- In February 2019, a Gender Equity Secretariat was created, which has allowed Sport Canada to position itself as a leader of gender equity in sport. The Secretariat is responsible for developing and implementing the Gender Equity in Sport Strategy. The Secretariat supports, administers and monitors existing and emerging gender equity initiatives and programs, and looks at innovative ways of addressing the challenges of participation and retention of girls and women in sport.
- In terms of sport safety, on June 3, 2019, the House of Commons received the report Tackling the Problem Head-on: Sports-Related Concussions in Canada prepared by the Standing Committee on Health Subcommittee on Sports-Related Concussions in Canada. The Subcommittee delivered thirteen recommendations to the federal government on how to better protect athletes from concussions and make sport safer for youth in Canada.
- The 2019 election platform of the Liberal Party of Canada committed to move forward with the use of Gender-Based Analysis Plus by renewing their commitment to a Federal Plan for Gender Equity, including a coordinated strategy built on the Gender Results Framework and other international agreements, and ensuring that rigorous Gender-Based Analysis Plus continues to be performed on all policy proposals.
- The 2019 election platform of the New Democratic Party committed to invest $100 million over five years to fund after-school programs, sports, and drop-in centres for youth across the country in an effort to keep them from joining gangs.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- The Canadian sport community has called for the Government of Canada to provide leadership, guidance, and support to effectively address issues of harassment and abuse in Canadian sport, as well as to create and sustain environments in which Canadians feel safe practicing sport.
- Ensuring that Canadians experience sport in safe, welcoming, and inclusive environments fits into the Department of Canadian Heritage’s mandate as it is a foundational element of achieving Sport Canada’s objectives of increasing participation in the practice of sport, and supporting the pursuit of excellence in sport.
- [REDACTED]
D. Implementation
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- The Gender Equity Secretariat at Sport Canada has been focusing its efforts on the Gender Equity in Sport Strategy by supporting, administering and monitoring existing and emerging gender equity initiatives and programs, and looking at innovative ways of addressing the challenges of participation and retention of girls and women in sport. The mandate of the Secretariat also includes the Inclusion component. [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
E. Strategic Considerations
FPT considerations
[REDACTED] The Red Deer Declaration for the Prevention of Harassment, Abuse, and Discrimination in Sport, which was endorsed by Federal-Provincial/Territorial ministers responsible for sport in February 2019, committed governments to taking collaborative and coordinated action in the areas of prevention, management, and reporting of incidents of harassment, abuse, and discrimination in sport.
International considerations
Work in the areas of concussion, harassment, abuse, and discrimination must be harmonized and developed in line with international sport regulations and standards such as the Fifth International Consensus statement on concussion in sport, and those from International Federations and multi-sport organizations such as the International Olympic Committee and the International Paralympic Committee.
Indigenous peoples considerations
[REDACTED]
Stakeholder perspectives
The Canadian sport community, particularly at the national level, has been calling for federal government leadership and guidance to support them in ensuring safety in sport and in preventing and addressing harassment and abuse. Additionally, they have been signaling the need for an independent body (or bodies) to oversee the Universal Code of Conduct and related sanctions that may need to be administered. The sport community has indicated its desire to contribute to the development of the implementation framework.
Urban/rural and regional considerations
Work is currently being done at the national level and Sport Canada continues to work with provincial/territorial counterparts to align the work throughout all levels of sport in Canada. [REDACTED]
Timing
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
Cost implications
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED] Sport Canada’s Hosting Program in [REDACTED]
A. Topic
- [REDACTED]
B. Background and Current Status
- The Canadian sport system and all that it brings to Canadians has been built on the back of major events. Major Games such as the Olympic and Paralympic Games hosted in Montreal (1976), Calgary (1988) and Vancouver (2010) have not only realized lasting sport legacies, but they have also profoundly affected the communities that have hosted them. This phenomenon has been demonstrated through the hosting of all sizes and types of sport events in Canada.
- Sport Canada supports the successful delivery of sport events, including over 80 international single sport events each year, a Canada Games every two years, the North American Indigenous Games, the Arctic Winter Games, as well as recent major multiport events such as the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games and the Toronto 2015 Pan and Parapan American Games.
- The Federal Policy for hosting international sport events (Hosting Policy), adopted on January 1, 2008, provides a federal framework to support the bidding and hosting of sport events in Canada.
- Sport Canada’s Hosting Program assists host societies and sport organizations to host the Canada Games and international sport events in Canada. The Program’s annual budget is approximately $20 million which supports the following three components:
- International Single Sport Events, such as World Championships and World Cups;
- International Multisport Games for Aboriginal Peoples and Persons with a Disability, such as the North American Indigenous Games, the Arctic Winter Games and the Deaflympics; and
- Canada Games.
- A fourth component of the Program deals with International Major Multisport Games, such as the Olympic and Paralympic Games and the Commonwealth Games, and requires a separate source of funding.
- Cities, not only in Canada but all over the world, are finding that it is more and more difficult to host major multisport events due to the perception that there are high costs with unclear benefits.
- Smaller jurisdictions are increasingly finding it challenging to host international sport events as well as the Canada Games, as it difficult to generate enough private and local government revenue to deliver the event.
- These challenges, among others, have resulted in the withdrawal of international bids (such as Calgary 2026 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games) and events (2021 Jeux de la Francophonie) over the past few years.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- Sport Canada plays a key role in the planning and hosting of sporting events in Canada. The hosting program works closely with other key stakeholders, including provinces and territories, to ensure that Canada is a destination of choice for international sport events and that hosting sport events provides tangible benefits to as many Canadians as possible.
