EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
If you want to work within Nunavut, whether commercially or other means, and are providing a service, then Bill 7 would have to be adhered to by those companies operating and providing a service within the territory of Nunavut.
Although the telephone company, NorthwesTel, has a head office in Whitehorse, they operate and maintain a service within Nunavut and would be bound by legislation from Nunavut, Mr. Chairman.
I thank the minister for clarifying that for the public record.
The next question I have deals with Communications, and I know I have raised it in standing committee as well, and it’s with subclause (3)(a), where it says, “all notices, warnings or instructions directed to users or consumers of the service.”
Mr. Chairman, I know the minister mentioned fire extinguishers earlier and I have raised that example in standing committee. All the fire extinguishers usually come from manufacturers with all of the instructions right on them. Some of them are actually stencilled or imprinted right into the side of the tank.
Also, on the fire extinguishers and other things as well where they have inspection certificates and things like that, will there be a requirement that all those things be in the Inuit language as well?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Service providers will have to follow Bill 7 once it’s enacted.
We’re not going to tell the companies who make the fire extinguishers to have them written in Inuktitut. However, the entities in Nunavut that bought those fire extinguishers in bulk form and will be distributing them to the houses or the service providers will be required to have the warning labels and/or instructions made available in Inuktitut.
We are not too worried about the workers but the companies that provide these items as part of their service. As an example, the Housing Corporation buys fire extinguishers in bulk so that they can provide their tenants with fire extinguishers as part of their fire protection services. It would be up to the Housing Corporation to provide those Inuktitut warning signs, not the company that makes the fire extinguishers.
All service providers would have to comply with the requirements under the legislation.
Not just the Housing Corporation but the government, whether it be a territorial government, or a federal government, or a municipal government, if they have fire extinguishers or any other kind of equipment like that in their facilities, would be responsible for ensuring that the Inuit language version of the instructions and copies of the certificates of inspection and things like that that are on there would be in one of the Inuit languages. Would that be correct?
Another example I used in the standing committee was the warning labels on liquor. I know right now, in some cases, you see them go out, “Don’t drink these if you are pregnant,” or things like that and I think it’s in French and English I have seen them out there now.
But I guess right now, the sale of liquor in Nunavut is just done by the government that the government would have to ensure that, because the potential is from any warehouse that it could be sold to any community in Nunavut that allows it, those labels would have to be in all four or at least the two Inuit languages, as well as any other requirements under the Official Languages Act, French and English as well.
For the government agency or department that manage the warehouses or the Liquor Licensing Board, we would strongly urge them to comply with the Inuit language requirement as all government departments and agencies have to comply.
At this time, the Department of Finance manages the liquor warehouses.
We would task the department to put warning labels in Inuktitut, outlining the dangers of liquor consumption, such as warnings that say, “Do not drink when pregnant.”
Any safety matters would have to be written in Inuktitut.
The responsible department or minister would ensure that all required safety materials or warnings are available in Inuktitut, Mr. Chairman.
I’ll just get another issue out there that I know would come up is: what about on cigarette packages that have those warning things right on the packages? Would there be a requirement for those things to be in the Inuit language as well?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): That’s an excellent question and one I didn’t foresee.
However, we will look into the issue of warnings on cigarette packages, such as “Smoking is bad for you” or “Smoking is dangerous to children.”
We will have to review this issue to see if there would be a requirement.
Mr. Chairman, that’s the only response I can give at this time. We will have to review the cigarette package warnings; I can just imagine the prices rising already. Yes, I will commit to looking into his concern.
Mr. Minister, I can’t believe there’s something we never thought of and talked about already after all that we have been through in our meetings.
I guess the other issue, and I know members will get approached about it, is when you go into a store and they have propane bottles and anything that has some type of warning label already on it, I guess the retailers I’m sure will come to us and say, “Okay, does that mean that we have to do that as well?” So I would just like to get that out there for the public record.
If anything retail has warning labels on it, like you go into a store and there are toys that say, “Warning: Choking hazard for kids under three,” and things like that, these are the first things you see that people are quick to point out and to question, so if we can get a clarification there.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Indeed, we will have to review that as well should it become a public concern and we would have to investigate that in case there are issues. We were talking about consumable products.
We would have to investigate all of these issues, especially when we are trying to enforce the provisions of the legislation. However, first off, we would have to inform all organizations impacted by this legislation to find out what issues they may face with the legislation being implemented.
We haven’t talked about consumable products, so that may have to be handled a little differently, Mr. Chairman.
I welcome the minister and his officials to the Committee of the Whole. First of all, I would like to express my appreciation to the committee for their tremendous work on developing this bill.
