This is page numbers 977 - 1013 of the Hansard for the 12th Assembly, 7th Session. The original version can be accessed on the Legislative Assembly's website or by contacting the Legislative Assembly Library. The word of the day was chairman.

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

Thank you. To the motion.

Some Hon. Members

Question.

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

Mr. Patterson.

Dennis Patterson Iqaluit

I sense that there is good support for the motion so I won't speak at length, but I would like to make a few brief points. First of all, Mr. Speaker, there have been cuts that have taken place in official language services, even though the Premier who is in charge of official languages has said that there is a review under way of all programs. Logically one would think that the review should have taken place before cuts were made haphazardly and randomly, but this doesn't seem to be happening.

The legal interpreters program is only one of many programs where cuts have been made and have been felt in the government departments, but also in communities.

For example, I think we should be concerned that the amount of funding for the aboriginal languages enhancement grants, which is a portion of the agreement available to communities to undertake their own language activities, has been reduced. This program is administered by the Department of Education, Culture and Employment. This reduction took place even though the GNWT had assured communities that this would be one of the highest priority areas for maintaining levels of funding. That doesn't seem to have now happened.

Several positions at the language bureau in Yellowknife have also been vacant for a long time: the Inuktitut linguists' the training officer; the manager of professional services; and, two editor/paraphrasers. The result is that on-the-job training and other support services are now almost non-existent for language bureau staff.

There are other areas where there have been cuts that are affecting services in the communities. For example, the number of clerk interpreters in health centres, who have been funded to take training in conjunction with Arctic College, has been drastically reduced.

Funding for research and development of renewable resource management terminology in aboriginal languages has been cut.

So, Mr. Speaker, the cuts are being made without a plan and without an overall review. I know that the groups in the Northwest Territories that are concerned about aboriginal languages are most anxious to give advice to the government about how cuts should be made and how priorities should be set. They know, and we all know, that federal funding has been drastically reduced. So the purpose of this motion is basically to encourage the government to quickly proceed with the review and to consult with the aboriginal languages groups rather than making random cuts without explaining and being accountable to the communities and the organizations that they serve.

Secondly, Mr. Speaker, I recommend that we should be willing to look in our own back yard. I know that we are very proud of the Official Languages Act and the simultaneous interpretation that is provided in this Assembly in all official languages. But, Mr. Speaker, we have been subject to severe funding reductions and we have to now say that even this service in our Assembly should be reviewed. It is expensive, I am told it costs about $11,500 for each sitting day to provide these services. That would be somewhere in the vicinity of $600,000 to $800,000 a year, depending on how many sitting days we have. That is a lot of money, Mr. Speaker.

I am not saying that it is money that shouldn't be spent, but I am saying that we should look at that sum of money alongside the money that is being spent for legal interpreting to support the rights of accused people in courts, and the other very important community programs and services that are being provided. Let's review everything and let's agree that because of the drastic funding cuts, we have to review everything.

Mr. Speaker, I have talked about the legal interpreter training program as an example of a cut that I don't think has been very well thought out. I haven't been pleased with the way the government has explained what is happening. The Premier and the Minister of Justice say that the training part of the program will be transferred to Arctic College. Yet, the Minister of Education said in the House yesterday that no final decision had been made on that matter; that he was awaiting the results of a consultant's report. Meanwhile, this morning on the radio, we heard Florence Smith, the head of the interpreter training program at Thebacha Campus of Aurora College, saying that she is confident that they will do a fine job of taking over this program.

So we are getting mixed signals about what is really happening and I think that is because the government has not taken a global look at the funding and really is cherry-picking here and there in a random fashion and making cuts.

I was also concerned that Mr. Kakfwi suggested that it was the federal government that had cut the PYs in his department. With respect, I don't think that is quite true, Mr. Speaker. We know that the federal government cut the global funding to the Government of the Northwest Territories, but it was Mr. Kakfwi who cut the two PYs in his department and recommended that they no longer be funded out of the aboriginal languages funding. So, it is not quite correct to suggest that the federal government is the bad guy in this case when decisions are being made by Ministers for the departments in a random fashion.

