This is page numbers 3073 - 3114 of the Hansard for the 16th Assembly, 3rd 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 languages.

Topics

The House met at 1:38 p.m.

---Prayer

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

Good afternoon, colleagues. Welcome back to the Chamber. Orders of the day. Item 2, Ministers’ statements. The honourable Minister of Finance, Mr. Miltenberger.

Michael Miltenberger

Michael Miltenberger Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to update Members and NWT residents on our Territory’s economic outlook and what it means for our government’s fiscal planning. Although it has only been two months since this Assembly passed the 2009-10 budget and departments have begun to implement its initiatives, we need now to start our planning for 2010-11 and beyond.

This will mark the third year of implementation of our plan to address our priorities of the 16th Assembly as outlined in our vision: Northerners Working Together. Earlier this week I met with my federal, provincial and territorial Finance colleagues to review the state of the global and national economies and the prospects for the next few years.

We are in the midst of the deepest global recession since World War II and this has had a significant impact on Canada’s economy. However, to date, Canada’s economy has been affected the least of the major world economies. Furthermore, there are some signs of stabilization that lead some forecasters to predict that the recovery, although a muted one, could begin by the end of 2009.

The fiscal stimulus measures planned by the federal, provincial and territorial governments are amongst the strongest in the world and are expected to provide an important source of economic support for this country in the short term. Despite this, the economy is weaker than was expected last fall and winter when we put our 2009-10 budget together. We estimate the diamond mine production in 2009 will be at least 25 percent lower than last year’s levels as a result of shutdowns and planned reductions in activity.

Mineral exploration activity is expected to fall by 80 percent from last year and indications are that total capital investments in the NWT will decline over 30 percent from 2008.

Our government’s revenues are being affected by the economic slowdown. The size of the impact will depend on how deep and how prolonged the slowdown is. Although our transfers from Canada will remain stable, we expect our corporate income tax revenues to be significantly lower than in previous years. Based on recent forecasts of corporate profits Canada-wide, we can see our 2009-2010 corporate income tax revenues decline by $40 million from the amount we planned for in our budget. If the NWT’s resource-based corporations are hit harder than the national average, GNWT revenues could fall even more.

We don’t know the actual impact on our tax revenues until later this fall, but we are planning based on the assumption that we will have fewer resources to meet the many needs we face.

There are some key questions that we will need to answer as we develop our plans. First, should we be changing our course to respond to reduced revenues as a result of the economic downturn? In the immediate term my answer would be no. The 2009-2010 budget we just approved was a sound response to a slowing economy. We kept the growth in O and M spending to only 2 percent. We introduced some modest new revenue measures.

However, in recognition of the NWT’s large infrastructure deficit and the need for our government to act as a counterbalance in the economy to offset the decline in private sector investment, we’ve put in place plans to invest in a record amount of capital infrastructure this year. Furthermore, we are proposing a supplementary appropriation bill this session which, after considering both capital carry-overs from the previous fiscal year and the investment related to the accelerated federal stimulus plan, will bring our 2009-2010 capital investment to $425 million.

For the medium and longer term, we need to consider how deep and how long the recession will last. A sharp, short drop and quick recovery would have different implications than a prolonged downturn and slow recovery. For example, we may be able to keep our infrastructure investment levels

high in 2009-2010 and 2010-2011, but if our revenues may not recover for some time we need to ask ourselves how much debt the government can afford to take on going into an economic downturn.

Our plans for 2009-2010 assumed we would have to borrow approximately $80 million by the end of the fiscal year on a short-term basis. Our higher capital investment plans this year will not likely require significantly more borrowing since they will be financed in part through capital carry-overs from 2008-2009 and in part through cash advanced by Canada under the Building Canada Plan. If our corporate tax revenues are lower than forecast, we may need to borrow more than planned.

The second key question we need to consider is whether this government should plan to borrow on a longer-term basis. Borrowing can make sense in the short term, but we need to understand how much we can afford and have a plan both for paying the interest and for paying back the debt. As a government we are constrained on what we can borrow, not only by the federal debt limit of $500 million, of which $156 million is spoken for, but also by what we can afford.

We also can’t ignore the fact that our population is continuing to decline. The numbers released last January showed that the NWT population fell by over 1 percent. That’s more than 475 people or almost $12 million when fully factored into our territorial formula funding payments. We won’t see the impact of this in 2009 because of the lag in our TFF, but this will hit us in the next few years unless we can turn the trend around. We need to understand what this means for our Territory and talk about how we should respond to this problem.

Borrowing an affordable amount to get us through this economic slowdown is an appropriate response. While not our plan, continuing to borrow until we hit the debt wall will ultimately mean cutting future programs and services and increasing taxes to pay our debt obligations.

