Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I could say this again, "in accordance with directions of the Minister" is the policy directions that are established for language education. That is the basis on which this is to be read. You can't read every one as though I am interfering every time on a decision. It is generally a policy that guides this particular matter.

Maybe, Mr. Chairman, if I could give an example for the honourable Member. For instance, let's say in Fort McPherson they decide the language of instruction is English; at least 21 per cent of the time, they should be taught in that language. Now, in another language, where we have given direction that an aboriginal language is also the second language --like Gwich'in --at the very least, nine per cent of that other language --approximately 90 hours - -has to be taught. So those are the kinds of general instructions that we give for this area.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Section 73.(1) deals with cultural diversity, language of instruction and

language to be taught. This one states: "A district education authority shall, in accordance with any directions of the Minister, determine a language to be taught as part of the education program in the education district or in any school in the education district." It determines a language or languages to be taught as part of the education program in the education district or in any school in the education district. I think it's a language issue and I would like to ask the Minister if he could clarity this section for me and it he could explain what the intention of this clause is. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is clear from the legislation that the schools have to determine the basic language that they are going to teach in. These are subjects that are taught in the language. In other words, it's not a matter of just a language program so many hours a day. This is the language of instruction. If you decide that Slavey is going to be the language of instruction, then all subjects must be taught in that language.

Now, having said that, you also then have to agree that another language --in this particular case, English --must be the language that is taught as the additional language, as a subject.

On the other hand, if you decide the other way, that English is the language of instruction, then you also can agree that the other language as a subject is then Slavey.

Basically, this clause deals with a language as a subject.

Mr. Chairman, section 73 deals with language of instruction, and I believe that every student has the right to be taught in their traditional language. That is the point I want to raise. What is now going on is that a lot of students are losing their language, but the parents still speak the aboriginal language.

What the French have is that the French have the first right, where, if a French child doesn't speak French and the parents do, they are classified under the French language. That is the kind of provision that we should have as well in aboriginal languages.

I think this section deals with it and it's up to the district education authority, with the direction of the Minister, to determine a language to be taught as part of the education program. Let's say it is a Dene language, then the DEA and the Minister would determine if the Dene language would be part of the education program. I think it is really up to the communities to decide among themselves what kind of language should be provided in the education system.

One point that some of my colleagues and the people I have talked to have raised is that they are afraid that the Dene languages are going to die by the year 2000. What we are trying to do here is to try to keep them alive. Hopefully, with these provisions, they will not die and they will remain in place.

I would like to ask the Minister if he agrees with that position, and would this clause help Dene languages to remain intact? Thank you.

Actually, Mr. Chairman, not only do I agree with it, but I support the principle that the honourable Member is stating.

In section 70, we have already dealt with the matter of the languages of instruction, which must be one of the official languages. The official languages are identified in the Official Languages Act of the Northwest Territories, so that is clear in our legislation if you look at section 70. We then deal with the matter of determining the language of instruction, which we deferred until tomorrow to bring in an additional amendment. But, in principle, it is very clear under section 70 that that is not a problem. Section 73 identifies languages to be taught as a subject. They must be taught as a subject. That's not the language of instruction; they are two different things.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In clause 73.(3) it reads: "If English is the language of instruction, an Official Language other than English must be taught as part of the education program." Does that mean that if in a school, there is English and someone may want French, and there are also people who speak Slavey, that only English and French would be taught and not Slavey? It seems you are only looking at two languages. I wonder if in a school there can be English, French and also Dene languages? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, we can consider other languages. I will also advise the honourable Member that section 70 deals with the recognition of the official languages. Section 71 deals with language of instruction --which we deferred --and section 73 deals with additional languages as subjects. That's what it is. I can advise the honourable Member that in lqaluit, programs are being offered in English, French and Inuktitut. That is already occurring and can occur in aboriginal communities. In fact, in aboriginal communities, we can also move to teach in aboriginal languages now, under the new act, we are already doing that in some cases. Thank you.

I just wanted to explain what the act is trying to say. , In our region --and I will use Coral Harbour as an example, which is a community of 700 --most of the parents speak Inuktitut. Before it said this in the act, we used to go to school to learn English, without any Inuktitut instruction. Now the act is trying to say that you can teach using Inuktitut as the language of instruction from kindergarten to grade 12, if you want to. What we're doing in our communities is, from kindergarten to grade 3, we have Inuktitut

as the language of instruction with oral English taught as a subject to the students, so they can learn to speak English.

But the parents have the choice if they want to have English, Cree or French taught. It could be any official language. But the education authority in our community decided that Inuktitut will be the language of instruction because it is the first language of the children and if you're trying to explain math concepts to a child in a language he doesn't understand, he might not get very far. But, if you explain the concepts in his own language, he will get further. That's the reason behind having aboriginal languages as languages of instruction.

After the education authority decides that Inuktitut is going to be the language of instruction from kindergarten to grade 3, they teach all the subjects in Inuktitut with Inuktitut teachers. Then they teach English as a second language as a subject for those students so they can learn the language. But, it could be French, if they wanted their kids to learn French as a second language.

Now, from grade 4 to 5, there is a transition period. They try to transfer students from their Inuktitut skills to English so that when they're in grade 6 and 7, they are at the same level as grade 6 and 7 students in Yellowknite or Winnipeg, for example. Then they start teaching Inuktitut as a subject. The language of instruction changes to English or French. When teachers teach subjects, they change the language they are speaking to students in. An official language then becomes a subject. That's what the difference is.

The way this act is worded, it is trying to say that we will not lose our language. In my region, with the new model that has been implemented for the last 10 years, we are attempting to produce bilingual, bi-cultural children. We don't have many French-speaking people in our communities --we may have one person --but they still have the option to choose that as a subject. I just wanted to clarity that we aren't going to lose our language using this act. It just makes it stronger so that if we want to teach all things in Inuktitut, we can and teach French and English as subjects, or another official language of the territories. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to say one more time that once district education authorities are established, they must ensure that the resources are adequate to provide for languages of instruction whenever possible. They should make every effort to preserve, enhance and develop the use of the official languages, especially the traditional languages of the students in the school program in all grades and schools. The resources that are required must be available as part of the education program. That's a comment that I wanted to make, Mr. Chairman, thank you.

Agreed.

---Agreed