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
D. Implementation
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
E. Strategic Considerations
FPT considerations
Hosting international sport events typically requires both federal and provincial/territorial funding. Canada Games and the North American Indigenous Games have their own F-P/T Financial Frameworks. Hosting international sport events also presents a unique and significant opportunity for federal, provincial, territorial and municipal governments to leverage and collaborate on policy objectives.
International considerations
Bidding for international sport events is a highly competitive undertaking. The measures that international sport organizations are putting in place are substantially changing how bids and events are developed, including how governments and sport organizations must increasingly collaborate to move major sport event bids forward.
Canada has been a leading nation in the successful and cost-effective delivery of sport events and in achieving important impacts and legacies through them. [REDACTED]
Indigenous peoples considerations
Sport Canada supports the North American Indigenous Games and the Arctic Winter Games.
As part of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada’s Calls to Action #87 through 91 for Sports and Reconciliation, the Government of Canada must ensure that national sport policies, programs, and initiatives are inclusive of Indigenous peoples. Call to Action #91 specifically calls upon officials and host countries of international sporting events to ensure that Indigenous peoples’ territorial protocols are respected and local Indigenous communities are engaged in all aspects of planning and participation in such events. [REDACTED]
Stakeholder perspectives
Public perception is that hosting international sport events is increasingly challenging and costly with benefits to only a small portion of the Canadian population.
Some stakeholders have suggested that enabling funding opportunities for a broader range of international sport events focused on participation rather than high performance would engage more Canadians in sport events.
[REDACTED]
Urban/rural and regional considerations
[REDACTED]
Timing
[REDACTED]
Cost implications
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
F. Alternative approaches or complementary measures
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
Community Sport Infrastructure
A. Topic
- The availability of, and access to, sport and recreational infrastructure is important for economic vitality, building vibrant communities, promoting social inclusion and encouraging healthy living through participation in sport and physical activity. [REDACTED]
B. Background and Current Status
- There is a sport and recreation infrastructure gap in Canada: a 2016 study by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities showed that sport and recreation facilities were in the poorest physical condition of all asset categories assessed. The replacement value of assets in very poor and fair condition was estimated at $9 billion.
- Canadian sport and non-sport organizations are seeking ways to meaningfully employ sport as an innovative approach to achieving objectives across a range of priority areas for the Government of Canada, including social inclusion, community development, health and well-being, economic development, and gender equity.
- The lack of quality of sport facilities is one of the barriers to safe and positive sport experience for participants.
- A 2018 study on ‘the Value of Community Sport Infrastructure’ commissioned by the Australian Sport Commission found that community sport infrastructure generates more than 16.2 billion Australian dollars annually (approximately $14.629 billion Canadian) in these benefit areas.
- The study identified economic benefits of activity associated with the construction, maintenance and operation of community sport infrastructure and increased productivity of those who are physically active as a result of available infrastructure. The identified health benefits include the personal benefits to those who make use of the infrastructure, lessening their likelihood of negative health consequences associated with physical inactivity, and the associated decrease in pressure on the health system resulting from a healthier population. The social benefits include social inclusion through the interactions that are facilitated by sport infrastructure, broader benefits to a community from providing ‘green space’, a reduction in crime and anti-social behaviour, and contribution to the quality of human capital in general.
- Sport, especially team sports, can be a powerful mechanism to achieve social outcomes, including improving health, keeping youth in school and providing teamwork and leadership skills which lead to improved employability and social inclusion. The Government of Canada recognizes the importance of sport and physical activity in the lives of Canadians and believes that all Canadians should have access to safe and welcoming sport experiences.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- Community sport infrastructure is being recognized as a key driver and enabler of economic, health, and social benefits. At the same time, there is a critical need for the repair and refurbishment of Canada’s existing sport facilities.
- There is an opportunity for the Government of Canada to maximize the benefits of its investments in sport. Currently, Sport Canada invests $3 million in sports facilities to host the Canada Games every two years and for major sporting events such as the Pan American Parapan Games or the Olympic and Paralympic Games through specific requests for additional resources. [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
D. Implementation
[REDACTED]
E. Strategic Considerations
FPT considerations
In Canada’s federated sport system, the implementation of sport programs at the provincial/territorial or community levels falls under the responsibility of the provincial, territorial, and municipal governments. Any federal initiatives that engage the sport community at those levels would need to be implemented in coordination with those orders of government. However, a strong federal-provincial/territorial mechanism exists for sport, with long-standing engagement and collaboration by governments on key sport files and physical activity initiatives.
International considerations
As a member state of the United Nations that has adopted the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, Canada has an obligation to contribute to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals and provide regular voluntary reports to the United Nations on progress towards them.
Indigenous peoples considerations
[REDACTED] would complement the Sport Canada branch’s Sport for Social Development in Indigenous Communities funding initiative that was co-designed with the Aboriginal Sport Circle. [REDACTED]
Stakeholder perspectives
[REDACTED] would be welcomed by Canada’s sport community, as well as non-sport organizations that are currently using sport-based programming to achieve development outcomes. This would also be well received by the provincial and territorial governments [REDACTED] and the possibilities of leveraging sport for social outcomes.
Urban/rural and regional considerations
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
Timing
[REDACTED]
Cost implications
[REDACTED]
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
[REDACTED]
Overview of Platform Commitments: Diversity and Inclusion and Youth
The Department has monitored the Liberal Party’s election platform commitments that relate to the mandate of the Department of Canadian Heritage and its portfolio organizations. An overview of these commitments is provided below and more information on how to implement these commitments is found in the tabs that follow.
