Weyt-k, bonjour, and good afternoon, Madam Chair.

I am Francyne Joe, president of the Native Women's Association of Canada.

I would like to begin by acknowledging that we are gathered on the Algonquin Anishinaabeg people's traditional and unceded territory.

Since 1974, the Native Women's Association has been the chosen national representative of grassroots indigenous women, girls and gender-diverse people. We represent first nations on reserve, off reserve, whether status, non-status, or disenfranchised, and Métis and Inuit. We defend their rights and we advocate for those voices that are not heard.

Today I sit before the House of Commons to outline NWAC's significant concerns about Bill C-91, an act respecting indigenous languages.

The Minister of Heritage and Multiculturalism, Pablo Rodriguez, tabled Bill C-91 without meaningfully consulting NWAC. The co-development process excluded us.

NWAC supports the Government of Canada's efforts to preserve, promote and revitalize first nations, Métis and Inuit languages, and agrees that Bill C-91 is essential. However, NWAC cannot fully support it without major revisions to address these disparities.

First, Bill C-91 does not include a culturally relevant gender-based lens. Intersectional lenses are imperative to every government policy and legislative decision. It reveals the distinct and unique impacts that legislation will have on marginalized and vulnerable groups, especially indigenous women. This is essential to meeting their needs and implementing effective legislation.

Additionally, this must be led by indigenous women. We are the keepers of traditions, of cultures, of languages. We are the hearts of the communities, and we are the mothers teaching our children how to communicate. Indigenous women must be the foundations of all language revitalization efforts, with full inclusion.

NWAC strongly recommends that the government meaningfully consult with us to apply culturally relevant, gender-based analysis and hear the concerns and solutions that indigenous women, girls and gender-diverse people have to contribute.

Second, Bill C-91 does not take a distinctions-based approach. You cannot treat the preservation of each language identically with a blanket approach, or it will fail. A distinctions-based approach considers how a specific policy, program, service, or piece of legislation will affect first nations, Métis and Inuit communities across Canada differently.

The act does not specify whether non-status indigenous women and their children have any language rights. It does not state how Métis people living all over Canada, not just in the west, will be represented and included. It does not take into consideration the needs and priorities of Inuit communities. While two-thirds of the Inuit population can speak Inuktitut, this number is steadily declining. NWAC recommends that before Bill C-91 can be passed, it must clearly outline how it will account for the distinct contexts, needs and priorities of first nations, Métis and Inuit communities with regard to language revitalization.

Third, the act must specify its legally binding commitment to provide adequate, sustainable and long-term funding for indigenous languages. Funding is one of the most substantial barriers to language revitalization.

On February 7, Mr. Virani stated, “over and over again in the consultations—that what we need is supports in terms of resources and what we need is stable, long-term, predictable funding.”

Outside of the preamble, the act does not specify that the government has legal obligations to create adequate, predictable, sustainable and long-term funding. This is not a question of determining a funding amount, but about distributing allocated funding enshrined in Bill C-91. NWAC recommends that before Bill C-91 is passed, it must clearly outline a legally binding commitment to provide adequate, sustainable and long-term funding.

Lastly, the act must specify its commitment to Jordan's principle.

Jordan's principle is a child-first principle aiming to ensure that first nations children have access to all essential public services, regardless of jurisdiction. Language education is an essential public service for all indigenous children.

Currently, every indigenous language in Canada faces potential extinction. We are in an urgent state for language education. There cannot be any delay in services due to payment disputes within or between the federal and provincial governments, because we know that language education is fundamental to identity, culture and the history of our nations. Language education is an essential service, yet indigenous languages ae not treated as essential services. Would anyone deny language services for the cultural survival of French Canadians?

NWAC recommends that before being passed, Bill C-91 must clearly outline its commitment to Jordan's principle, as indigenous languages must be treated as an essential service.

Thank you, and kukstemc.

Transcript

Discussions (0)