The final key question is, how do we manage our expenditures as we enter the recovery? This means putting tougher controls on ongoing spending growth, limiting investments in strategic change, and reducing the level of new capital investments once the current budget has passed. Reductions and reallocations of spending need to be a regular part of the planning process as opposed to being implemented on a crisis basis. We also need to take a longer-term approach to revenue growth.

The global economy is in a state of change and uncertainty. Worldwide economists and policymakers are struggling to understand the causes and develop solutions. As a Territory we are not sheltered from the effects of this downturn. But we need to remember that we enter this period of

economic slowdown in relatively good fiscal shape with a plan for long-term fiscal sustainability.

The challenges of the economic downturn are greater than we first forecast when we first came into office, but we are in a good position to face those challenges. We have reduced our expenditures, we have begun to plan for aggressive infrastructure investments, and we have the resources to make significant investments in education and training of our residents. We are continuing to invest in our people, our environment, and our economy. We plan to closely monitor economic events. We plan to review our fiscal assumptions and priorities before we put specific plans together for the next fiscal year and beyond. I look forward to hearing from the Members on these critical issues as we begin our business planning for 2010-2011.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Minister responsible for Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.

Jackson Lafferty

Jackson Lafferty Monfwi

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Today I would like to update this House on the ongoing work and achievements of the Department of Education, Culture and Employment as we progress towards the vision of the 16th Assembly -- Northerners Working Together -- particularly the goals of healthy, educated people and diverse economies that provide all communities and regions with opportunities and choices.

ECE’s 10-year strategic plan predates this Assembly’s vision, but the direction this Assembly has laid out has allowed us or enabled us to enhance improved plans and become more effective for the people of the Northwest Territories. The department has a very broad mandate and the work we undertake spans all five strategic initiative committees: Managing This Land, Refocusing Government, Building Our Future, Maximizing Opportunities, and Reducing the Cost of Living. Most of our work falls within Building Our Future, Maximizing Opportunities, and Reducing the Cost of Living.

Today I would like to provide some information about the work in which the department is currently engaged in. One of our most fundamental roles is to enable the provision of kindergarten to Grade 12 education. We are fortunate to work with some very progressive, engaged school boards whose commitment and dedication serve to improve our education system and contribute to the ongoing success of our students. Our student graduation rates have never been higher and, while we always look to improve them, I want to commend the students who have worked so hard to invest in their

futures and the teachers who have guided them. Part of the curriculum is Northern Studies, where our children can learn about the North, its culture, and its history. As well, aboriginal languages are studied in our schools as part of the broad plan to encourage and revitalize languages. I will discuss this plan more later on.

We are very pleased by how many students are encouraging elders into the classroom, to share their knowledge and wisdom with the students and bring together those just starting out in life and those who have experienced it to its fullest. It takes a community to educate a child. We are currently undertaking an Aboriginal Student Achievement Initiative to bridge the gap between aboriginal and non-aboriginal students in which industry and many other partners are playing a part. This project is just starting out, but so far it is receiving the support and participation of many stakeholders, such as Dene Nation, Inuvialuit Regional Corporation, Metis Association, school superintendants, and the Northwest Territories Teachers’ Association, businesses and other GNWT departments. Their work is the result of consultation advice from our partners, from MLAs and from concerns we have heard from the public. As a result of this initiative, in the near future we hope to be able to report that attendance has increased and that aboriginal students are more engaged in the classroom than ever before.

Our capital plan continues to support a healthy learning environment, with three new schools currently being built and three existing schools being renovated in the plan. We continually receive more capital requests than we can fulfill, but with the support and guidance of Members of this House we are confident we can meet those requirements in a measured and equitable way that addresses our most compelling need.

Literacy is a critical part of the ECE plan. Guided by our strategy towards literacy, we focus on literacy across the lifespan in all official languages, with an increased emphasis on youth and the importance literacy plays in their lives. We support the development of libraries, virtual libraries and the borrow-by-mail system to enhance any services that may not be available in the communities.

Mr. Speaker, the work that Education, Culture and Employment is undertaking with its partners to improve adult education and career and employment development specifically in the area of apprenticeship and occupation certification has been very successful. Since the review of the Apprenticeship Program we have increased investment for the trades and are seeing an increase in the number of apprentices enrolled in our programs across the Northwest Territories. Our partnership with the Mine Training Society has had a tremendous impact on Northerners. Coupled with

the Mining Workforce Initiative, we can report that in a relatively small amount of time Northerners have been provided with access to on-the-ground mine training and improved community access to mine opportunities.

Mr. Speaker, as well, since Aurora College took delivery of mine simulators, their policy of mine training has improved and, as a result, Northerners are entering mining careers with improved technical and safety skills. As well, Aurora College and many partners added a mobile trades training unit in the Beaufort-Delta region and are expecting significantly more students to be able to take advantage of this type of training where they can access it in their own community.