So, Mr. Speaker, those are reasons why we should support a timely and urgent review of these programs and it should be done in conjunction with the groups that are concerned about official languages in the Northwest Territories, including the Francophones. Mr. Speaker, I know these groups are anxious to participate and to offer their experience in delivering these services. The Commissioner of Official Languages has recommended that they should have a role. So far it seems they may not be involved, but it would be useful to get their advice because they are people who are dedicated to the use of the aboriginal and official languages in the Northwest Territories and they have experienced delivering these programs.

For all these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I hope Members will support this motion. I think if the review takes place, it will eliminate a lot of the uncertainty and confusion that we have seen with the legal interpreter program and some of the cuts -- some of which we may not even know about -- that have been executed by departments unilaterally and without consultation with those affected, including Members of this Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

Thank you. To the motion.

Some Hon. Members

Question.

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

Mr. Lewis, as seconder, do you wish to speak to the motion? Mr. Patterson? Question has been called. Mrs. Marie-Jewell.

Jeannie Marie-Jewell Thebacha

Sorry, Mr. Speaker. I did not have my hand up when you asked with respect to speaking to the motion. Mr. Speaker, I am somewhat concerned at the way the wording of this motion is developed. I will just make two comments that I certainly agree with the intent of the motion. However, I am concerned with the comments, and I quote the last paragraph, Mr. Speaker: "And further, that this Assembly recommends that the Government of the Northwest Territories, in cooperation with the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, review the effectiveness and cost of official languages services provided for the Legislative Assembly."

Mr. Speaker, I recognize the cost of providing official languages to the people of the north for the Legislative Assembly, and I certainly agree with the total concept of this Legislative Assembly being granted to the people of the north in official languages. I am somewhat concerned; as Mr. Patterson stated, we do possibly spend $11,000 per day. However, reviewing the effectiveness and cost may allow for some aboriginal languages to be eliminated, and I am concerned, and I state this for two reasons.

Many of my constituents speak Chipewyan. Unfortunately, I don't speak it fluently. I understand it to some degree, there is no doubt. But many of my constituents also speak Cree which is not provided by this Legislative Assembly. I am concerned that they may feel that, if no Member in this Assembly speaks Chipewyan, it may not be effective and cost-efficient to provide that language. Possibly, by this motion, it could result in that particular language being eliminated by this Assembly, and I am very concerned with that. I will state that I have a difficult time supporting this motion with the particular wording, "in reviewing the effectiveness and cost of official languages services provided for the Legislative Assembly", so I would like to propose an amendment, Mr. Speaker, if I may.

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

Thank you. Go ahead with your amendment.

Jeannie Marie-Jewell Thebacha

Mr. Speaker, I move to amend the motion by delete the words, "review the effectiveness and cost of official languages services provided for the Legislative Assembly" and implement "Legislative Assembly review of official languages services provided for the Legislative Assembly". Thank you.

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

Thank you. I would like to get a copy of your motion and get it translated so we will take a 15-minute break.

---SHORT RECESS

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

The House will come back to order. We have an amendment to the motion on the floor. For the record, Mrs. Marie-Jewell, could you re-read your amendment, please?

Motion To Amend Motion 17-12(7), Carried

Jeannie Marie-Jewell Thebacha

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Iqaluit, that the motion be amended by deleting the words "effectiveness and cost of" from the last paragraph.

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

Thank you. To the motion, as amended.

An Hon. Member

Question.

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion to amend is carried.

---Carried

To the motion, now, as amended. Mr. Ballantyne.

