EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
We have continued to have expectations about higher funding when that legislation was passed in June. Actually, if there have to be additions, we received 35 comments or concerns about the legislation based on the task we have been delegated.
We have tried to work on implementing these recommendations.
The IUT committee now has a board and they will try to meet every week.
We had expected that they would be up and running by last spring, but unfortunately it’s taking a while.
I believe you made a statement on that issue in the House.
The Official Languages Act hasn’t been implemented yet.
I don’t have the record of the proceedings in front of me, but in June, you tabled Uqausivut, a draft implementation plan for both of the Languages Acts.
I believe that the Official Languages Act was passed on June 4, 2008 in the Legislative Assembly and received Parliamentary assent in June 2009.
My first question here is: can we expect to have this Act come into force?
I’m referring to the Official Languages Act that was passed in the Legislative Assembly on June 4, 2008.
Yes, I responded in the House that the Official Languages Act was grandfathered from the Northwest Territories in 1988 and it’s still in force.
We look forward to it being implemented in the near future.
We are working on it and it also includes the Inuit Language Protection Act, which was passed.
Under that law, the French speakers can use their language in the workplace, and it’s being used in the schools.
In the Inuit cultural school, the language of instruction is Inuktitut.
It is being slowly implemented.
Once Uqausivut is approved and tabled in the House, it will be one of the responsibilities.
I will make this the last one for the time being, Mr. Chairman.
With respect to the Inuit Language Protection Act and the Official Languages Protection Act that we have to implement in Nunavut, what are your plans for dealing with large institutions, such as Royal Bank of Canada and other banks?
When you go to the bank to be provided services, for example, you have to make a deposit, they ask, “What can I do for you? Do you want to make a deposit or withdrawal?”
The forms are available in English and French. There’s another language I’m not sure about.
I never quite get the particular language, but I believe you can choose Chinese or Japanese when you press buttons at the ATM.
The ATMs are starting to surface in a lot of the smaller communities and you have to use these cards to access your funds.
It’s become obvious that when elders receive their pension funds, they generally request assistance from the closest person, even though there’s confidential information or a potential for money to be stolen from them.
What I would like to understand, Mr. Chairman, is: are you speaking with these financial institutions to see if we could be serviced in our own language?
I have no idea what they are either.
The Languages Commissioner is working with these institutions as part of our mandate, enforcing the Official Languages Act as well as the Inuit Language Protection Act.
We cannot really enforce it at this time, but there is a time down the road where we will be able to enforce them.
In the meantime, we can meet with these large institutions to try to develop language-specific forms or applications. These are things that we can work with these institutions because at this time, they’re available in various languages, such as Chinese. Yes, we can discuss those matters with them.
Mr. Tapardjuk (interpretation): I think I am not to talk, as the clock for my time did not even stop.
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Tapardjuk, I apologize. Our assistant forgot to press the clock to stop it, but please proceed if you wish.
Mr. Tapardjuk (interpretation): I just wanted that time noted; I did not really mean that I was not to talk.
It states in the document that you will hire six staff for the Official Languages and Services Division as per the Official Languages Act.
What exactly are these positions going to be doing?
My officials will be able to provide more detail.
At this time, there are interpreter/translators for all documents. There will be an editor.
So there are three main interpreter/translators with one editor and also the supervisor or manager responsible for translating proper terms. There will also be one technician.
At this time, we have identified six positions specifically for implementing this legislation.
I would like to ask my deputy, Mr. Awa, to add more detail.
The positions have been approved and it’s contained within the legislation, specifically for implementing the legislation and enforcing it.
During the 2011-12 fiscal year, there were six positions and they will add a few more positions to go in 2013-14 because the duties inherent in converting documents to Inuktitut, Inuinnaqtun, French, and English are growing.
We can’t even keep up with the demand at this time when all of the documents have to be translated into the four official languages.
Additionally, I am quite glad, Mr. Chairman, since previously any documents written in either Inuktitut or Inuinnaqtun was never proofread.
As long as the document was written in Inuktitut, with all of its errors and even if it did not make sense, it would be published.
Now, with the requirements of the legislation, there are specific positions identified to proofread all documents for readability and I am very glad that there will be editor positions in our department.
As the minister indicated, there are now six positions listed and we are looking at adding new positions in the new fiscal year.
Now in June 2011, apparently you tabled the Uqausivut plan to the House, but I was not yet a representative here, so I have only heard of this fact.
With respect to the Official Languages Act and the Inuit Language Protection Act, I believe those are the official titles and they were passed in this House.
I would like to know what type of implementation plans you are working on. Can you provide some information on any plans you have?