ECE also has a new Teacher Education Program Strategy where increased investments are being made to allow Aurora College to expand into the community delivery of the Teacher Education Program and also Aboriginal Language and Culture Instructors Program. We have seen much success in the community delivery of the Behchoko program and will continue to use this model in other regions throughout the Northwest Territories.

Aurora College is also delivering a Masters in Nursing Program for the first time. Mr. Speaker, these programs will support the recruitment and retention of professionals in the Northwest Territories.

This session I will be providing Members with more details on the NWT Nominee Program which we have successfully negotiated with the Government of Canada. This has been a long time coming. Members have been lobbying for the program for some time now. We are pleased to say that we will begin the implementation of this program in July and I will offer Members more details later this session.

As well, we are pleased to announce that in addition to expanding our agreements with the federal government for the Labour Market Development Agreement and the Targeted Initiative for Older Workers, Education, Culture and Employment has also been successful in negotiating a labour market agreement with the Government of Canada that will provide more opportunities for NWT residents to participate in career and employment development opportunities in the labour market and provide a healthy future for themselves and their families. Again, I will offer Members more detail about this later in the session.

Mr. Speaker, the arts and culture are really important to our residents and the Members of this House. We often hear that we should invest more money in these areas. I am pleased to say that ECE has increased its investments in the arts. We are supporting the participation of our artists in the 2010 Olympics. Artists will have the unprecedented opportunity to showcase their unique talent and sell

the fruits of their labour to a waiting world. We are currently in the process of selecting a cross-section of artists who represent the Northwest Territories and we will be reporting to the Members on the success this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity will certainly bring.

As well, NWT museums continue to headline the most important tourist “must-sees” in our Territory. The Prince of Wales Northern Heritage Museum is unrivalled for its northern comprehensive archives and diverse exhibits and strives to be better, bolder and more exciting with every new presentation.

Mr. Speaker, one of the most important services ECE provides is that of income security. At the tail end of the 15th Assembly, we completed a

comprehensive review of the Income Security Program that resulted in an overhaul in the way we deliver services that is much more tailored to the needs of our residents. ECE has expanded ECE service centres to more remote communities and now provides information, increased access to a combination of income security programs and other developmental programs that together help residents achieve individual goals of self-reliance.

Mr. Speaker, we are currently planning a review of the Public Housing Rental Subsidy Program. We have sought the advice of Members into what should go into this review. In the coming months we hope to review the findings of our consultations with Members and seek guidance on the best path to take as we move forward.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to end by talking about our work on official languages. Recently, Members of this House went through a thoughtful and detailed piece of work on the review of the Official Languages Act, and I thank them for their commitment to this important project. We have much work to do in this area but we are pleased to report some meaningful progress. The French language service window has been up and running for some months now and has been very successful. As well, we are undertaking a review of the aboriginal languages to understand where to direct our resources according to the needs of our aboriginal residents. We have increased funding to language nests that allow young children and adults to develop language skills together.

Mr. Speaker, we see this as a very important component to the healthy development of our languages. Unless languages are used in the home, they will continue to be at risk. I know many elders advocate strongly for their languages, not the least of which is our newly appointed Languages Commissioner, Ms. Sarah Jerome, who we congratulate on her appointment and are very much looking forward to working with on this important and rewarding challenge.

Mr. Speaker, as you can see, the Department of Education, Culture and Employment is working

hard for the people of the Northwest Territories to fulfill the goals of this Assembly. I would like to thank all the staff for their hard work and commitment. We appreciate you all. Mr. Speaker, we also appreciate the guidance, the wisdom and support of the Members of this House. Your input and experience is invaluable as we move forward to make the Northwest Territories a better place to live and work. We can all be proud of our past and work hard today for a promising future that we can all build together. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Item 3, Members’ statements. The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Jane Groenewegen

Jane Groenewegen Hay River South

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, it’s my pleasure today to use my Member’s statement to welcome Grade 6 students from Hay River to the Legislative Assembly.

---Applause

With the support of their teachers and their principal, this has turned into an annual event for the past number of years. The visit to Yellowknife includes things such as a trip to the Prince of Wales Museum and a presentation by Jamie Bastedo, trip to the Pizza Hut, a trip to the Ruth Inch Memorial Pool, and they have the use of the Ski Club for a place to stay. And, of course, it includes a tour of the Legislative Assembly, photos in the Chamber, lunch in the Great Hall and an opportunity to view the proceedings of the Assembly before they get on their bus to go back home.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to name the visitors we have with us today and recognize them. I think it might be okay to just give a wave so that people can know who they are. Our teachers and chaperones from the Princess Alexandra School in Hay River are: Jennifer Tweedie, Rita Moizis, Glenn May, Doug Bryshun, Poul Osted, Donna Dean, Dorothy Lirette, Louise Schumann. School principal, Jeff Buerger -- Mr. Buerger, I guess, in front of the students. Bus driver, Steve Blakely. That bus is sponsored by the Hay River Elks, which is much appreciated. And the Grade 6 students themselves: Jordan Bryshun, Dylan Carter, Evan Smith, Amanda Roach, Elycia Nimegeers, Roland Lamalice, Jessica Conroy, Jacob Wiedemann, Kendra McKay, Morgan Giroux, Kyla Milne, Jessy Hearn, Chantelle Lafleur, Joel Demarcke, Devinne Charlton, Jesse Morfitt, Bryden Patenaude, Devon Courtourielle, Ryan Dragon, Connor May, Kali Ward, Jasmine Minoza, Harley Beaulieu, Michelle Buckley, Caitlin Chambers, Skyler Constant, Kjel

