What we Heard Report: Consultations on the Implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act — October 16, 2020 — British Columbia

Context

The Government of Canada is undertaking a variety of consultation activities across Canada on the implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act, with a focus on the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages and Directors and the Indigenous Languages Funding Model.

These consultation sessions will help the Minister of Canadian Heritage make recommendations to the Governor in Council for the appointment of a Commissioner of Indigenous Languages and up to three Directors. Feedback from these sessions will also inform the development of the Indigenous Languages Funding Model.

For further details and information about the Indigenous Languages Act and current consultations, we invite you to read our Discussion guide: Consultations and Engagement on the Implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act.

A summary of the most recent consultation session is provided below. The summary is not a complete account of the discussions. Instead, it highlights the key themes that emerged from this consultation session. Please visit the online consultation portal and review the discussion guide to share your own and/or additional views.

Participants Overall Comments and Suggestions

Office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages

The following considerations and themes were raised during the discussion on the Office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages:

Roles and Responsibilities:

Participants indicated that it was important that the Office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages:

• Prioritize the critical work of revitalizing Indigenous languages - this focus shouldn’t be overtaken by other responsibilities such as the dispute resolution function;
• Establish critical partnerships with provinces and territories;
• Work to assemble and share a repository of best practices and research, both domestically and internationally, in the area of Indigenous language revitalization; and,
• Support Indigenous-led and community-driven research.

Plans and Priorities and Early Successes - Office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages:

Participants suggested that the Office focus immediately on:

• Developing a national strategic plan and benchmarking for the work ahead (many participants stressed the importance of co-developing such a plan with Indigenous Peoples and involving provinces and territories while others thought that regional plans or plans based on language groups, might be better); and,
• Gathering an accurate assessment of the state of Indigenous languages, and ensuring the starting point is correct (ensure data accuracy around Indigenous languages - number of languages, dialects, levels of fluency).

Many participants commented on the fact that time is of the essence when it comes to Indigenous language revitalization - many languages are in critical danger, and fluent speakers, mostly Elders, are being lost.

Selection of a Commissioner and Directors:

Participants proposed that appointees to the Office of the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages should be:

• Able to adequately represent British Columbia, in recognition and understanding of the diversity within the province, the number of First Nations, and the realities of many remote and isolated communities (many participants thought that the Commissioner, or at least one Director, should be from British Columbia);
• Indigenous, with experience in the work of Indigenous language revitalization;
• Ready to get to work right away and have a solid understanding of Indigenous languages and language groups and their current state;
• Aware that restoring Indigenous languages is connected to restoring a way of life; and,
• Capable of acting as strong advocates.

Indigenous Languages Funding Model

The following considerations and themes were raised during the discussion on the proposed Indigenous Languages Funding Model:

Language Vitality and Governance Capacity:

According to participants, the Indigenous Languages Funding Model should:

• Reflect needs rather than population - per capita-based distribution does not work for smaller communities; and
• Prioritize the needs of critically endangered Indigenous languages.

Some participants suggested that a Nation-based approach to funding could work. Many participants also stated that current funding is nowhere near adequate for the work that lies ahead.

What to Fund:

According to participants, the funding model should reflect a holistic approach to language revitalization work and be flexible enough to support community language plans, culture and land-based programming. The model should support building capacity at the Nation level individually and for Nations to support each other in their efforts.

Many participants also said that focusing on the next generation of speakers is key, while others spoke about the importance of establishing immersion programs and of supporting and compensating fluent speakers adequately.

Funding Process:

According to participants, the funding process should ensure that funding is stable and long-term. Some participants suggested that 10-year funding agreements would enable proper planning and implementation.

The discussion on funding process also included a number of comments about who should receive funding. Many participants stated that funding should flow directly to communities and to local practitioners working on Indigenous language revitalization, not to political or governing bodies or to institutions. Others thought that funding decisions should be Nation-driven and that communities should ultimately decide if funding ought to flow to ally institutions.

Defining and Measuring Success:

Participants expressed that markers of success could include the following:

• Increased fluency;
• Funding that is equitable to English or French-language education;
• Hearing Indigenous languages spoken more in the community; and
• Indigenous people being proud of who they are and proud of learning and speaking their languages, without fear or shame.

Many participants indicated that the goal is to have languages that are fully alive. Others drew a link between language revitalization and wellness, and that healthy languages will help heal people and the earth.