I would particularly like to thank my colleague, Mr. Tootoo, for asking a number of questions on this. He has asked a lot of questions that I had planned to ask and I’m sure a lot of my constituents back in my riding will ask when I get back to the community.
One of the questions I have just off the top of my head here, I was reading further ahead in document where it says “Commencement, Coming into force,” it was unclear from reading section 49. It says, “Sections 3 and 5 come into force…” Could the minister indicate when this particular section is going to come into force?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Again, we will have to look into this to find out if we’re going to be creating any problems. After reviewing the matter, we would look into the implementation stages of this bill.
I would like to inform the member that we will have to find out from the affected entities and see when it’s going to be implemented, Mr. Chairman.
I can certainly see from reading this section and also from listening to questions thus far, there’s going to be a fairly important transition period, a transition from what people are used to now to what’s going to be expected of them.
I know under section 3(1)(d), “provide, in the Inuit Language, its reception services,” I know in my riding, and it alludes to it back in clause 1, “the revitalization of Inuinnaqtun,” we have problems with our communities where Inuinnaqtun isn’t strong.
We don’t have a lot of Inuinnaqtun-speaking people there who can work in jobs where they are required to speak in that language.
If you’re requiring any organization to provide reception service in Inuinnaqtun, it could be difficult for them until there’s enough qualified Inuinnaqtun speakers in the community who may be interested in working for that particular organization or company.
I’m wondering if the minister could explain to me how an organization would overcome that potential problem.
Yes, we have a slight problem there.
There are individuals who speak Inuinnaqtun fluently, but the severe shortage of Inuinnaqtun speakers is a concern to our department. We continue to have a shortage of Inuinnaqtun speakers and this is a need that has been expressed across the board.
But due to the limited number Inuinnaqtun speakers who can provide the services, it’s a concern when we are talking about providing services in Inuinnaqtun, especially since there are not very many people who speak Inuinnaqtun compared to Inuktitut.
Due to that reason, Mr. Chairman, one of our priorities is how we can revitalize or revive the Inuinnaqtun language.
We will have to wrestle with that issue first.
We have to revive the language and encourage the people to relearn Inuinnaqtun.
Increasing the number of Inuinnaqtun speakers and having Inuinnaqtun taught from kindergarten on up are some things that we will have to take into consideration.
As Mr. Peterson alluded to, we do have a slight problem due to a shortage of Inuinnaqtun speakers and we will definitely have to work on that to increase those numbers.
Once this bill is enacted, the Minister of Languages will have to make a written report to this House on the implementation stages of this bill.
Clearly, Inuinnaqtun would have to be identified in the report and include an outline of what the plans are for increasing the usage of Inuinnaqtun once the implementation process is underway. The Minister of Languages would have to undertake that, Mr. Chairman.
Perhaps the minister could explain section 5 to me. It says under “Accommodation for private sector body,” they may apply to the Languages Commissioner and the Languages Commissioner “may relieve a private sector body of an obligation” if it causes undue hardship to the business.
Could the minister explain: could an organization apply under that section and say, “We can’t provide reception services at this time,” and then the Languages Commissioner would review and make decision to provide, like it says here, “a less onerous requirement”?
Is that something that would be considered under that section?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Yes, that’s totally true.
For example, if an individual with a small business can’t provide the Inuktitut service, they would be able to approach the Languages Commissioner and look at ways to get assistance or alternatively, make an application under this part for an exemption.
Negotiations between the business that’s making the application and the Languages Commissioner would be initiated to resolve any issues. They would negotiate to come to an agreement where it results in undue hardship, Mr. Chairman.
With respect to the matter you spoke to, I have a question under clause 3 regarding the public and private sector organizations and other entities.
They will be providing communication for the public about their operations, which is good for business.
If the public learns of all the challenges faced by businesses, then they would not request free stuff or work from them.
But if they want to be known and patronized, their correspondence should be in all languages.
If Inuit didn’t utilize their language here in the Eastern Arctic, then we also would be looked on as not fluent in our language, even if we looked like Inuit.
There are a number of Inuit in that position here in Nunavut.
I would like to ask under clause 3(a), it says, “display its public signs… in the Inuit Language together with any other language used.”
It could be in either French, or English, or Inuinnaqtun, or Inuktitut. It could be in four languages.
Under clause 3(c), it says, “ensure that the Inuit language text of its public signs, posters and commercial advertising is at least equally prominent....” But it doesn’t say what size.
Could this be tightened up under the regulations?