Crook, Jonelle Fabian-Bjornson, Calvin King, Travis Laviolette, Andrew Lirette, Rayleen McKay, Aaron Moizis, Madison Montgomery, Kaitlyn Moses, Michael Osted, Taylor Price, Sandra Roloson, Allyshia Rymer, Levon Schumann, Jared Smith, Elizabeth Sperry.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

Mrs. Groenewegen, your time for Member’s statement has expired. Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. I also would like to welcome the entire group to Yellowknife and wish them safe travels on their way home. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.

Kevin A. Menicoche

Kevin A. Menicoche Nahendeh

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am glad to hear that the Minister of ECE reaffirmed our goal to build our future. On a recent tour to Trout Lake, I heard once again that the priority for the chief and council and the residents is that they need a new school. The current school is a one room school, the likes of which has not been seen since the early 1900s. The department has always referred to the Charles Tetcho School. However, I have learned that it is now derelict and laying in ruins and for some time has been abandoned. Classes are now held in the community recreation centre.

Trout Lake is a growing and vibrant place. People are coming back to the community bringing their children with them and staying in the community. The Louie Norwegian School in Jean Marie River is a good example of a school that Trout Lake is asking for.

Learning starts in the home community and when children are young, they need a healthy, safe and enjoyable environment. They need the necessary space to play and work together and learn together in groups. Trout Lake has students of both primary and middle age. The community needs a building with classrooms where there can be some separation of grade levels to allow for different activities to be going on at once. To be poised for future growth, the community needs a new standalone school, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Beaulieu.

Tom Beaulieu

Tom Beaulieu Tu Nedhe

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I am talking about a respected Fort Resolution elder who passed away on April 23, 2009. Mr. Edward McKay Sr. was born in Fort Resolution on August 23, 1918. He was a trapper, hunter, fisherman and

worked in the sawmill in Fort Resolution and also in the Pine Point mine.

He spent all of his life in the South Slave region, living in Rocher River, Jean River, Hay River, Pine Point and Fort Resolution. He lived a very traditional lifestyle all his life and I was told he was still looking forward to boating and doing some repairs to his cabin this summer.

Edward was always looking forward, not backwards. He was not formally educated, but due to his ingenuity and hard work ethic, he raised and provided for a family of 15 children. Many will remember Edward McKay for his radiant smile and his love of and talent in jigging moves in his moccasins. He floated like a feather and won every trophy imaginable.

I have known Edward since I was a young man. Even today as an adult, whenever I saw Edward, he would always greet me with a smile and treated me with respect.

Edward was always full of life. Recently, on April 14th , he celebrated his 57th wedding anniversary

with his second wife. Edward is survived by his wife, Denise, his children, Henry, Christine, Joann, Ronald, Linda, Bess-Ann, Frank, Andy, Janet, Dean, Lorraine, Eddie and Shawn. As a tribute to Edward, CBC North hosted a very special show and recognized and honoured the life and times of Edward, particularly his participation in many jigging and talent shows across the Northwest Territories.

Please join me in honouring this much respected elder and to convey our condolences and prayers to his wife, many children and grandchildren and great grandchildren of Mr. Edward McKay Sr. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. The honourable Member for the Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.

Norman Yakeleya

Norman Yakeleya Sahtu

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a concern from the communities in the Sahtu about the local summer hiring of local students in the Sahtu communities. Mr. Speaker, changes need to happen in terms of this program to be successful in our small communities.

There is an EI requirement on local summer students that we want to hire through the service contract with the Department of Education, Culture and Employment. The GNWT provides us with $5 per hour and the agencies cover the request for regional pay for summer students. We are aware the GNWT may change the summer student program. It really doesn’t fit our communities in this time we need here. We have been working on this issue for a number of years and we seem to be hitting a brick wall on this issue. The response is that this is the GNWT’s requirement and it is a final

decision. There seems to be very little flexibility in terms of moving on this issue here. It has been quite a frustrating time for some of our agencies who want to hire summer students. A simple question for the government is: Why is there an EI requirement for local summer hire students here? It is a GNWT program. It is a Government of Canada program. Regardless of which government, more effort should be put in resolving this program’s problems for us in our communities.