As per my previous statement, there is a committee that has been struck that will be looking at developing these ideas further in respect to the item that was tabled in June 2011.
Also, as per my earlier statement, we received about 35 submissions to the document we prepared, with the majority commenting, with not too many parties disagreeing with the document.
However, we cooperated with officials from the Office of the Languages Commissioner, NTI, and the Department of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth to strike a committee.
Representatives on this committee are going to develop the action items. Currently, they are working really hard and additionally, we have prioritized this committee and they will be concentrating on these matters up until springtime.
Mr. Oshutapik (interpretation): Further on page 88 of the business plan, the funding for the Language Acts Implementation Division seems to have decreased in 2012-13 if you compare it to the previous year.
Can you explain why there has been a decrease in funding?
We didn’t quite get what he was referring to.
Perhaps the member can clarify exactly what he is speaking to.
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Oshutapik, please elaborate further.
If you compare the figures for 2011-12 with 2012-13 on page 88 of this document here, they seem to be decreasing. (interpretation ends) According to page 88 of your 2012-13 draft business plan, the budget for the Language Acts Implementation Division will be less than half of what it was in 2011-12.
When Nunavut’s new Official Languages Act comes into force, wouldn’t this division require additional resources and, if not, why not?
He said that it’s on page 88 of the business plan.
Do you now know where it is, Mr. Arreak?
We now understand what he was referring to, so I would like to ask Mr. Awa to provide some more details to the member of the reasoning.
Yes, the page the member referred to that outlined over half of the funding being cut, the reason was primarily due to the preparation work required to get it going.
It is now more than halfway completed and due to this, the main work revolves around consultation work and requests to other bodies for information and with most of these activities largely completed, that is why the fund was cut in that manner.
However, on the other hand, looking at the mandate of the government, we will expend other funds for implementing the legislation. This fund is mostly for the preparation work to get the legislation drafted and reviewed.
Due to that reason, since the legislation has been largely completed, that is why the funding is much smaller as it is just an indicator of the amount of work left.
I would like to thank the minister for appearing in front of the committee.
I would like to speak about languages and the fact that the two pieces of legislation are slowly being implemented.
It’s very complex and challenging. The work to implement the Official Languages Act is ongoing.
I would like to raise this question. You support the use of Inuktitut, especially once Inuktitut becomes an official language.
I would like to ask the minister whether our government will eventually be able to provide services in Inuktitut. If so, does the government have a strategy for teaching its employees how to speak Inuktitut if they were unable to speak the language?
My Deputy Minister, Mr. Awa, will respond to that.
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Awa, please clarify.
I cannot really provide a whole lot of detail, but if that could be accomplished, I personally would be very happy if the government was able to provide services and operate in Inuktitut.
I look forward to the day that all government employees would be able to speak and write in Inuktitut, but I can’t even forecast a date.
With respect to my expectations and my dedication to this task, those of us who are Inuit are starting to lose our language, so that should be our first priority.
If we are more focused on reclaiming and repatriating our language and more people want to learn our language, then the demand will grow.
I do expect that at least the senior officials, managers, and others who want to learn Inuktitut are provided that opportunity and that opportunity is available throughout the year.
Generally the public service has workers with different levels of fluency, whether they are beginners, intermediate, or more advanced. There are announcements that talk about classes that are occurring throughout the week, and they identify beginners, intermediate, or advanced classes within these announcements.
That’s all I can say about that, Mr. Chairman.
Yes, I understand that clearly and I agree with them.
It seems that the Member for Amittuq keeps questioning when the legislation will come into force.
These two pieces of language legislation have been approved by the House, but the government keeps deferring the implementation of the language legislation.
If the term “official languages” is defined, English is not the only official language, is it?
Although the official language legislation has been approved in the House, we have agreed that the Inuit, English, and French languages would be the official languages of Nunavut.
Although those three languages will be the official languages in Nunavut, English and French are the official languages throughout Canada.
In Nunavut, I believe we will be the first territory to protect the Inuit language by making it an official language through legislation.
English is not the only official language.
Although we have a target date to start enforcing the Official Languages Act this coming spring, we are also considering Aboriginal Day or the anniversary of the Prime Minister’s apology for trying to assimilate their fellow Canadians or another date of importance.
English is not the only official language here.
However, I believe it would also be true if we stated that if the Inuit language was a language of operations within all government workplaces, people would receive service in Inuktitut.
I think this should be researched, although I know it is not part of your mandate to enforce that with the government employees.