Promoting Equality and Diversity
- The Liberal Party platform committed to new investments of $340 million over four years to support diversity, anti-racism and multiculturalism initiatives, starting in fiscal year 2020-21.
Fighting Racism in Canada
- Canadian Heritage is responsible for Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy under the auspices of the Multiculturalism Program. The Liberal Party platform included commitments to “strengthen the Anti-Racism Strategy and double its funding” as well as “boost funding for community-led initiatives to promote inclusion and combat racism.”
- More information on a proposed approach to Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy is available at Tab 1.
Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy 2019-22
A. Topic
- With an initial investment of $45 million, Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy 2019-2022 will aim to counter racism and build a foundation for longer-term action. Additional measures are proposed to enhance the Strategy as part of the newly elected Government’s platform commitment to double its funding.
B. Background and Current Status
- An extensive body of evidence points to the continued existence of various forms of racism and discrimination within Canada, with their impacts felt in particular by newcomers, racialized communities, religious minorities and Indigenous peoples, even as Canada’s diversity continues to increase.
- To address systemic racism and unconscious biases, the Government introduced, in June 2019, Building a Foundation for Change: Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy 2019-2022, with $45 million over three years in new investments to support the following key principles and/or areas of intervention:
- Demonstrating Federal Leadership: The Government of Canada must take a leading role in addressing systemic racism and discrimination, establishing a new Anti-Racism Secretariat to lead federal institutions to identify and coordinate responsive initiatives, identify gaps, assist in developing new initiatives, and consider the impacts of new and existing policies, services and programs on communities and Indigenous peoples. The Secretariat will also report on whole-of-government outcomes, and continue to engage and work with provinces and territories, non-government partners, Indigenous peoples and communities to identify and develop further areas for action.
- Empowering Communities: The Government of Canada must support racialized communities, religious minorities and Indigenous peoples on the ground who have expertise in addressing various forms of racism and discrimination. The new Anti-Racism Action Program is one important means by which the Government is implementing the Strategy by delivering community funding to address barriers to employment, justice and social participation among Indigenous peoples, racialized communities and religious minorities.
- Building Awareness and Changing Attitudes: Public education and awareness are essential to the elimination of racial discrimination and inequality. The Strategy will support a National Public Education and Awareness Campaign based on regional and demographic needs that will be informed and developed with impacted communities and Indigenous peoples. Its goal will be to increase public awareness and understanding, in both urban and rural areas, of the historical roots of racism and its different impacts on Indigenous peoples, as well as racialized and religious minority communities.
- Activities undertaken within the three years of the Strategy and the support structures put in place to implement them will be assessed over this period to inform forward action and investments.
- Since the official launch of the Strategy in June 2019, Canadian Heritage (PCH) has begun to implement the key components of the Strategy, including the establishment of the Federal Anti-Racism Secretariat, mechanisms to deliver new community-based projects and programming, and approaches to build awareness through improved data and evidence.
- The Strategy, through its open-call grants and contributions funding, is equally able to support activities undertaken by eligible recipients in furtherance of the United Nations International Decade for People of African Descent (2015-2024). This will complement specific funds allocated to Canadian Heritage, the Public Health Agency of Canada and Employment and Social Development Canada for this purpose.
- To continue this important work, the newly elected Government has committed to:
- Strengthen the Anti-Racism Strategy and double its funding;
- Boost funding for community-led initiatives to promote inclusion and combat racism; and
- Improve the quality and amount of data collection Statistics Canada does regarding hate crimes in Canada, to help create effective and evidence-based policies to counteract these crimes.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- Canadians understand that diversity is our strength. However, racialized communities and Indigenous peoples continue to face systemic barriers, notably in employment, justice, and social participation. This underscores the need for a concerted federal action aimed at addressing racism and promoting diversity and inclusion.
- Since the launch of the Strategy in June 2019, PCH has taken and will take the following actions in its implementation:
- Demonstrating federal leadership:
- A new Anti-Racism Secretariat has been put in place to lead coordination and monitoring of federal initiatives, continue engagement with communities, and collaborate with provinces and territories. Senior-level whole of government committees, constituted for the purpose of having contributed to the Strategy’s development, are continuing to guide the Secretariat in its work.
- The Secretariat has begun meeting with stakeholders in the community and private sectors, as well as with other government departments. [REDACTED]
- $900,000 was transferred to Public Safety to develop a national framework and evidence-based guidelines to better respond to hate crimes, hate incidents and hate speech.
- Empowering communities:
- The new Anti-Racism Action Program was launched in September 2019 and will close in December 2019. It is intended to help address specific barriers to employment, justice and social participation among Indigenous Peoples, racialized communities and religious minorities, and will also prioritize projects that target online hate and promote digital literacy.
- [REDACTED] It provides funding for community development, anti-racism initiatives, and engagement projects that promote diversity and inclusion by encouraging interaction among community groups, as well as for capacity building projects that contribute to the recipient's ability to promote diversity and inclusion.
- [REDACTED]
- Building awareness and changing attitudes:
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- Demonstrating federal leadership:
D. Implementation
- Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy’s three-year timeline, beginning in June 2019, was developed to build a strong foundation for sustained action, while also supporting immediate action. [REDACTED]
- Demonstrating federal leadership:
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED] While The Strategy as announced provided direct funding to three departments for specific initiatives, [REDACTED]
- Empowering communities:
- [REDACTED]
- [REDACTED]
- Demonstrating federal leadership:
E. Strategic Considerations
FPT considerations
- The new Anti-Racism Secretariat will engage provinces and territories, many of which have developed resources or launched their own anti-racism strategies, through existing federal-provincial-territorial networks and bilaterally. It will work to strengthen partnerships, share best practices and identify potential areas of collaboration.