Some of the organizations hired summer students last summer. Most of them buy clothes and some of them help out with some of the families that are in desperate need for helping out with the household needs. These students here help out with the families in the communities as some of the parents are unemployed. Again, Mr. Speaker, they have high unemployment in our communities and we need to help the GNWT to help with this local summer hire student requirement.

Mr. Speaker, the organizations in our communities are looking forward for this government to see if they would work with the federal government in terms of making the requirement for summer local hire students, especially with the restrictions on EI restrictions only are allowed to apply for these types of programs. It doesn’t make any sense for our summer students to be applying for it as they won’t be eligible. I will be having questions for the Minister on this issue.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Member for Nunakput, Mr. Jacobson.

Jackie Jacobson

Jackie Jacobson Nunakput

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I wish to devote my Member’s statement to the graduates of 2009 in my riding of Nunakput. The names I must go through today is long, but for that I am truly proud. At graduation time, communities do gather to celebrate accomplishments of our most important resource, our youth. They are our future. This year in Mangilaluk School: Ms. Tamara Elias, Kayla Felix, Ashley Jacobson, Shaylene

Lundrigan, Jocelyn Noksana, Brian Raddi, Ashley Teddy, Margaret Thrasher and Ryan Walker. Mr. Speaker, this young graduate student Ryan Walker never missed a day from K to 12 in the school.

---Applause

Just for me, going to school is a big thing but this young man is truly a really devoted student.

At Helen Kalvak School, this past last weekend I attended the graduation of Margaret Akoakhion, Patrick Akhiaktak, Violet Kimiksana, Steven Kuptana, Tyler Inuktalik and hello to Patrick Joss if you are watching, Patrick.

At Samuel Hearne, students this year are: Shayne Cockney from Tuk, Christine Esau from Sachs Harbour, Amber-Joy Gruben from Tuk and my daughter Chelsey Jacobson. I only have eight more kids in my house to push through school before they all graduate.

I also wish to add my admiration and appreciation for all the DEAs and education staff in the Beaufort-Delta and the Nunakput communities and the DEAs. Our graduation numbers are an example of that hard work, dedication and devotion of all these people in the communities is working. We all recognize increasing importance of education in ensuring the future of our people, our region and our Territory in this ever changing world. I am proud to be their MLA and I am proud to honour them today, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

Thank you, Mr. Jacobson. Before I go to the next order on the Order Paper, I would like to recognize in the visitor’s gallery the presence of the Official Languages Commissioner. Ms. Sarah Jerome is with us today.

---Applause

Item 4, reports of standing and special committees. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

Executive Summary

Introduction

Kevin A. Menicoche

Kevin A. Menicoche Nahendeh

Mr. Speaker, your Standing Committee on Government Operations is pleased to provide its Final Report on the Review of the Official Languages Act 2008-2009: Reality Check: Securing the Future for the Official Languages in the Northwest Territories and commends it to the House.

Section 35 of the Official Languages Act requires the Legislative Assembly or a special committee of the Assembly to conduct a review of the act “at the next session following December 31, 2007, and subsequently at the next session following each successive fifth anniversary of that date.” In accordance with this statutory requirement, the 16th Legislative Assembly adopted a motion on February 11, 2008, referring the review of the provisions and operation of the Official Languages

Act to the Standing Committee of Government Operations (the committee).

Background

The 14th Legislative Assembly initiated the Special

Committee on the Review of the Official Languages Act (SCROLA) in 2001. SCROLA tabled its comprehensive final report in 2003. The reports identified 65 recommendations and suggested implementation and investment schedules for these recommendations. The GNWT tabled a response to this report in 2003.

Amendments to the Official Languages Act were made during the last session of the 14th Legislative

Assembly. These changes introduced an Aboriginal Languages Revitalization Board, an Official Languages Board, and new roles for the Languages Commissioner and the Minister. The act requires a review after five years.

The SCROLA review was comprehensive and provided much background research into the socio-linguistic field of language preservation and revitalization. The findings of the Special Committee on the Review of the Official Languages Act are still valid and usable, allowing the scope of the this five-year review to focus specifically on the requirements as set out in the act itself.

The 2008-2009 review examined

whether progress has been made since the changes to the Official Language Act in 2003;

whether the government implements and

administers the act effectively and efficiently;

whether the objectives and goals of the

preamble are being met;

whether the changed roles and responsibilities of the Minister responsible for Official Languages improved the administration and implementation of the act;

whether the changed role of the Languages Commissioner as an ombudsperson improved the implementation of the act;

whether the new Official Languages Board has met its mandate to review the rights, status and use of official languages;

whether the Aboriginal Languages Revitalization Board has fulfilled its mandate to promote, maintain and revitalize aboriginal languages.