If some businesses don’t like putting up Inuktitut signs, they might make it less prominent than the other language that is used to cut down on the costs and this could show up.
Could you tighten it up under the regulations?
If we use Quebec as an example, the highway signage in English used to be very small compared to French, so the result was that you could hardly read the signs while driving down the highway.
I wonder if we may face some of the same experiences or problems here. I think my question is clear, Mr. Chairman.
Under this section, all public signage will require that languages be equally prominent.
We would not want to see a situation where Inuktitut was far more prominent on the wall.
The languages will have to be equally prominent and not one language is to be smaller than the other, whether it’s Inuktitut, French, or English.
That’s how we have worded it, Mr. Chairman.
I would also like to thank Mr. Curley.
Just a quick one on the signs, is that commercial advertising? If a company has their name and phone number on the side of a vehicle in English, would it be considered that it would have to be there in the Inuit language as well?
When this Act is enacted, regulations will be required.
So these regulations have to be written and that’s where it will identify the signage requirements for vehicles.
The other one in 2(b) where it talks about restaurants, does that mean that menus would have to be in the Inuit language, too?
So my dad would be able to go in and see it in syllabics, and not just tell us, “I want the one with this, this, and this,” where we would have to look for it on there for him, but menus would have to be in the Inuit language as well?
If anyone wishes to open up a restaurant and operate in Nunavut, then their menus will have to include Inuktitut. However, the issue will require more discussion. Maybe they would require the assistance of some Inuit language terminologists to word them properly.
Sometimes it’s much better to have a picture of the dish on the menu that someone can point to.
Perhaps that’s something we can recommend instead.
These will have to be part of the regulations and we can deliberate on these issues.
To answer the member’s question directly, yes, restaurants will have to provide their menus in Inuktitut.
I think Iqaluit might be unique. I think it’s the only place in Nunavut with a Chinese restaurant and some of those terms and things on the menu, I don’t know if there are Inuktitut or Inuit language words for them.
So I guess in any cases where there isn’t a word for something that’s on a menu, I think I used the example and it was one of my favourite dishes in one restaurant in Yellowknife was Hun Yung Gai Ding, mixed vegetables with almonds.
I know there’s no terminology for that in Inuktitut, even something like Bok Choy or things like that that there are no terminologies.
What would be the process say if the restaurant here wanted to comply but no one knows what this means, so how do you translate that or how would he go about getting help to be able to do that so he could be compliant with the legislation?
Yes, that’s true. There won’t be any Inuktitut versions of certain items on the menu since they are not from Nunavut.
We would ensure that we use Inuit language terminologists and they would really assist this process. There’s also a terminology committee here called the Inuit Uqausinginnik Taiguusiliuqtiit that would also review the matter, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate the minister’s response in that these are the kind of things that are going to come out when it’s out there, and I don’t think it’s a laughing matter but some people seem to think it is.
I’m sure that Simon at the Navigator, if you’re listening, “How am I supposed to do this?” He probably wants to but is saying, “Okay, how am I going to do it?”
And these are the kind of things that need to get out there for people to hear.
The other question I have, Mr. Chairman, is in subclause 3(b) where it talks about “monthly bills, invoices and similar demands directed to persons,” and it says, “… who may be Inuit Language speakers.”
How would a service provider determine if someone may or may not be if they’re just doing it over the phone or they get a message in and it’s someone saying, “I need someone to come and check this out.”? How is that determined?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): I will have Susan Hardy respond to that question, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Hardy.
Ms. Hardy: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Minister Tapardjuk.
I’m not sure I heard the full question or understood it, but I think it’s important to put on the public record that the bill offers help from the Languages Commissioner. Anyone who is having a difficulty to understand how they might individually apply it can voluntarily submit a language plan and part of the commissioner’s role is to provide the help that person needs.
The Taiguusiliuqtiit can be involved in helping an organization get its language plan together, so that responds to the piece of what you were discussing.
You also mentioned about bills and invoices, and those are things that Inuit speakers need to understand when they receive them in their homes. Again, if there’s a company that needs assistance with that, part of what this Act provides is a helping response, not just a punitive response.
There are some layers of billing people, like what your computer does in your store that you already own, that the Languages Commissioner may have to consider on an individual basis.
So the computer may not be able to spit out in Inuktitut and we’re not saying to a single business owner, “You have to go out and buy a new machine to calculate your invoices immediately.”
What we’re saying is, “Let’s get a reasonable plan together so that you’re serving people in the Inuit language to a reasonable standard.”
If there’s another piece to your question, I’m going to have to apologize and ask for you to add that piece.