If Inuktitut will become a language of service, then it has to be clearly identified and a directive should be made to all senior officials, and not just within your department. The reason I make this statement is that currently, if there is a vacant position that will be advertised for a government job, it usually has a caveat: this position is not a bilingual position.
Can you include this in your review? All positions will eventually have to be listed as bilingual positions in Inuktitut and English.
We do not use French as an operational language. The French language is protected at the federal government level.
I truly believe that not many Inuit would be taking French language instruction and it’s the federal government’s responsibility. The French language is recognized as an official language here in Nunavut due to the inclusion as an official language in Canada.
I believe the Inuktitut language needs support to reach that level. If the leaders do not resolve this at the top level, that all job opportunities at the senior level will be required to be staffed by bilingual workers… .
The way it is set up is what causes the problem. If you are going to be speaking in Inuktitut or are required to provide service in Inuktitut, following the official language legislation, that position has to be identified as being a bilingual position.
The only reason for categorizing a position is so that person can get a bilingual bonus.
Any position thusly not identified, even if the employee is an Inuk, without the bilingual requirement for that position, that Inuk does not receive a bonus.
For that reason, if your department is unable to deal with this matter, you should collaborate with the Official Languages Commissioner to try and get more compliance.
The Languages Commissioner does receive complaints when services are not being provided in Inuktitut, English, or French. You can submit your complaint to the commissioner regarding any of the official languages.
With respect to the positions that require bilingual bonus, particularly English and Inuktitut, this is a matter that is being discussed and debated both in the offices of CLEY as well as Human Resources.
They are holding discussions on how to better define bilingual bonus positions and how you can qualify.
This is always in the realm of hiring prospective employees here in Nunavut.
That is the way it is set up now.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): Thank you. The basis for my statement is that this government wants a bilingual workforce, but we still have to implement legislation and the majority of our positions state that the position does not require Inuktitut. It states Inuktitut is not necessary.
I discovered, accidentally sort of thing, in English, since I was not really looking for a case.
I found out that this person, although they are bilingual, does not receive a bonus for this ability.
I asked why. I was told that the position did not require a bilingual worker, even though the worker was an Inuk and fully fluent. Why?
Whenever a unilingual person calls the office, the desk clerk may not speak Inuktitut and all of a sudden, this employee becomes their interpreter, even though their position states that bilingualism is not necessary for the job. (interpretation ends) That’s not fair.
(interpretation) Inuit employees have to receive much fairer treatment within our government workplaces. I spoke to this issue to recommend that the system be revised and the issues addressed.
We should remove that category and make them bilingual. The reason why I say that is because Canada has been officially bilingual since the 1970s. In those days, the Prime Minister of Canada announced that bilingualism is now an official part of the public service everywhere.
That made it much easier. Learning French became mandatory for anyone wanting promotion in the public service and those who became proficient earned increases in their pay.
Here we are nickel-and-diming Inuit.
What we must do with our legislation, not just your department, but I believe you can contribute as a department or through EIA, if this government is to be bilingual and to have everything become open and accessible to Inuit, I imagine that you can examine this to determine precisely what the barriers are if this government is to practise bilingualism.
I’m asking if that effort can be made.
As per our continual statements, we are working towards the goal of any official language being used within our government offices. Furthermore, on September 19, we started implementing this requirement to use any official language within the workplace.
The workplace requirements, such as the job descriptions for these positions, are being reviewed. However, I can’t speak for the Minister of Human Resources, as he has to speak for his own department.
At this time, all I can state is that this is under review, but I can’t speak to the details.
I can’t respond either as we already have a Minister for Human Resources who has that mandate.
The bilingual language requirement, as it stands currently, doesn’t really define whether it’s Inuktitut-English, Inuktitut-French, or French-English. It just speaks about bilingualism, the ability to speak more than one language.
That is what it states currently.
That response has clarified the situation to many members, as some of the MLAs believe that an employee of the government who is an Inuk is in a bilingual position. No! Only those positions that have clearly been identified as requiring bilingual workers get this bonus.
I want to turn to another subject. My next question regards the writing system which is concerning to many people. Personally, I can use either system and I have absolutely no problem with syllabics being used as a language of instruction and I would prefer to see this system protected, as well as Roman orthography for Inuinnaqtun, obviously.
Some of my constituents have stated that they learned the original syllabic system whereas the shortened version is currently used within the schools to teach Inuktitut. Will they continue to use the shortened version of syllabics within the school?
Exactly how, I am unsure.
With respect to this issue, the Minister of Education would deal with the regulatory or policy matters, and if they have any policies to that effect.
I will not be speaking on behalf of my executive colleague responsible for education.