As a first step, the committee reviewed government reports, languages regimes of other Canadian and international jurisdictions and publications related to language endangerment and protection. This step was followed by extensive consultations with the public and stakeholders including aboriginal languages frontline workers and professionals and community language groups. The committee

provided further opportunities for public input including a questionnaire that was posted on the Assembly’s website and written submissions.

The committee scheduled witnesses for hearings during public committee meetings and invited the Minister responsible for Official Languages, the Languages Commissioner of the Northwest Territories, the Aboriginal Languages Revitalization Board and the Official Languages Board, the NWT Bureau of Statistics, the Federation Franco TeNOise and the NWT Literacy Council.

The committee tabled its “Interim Report on the Review of the Official Languages Act 2008-2009” in accordance with section 35(1) of the Official Languages Act to the Legislative Assembly of the Northwest Territories on October 16, 2009.

Mr. Speaker, I ask Mr. Hawkins, my deputy chair, to continue with the executive summary. Mahsi cho.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.

What Committee Heard From The Public, Stakeholders, And Witnesses

Robert Hawkins

Robert Hawkins Yellowknife Centre

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Chairman Menicoche. People are concerned about the dire situation of the aboriginal languages in the Northwest Territories. They worry about the survival of their languages and how they can be kept alive as languages of everyday use. There is a great awareness of the connection between language and cultural identity and that language loss has non-reversible impacts on the culture and identity of aboriginal peoples of the Northwest Territories.

The intergenerational gap of language and traditional knowledge is growing to an extent never seen before. Elders describe this gap as a total communication breakdown because their grandchildren no longer speak the same language. People are also disillusioned and frustrated with the lack of accountability for implementing government commitments relating to official languages.

The lack of interpreter/translators in the health and justice systems, the lack of adequate training for these interpreters and the need for ongoing terminology development and standardization in an ever changing modern environment was brought to the standing committee’s attention in every community.

Participants also identified short-comings within the education and school system, for example:

aboriginal languages curriculum development and implementation is slow and under-resourced;

providing 30 minutes of language instruction per day is insufficient, particularly when all other subjects are taught in English;

language instruction often does not extend

beyond elementary school grades;

lack of accountability to ensure language

funding for schools is used for language activities; and

insufficient support, resources and training for aboriginal language and cultural instructors.

This being said, people also acknowledged that some progress has been made, for example in the development of aboriginal language curricula and the start of some language nest programs. At the same time, participants repeatedly expressed that if government is serious about its role in aboriginal language revitalization, then the implementation of such programs needs to be accelerated and resourced adequately in order to counteract the language decline particularly among children and younger adults.

The messages the standing committee received with regard to community language funding were unified, loud and clear:

The major obstacle of the community language funding is that minimal and insufficient amounts do not match the needs for essential resources and programs that could contribute to the survival of the aboriginal languages.

There is no funding consistency.

There are too many interruptions in the

programs due to lack of funding.

Insufficient funding also prevents program

expansions for adult language and literacy learners and preschool programs. Such programs would be crucial for the revitalization of the aboriginal languages.

The allocation by regions and by language

groups does not consider needs.

Existing community language funding does not allow for year-round programming. The proposal-based year-to-year funding forces staff and community volunteers to spend their time on proposal writing in search of funding sources instead of on program delivery.

Information is difficult to find about funding

sources, criteria, and application processes. Participants stressed that this is of particular concern considering the expectations put on the communities by the Official Languages Act assigning them an essential role for language revitalization.

People are also disillusioned and frustrated with the lack of accountability for implementing government commitments relating to official languages.

Generally they found that the government is not fulfilling its obligations for aboriginal languages as prescribed by the Official Languages Act. There is no plan in place that supports central, regional or community government offices and agencies to provide services in the aboriginal languages. People also found that there is no accountability or reporting mechanism in place that assesses how the government provides these services.

Many aboriginal people said their languages are not treated equally with French and perceive this as a form of injustice towards First Nations. Other participants reminded the members of the committee that it was government policies of the past that contributed largely to the language loss experienced today. They believe that out of this past injustice comes a responsibility of today’s governments to fund and support the language communities to reverse this language shift.

Many participants were aware of the multitude of challenges the government is facing. What they are asking for is an honest commitment, a willingness to work collaboratively with community language stakeholders and sufficient resources to implement a comprehensive action plan. Several participants expressed the view that committing to such measures will determine in the near future if the aboriginal languages will have a chance to survive.

While some people had heard of the Official Languages Board and the Aboriginal Languages Revitalization Board, most did not understand their roles and mandates or why two language boards exist. Participants also did not know who the board representatives were and were generally critical about the boards’ capacity to develop ongoing relationships and communication with the community language groups, frontline workers and advocates. In addition, the appointment process for the boards, their dependent relationship with the Minister’s office, and the lack of powers and resources were questioned frequently. Participants also found the absence of any reporting mechanism or any publicly available information relating to the activities of the boards inconsistent with their mandate and intended purpose.