Michael Ballantyne Yellowknife North

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have some problems with the motion. I remember back to Norman Wells. At that time, Mr. Zoe demanded to have Dogrib interpretation, we didn't have it, and we shut down the House. That precipitated quite a heated debate on how we were going to proceed, how we were going to proceed with French and how we were going to proceed with the aboriginal languages. Out of that, there was a committee formed which I was a Member of. We met with many, many groups across the territories and, at the end of the day, there was quite a bit of support for the symbolic use of all the official languages in the Legislative Assembly.

One thing that many of us -- I think everybody in this room, at one time or another -- whether here or in southern Canada, have probably spoken about is that our Assembly has simultaneous translation in all of the official languages. That is very important. There are those who say that money can be spent elsewhere and there are very good arguments about how the money can be spent. But one of the very significant ways we protect the official languages is through the use of them in the House of Assembly.

I think it is something that has been commented on by commentators, politicians, and observers across the country and around the world, that we have more official languages here than they do in the United Nations. I think it's something everyone here can be proud of. Though I understand what Mr. Patterson is trying to achieve, I can't support the motion. I just want to make it very clear that I stand by the original decision that every official language will be represented in this Legislative Assembly. Thank you, very much.

---Applause

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

Thank you. To the motion, as amended. Mr. Lewis.

Motion 17-12(7): Review Of Official Languages Services
Item 16: Motions

April 11th, 1995

Page 992

Brian Lewis Yellowknife Centre

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was a Member of the ABC committee that reported to this House on the work of the Languages Commissioner. Members will recall that many of the comments that we made in fact substantiated the sentiments just expressed by the Member for Yellowknife North, that this was a very important place and the use of languages in this Chamber was an example to the rest of Canada and to the rest of the world, in many ways.

When I looked at Mr. Patterson's motion asking for a review of all our language programs, he was looking for the seconder of his motion. Being somebody who doesn't always have his feet in concrete and is prepared to look at things or re-examine, I said sure, I don't mind seconding the motion to examine the things we do because I think we should always be reviewing the things we do to see if there is a way of doing them better.

I believe it's in line with the sentiment expressed sometimes that we are very, very quick to impose discipline on all other kinds of people but we never look at ourselves. I thought that the report of the Languages Commissioner never really gave us good, concrete reasons. It wasn't a real review, if you like. It was just a catalogue of sentiments about what went on here and whether it was the best use of money, and whether we could be doing things with that money in other program areas. That's not the purpose of this motion, as it has been amended, Mr. Speaker.

What it does is say that, as a responsible Assembly, where we have new realities to face with regard to our funding and the ways we have to serve people, it is always good to review. In light of the statement just made by our Premier, if you recall when we looked at the main estimates for the executive offices program of the Executive, we were told about the tremendous struggle that is taking place with regard to the Canada/NWT official languages agreement, the fact that we were asked to take a more realistic look at our demands. The $30 million we asked for and the $9 million counter offer made by the federal government has led us to a position now where we don't have the kinds of money that we would like to have to solve all our problems.

I agree with all the sentiments that have been expressed about the importance of language as it is used in this House, but I'm not the kind of individual who says, in light of everything that happens around us with regard to the way we're funded, that we shouldn't always be examining, reviewing and seeing if we can do things better than we do.

It's for that reason that I have no problem in seconding Mr. Patterson's motion and also will be quite happy, in fact, to support it when it comes to a vote. Thank you.

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

Thank you. To the motion, as amended. Mr. Dent.

Charles Dent

Charles Dent Yellowknife Frame Lake

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At the risk of being accused of having my feet in concrete, having been a Member of the Standing Committee on Agencies, Boards and Commissions which did, in fact, recommend that this House not accept the Languages Commissioner's suggestion that we review the provision of simultaneous translation in the House, since that was only recently, I think, dealt with by this House, and since, as was pointed out in the Premier's statement on languages, we have, in fact, received more money for official languages than what we had expected to get when the Standing Committee on Agencies, Boards and Commissions made its recommendations to this House, I would have to say that I have great difficulty supporting this motion.