Is your department responsible for determining which writing system should be used or is there another department responsible for that?
Hon. James Arreak (interpretation): The Inuit Language Authority is now starting their work regarding languages and the writing system.
The Department of Education has their own legislation with regard to that.
What I’m trying to say is there was an elder who was concerned about the old style of syllabics and I’m just using that as an example. We are now using the shorter style of syllabics.
Maybe the Minister of Education can sing the Inuktitut alphabet song. At the end of that song, they sing, “I can speak Inuktitut now.”
I really like that song.
The elder usually speaks to this issue and I was just using it as an example.
We have a shorter version of syllabics and we also have a longer version of syllabics, so we have two syllabic writing systems.
They are using the shorter version of syllabics in education and I believe that it’s better to use that one.
I would like the minister to know that many people have approached me with their concerns related to this.
I hope that’s understandable.
Minister Arreak, did you understand?
Yes, I understood. He showed me two versions that he has.
I don’t believe that there is legislation as to which syllabic version is to be used.
I have never seen anything on it, but the shorter version of the syllabics was created at a time when there were no Inuktitut keyboard layouts. When IBM was creating fonts in syllabics, there were too many syllables and that’s why the shorter version started being used.
I’m sure the member can recall that, as I believe he was working for Inuit organizations when it was being worked on.
Mr. Curley, I’ll get back to you. I have other names on my list.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Yes, while we are discussing the issue of language, I want to ask this question.
Inuktitut is still quite prevalent in its usage, and non-residents assume we have language legislation, such as that recently passed for Nunavut’s official languages of French, English and Inuktitut.
However, in the western region, the usage of Inuktitut is deteriorating very quickly, especially in our Netsilik region.
Is there any funding specific to parents for maintaining and preserving our dialect? We do want to preserve it.
Whenever our colleagues mention that the French language is rarely used outside the capital, I take a personal slight because my grandchildren are able to converse in French and I am proud of their capability.
The two older children, through conversing with their father, have become able to speak in French.
It’s not good to hear that because my grandchildren are able to speak French As good parents, we must try to teach our children their languages and to preserve their languages.
When you are considering the actual funding to protect languages, I would want to see any language protected irrespective of whether it is French, English, or Inuktitut.
I believe many people assume that a lot people can’t even speak in English. A lot of adults also have problems speaking their dialect properly.
I imagine that is the case all over Nunavut.
Parents should speak their language to their children regardless of what language it might be. From a personal perspective, when I look at my grandchildren, I see their capability because they speak a language I can’t speak.
We should be trying to increase all Inuit and all Nunavummiuts’ ability to speak their languages.
The member’s comments were comprehensible.
The Inuinnaqtun dialect remains a concern for many people, as people fear it is being lost.
We try to promote Inuinnaqtun, and I have seen initiatives to promote the usage of Inuinnaqtun when I have travelled to the region. It seems to be coming back into vogue as it seems to be resurging, but I imagine it is being lost in certain places.
Yes, these funds are made available to all applicants, whether it is the RIAs, the local municipalities, or even individuals.
An individual can also apply for funding from this fund if it is specific to protecting the Inuit language or if it is related to language activities.
If you are a parent or any person who will be trying to conduct language activities, the funding is available as long as it is related to languages.
Looking at the time, I would like consent from my colleagues to take a break. When we come back, we will have Minister Arreak return to the witness table along with Mr. Awa and Mr. Rudolph.
We will break for lunch and when we come back, Mr. Curley can continue with his questions.
We will take a lunch break now and resume at 1:15 p.m. Thank you.
>>Committee recessed at 12:05 and resumed at 13:16
Chairman (interpretation): Members, I would like to thank you for coming back.
Prior to recommencing our committee meeting, I have some news to pass along.
(interpretation ends) As members are aware, the Minister of Economic Development and [Transportation] has been representing Nunavut in the Mines Training Strategy meeting in Toronto this week. (interpretation) For the record, I wish to advise members that Moses Aupaluktuq, Member for Baker Lake, is accompanying the minister at this event in Toronto.
We can proceed and as I stated earlier, we will begin with Mr. Curley.
I believe we are all aware that the Inuit Language Authority meets regularly, so I want to ask a question about that.
I believe they have met quite a few times and perhaps the minister could elaborate on what their mandate is and also outline what they do. That’s my first question.
They meet occasionally and I believe they meet four times per year. If they do have to surpass the four meetings per year, they do so, but they don’t meet much more than that.
I wasn’t really asking about that.
What I wanted to know is what their mandate is and what they do.
Maybe he can respond to that later.