Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With my Member's statement today, this was no way, shape, or form about "us against them." It's about equity. Our Indigenous public servants are being told to answer phones, while working for the GNWT, in English and French. This has been in effect since 2015, when it was rolled out, a language completely foreign to them, at the same time not allowing for active offers in their own languages. Why are we as a government forcing Indigenous public servants to answer phones in a language that is not theirs? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just to clarify something right off the bat, if an Indigenous employee or any employee wants to make an active offer in any one of our Indigenous languages, they are not only allowed to, I encourage them to. I think we need more of that. There is no policy saying that people cannot make active offers in their own languages. In case there is any question within the departments, the Minister is telling them right now that it is allowed and that it is encouraged.
---Applause
The reason that these active offers are being made is that Section 11(1) of the Official Languages Act requires service in English and French, and active offers will let citizens know that they can receive that service. It is required in head and central offices, as well as in Hay River, Inuvik, Yellowknife, and Fort Smith, where the majority of the francophone population is. When you go to an office, there is often signage. When you call somewhere, you can't see that there is signage, and so that's why that active offer is made in French. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you to the Minister for that. I am aware of the training and the videos that went along with it, and there was never any part of saying that you could do it in another language. Will the Minister review whatever policy or whatever could be put in place to make sure that our Indigenous public service who answer phones in French and English be removed or be informed that, if they want, they don't have to, they can answer in one of their own languages, for instance?
Just to be clear, an Indigenous language can be added onto the English and French. We still need the English and French as part of the active service. It was my understanding that, during this active offer training, employees were encouraged to answer in any Indigenous language they are able to speak. I will look into that, and I will ensure that that is actually happening because the Member has different experiences or a different understanding of that. I will double check and I will get back to the Member.
The official languages guidelines are currently being updated by the Indigenous Languages and Education Secretariat in ECE. I believe they were last updated in 1997, and so this is part of the Indigenous Languages Action Plan. Through that update, we are going to ensure that these aren't questions anymore, that everyone knows these, because that's the direction we want to move in.
I get what the Minister is saying, but if I wanted to answer the phone as an Indigenous person in my government office and say, "Hello, drin gwiinzii" or "uvlaami," why would I have to say it in French if I'm saying it in two different languages? If a French person needs a service in my community, if a Muslim person, a Somalian person needs language, there is the translation service provided. They can request it. What I'm asking is: why do we have to make Indigenous people have to say it in French? What's wrong with saying it in their own language? It's another language. It's giving an active offer, saying we can provide service in another language.
There is nothing wrong with saying it in an Indigenous language, but the fact is that GNWT is a public government and Canada is a bilingual nation. Until Indigenous governments take over certain services and service delivery, those are the laws that we have to follow.
I don't think that answering in one language denigrates or reduces the value of another language. I was talking with my spouse about this the other day. She was saying her granny spoke many languages, and when I think back, my grandpa spoke many languages. He was from Fort Chipewyan. He spoke English, French, Chipewyan, Cree. I don't think there is anything wrong with offering service in a number of different languages. I think it's something that we can all strive for as opposed to resist.
Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary. Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess what I'm saying is that our policies have no teeth. Our Indigenous languages have no teeth. To say it's important, we have to add the French in. We don't have to add the Inuktun in. We don't have to add the Chipewyan in. We don't have to add all these other ones, but we have to add the French in. This is what I'm saying: why? I get it that, but again, it's not an "us against them." If we're saying it in whatever, we're saying hello, if somebody needs a service, but why? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The direction we're moving in is that, if you are answering a phone in a government office in a region where there is a number of Chipewyan speakers, then my hope is that, in the coming years, there will be a requirement to answer in that Indigenous language. Wherever there are sufficient numbers of speakers, I hope that there will be a requirement to answer in that language the same way there is with French in those four communities, where there is a significant number of French speakers.
We are definitely moving in the direction that the Member is talking about. ECE has the French Language Secretariat and the Indigenous Languages and Education Secretariat, and those two groups work very well together. The French language in the territory is strong. There is a number of French speakers, both natural-born French speakers and people who come through the immersion program. In response to that, the GNWT has really developed a robust French-language service regime in the territory. That is what we aspire to have, or that's how we want the Indigenous languages to be delivered in the future, as well. The two languages are working together. There is no "us against them." I know the Member points it out, but I just wanted to point it out myself because it's often seen as "us against them." It's a red herring. It seems to be taking money away, funds away, something away from Indigenous languages when we deliver services in French, but that's not the case. The case is to expand all languages, all official languages. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Great Slave.