International considerations
- The Multiculturalism Branch continues to promote Canadian actions and initiatives in respect of Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy and multiculturalism more broadly on the international stage, as well as supporting the United Nations Decade for People of African Descent.
Indigenous peoples considerations
- The public education and awareness campaign will build understanding of the history and experiences of Indigenous peoples in Canada. The Anti-Racism Secretariat will also engage with Indigenous peoples and partners to identify and develop further areas for action.
Stakeholder perspectives
- Generally positive reactions among the general public and mixed reactions from target communities were observed after the official launch of the Strategy in June 2019. It was well-received by some groups as they saw it as a sign that the federal government is taking racism seriously. Others have seen the Strategy as insufficient to address racism and discrimination or not responsive to the specific needs of certain groups (for example, Indigenous peoples and Black communities).
Urban/rural and regional considerations
- The Anti-Racism Action Program will provide funding to support local, regional, as well as national initiatives, and the Anti-Racism Secretariat will engage with community stakeholders, both urban and rural, as part of its broader work to identify and develop future areas of federal action.
Timing
- Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy is a three-year action plan, starting in 2019-20. [REDACTED]
Cost implications
- Canada’s Anti-Racism Strategy was funded through Budget 2019 for $45 million over three years. [REDACTED]
F. Alternative approaches or complementary measures
- [REDACTED]
Overview of Platform Commitments: Official Languages
The Department has monitored the Liberal Party’s election platform commitments that relate to official languages. An overview of these commitments is provided below and more information on how to implement these commitments is found in the tabs that follow.
Protecting and Promoting Official Languages
- The Liberal Party platform committed to supporting minority-language rights and encouraging more people to learn English or French as a second language. The value of these commitments total $385 million over four years, beginning in fiscal year 2020-21.
A. Official Languages Legislation and Programming
- Canadian Heritage plays a central role in the implementation of Canada’s official languages policy. The Liberal Party platform committed to:
- “modernizing the 50-year-old Official Languages Act, including making Radio-Canada’s mandate for regional news part of the Act;”
- “reviewing and strengthening the powers of the Commissioner of Official Languages;”
- “undertaking an enumeration of rights-holders and a thorough post-census survey to better account for – and better serve – minority-language communities;” and
- providing new investments to promote bilingualism, including funding of $325 million over four years to “help train, recruit and attract teachers in both immersion and second-language programs, based on new targets set by the provinces and territories” as well as “investing an additional $60 million [over four years] to help build the infrastructure that supports strong minority-language communities, including schools and cultural centres.”
- More information is available on modernization of the Official Languages Act at Tab 1 and on implementation of the Action Plan for Official Languages 2018-2023 at Tab 2.
B. Establishment of the Université de l’Ontario français
- The Liberal Party platform pledged to work with the Government of Ontario to “help establish the Université de l’Ontario français” in order to “help the more than 600,000 Francophones in Ontario better access post-secondary education.”
- More information on how to implement this commitment is available at Tab 3.
Modernization of the Official Languages Act
A. Topic
- A process is underway to update the Official Languages Act, a quasi-constitutional law first enacted in 1969 that made English and French Canada’s two official languages.
B. Background and Current Status
- The Government of Canada’s policies and programs in official languages are directed in large part by the Official Languages Act, which enshrines significant obligations for all federal institutions. These include duties related to service to the public, language of work, ensuring equal opportunities in the federal public service for English- and French-speaking Canadians, supporting official language minority communities (OLMCs), and fostering the full recognition and use of English and French in society.
- The Department of Canadian Heritage Act gives the Minister of Canadian Heritage jurisdiction over the advancement of the equality of status and use of English and French and the enhancement and development of OLMCs. Part VII, Section 43 of the Official Languages Act further specifies the measures the Minister may take to meet these obligations. The current Act also gives the Minister of Canadian Heritage the responsibility to encourage and promote a coordinated approach to meeting federal institutions’ obligations (under Section 42) to take positive measures toward the advancement of English and French. The Official Languages Branch at Canadian Heritage supports the Minister in carrying out these responsibilities.
- In 2019, which marked the 50th anniversary of the Act, public engagement events were held to solicit input on how to modernize this legislation. Nearly 1,500 Canadians shared their views by email, webcast, or in person at one of 12 round tables and five forums across the country. These engagement events culminated in a two-day symposium on official languages in Ottawa in May 2019.
- The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages, and the Commissioner of Official Languages all published reports in 2019 calling for the Official Languages Act’s modernization.
- Relevant commitments from the party platforms:
- The Liberal Party of Canada has committed to: modernizing the Official Languages Act, including making Radio-Canada’s mandate for regional news part of the Act, and making sure that Air Canada provides fully bilingual services to its customers; reviewing and strengthening the powers of the Commissioner of Official Languages; naming bilingual judges to the Supreme Court of Canada; and enumerating rights-holders.
- The Conservative Party of Canada has committed to: ensuring that official languages governance is entrusted to the Treasury Board Secretariat; modernizing the Official Languages Act; strengthening Part VII of the Official Languages Act to include a requirement for a continual five-year action plan for official languages and consultation with OLMCs in the development of this plan; ensuring that federal funds provided to provinces for OLMCs are being spent on these communities as intended; and establishing an official languages tribunal to provide recourse when the language rights of Canadians are violated.
- The Bloc Québécois has committed to: modernizing the Official Languages Act; strengthening the powers of the Commissioner of Official Languages; and requiring the nomination of bilingual judges to the Supreme Court of Canada.