During the witness hearings, the Federation Franco-TeNOise representatives explained that they withdrew from the Official Languages Board as they deemed it ineffective for dealing with the needs and realities of the francophone community. Instead they suggest a “cooperation committee” between their organization and the Department of Education, Culture and Employment to deal directly and exclusively with issues relating to the francophone community. The Federation Franco-TeNOise also commented that government services offered in French are insufficient, that bilingual positions are not publicly identified. Generally the organizations agreed with the spirit

and intent of the act, but found that it has not been properly implemented.

There was a general concern about the role and functions of the Languages Commissioner: People did not know who the incumbent is or what the Languages Commissioner does. They did not know the role and responsibilities of the Commissioner had changed. Participants stated repeatedly that they had not seen the Commissioner in their communities nor did they know whether annual reports were published.

Several participants doubted that the Minister, who is also responsible for the government-wide implementation of the act, could effectively promote aboriginal languages. The language stakeholders also felt that the Minister did not connect with communities and is not seen to provide support for the language communities to achieve their goals of language preservation and revitalization.

In several communities the standing committee was also reminded of its role to hold government accountable for its commitments to language activities and its responsibilities under the act. Those participants who were aware of the 2003 SCROLA recommendations remarked on the lack of implementation and lack of transparency related to government commitments and activities. People asked the members of the standing committee to play a more active oversight and accountability role; for example, insisting on detailed implementation and progress reports.

Many participants in the public hearings expressed their disappointment and distrust in the effectiveness of the Official Languages Act. Some participants believed that since the last review and the amendments to the act in 2003, the situation for aboriginal languages has worsened; that the status of aboriginal languages as Official Languages of the NWT has become more and more meaningless. People have also lost faith in the review process.

Many participants expressed their disagreement with the status of French being equal to English in the official languages legislation of the NWT. It is perceived by many who participated in the review process that because aboriginal languages have less protection and rights, there has been unfair treatment. The main concern was that this translates directly into less funding for programs, services, and support for the communities. Several participants suggested that the official status for aboriginal languages should be no less than that for French.

Mr. Speaker, at this time I would now like to pass the reading of the report on to my colleague, Mr. Glen Abernethy, MLA for Great Slave.

The Speaker

The Speaker Paul Delorey

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The honourable Minister for Great Slave, Mr. Abernethy.

Research And Analysis

Implementation Of The SCROLA Recommendations

Glen Abernethy

Glen Abernethy Great Slave

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Some Hon. Members

Oooh…

---Laughter

Glen Abernethy

Glen Abernethy Great Slave

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The committee looked at what progress has been made since the Special Committee on the Official Languages Act review (SCROLA). One of SCROLA’s intentions was to develop a Northwest Territories’ language revitalization framework. With this in mind, SCROLA’s recommendations were structured to support such a framework. The recommendations address legislation and policy, management, financing, service delivery, human resource development, language research and development, education, promotion, and media and technology. The Government of the Northwest Territories tabled its response at the dawn of the 14th Legislative Assembly in 2003. Bear with me, I

am losing my voice.

The following section provides an overview of the recommendations, and highlights the committee’s most important findings on the progress of their implementation.

Strengthening Legislation And Policy (Section A Of The Recommendations)

The Official Languages Act was amended

following the SCROLA recommendations. Amendments included the recognition of collective aboriginal language rights in the preamble, the important role of language communities in preserving and developing their own languages, and the changed roles of the Minister and Languages Commissioner.

Government institution regulations were

established to clarify which government boards, agencies, corporations and so forth are bound by the provisions of the Official Languages Act.

Contrary to the SCROLA recommendation to establish one Aboriginal Languages Board, the GNWT introduced the Official Languages Board and the Aboriginal Languages Revitalization Board (the languages boards). The GNWT established regulations to create the two languages boards. These regulations only address the appointment process and the terms of the appointments, and not the terms of reference or consultation functions of the boards.

Improvement of Management and Accountability (Section B Of The Recommendations)

SCROLA had hoped that an empowered

Official Languages Secretariat directly

reporting to the Minister would create and monitor a government-wide implementation plan and evaluation framework. The secretariat was to support the development of official languages regulations and policies, to provide operational support for the languages boards. In addition to its managerial and administrative functions related to various contribution agreements, and intergovernmental relations concerning languages.

The GNWT restructured the official languages division within the Department of Education, Culture and Employment, creating a direct reporting relationship to the deputy minister. The government did not add any resources to the division to address its expanded mandate.

To date, no implementation plan for the act, no evaluation framework, and no regulations or new policies addressing language services have been developed.