I think ABCs, in their consideration of the provision of all official languages in this House, did weigh the symbolic value and importance of maintaining the provision of those services, I think we have to recognize just how important it is to preserve those languages and ensure they are used. I think that seeing them used here in this House is a very important, symbolic way of having them preserved.

So, Mr. Speaker, I will just advise that I'm afraid I will not be able to support this motion.

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

Thank you, Mr. Dent. To the motion, as amended. Mr. Antoine.

Jim Antoine Nahendeh

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. (Translation) I will be speaking in my language. Mr. Speaker, I will be speaking about the motion pertaining to official languages. I think it is good that the federal government is helping us fund official languages. There are a lot of official languages in the territories and when we meet, interpreters translate for us simultaneously. In doing so, people across the NWT are able to understand what we are saying in their language.

Also, the department that looks after the training of interpreters has released the two people who help to train court interpreters. Because of this, when native people go to court, I don't know how they are going to be interpreted for in court.

They are reviewing how the Official Languages Act is working at present. Although the review hasn't been finished, they have released some of the people. This is what I do not agree with.

The Government of the Northwest Territories is saying that we should be reviewing the Official Languages Act and would like to meet with all the people who are affected by the Official Languages Act. This is important to me.

As long as the Legislative Assembly has been sitting, we have had simultaneous interpreting and they have done a good job. So what is now being said is that they will be revising the usage of the official languages. There are many languages across our territories. We should be talking to the people who are affected by the Official Languages Act. (Translation ends)

What I am saying here, Mr. Speaker, is that I think the main point here I would like to stress is in the "now therefore I move" section of this motion, the section that deals with "in cooperation with the NWT organizations with interest in official languages". I think that is the key area for me because, up to this point, this Legislative Assembly, since introducing the official languages services which I have always supported has developed it to this point.

Now that there are cutbacks from the federal government, there are diminishing resources to provide this service as we have known it to date. There have been some cuts that have been implemented by certain government departments and, at the same time, there is a review that is going on. This review is not yet concluded. Already, the government is making some decisions to change the way they provide the official languages services. I guess that is the main point that we are trying to reach here. Where do we go from here? This is the direction of this motion. What I would like to stress in this motion is "in cooperation with the NWT organizations". Instead of just a merry, breezy type of consultation, we should have a more in-depth involvement of all the individual aboriginal language groups in the north in this review because, up to this point, I have heard a lot of comments by different aboriginal leaders, different organizations which deal with culture and so forth.

Language is the key; language is the key to the cultures of the different aboriginal organizations in the north, and therefore, they have to be really involved in this whole process if this motion goes ahead.

(Translation) This is as much as I would like to say. Thank you.

The Speaker Samuel Gargan

(Translation) Does anybody else want to speak to the motion? Mr. Morin.

Don Morin Tu Nedhe

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I remember some years ago when official languages were introduced into the Northwest Territories, Mr. Zoe raised the issue in Norman Wells speaking his first language, the Dogrib language, and that is something that shut the House down at that time. At

that time, it created quite an uproar and people insisted that all aboriginal languages be represented in this House.

I also remember when there was another Minister responsible for the languages program when I was an ordinary Member in this Assembly. The majority of the people in my riding speak the Chipewyan language, and because I did not speak that language was the reason the government was using for not supplying interpretation in the Chipewyan language.

But we all know that language, whether it be Chipewyan, Dogrib, North Slavey or whatever, is carried live on CKLB to our constituencies, and whenever I visit the elders in my constituency, they always talk about listening to me on the radio. It is more important that the languages service provided in this House is provided outside of this House to the ridings. That's where the people listen to it and they get some comfort in listening to it in their own language and the elders do understand Chipewyan.

So we fought to get the Chipewyan language into this House so that our elders could listen to it and understand what is going on with this House and I'd be very disappointed if we looked at taking the Chipewyan language out of this House, or any other aboriginal language. I view it as an essential service to the people of the Northwest Territories. We are all elected to serve the people of the Northwest Territories, so that is what we should continue to do. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Applause