- The New Democratic Party has committed to: modernizing the Official Languages Act to strengthen oversight and accountability, expand the scope of language rights and ensure that OLMCs are consulted on decisions that impact them; and ensure that Canadians can access justice in their language of choice, and that judges on the Supreme Court of Canada are bilingual.
- The Green Party of Canada has committed to: promoting and implementing a modernized Official Languages Act to protect both national languages; and strengthening the role and protecting the independence of the Commissioner of Official Languages.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- [REDACTED]
- In 2018, the Government made a commitment to modernize the Official Languages Act. The aim of the review currently underway is to ensure the Official Languages Act continues to serve Canadians in our ever-evolving public environment. [REDACTED]
D. Implementation
[REDACTED]
E. Strategic Considerations
Legislative considerations
The Official Languages Act and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms provide the general framework for the Canadian language regime, codifying Canadians’ rights and the Government’s obligations with respect to official languages. Any amendment to the Official Languages Act must remain aligned with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Part IV (Communications with and Services to the Public) Regulations: Updated regulations, which specify the circumstances under which an office of a federal institution must provide bilingual services under Part IV of the Official Languages Act, were registered on June 25, 2019. The revised Regulations include adopting a more inclusive calculation method for determining whether there is “significant demand” in the minority official language. These changes will come into force following the publication of 2021 Census data, expected in the fall of 2022.
Part VII (Advancement of English and French) Regulations: In 2005, the Official Languages Act was amended to give federal institutions the duty to “ensure that positive measures are taken” (subs. 41(2)) to enhance the vitality of OLMCs and to promote the equality of English and French in Canadian society. The Act was further amended to permit the enactment of regulations prescribing how federal institutions must fulfill this duty.
The Gascon decision of 2018 found that since no regulations have been adopted for Part VII of the Official Languages Act, the specific nature of the obligation contained in subs. 41(2) remains general and lacks the specificity that regulations would attribute to it. According to the Court, the absence of regulations on Part VII of the Official Languages Act makes it impossible to determine whether more specific positive measures should have been taken. The Gascon ruling is now being appealed at the Federal Court of Appeal.
FPT considerations
Provinces and territories are key federal partners in meeting the official languages obligations set out in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Official Languages Act. The Government of Canada provides financial support to provinces and territories for minority language education and second language instruction, and has long encouraged and helped provinces and territories to deliver services in the minority official language.
A number of stakeholder proposals for the modernization of the Act refer to, or could refer to, areas of interest to provinces and territories or under provincial and territorial jurisdiction. These proposals include giving all Canadians the right to learn their second official language and adding official languages obligations to all federal-provincial/territorial agreements. [REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
International considerations
A small number of stakeholder proposals for the modernization of the Official Languages Act have international considerations. These include reinforcing Canadian global leadership in official languages and promoting the value of OLMCs on the global stage
Indigenous peoples considerations
The Government has not specifically or directly consulted Indigenous Peoples on the modernization of the Official Languages Act. During engagement events, multiple stakeholders proposed that a modernized preamble to the Act acknowledge Indigenous languages as the first languages used in Canada and recognize their important role in our country’s development. The importance of giving Inuktut the same status as English and French in a territory where it is the majority language was raised by some stakeholders, including participants at a round table discussion in Iqaluit, Nunavut and at the Ministerial Conference on the Canadian Francophonie, held in May and June 2019 respectively.
On June 21, 2019, the Governor General of Canada granted Royal Assent to Bill C-91, An Act respecting Indigenous languages, which aims to reclaim, revitalize, maintain and strengthen Indigenous languages in Canada. Canadian Heritage led the co-development of the Bill with representatives of First Nations, Métis, and Inuit communities. A group of academics and language advocates submitted an open letter to the world’s language commissioners in June 2019, asking for their support in calling for the modernized Official Languages Act to grant Inuktut equal standing with English and French in Nunavut. The Government has maintained that there is no conflict between the reclamation, revitalization, strengthening and maintenance of Indigenous languages and the protection and promotion of official languages in Canada. It has rather emphasized Canada’s capacity to reconcile and find synergies between these efforts.
Stakeholder perspectives
Stakeholders provided significant input during the previously mentioned engagement events as well as the studies and consultations conducted by the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Official Languages, and the Commissioner of Official Languages. These contributions and recommendations are being analyzed and considered as part of the broader review.
Here is a brief overview of the key issues raised:
- Making consulting OLMCs and taking into account the results of consultations mandatory
- Clarifying the obligations of federal institutions under Part VII of the Act
- Including official languages obligations in federal-provincial/territorial agreements
- Better identifying citizens who have language rights under the Charter
- Entrusting a central agency with implementing the Act
- Strengthening the powers of the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages
- Requiring the bilingualism of justices of the Supreme Court of Canada
- Creating a work environment in the federal public service that promotes the use of both official languages
- Formalizing the bilingual character of the National Capital Region and the City of Ottawa
- Clarifying and extending language of service obligations
- Introducing a right (or even an obligation) to learn one’s second official language
- Amending the preamble of the Act
- Giving greater prominence to Indigenous languages in the Act
Urban/rural and regional considerations
The new provisions of the recently revised Part IV Regulations will benefit the Francophone OLMC population, which is overrepresented in rural settings compared to the Canadian average. The overrepresentation of Francophone OLMCs in rural areas is an element that will be considered in the process of modernization.
Timing
[REDACTED]
Cost implications
The interdepartmental working group on the modernization of the Official Languages Act will analyze the cost implications of its proposed amendments. Actual costs will depend on the specific amendments adopted.