Effective and Adequate Financing (Section C Of The Recommendations)

SCROLA recommended that the GNWT

ensure all language funding to schools is actually used for language activities, that funding for the language initiatives indentified in the recommendations be put in place, and that maximized federal participation through the NWT-Canada contribution agreement be negotiated.

Very little progress has been made in this area. While some areas have seen funding increases, no comprehensive funding approach that would match the suggested initiatives has been created. This may be linked to the non-existence of an implementation plan.

Community language initiatives and even

departmental official languages funding continues to be provided on a year-to-year basis, increasing the difficulty for these organizations and institutions to make long-term plans and allowing continuity of their activities.

Enhance Service Delivery (Section D Of The Recommendations)

Little has been done to address these

SCROLA recommendations or the GNWT’s commitments in its response to these recommendations. There are no regulations or policies addressing “active offer”; nor are there any government-wide procedures and measures for tracking demand and service delivery in official languages.

Some progress has been made on addressing improvements for French service delivery: a single-window service centre pilot project for

French opened in Yellowknife in June 2008; and Education, Culture and Employment is working on a plan to improve French language services generally.

The GNWT has preliminary plans to phase in the establishment of a single-window service centre for aboriginal languages.

No public registry of interpreters/translators

has been made available. Instead, the official languages division continues to compile a contact list for interpreters/translators that is shared with government departments and institutions.

A certification process for aboriginal

interpreters/translators has still not been established. The GNWT actually put this renewal initiative on hold when it was discovered that there was a lack of qualified aboriginal evaluators. The GNWT hopes that it can revisit this initiative when more interpreters and translators have been trained. Excuse me.

Build Human Resources Capacity (Section E Of The Recommendations)

Progress on the reinstallation of interpreter/translator training is very slow. The Akaitcho language groups are presently offering a regional community-based training program. The GNWT supports this initiative through a pilot project that it hopes will be adaptable for other language groups.

Progress has been made on the Aboriginal

Culture and Languages Instructor Program (ACLIP): the part-time one-year certificate program delivered has been expanded to a two-year diploma program delivered full time. This new diploma program is currently being delivered for the first time in the Taicho region.

The committee found that the GNWT does not lend sufficient support to build the human resources capacity for professions related to official languages. This is a concern, as the success of revitalization efforts will also depend on the availability of qualified language professionals like teachers, instructors and interpreter/translators.

Support Research And Development For Official Languages (Section F

Of The

Recommendations)

The committee is particularly concerned that the GNWT has not addressed the SCROLA’s recommendations relating to terminology development. The urgent need for terminology development was identified by all stakeholders in all regions and languages. These needs, along with proposed actions and solutions, have repeatedly been brought to the government’s attention. Its inaction has

contributed to the frustration expressed by language stakeholders to the committee during the consultation process.

Furthermore, the importance of terminology

development for language survival and revitalization has been well documented. Failure to support and advance terminology development has devastating consequences for languages already under threat.

It should be noted that in its response to the SCROLA recommendations, the GNWT suggested that much of this work should be conducted by the Aboriginal Languages Revitalization Board. The committee questions whether the Aboriginal Languages Revitalization Board is sufficiently resourced and adequately supported for this undertaking.

Similarly, the GNWT did not address a

recommendation to establish a coordinated cataloguing and distribution process for aboriginal language resource materials.

Increase And Improve Aboriginal Languages Education (Section G Of The Recommendations)

The Minister of Education, Culture and

Employment issued a directive to the divisional education councils and the divisional education authorities in 2004, setting minimal standards for aboriginal language instruction (30 minutes per day and 90 hours per school year) outlining funding and reporting requirements. While this has led to some improvements of aboriginal language programming in the school system, there are still concerns that the funding is not always used for language activities, and that 30 minutes of language instruction is insufficient to impact language revitalization in any meaningful way.

The committee was glad to find that support for language nest programs improved. Presently the GNWT provides funding to 18 registered early childhood facilities for language nest programs. However, the committee was concerned that in recent years this funding has been reduced.

The committee also saw the improvements to the regional delivery of the Teacher Education Program and the Aboriginal Language and Cultural Instructor Program as steps in the right direction.

There is no overall strategic aboriginal

languages education plan that would link the different activities and allow for the measurement of successes and overall progress.

Promote Official Languages (Section H Of The Recommendations)

The GNWT did not issue a progress report on the implementation of its commitments for action to the SCROLA recommendations.

The GNWT provides ongoing support to the French language community for their cultural activities supporting French.

The government and the Minister responsible for Official Languages have not addressed any of the recommendations concerning the promotion of aboriginal languages

The committee questions whether this inaction means that the responsibilities for language promotion are not a good fit with the Minister’s role and mandate.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to pass on the continued reading of the executive summary to Mr. Jacobson. Thank you.