The part where it says, “who may be Inuit Language speakers,” what mechanism do they have to use to determine that they could send it out?
If you look at just the demographics of the population, it’s 85 percent Inuit and 15 percent non-Inuit.
So if they just go through the list and say, “85 out of a 100 things are going to be done in Inuktitut and the other 15 are going to be in another language.” How are they to determine whether someone is or not?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): I will have Ms. Hardy respond to that question as well, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Hardy: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Minister.
The intention there is that the business should be able to determine, on first contact, by using the Inuit language whether that is the preference of the person receiving the service.
This is not difficult to do; you can do it even with an automated phone in some cases.
If it proves more difficult to do, then that’s something that this Act provides assistance with and that was the piece of your question that I was answering.
So what you indicated in your question is correct, it’s often going to be the case that one should assume that you’re dealing with the 85 percent of the population and not the 15 at first contact, and then proceed in the language that the person prefers from that point on.
I thank Ms. Hardy for clarifying that.
Say, for example, someone does, on the first contact, ask the consumer, or whoever it is, “In which language would you prefer to be served?” And if that individual indicates the Inuit language, then they can provide it in the Inuit language.
But if they indicate that they would prefer to be served in English or any of the other languages that are out there, would they still be required to do that from then on? If the customer says, “I just want my bills in English or I just want my bills in Inuktitut,” that they wouldn’t have to ask again and that they would be able to do that once and have it set up so that they wouldn’t have to keep doing that every month?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Yes, your understanding is correct. It would be in that case, Mr. Chairman.
Going back to instruction and I know I brought this up in standing committee as well is if you go to any bank machine or ATM, they’re just in English or French and there’s actually, I think at RBC here, you can get it in Chinese, too.
Will there be a requirement for the financial institutions or anyone, because some of them are private as well with banking or ATM machines, to provide an option for using the Inuit language as well?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Bill 7 is for the protection of the Inuit language. We will have to take these issues into consideration. We would also like to see all Nunavut businesses implement this by displaying signage in Inuktitut.
This would just be part of the requirements.
Many of our elders can’t speak English and they can’t receive services without another person assisting them since the signage is not in Inuktitut.
For that reason, Inuktitut signs have to be used here in Nunavut.
So those machines would have to have an Inuit language service in order for you to be able to push the buttons and it will be in syllabics, or Inuinnaqtun, or roman orthography, depending on where you are.
That’s our objective here in Nunavut. Forms such as loan applications at the banks should be available in Inuktitut. This is something we will have to work hard to implement here in Nunavut if we are to protect our Inuit language, Mr. Chairman.
I couldn’t agree. I think you get a lot of cases where you hear of elder abuse and scenarios where they can’t use the machines because they don’t understand it, so they give their card to someone and they take off with all their money or things like that, so I think it would be great.
I’m just not sure if I got a clear answer from you.
Would they be required under the law to have those machines operate in an Inuit language as well?
You indicated, “That’s what we’re striving towards, that’s what we would like to see, and that’s what we’re trying protect.”
But would that be a requirement for anyone with an ATM or bank machine to have it so it can operate in an Inuit language as well as English, French, or even Chinese as we see here?
Yes, that’s totally true.
Those ATMs and bank machines would have to be make Inuktitut available if they are to comply with Bill 7.
However, as we discussed earlier, if a business is experiencing a problem in trying to comply, then they can negotiate with the Languages Commissioner. They would then review the issues and try to come up with resolutions if it seems that they will be experiencing problems in providing those services.
With respect to his questions, yes, it’s true that those ATM machines will have to include Inuktitut according to this legislation, Mr. Chairman.
Sorry, that’s clause 3 we’re on, my next question is on clause 4.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): I think I’m beginning to understand. If the businesses wish to earn more money, if they want the services they provide used, and if they wish to be recognized, then their forms cannot only be in English.
Is my understanding on this correct? Is this how it’s defined in this bill?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Yes, according to the legislation, that will be a requirement. The Inuit language is recognized in Nunavut in law and they must provide services in the native language of the person if they operate in Nunavut.
That’s the goal of Bill 7 and that’s what it’s trying to state, Mr. Chairman.
Under clause 3(2)(a), it says, “essential services, including (ii) health, medical and pharmaceutical services,” and “(c) the other prescribed services,” have to be in the Inuit language.
I will use telephone banking as an example because I don’t use Internet banking as much.
When I’m going to transfer funds or pay bills, then I use telephone banking and this is more convenient for me, rather than using the Internet.
The telephone banking offers either English or French for the services that they provide. For instance, you press 1 for English.