Machinery of Government considerations
The Official Languages Act gives several federal institutions specific coordination responsibilities for parts of the Act: Treasury Board Secretariat for Parts IV, V and VI, and Canadian Heritage for Part VII. The Department of Justice is responsible for providing legal advice to the Treasury Board Secretariat, Canadian Heritage, as well as all federal institutions, on any question involving the linguistic provisions of the Act, litigation, legal issues, etc.
Multiple stakeholders have proposed that a modernized Official Languages Act entrust a single central agency with its implementation, including horizontal coordination and accountability, in order to ensure institutions meet their obligations. As such, governance of the Act is one of the eight key themes being analyzed. Stakeholders have also suggested strengthening the powers of the Commissioner of Official Languages, and creating a new administrative tribunal for official languages. [REDACTED]
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
Stakeholder expectations for modernizing the Official Languages Act are high. [REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
Implementation of the Action Plan for Official Languages 2018-2023
A. Topic
- On March 28, 2018, the Government of Canada unveiled the Action Plan for Official Languages 2018-2023 (Action Plan). Implementation of the new initiatives, using a “by and for” collaborative approach, is well underway. As planned, some of the new measures under the Action Plan were implemented in 2018-2019, while others are being implemented in 2019-2020.
B. Background and Current Status
- The 2018-2023 Action Plan includes nearly 500 million dollars in new funding over five years. The new investments will help the future of official language minority communities (OLMCs) and bilingualism outside Quebec. The budget envelopes are as follows: Strengthening our communities (267 million dollars), Strengthening access to services (129 million dollars), and Promoting a bilingual Canada (100 million dollars). These funds are on top of the permanent funding for existing programs, for a total government investment of 2.7 billion dollars over five years.
- A number of federal government departments and agencies are participating in this new federal strategy, including Canadian Heritage, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, Health Canada, Employment and Social Development Canada, Public Health Agency of Canada, Justice Canada, and Statistics Canada (a list of specific initiatives is provided below).
- Canadian Heritage is responsible for the horizontal coordination of the Action Plan’s implementation, and in particular, for ensuring that Canadians are made aware of the results by means of the Annual Report on Official Languages tabled in Parliament. Each of the Action Plan’s federal partners is responsible for implementing and reporting on its activities.
- Relevant commitments from the party platforms:
- The Liberal Party of Canada has committed to: working with the provinces and territories to ensure that all Canadians can access second language programs, like immersion, in their local schools if they choose to do so; investing to help train, recruit and attract teachers in both immersion and second-language programs, based on new targets set by the provinces and territories; developing and promoting new opportunities for language and cultural exchanges; and investing an additional $60 million to help build the infrastructure that supports strong OLMCs, including schools and cultural centres.
- The Conservative Party of Canada has committed to: partnering with OLMCs, leading by example, and providing them with better support from the federal government; requiring the development of a continual five-year action plan for official languages and consultation with OLMCs in the development of this plan; and ensuring that federal funds provided to provinces for OLMCs are being spent on these communities as intended.
- The New Democratic Party has committed to: enhancing the Action Plan for Official Languages to improve access to services in the language of choice, including working with the provinces and territories to improve minority language education; and attracting more French-speaking immigrants.
- The Green Party of Canada has committed to: allocating greater funding for training in official languages (English and French as a Second Language) for new immigrants through earmarked transfers to the provinces for primary and secondary public school and free night school programs.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- [REDACTED]
- The Government of Canada plays a key role in the promotion of English and French and in the development of OLMCs. The government also contributes to the vitality of both official languages by encouraging Canadians to learn, maintain and use their second official language. Despite the success of government action over the past 50 years, however, worrying trends can be seen: a decrease in demographic weight of Francophones across the country, especially in OLMCs outside Quebec, and a leveling-out of the rate of bilingualism among Anglophones outside Quebec.
- In 2015, the government committed to developing a new multi-year official languages plan to enhance the vitality of OLMCs. To that end, it conducted large-scale consultations across Canada on the issue of official languages between June and December 2016, allowing Canadians, and in particular OLMCs, to express their concerns, needs and points of view.
- The Action Plan responds to the worrisome trends identified and to the needs of OLMCs.
D. Implementation
The government has committed to ensuring that public investments in official languages translate into concrete, tangible results that benefit Canadians. Under the Action Plan, some new measures were scheduled to be launched in 2018–2019, and others in 2019–2020. Implementation of the Action Plan is proceeding according to plan.
Each of the Action Plan’s partner departments is responsible for implementing the initiatives under its authority. With respect to reporting on the Action Plan’s initiatives, the partner federal institutions must submit financial (actual expenditure and results) and qualitative data to Canadian Heritage three times a year. That information will be presented in the Annual Report on Official Languages.
Implementation of the new initiatives relating to Canadian Heritage’s Official Languages Support Programs was undertaken using a “by and for” collaborative approach, through which the priorities and conditions of the new measures were identified in cooperation with key stakeholders during a number of discussions.
In 2018–2019, Action Plan investments relating to Canadian Heritage’s Official Languages Support Programs were allocated, totalling over 376 million dollars—including over 28 million dollars in new funding. This was achieved, for instance, through a 20 percent increase in the core funding previously approved for 276 community organizations. Implementation is ongoing in 2019-2020.
E. Strategic Considerations
Legislative considerations
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Official Languages Act are at the core of government action in the area of official languages. The Official Languages Act, which was adopted in 1969, is a quasi-constitutional statute that made Canada an officially bilingual country. A review towards modernization of the Official Languages Act is currently underway and a fiche on this subject is available.
FPT considerations
Some measures in the Action Plan fall under provincial/territorial or shared jurisdiction. The provinces and territories, including Quebec, had the opportunity to share their points of view during the 2016 consultations. Action Plan measures that relate to provincial/territorial jurisdiction are carried out with the help of Government of Canada funding to provinces and territories or via ongoing cooperation between the various levels of government.
[REDACTED]
International considerations
The Action Plan reflects Canada’s approach to official languages, institutional bilingualism, and the development and recognition of OLMCs. As a result, it gives the government the opportunity to present the international community with a concrete example of the implementation of its vision, which is based on inclusion, diversity and social cohesion.
Canada has been a member state of the Organisation internationale de la francophonie since its inception in 1970 and plays a leading role.
Indigenous peoples considerations
In the event that an activity is implemented in a region in which a modern treaty applies, the Government of Canada will work with the treaty signatories to ensure that the program is offered in a way that respects the areas under the jurisdiction of that treaty, in accordance with ancestral rights and treaty rights; the legal obligation to consult the Crown and the legal obligation to take account of ancestral rights; the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; and the implementation of the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada.
Stakeholder perspectives
The development of the Action Plan was based on cross-Canada consultations including 22 roundtables (350 participants), an online questionnaire (6,375 respondents), meetings with key stakeholders, and discussions with provincial and territorial governments.
Implementation of the Action Plan was based on unprecedented cooperation with community stakeholders and other orders of government. Between June 2018 and March 2019, a number of discussions were held to establish the parameters for the implementation of 10 Action Plan measures. The “by and for” approach was an integral part of the discussions held during the working sessions.
Implementation of the Action Plan is also one of the three priorities of the Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages between now and 2025.
Urban/rural and regional considerations
Some initiatives are direct responses to the concerns of rural and regional populations. Others take the needs of rural communities into account in their implementation.
Timing
For new initiatives launched in 2019–2020 under the Canadian Heritage Official Languages Support Programs, a call for projects was issued in spring 2019, third parties have all been confirmed, and partners are looking to launch their respective programs by the end of December 2019.
Cost implications (over five years)
Implementation will be carried out using the permanent funding available within the departments’ reference levels:
Canadian Heritage
- Increase in core funding: $57.37 million (enhanced)
- Strengthening of community media: $14.53 million (new)
- Support for community spaces – Infrastructure: $67.25 million (new) + $28 million (Budget 2017)
- Strategic investments: $10 million (new)
- The Mauril – Canadian cultural program for English and French second-language learning: $16.5 million (new)
- Explore Program: $21 million (enhanced)
- Odyssey Program: $17.5 million (enhanced)
- Interchange Canada (official languages initiatives): $11.25 million (enhanced)
- Community Cultural Action Fund: $11.16 million (enhanced)
- Funding for English-speaking communities of Quebec: $5.28 million (new)
- Support for civic community schools: $5.25 million (new)
- Teacher recruitment strategy: $62.58 million (new)
- Post-secondary bursaries: $12.6 million (new)
Employment and Social Development Canada
- Enabling Fund: $4.5 million (enhanced)
- Support for early childhood development: $20 million (new)
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada
- Francophone Integration Pathway: $36.56 million over five years (new)
- Cooperation and Accountability: $4.2 million (new)
Health Canada
- Official Language Health Program: $16.9 million (enhanced)
Public Health Agency of Canada
- Early childhood health promotion programming: $10 million (new)
Justice Canada
- Access to Justice in Both Official Languages Support Fund: $10 million (enhanced)
- Core funding: $3.75 million (new)
Industry Canada for Statistics Canada
- Perpetuate the language statistics section of Statistics Canada: $3 million (new)
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
Additional funding has recently been invested in official languages to complement or enhance Action Plan measures. In the area of youth employment, additional funding was provided to extend by one year (2019-2020) an investment of 1.2 million dollars into Young Canada Works in both official languages (Canadian Heritage) for green jobs. In the area of justice, an additional contribution of 21.6 million dollars over five years (2020-2021 to 2024-2025) will be invested to support access to family justice in Canadians’ preferred official language.
In the area of education, an additional 60 million dollars over four years (15 million dollars per year from 2019-2020 to 2022-2023) is available to increase federal support to minority-language education. The allocation of this additional funding was conditional upon the signing of a new Protocol for Agreements and/or new bilateral agreements with provincial and territorial commitments to improve reporting and regularly consult with stakeholders. On September 4, 2019, the Government of Canada finalized a new Protocol for Agreements for Minority-Language Education and Second-Language Instruction with provincial and territorial governments, for a period of four years (2019-2020 to 2022-2023), which meets the above-mentioned conditions.
The Université de l’Ontario français
A. Topic
- The Université de l’Ontario français submitted a funding request to the Government of Ontario totalling 126 million dollars over eight years (2019-2027) to establish the Université de l’Ontario français with the expectation that the governments of Canada and Ontario would invest 50/50 into the project.
B. Background and Current Status
- In November 2018, the Government of Ontario announced its decision to withdraw its support for the Université de l’Ontario français. Following this announcement, the Government of Canada publicly committed to supporting the creation of the new post-secondary institution.
- In January 2019, Canadian Heritage entered into an agreement with the Université de l’Ontario français, as a non-profit organization, for 1.9 million dollars in funding for 2018-2020 to ensure that the team responsible for setting up the institution could continue its work.
- The governments of Canada and Ontario concluded a memorandum of understanding on September 7, 2019, to jointly fund the establishment of the Université de l’Ontario français for the period of 2019-2020 to 2026-2027. According to the memorandum of understanding, the Government of Canada could assume up to 50 percent of the project’s total cost. The federal contribution would be allocated over the first four years of the project, and the Government of Ontario would cover expenses over the following four years. The Government of Ontario has committed to reimbursing the federal government for its share of the project contribution if Ontario is unable to provide the funding in a timely manner.
- A joint working group including representatives from the governments of Canada and Ontario was created in September 2019 to work together and agree on eligible expenses, timelines and project activities, while following an appropriate due diligence process.
- Relevant commitments from the party platforms:
- The Liberal Party of Canada has committed to collaborating with the province of Ontario to establish the Université de l’Ontario français.
- The Conservative Party of Canada has committed to supporting the creation of a Francophone university in Toronto by honouring the memorandum of understanding, by looking at federal government real estate that could be made available as a possible campus and by assisting with start-up costs.
- The Bloc Québécois has committed to supporting the creation of a Francophone university in Ontario.
- The New Democratic Party of Canada has committed to supporting the creation of the Université de l’Ontario français.
Secret section below
The information below this line is advice to a Minister and cannot be publicly released under section 21 of the Access to Information Act.
C. Proposed Action and Rationale
- [REDACTED]
- There is currently a significant gap in access between French-language and English-language post-secondary programs. Moreover, access to the different categories of programs decreases significantly between undergraduate studies and doctoral-level studies.
- The limited supply of French-language post-secondary education programs in the Central and Southwestern regions leads Francophone graduates in these regions to enrol in large numbers in English-language institutions. This reality also exists in the province’s Eastern and Northern regions, although to a lesser extent, as a result of the presence of well-established bilingual and French-language post-secondary institutions. The only French-language university in Ontario is Université de Hearst, which is affiliated with Laurentian University. There are also three bilingual universities: University of Ottawa, University of Sudbury and Dominican University College.
- Establishing the Université de l’Ontario français in Toronto would enhance institutional supply in Francophone Ontario and strengthen the development of this official language minority community. It would also support the offer of a full range of French-language education in a minority environment. Lastly, it would ensure that members of official language minority communities can study and thrive in their language and in their community.
- Through bilateral education agreements, Canadian Heritage invests 235 million dollars per year. In several provinces, these agreements cover not only primary/secondary education but also French-language colleges and Francophone or bilingual universities. Requests for funding for these projects must come from provincial/territorial governments and they must provide a contribution that is equal to or greater than the federal government’s contribution.
- Over the years, Canadian Heritage has supported other infrastructure projects for post-secondary institutions (such as the Faculty of Law at Université de Moncton in New Brunswick and laboratories at Université de Saint-Boniface). In the 1990s and early 2000s, Canadian Heritage invested over $100 million in many provinces, including for the creation of a network of French-language colleges in Ontario.
D. Implementation
The governments of Ontario and Canada are currently conducting a due diligence process based on the official proposal that Ontario submitted on September 6, 2019, to move forward in a reliable, accountable and transparent manner. A joint working group was created to determine the scope of the investments and to agree on eligible expenses, timelines and project activities to establish the Université de l’Ontario français. The joint working group is aiming to finalize negotiations on a date it will agree upon, which is not yet determined.
Once the governments of Canada and Ontario have agreed on their government contributions and the respective funding sources have been confirmed, a multi-year agreement will be reached between Canada and Ontario. The project description, the identification of eligible expenses and the payment schedule for eligible expenses by both parties for the fiscal years the project covers will be set out in this multi-year agreement.
As per the memorandum of understanding, in the event that the Ontario government withdraws from the Université de l’Ontario français project, the Government of Canada will recover its 63 million dollars by cutting funds that are allocated to the Government of Ontario through the bilateral education agreement.
E. Strategic considerations
FPT considerations
The memorandum of understanding between the governments of Canada and Ontario, signed on September 7, 2019, specifically recognizes that, “subject to the Canadian Constitution, education falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the provinces and territories, and the provincial and territorial governments are responsible for establishing plans for, determining the objectives of, defining the contents of, setting priorities for, and evaluating their education programs, including minority-language education programs.”
[REDACTED]
Stakeholder perspectives
The large majority of stakeholders in Ontario’s Francophone community support the creation of the Université de l’Ontario français. The file has not only mobilized tens of thousands of Francophones in Ontario but has also brought together Francophones and Francophiles across the country. The announcement of an agreement to fund the creation of the institution was very well received by stakeholders in the official languages community.
Urban/rural and regional considerations
The limited supply of French-language postsecondary programs in Central and Southwestern Ontario has led to Francophone students enrolling in English-language institutions. However, as explained above in the rationale for the proposed measure, there is a considerable Francophone population in Central and Southwestern Ontario. The creation of the Université de l’Ontario français in Toronto would help to retain these students in their region, in a French-language post-secondary institution.
Timing
The funding granted directly to the Université de l’Ontario français by Canadian Heritage is expiring on January 31, 2020. Moreover, the request for funding submitted by the Université de l’Ontario français to the Government of Ontario includes funding that would start in 2019-2020. This means that a contribution agreement between the governments of Canada and Ontario should be finalized by [REDACTED] at the latest, so that expenses carried out during the 2019-2020 fiscal year can be recognized.
Cost implications
Funding negotiations will begin following a due diligence process. The Government of Canada’s contribution cannot exceed 50 percent. It is also expected that the federal contribution be paid for the first four years of the agreement (that is, 2019-2020 to 2022-2023), while the Government of Ontario would cover the expenses for the four subsequent years. The province has agreed to give its assurance that it would reimburse the federal government its part of the contribution to the project if Ontario is unable to provide the funding within the expected timeframes.
Funding for fiscal year 2019-2020 (3.4 million dollars) will be provided through the Official Languages Branch’s program funds. [REDACTED]
F. Alternative Approaches or Complementary Measures
[REDACTED]
Page details
- Date modified: