1 Standing Committee on Legislation Hearings on Bill 25, an Act To

Standing Committee on Legislation ᒪᓕᒐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ Hearings on Bill 25, An Act to Amend the ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓂᖏᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᖁᓪᓗᒍ Education Act and the Inuit Language ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ Protection Act ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓ ᓴᐳᒻᒥᔭᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ Iqaluit, Nunavut ᐃᖃᓗᐃᑦ, ᓄᓇᕗᑦ November 26, 2019 ᓄᕕᐱᕆ 26, 2019

Members Present: ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑏᑦ ᐅᐸᒃᑐᑦ: Tony Akoak ᑑᓂ ᐋᖁᐊᖅ Pat Angnakak ᐹᑦ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ Joelie Kaernerk ᔪᐃᓕ ᖃᐃᕐᓂᖅ Mila Kamingoak ᒦᓚ ᖃᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ Pauloosie Keyootak ᐸᐅᓗᓯ ᕿᔪᒃᑖᖅ Adam Lightstone ᐋᑕᒻ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ John Main, Chair ᐋᕐᓗᒃ ᒪᐃᓐ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ Margaret Nakashuk ᓯᒥᐅᓐ ᒥᑭᓐᖑᐊᖅ David Qamaniq ᒫᒡᒍᓚ ᓇᑲᓱᒃ Emiliano Qirngnuq ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ Paul Quassa ᐃᒥᓕᐊᓄ ᕿᓐᖑᖅ Allan Rumbolt ᐹᓪ ᖁᐊᓴ Cathy Towtongie, Co-Chair ᐋᓚᓐ ᕋᒻᐴᑦ ᖄᑕᓂ ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᐅᖃᑕᐅᔪᖅ

Staff Members: ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ: Michael Chandler ᒪᐃᑯᓪ ᓵᓐᑐᓗ Stephen Innuksuk ᓯᑏᕙᓐ ᐃᓄᒃᓱᒃ Siobhan Moss ᓯᕚᓐ ᒫᔅ

Interpreters: ᑐᓵᔩᑦ: Lisa Ipeelee ᓖᓴ ᐊᐃᐱᓕ Andrew Dialla ᐋᓐᑐᓘ ᑎᐊᓚ Attima Hadlari ᐊᑏᒪ ᕼᐊᑦᓚᕆ Allan Maghagak ᐋᓚᓐ ᒪᒃᕼᐊᒐᒃ Philip Paneak ᐱᓕᑉ ᐸᓂᐊᖅ Blandina Tulugarjuk ᐸᓚᓐᑏᓇ ᑐᓗᒑᕐᔪᒃ

Witnesses: Melissa Alexander, Manager of Planning, ᐊᐱᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᔪᑦ: Reporting and Evaluation, Department of ᒪᓕᓴ ᐋᓕᒃᓵᓐᑐ, ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨ ᐸᕐᓇᓐᓂᕐᒧᑦ, Education ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐅᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ, Jack Ameralik, Vice-Chairman, Gjoa Haven ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ District Education Authority ᔮᒃ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᐅᑉ ᑐᓪᓕᐊ, ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ James Arreak, Interim Executive Director, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ Coalition of Nunavut District Education ᔭᐃᒥᓯ ᐋᕆᐊᒃ, ᑐᑭᒧᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᔨᒻᒪᕆᐅᑲᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᖅ, Authorities ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᕘᒥ

Okalik Eegeesiak, Board Member, Iqaluit ᐅᑲᓕᖅ ᐃᔨᑦᓯᐊᖅ, ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐅᖃᑕᐅᔪᖅ, ᐃᖃᓗᓐᓂ District Education Authority ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ John Fanjoy, President, Nunavut Teachers ᔮᓐ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ, ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ, ᓄᓇᕗᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ Association ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑦ Amy Hodgers, Member Services ᐊᐃᒥ ᕼᐋᔾᔪᔅ, ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐱᔨᑦᑎᕈᑎᖏᓐᓄᑦ Administrator and Assistant Executive ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑐᑭᒧᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᔨᒻᒪᕆᐅᑉ Director, Nunavut Teachers Association ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᖓ, ᓄᓇᕗᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑦ Lori Idlout, Coalition of Nunavut District ᓗᐊᕆ ᐃᓪᓚᐅᖅ, ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᖏᑦ Education Authorities, Legal Counsel, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᕘᒥ, ᒪᓕᒐᓕᕆᔨ, Crawford Law Office ᑯᕌᕗᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᓪᓚᕝᕕᖓ David Joanasie, Minister of Education ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒥᓂᔅᑕ Jedidah Merkosak, Chairperson, Coalition of ᔩᑎᑕ ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓯᖅ, ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᖏᑦ Nunavut District Education Authorities ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᕘᒥ Kathy Okpik, Deputy Minister of Education ᑳᑎ ᐅᒃᐱᒃ, ᒥᓂᔅᑕᐅᑉ ᑐᓪᓕᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ Doug Workman, Chairperson, Iqaluit District ᑕᒡ ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ, ᐃᖃᓗᓐᓂ Education Authority ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ

>>Committee commenced at 9:01 >>ᑲᑎᒪᓯᒋᐊᖅᑐᑦ 9:01ᒧᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ Chairman (Mr. Main)(interpretation): Good morning. We are going to resume our meeting ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ (ᒪᐃᓐ): ᐅᑉᓛᑦᓯᐊᖅ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐊᓛᖑᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᓕᐅᕐᓂᐅᑉ ᒥᒃᓵᓄᑦ this morning with the Standing Committee on ᑲᑎᒪᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓂᐊᓕᕐᒥᒐᑉᑕ ᐅᑉᓛᖑᔪᖅ. ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥᒃ Legislation. First of all, Mr. Quassa, can you ᒥᔅᑕ ᖁᐊᓴ ᑐᒃᓯᐊᕐᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑎᑦᑑᓪᓗᐊᖅᐱᑎᒍᑦ. say the opening prayer, please. Thank you. ᒪ’ᓇ.

>>Prayer >>ᑐᒃᓯᐊᖅᑐᑦ

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. ᒪ’ᓇ ᖁᐊᓴ. ᑐᒃᓯᐊᕐᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᒐᕕᑦ. Quassa, for opening our meeting with a prayer. ᑕᐃᒪ ᐃᑉᐸᒃᓴᖅ ᐅᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᓯᒐᑉᑕ. ᑕᐃᒪ ᐃᑉᐸᒃᓴᖅ ᑐᓴᕐᕕᖃᓚᐅᖅᖢᑕ We are here this week to discuss Bill 25. ᒥᓂᔅᑕᕆᔭᐅᔪᒥᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ Yesterday we heard from the Minister of ᑐᓴᕐᕕᒋᖅᑳᓚᐅᖅᖢᑎᒍ ᑭᖑᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ Education and shortly after that Nunavut ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒋᐊᖅᑐᖅᓯᒪᓚᐅᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ Tunngavik Incorporated made their ᐅᑯᐊ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᐊᓛᑦ presentation, as well as the coalition of district ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᖏᑦ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᓕᓚᐅᖅᖢᑎᒡᓗ education authorities, and then we asked them ᐊᐱᖅᕼᐅᖅᑕᖅᑑᓪᓗᐊᓕᓚᐅᕋᑦᑎᒍᑦ. ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒃᓴᓖᑦ questions. There are still questions and we ᑕᒪᔾᔭᐅᖕᒪᑕ ᓱᓕ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑲᔪᓯᓂᐊᕐᒪᑦ. ᐅᑯᐊᓗ will continue with that. After we complete ᐊᐱᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᕌᓂᒃᐸᑕ ᑭᖑᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᐅᑯᐊ this group, we are going to hear from the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᓯᔩᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ, ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ teachers association this morning. Our ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑐᑦ ᑕᕝᕗᓐᖓᖅᓯᒪᓂᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐅᑉᓛᖅ. colleague, Ms. Angnakak, still had questions ᐃᑉᐸᒃᓴᖅ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒃᓴᖃᐅᓚᐅᕐᒪᑦ ᓱᓕ yesterday, so we will start with her this ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐅᖃᑎᕗᑦ. ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ. ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑎᑦᓯᓂᐊᕐᒪᑦ morning. Ms. Angnakak. ᐅᑉᓛᖅ.

Ms. Angnakak (interpretation): Thank you. ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ.

Good morning. I want to ask this other ᐅᓪᓛᒃᑯᑦ. ᐊᐱᕆᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᓕᕐᒥᔪᖓ ᐆᒥᖓ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) question. (interpretation ends) In the chapter ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓚᖓᓐᓂᒃ ᑎᑎᕋᖁᑎᒋᔭᕐᓂᒃ of your submission which focused on the ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒦᓚᐅᕋᔅᓯᒎᖅ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᐊᕝᕗᕋᖅᑐᓯ ᐃᓛᒃ Education Act consultations that they did in ᓄᐊᑦᑎᓪᓗᓯᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᖃᓚᐅᕐᒥᒐᔅᓯ the communities, you note one specific ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᖃᖁᔨᓪᓗᓯ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᑦ suggestion that the Minister of Education ᒥᓂᔅᑕᖓ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᖃᖁᓪᓗᓯ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᒍᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎᒃ should have an advisory committee that is ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ. ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓚᖓᓐᓂ ᒪᓕᒐᐅᔫᑉ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ made of community advisors. Subpart 8 of ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᐅᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ ᓯᕕᑐᔪᓂᒃ Bill 25 proposes an amendment to section 190 ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓂᒃ ᐸᕐᓇᖃᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ of the Act whereby the coalition would assist ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᕐᒨᖓᔪᓄᑦ. ᐃᒃᐱᒍᓱᒃᐲᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ the Minister in long-term planning for the ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᒃᓴᐅᒐᔭᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᐃᓗᑎᒃ public education system. Do you feel that the ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᖑᓕᕐᓂᖅᐸᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᐅᔪᖔᑦ advisory committee of the community ᓴᓂᐊᓂ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᖁᓵᖅ. advisors would be better able to assist the Minister in long-term planning than the coalition would? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. Merkosak. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ.

Ms. Merkosak (interpretation): Thank you, ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᕆᔭᐅᔫᖅ. Mr. Chairman. The (interpretation ends) ᒪᓕᒐᕐᓂᐊᖅᑎᐅᑉ ᑭᐅᓂᐊᖅᑕᖓ ᑖᓐᓇ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. lawyer (interpretation) will respond to that question. Thank you.

ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐃᓪᓚᐅᖅ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. Idlout.

Ms. Idlout (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. ᐃᓪᓚᐅᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ Chairman. I also thank you for the question. ᐊᐱᕆᒐᕕᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᒪᕐᕉᒃ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑑᖕᒪᑕ. What you’re asking are two different things.

Our presentation which we submitted included a request from a community who ᐅᑯᐊ ᐅᓂᒃᑲᐅᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑕᕗᑦ wanted to establish a committee, as an ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑐᖃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᒥᒃ example, to advocate on its behalf or as a ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᑎᖁᔨᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᓲᕐᓗᖃᐃ reminder to government that communities had ᐊᔭᐅᖅᑐᐃᓐᖑᐊᖑᔭᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ concerns that needed to be heard. It was ᐃᖅᑲᐃᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᐅᔭᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᓂᒃ recognized by some DEAs that the officials of ᑐᓵᔪᓐᓇᖁᔭᐅᓪᓗᓂ. ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓄᑦ the department overrode the communities’ ᐃᓕᑕᕆᔭᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑰᕐᓂᕐᒪᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑯᓗᖏᑦ point of view due to the weight placed on ᐊᒃᓱᐊᓗᒃ ᓴᓐᖏᔪᒥᒃ ᓂᐱᖃᕐᒪᑕ. their perspectives. They wanted local ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᓂᒃᑕᐅᖅ ᑐᓴᖃᑦᑕᖁᔭᐅᓪᓗᓂ ᑖᓐᓇ concerns to be weighted the same and the ᒪᓕᒐᒨᖁᔭᐅᓪᓗᓂ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓚᐅᕐᒪᑦ. need to include it within the proposed legislation.

The question you raised with respect to Bill ᐅᕙᓂ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᐃᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐃᓗᐊᓃᑦᑐᖅ 25 is a little bit different as well, but at least if ᐊᔾᔨᒋᓐᖏᐊᕐᔪᒃᑭᓪᓗᓂᐅᒃ ᐊᒃᓱᓪᓘᓐᓃᖅᑲᐃ a better explanation was provided, it would ᑐᑭᓯᑎᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᕈᑦᑕ ᖃᓄᖅ allow us to understand how this aspect would ᓴᖅᑭᔮᖅᑎᑕᐅᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᕋᔭᕐᒪᖔᑦ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᕆᔭᐅᔪᖅ be publicized, especially how the Minister of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ Education would deal with issues that are ᑲᔪᓯᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᓂᒃ. forwarded by the local DEA. Obviously it is ᓲᖃᐃᒻᒪᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᓐᖏᐊᓂᖕᒪᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᒥᖕᓂᒃ quite clear that the Minister has to listen to his ᓈᓚᒋᐊᓕᒃ. ᖃᓄᕐᓕ ᑲᔪᓯᑎᑦᑎᒐᔭᖅᐸ ᓴᖅᑭᔮᖅᑐᓂᒃ officials. How would the Minister put forward ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᓈᓚᖕᓂᖓᓐᓂᒃ. an initiative submitted by the community ᑭᐅᑦᑎᐊᖅᐸᕋᖃᐃ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. showing his readiness to listen to community concerns? I hope that my response was adequate. Thank you.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. It will ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᑭᐅᑦᓯᐊᕐᒪᖔᒍ ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ be up to Ms. Angnakak to decide if it was an ᐃᓱᒪᖅᓱᕐᓂᐊᕐᒥᔫᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᑭᐅᑦᓯᐊᕐᒪᖔᑦ ᐃᓛᒃ adequate response or not. It’s not up to me. ᐅᕙᖓᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐋᕆᐊᒃ. Mr. Arreak.

Mr. Arreak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With respect to the question directed to us, we have contemplated the ᐋᕆᐊᒃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑕᐅᔪᖅ issues related to it somewhat, especially how ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᒋᓯᒪᔭᕗᑦ ᐃᓚᖓᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ it would work within a school, to try to ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᐹᓪᓕᕋᓱᒡᓗᑎᒃ, ᐸᕐᓇᒋᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᑕ improve the situation and whether it would ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᓂᖓᓂ 190−ᒥ. ᑖᓐᓇ require a formal plan as per the requirements ᑕᑯᓇᒃᖢᑎᒍᑦ ᐃᓗᓕᖃᕐᒪᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ of (interpretation ends) section 190. ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐊᓯᔾᔩᒋᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ (interpretation) In studying that section, it ᐸᕐᓇᖕᓂᖃᕆᐊᖃᖅᖢᓂᓗ ᐃᓗᓕᖃᖅᖢᓂᓗ contains instructions on how changes can be ᐊᒥᓱᑲᓪᓚᖕᓂᒃ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ made within our schools. This also requires ᐱᑦᑎᐊᕆᐊᖃᖅᐸᑦ ᖃᓄᕐᓗ ᑕᐃᒫᒐᓚᒃ ᐃᓗᓕᖃᐅᕐᒪᑦ planning to that end and includes a number of ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᐅᒐᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓚᖓᓂᒃ issues, such as acceptable behaviour within ᐸᕐᓇᑯᑖᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᖃᕋᓱᒋᔭᕗᓪᓕ ᐅᕙᒍᓪᓕ ᓇᖕᒥᓂᖅ the school. These would be incorporated into ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᒋᓯᒪᓪᓗᑎᒍᑦ. the plan. Based on our conceptualization, we believe it would take a comprehensive plan as we have modelled it.

We would have to plan and involve the DEAs on how we can provide further support as a ᐸᕐᓇᒋᐊᖃᕋᔭᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ coalition. It states that we, the coalition, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓃᑦᑐᐃᑦ would have to provide the training or ᐃᑲᔪᕈᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑦᑎᒍ. ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᑦ ᐅᕙᒍᑦ orientation to the DEAs in the communities, ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑐᒍᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᒋᐊᖃᕋᔭᕋᑦᑕ. and this is what would be included, especially ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᒍᑦᑕ ᖃᓄᖅ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ when looking at supporting our students ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ within that school to improve their education. ᐃᓗᓕᖃᕋᔭᖅᑐᖅ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑯᓗᐃᑦ That is my response to you, Mr. Chairman, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑕ. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᑭᐅᕙᒋᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ.

and I give the floor back to you. Thank you. ᐃᓕᖕᓄᑦ ᐅᑎᖅᑎᑉᐸᕋ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ. Angnakak.

Ms. Angnakak: Thank you. (interpretation) Thank you for responding to me. Thank you. ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᑭᐅᒐᕕᓐᖓ. ᑭᐅᒐᕕᓐᖓ.

(interpretation ends) I’ll ask one more question. With respect to Bill 25’s proposed (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐊᐱᕆᓚᐅᕐᒥᓚᖓ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ ᓱᓕ. ᑖᓐᓇ amendments to inclusive education in the ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᖁᔭᐅᓂᖓ legislation, what is the coalition’s position ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᐃᓚᐅᔪᓐᓇᐃᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᒪᕐᒥᓕᒫᑦ specifically regarding the role of DEAs in ᑖᓐᓇ ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ advocating on behalf of students? Thank you, ᐅᖃᐅᔾᔨᔨᐅᖕᒪᖔᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᒥᒃ, Mr. Chairman. ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᖁᔭᐅᓂᖓᓂᒃ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. Merkosak. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ.

Ms. Merkosak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. James will respond to the ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᔭᐃᒥᓯᐅᑉ ᑭᐅᓂᐊᖅᑕᖓ. question.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐋᕆᐊᒃ. Arreak.

Mr. Arreak (interpretation): Thank you to the member asking that question. ᐋᕆᐊᒃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᑖᔅᓱᒧᖓ ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒧᑦ.

We must advocate for parents of students ᑖᓐᓇ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᒋᐊᖃᓪᓚᑦᑖᕋᑦᑕ, ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ whenever problems arise within the schools, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᖁᑎᒥᓂᒃ ᐃᓛᒃ ᕿᑐᕐᖓᒥᓂᒃ as their voices must also be heard. We, as the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᓕᕌᖓᑕ coalition, have planned out this advocacy role ᓂᐱᖃᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑕ. ᐅᕙᒍᓪᓕ ᐸᕐᓇᒃᓯᒪᔪᒍᑦ on behalf of the parents of the students. The ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ, (interpretation ends) DEAs (interpretation) ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᓐᓂᒃ. already have fairly full workloads dealing ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ with school operations. When they aren’t ᐱᔭᒃᓴᖃᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᓂᒃ. involved directly, parents start submitting ᐱᖃᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓃᕌᖓᑕ ᓂᓪᓕᐊᓲᖑᖕᒪᑕ concerns directly to the next level, and they ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐊᖅᑯᑎᖃᓲᖑᓪᓗᑎᒃ tend to follow the decision-making ladder. ᐃᓛᓐᓂᒃᑯᑦ.

However, it creates problems as well in terms of our advocacy, particularly to a parent who feels that the school administration has ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᕈᑎᖃᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑦ already made the decision, and they feel ᐅᕙᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ. unwelcomed when submitting disagreements ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒃᑑᔮᖃᑦᑕᖏᒻᒪᑕ

with the school. The parents are made to feel ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᑦ unwelcomed whenever a problem arises with ᑎᑭᒃᑳᖓᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑯᓗᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ their child who is a student. To use the ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᕈᑎᖃᓕᕌᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕋᓱᒃᖢᓂ. ᑖᓐᓇ (interpretation ends) principal (interpretation) ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖓ ᐆᒃᑑᑎᒋᓗᒍ as an example, if they are unaware of the ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓐᖏᓗᐊᖅᐸᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᑭᐊᖅ, circumstances or of the community, or ᑕᐃᒫᒐᓚᒃ ᑐᑭᓯᐅᒪᑦᑎᐊᓐᖏᓗᐊᕐᓂᖅᐸᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ whichever, if they cannot understand the ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔫᑉ ᓲᕐᓗ complaint, it can create a barrier to the parent ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᕈᑎᒋᔭᖓᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ, who is trying to resolve the problem, ᓲᕐᓗ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒍᓐᓇᖏᑉᐸᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ especially when they are unilingual and can’t ᐊᒡᕕᕈᑎᐊᓘᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᒧᑦ. speak English. This is the biggest obstacle that unilingual parents face.

We have to review whether or not (interpretation ends) inclusive education ᑖᓐᓇ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐊᑕᖐᔭᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ (interpretation) has been the focus of the (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᐱᖃᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᕋᓱᖕᒪᖔᑕ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ school administration, so we have to create a ᐊᖅᑯᓯᐅᕆᐊᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ path in some cases. Our local (interpretation ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ends) DEAs (interpretation) must also create a ᐊᖅᑯᓯᐅᕆᒋᐊᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᓂᓪᓕᖅᑎᑎᓪᓗᑎᒃ path forward when they allow parents to voice ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᓂᐱᖃᑦᑎᐊᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᓲᕐᓗ. ᑐᑭᓯᓇᕈᒪ. their concerns where their voices haven’t been ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. heard. I hope that was clear. Thank you.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Are ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᑕᐃᒫᖅᐲᑦ? ᒪ’ᓇ. ᐊᕐᕕᓕᒡᔪᐊᕐᒥᒃ you done? Okay. Thank you. From ᒥᔅᑕ ᕿᓐᖑᖅ. Arviligjuaq, Mr. Qirngnuq. ᕿᓐᖑᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ. ᐅᑉᓛᒃᑰᖅᐸᒃᑲ Mr. Qirngnuq (interpretation): Thank you, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᖅ ᑕᑉᑲᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᖅᑕᑉᑲᑦ. ᐅᕙᓂ Mr. Chairman. I say “good morning” to the ᐊᑕᐅᓯᓐᓇᐱᐊᒥᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒃᓴᖃᕋᒪ ᐅᑉᓛᖑᔪᖅ witnesses. I have one question this morning, ᑐᐸᑦᓯᐊᓐᖏᓗᐊᒧᖅᑲᐃ ᓱᓕ. maybe because I still need to hear more from this group. ᐅᕙᓂ ᐅᒃᑯᐃᕈᑎᒋᔮᓂ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᖅᑕᖃᕐᒪᑦ ᒪᑉᐱᒐᖃᖅᑐᖅ ᑐᒡᓕᐊᓂ ᐊᐃᑉᐹᓂ. ᐅᑯᐊ There’s a section in the opening comments on ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑑᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ, ᖃᑉᓗᓈᑑᕐᓗᒍ, ᑐᑭᓯᐊᖓᓂᒃ the second page and it’s in English, so I’ll say ᑐᑭᓯᒃᑲᔭᐅᔪᒪᓪᓗᖓ ᐅᓐᓂᖅᑐᕐᓂᐊᖅᐸᕋ. it in English. I want to get clarification on the ᐅᖃᓕᒫᕐᓂᐊᖅᐸᕋ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑕᑉᕙᓂ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᑎᒍᑦ meaning. I’ll read what is stated under the ᑎᑎᕋᕐᓈᖅᓯᒪᔪᑎᒍᑦ ᐊᑖᓃᑦᑐᖅ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ heading (interpretation ends) “English Bill 25 ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᑐᓂᔭᐅᔪᖅ. ᐅᓇ ᑕᓪᓕᒪᒋᔮᓐᓂ Submissions.” (interpretation) I’ll read what is ᖃᕐᔪᓐᖑᐊᕐᓄᐊᕐᒥ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑑᕐᓗᒍ stated in the fifth bullet in English so that I ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ ᐅᖃᓕᒫᕐᓂᐊᖅᐸᕋ can be understood clearly. (interpretation ᑐᑭᓯᓐᓇᑦᓯᑦᓯᐊᕐᓂᐊᕋᒪ, ᓱᓕᓛᒃ ends) “We are encouraged by NTI’s ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᑦᓯᐊᕈᒪᓪᓗᒍᓗ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐊᒻᒪ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ leadership and the 13 responses by ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᑦ ᓯᕗᓕᐅᖅᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ Nunavummiut who voiced their concerns by 13-ᖑᔪᐃᑦ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᒋᔭᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥᐅᑦ using NTI’s template offered as a service.” ᓂᐱᖁᑎᒋᔭᖓᓂ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐱᔨᒃᓯᖅᑕᐅᓗᑎᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ (interpretation) Mr. Chairman, I’m asking for ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᒐᖓᓂ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᖁᑎᒋᔭᖓᓂ ᑖᓐᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᐅᓇ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ

clarification on exactly what that means. ᑐᑭᓯᓵᑦᓯᐊᕈᒪᑉᓗᒍ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᕙᕋ, ᖃᓄᖅ Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᑐᑭᖃᑦᓯᐊᕆᐊᒃᓵᓂᒃ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐃᓪᓚᐅᖅ. Idlout.

Ms. Idlout (interpretation): Thank you. Your ᐃᓪᓚᐅᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓯ Chairman, John Main, provided letters to us ᔮᓐ ᒪᐃᓐ ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᑎᓚᐅᕐᒪᑦ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᕕᓂᕐᓂᒃ that came from members of the public who ᑎᑎᖅᑲᕐᓂᒃ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᐃᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᑦ voiced their concerns and we read each of ᑭᒃᑯᑦᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᑦ. ᑕᒪᕐᒥᒃ them. We wanted to also understand what ᐅᖃᓕᒫᓚᐅᕋᑦᑎᒍᑦᑕᐅᖅ, ᑐᑭᓯᖃᑕᐅᔪᒪᓪᓗᑕ ᐊᓯᖏᑦ other concerns people might have had. It was ᖃᓄᖅ ᐅᖃᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᖕᒪᖔᑕ. ᓇᓗᓇᓚᐅᓐᖏᒻᒪᑕ apparent that those who wrote letters used the ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᓕᐅᖃᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ template provided by Nunavut Tunngavik. ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓐᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ We were pleased with the responses, but ᐅᐱᒋᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᓱᓕ ᑭᓯᐊᓂᖃᐃ maybe they couldn’t draft their own ᐱᕕᑭᑦᑑᓗᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓇᖕᒥᓂᖅ submissions due to time constraints. However, ᑎᑎᕋᕈᓐᓇᓐᖏᓐᓂᕐᒪᑕᖃᐃ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂᖃᐃ they believe in Tunngavik and they feel that ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ ᓱᓕᔪᖅᓴᕐᒪᑕ. ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ they are represented by Tunngavik. We ᒪᓕᒃᓴᕈᒪᖕᒪᑕ. ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᖅᑕᐅᒐᓱᒋᒐᒥᒃ. wanted that known and we mentioned it ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᒃᐱᕆᖕᒫᑎᒍᑦ ᐅᔾᔨᕆᖁᔭᐅᑎᖁᓪᓗᑎᒍ because we are proud of them. Thank you. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓚᐅᖅᐸᕗᑦ ᐅᐱᒋᒐᑦᑎᒍ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Let’s ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᑲᔪᓯᓗᑕ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖁᐊᓴ. proceed. Mr. Quassa.

ᖁᐊᓴ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᑦᑎ. Mr. Quassa (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome. ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓛᒃ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᓯᑉᑎᒻᕙ 13, 2019-ᒥ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᒥᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᓚᐅᕋᔅᓯ ᖃᐃᖁᔭᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᓐᖏᓇᔅᓯᒡᒎᖅ In the September 13, 2019 submission you ᓲᕐᓗ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᖃᑎᖃᕆᐊᖅᑐᕐᓗᓯ ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ had identified that you were never invited to ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ, ᐅᖃᖃᑎᖃᕈᒪᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒃᑲᐃᓂᖅ discuss the legislation; (interpretation ends) ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᒨᖓᔪᒥᒃ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐅᔾᔨᕐᓇᕐᒪᑦ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ “…invited to an open conversation about ᑐᓂᓯᓇᓵᖅᑐᓯ ᐅᕙᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ legislation…” (interpretation) However, it is ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕐᔪᐊᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ noticeable in the submission you provided to ᐱᓕᕆᕝᕕᐊᓂ 2018−ᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ us that when the (interpretation ends) ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᑐᓴᕆᐊᕐᕕᖃᕐᓂᕐᓂᒃ, ᓲᕐᓗ ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ Department of Education (interpretation) had ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕐᔪᐊᖅᓯᒪᖦᖤᕋᓗᐊ the (interpretation ends) 2018 Education Act ᖃᐃᖁᔭᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᓐᖏᓐᓇᔅᓯᒎᖅ. consultations, (interpretation) you said that ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᑐᐃᓐᓇᓕᖅᐸᕋᓕ ᖃᓄᕐᓕ ᑖᓐᓇ you were not invited. I would just like to ask: ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕈᓐᓇᖅᐱᓰ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑐᓴᐅᒪᑎᑦᑎᓇᓱᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ when the Department of Education held ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᕝᕕᐊᓂ consultations, were you not given ample ᑐᓴᕆᐊᕐᕕᖃᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ, ᑕᐃᒪ ᖃᓄᖅ opportunity to have a conversation regarding ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒡᕕᖃᓗᐊᓚᐅᓐᖏᓐᓇᔅᓰ? ᐅᖃᖃᑎᖃᕐᓗᓯ, the proposed legislation? That’s my question, ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒡᕕᖃᓗᐊᓚᐅᓐᖏᓐᓇᔅᓯᖃᐃ ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ Mr. Chairman. Thank you. ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ. ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᖃᖅᐳᖓ ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐋᕆᐊᒃ. Arreak.

Mr. Arreak (interpretation): Thank you. I also thank the member for asking a good ᐋᕆᐊᒃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᐊᒻᒪ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᐊᐱᕆᑦᑎᐊᕋᕕᑦ. question. This matter which we brought up ᑖᓐᓇ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᓂᒃ had the following issues; yes, we participated ᐃᓗᓕᖃᓚᐅᕐᒪᑦ. ᐄ, ᐱᖃᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᐳᒍᑦ in some of the consultations when the ᑐᓴᕋᓱᒃᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 department requested written submissions on ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓇᒃᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ Bill 25 during the review, nonetheless, we ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᖅᑕᐅᓇᓱᒃᑎᓪᓗᒍ, were not involved in the actual (interpretation ᑎᑎᕋᕆᐊᓐᖓᐅᑎᓕᐊᖑᑎᓪᓗᒍ, ends) drafting (interpretation) of the ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ legislation and that was our main reason for ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᓗᐊᓚᐅᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ ᑎᑎᕋᕋᑦᑕ. submitting our written response.

With the other issues, if I understood the question correctly, the other bodies or ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᖏᑦ ᖃᔅᓯᓂᒃ, organizations such as the district education ᑐᑭᓯᑦᑎᐊᕈᒪ, ᐊᓯᖏᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑎᒥᐅᔪᐃᑦ authorities and perhaps the CSFN, I forget ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᕋᓛᑦ ᐅᐃᐅᐃᒃᑰᖅᑐᖏᒃᑯᐊ, which body, were involved right from the ᓇᓕᐊᑭᐊᕐᖏᓐᓇ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ start when they began the drafting of the ᑎᑎᕋᕐᓂᐊᓕᕐᒪᑕ ᐱᖃᐅᑎᑕᐅᓪᓗᑎᒃ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓗᐊᖅᖢᑎᒍᑦ ᓂᓪᓕᕈᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ. proposed legislation. That was our primary ᐃᓱᒪᒋᓪᓗᑎᒍᑦ, ᐃᓱᒪᖃᖃᑦᑕᕐᒥᒐᑦᑕ ᑖᓐᓇ reason for voicing our concern, and our ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᓪᓗᒍ perspective on this matter was that during the ᐱᖃᑕᐅᓂᐊᕋᓱᒋᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᓗᐊᕐᒥᒐᑦᑕ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ drafting of the bill, we would be involved ᐱᖃᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᒍᑦ ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ from the start. However, we were not invited ᐱᓕᕆᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᖃᖅᐳᖓ. during the drafting of the bill. That is my response.

Our chair may want to add to that. I’m done. ᐅᓇᖃᐃ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖓ ᐃᓚᓯᒋᐊᕈᒪᓪᓗᓂ. ᑕᐃᒫᖅᐳᖓ. Thank you. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ. Merkosak. ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᔮᓐ ᒪᐃᓐ. ᑕᐃᑲᓂ Ms. Merkosak (interpretation): Thank you, ᑕᕝᕗᓐᖓᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᑎᓪᓗᑕ, John Main. Before they did community ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓄᐊᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᓐᖏᓱᖓᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ, ᓱᓕ consultations, we had teleconferences with ᐅᖄᓚᐅᑎᒃᑯᓪᓗ ᑲᑎᒪᖃᑎᒋᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ stakeholders, but we were not consulted and ᑎᒍᒥᐊᖅᑎᐅᓂᕋᖅᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ we were not contacted during the actual ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᖅᑕᐅᒻᒪᕆᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ, ᑐᒃᓯᕋᕐᕕᐅᓚᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᒍᑦ drafting of the bill. As we are the voice for the ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒡᕕᐅᓚᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᒍᑦ. ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᓂᐱᒋᔭᐅᓪᓗᑕ communities, it would have been nice to be ᐃᓚᐅᖃᑕᐅᔪᒥᓇᓚᐅᖅᑑᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ involved so that we would know how the ᐅᖃᖅᑕᐅᓇᓱᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᖃᓅᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᑦ communities wanted the bill written and what ᑭᓱᒥᒡᓗ ᐃᓗᓕᖃᕆᐊᖃᖅᑰᔨᖕᒪᖔᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ it should contain. It would have been good to ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ. ᓂᐱᒋᔭᐅᑎᓪᓗᑕ have a voice. I hope I responded adequately. ᓂᓪᓕᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᒥᓇᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᑑᒐᓗᐊᖅ. ᑭᐅᑦᑎᐊᕋᓗᐊᖅᐳᖓᖃᐃ.

Thank you. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖁᐊᓴ. Quassa. Mr. Quassa (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. ᖁᐊᓴ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ Chairman. Thank you for that clarification. ᑐᑭᓯᑦᑎᐊᖅᐳᖓ. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ ᖃᓄᐃᖅᓴᖏᒃᑯᕕᑦ Mr. Chairman, if it’s okay with you, I would ᑖᓐᓇ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒧᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᓇᔭᓐᖑᐊᓕᕆᕙᕋᓕ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ like to ask the Minister this question. When ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᓴᓇᔭᐅᓚᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ bills are being drafted, as this is not the first ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖑᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᓴᓇᔭᐅᓇᓱᒃᑎᓪᓗᒍ time legislation has been drafted, have they ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᐃᑦ. ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᕆᐊᓐᖓᐅᑎᓕᐊᖑᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ involved district education authorities, their ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᕚᑦ ᓯᕗᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᑭᖑᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ coalition, or anyone else in the past? Did they ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᓂᒃ, ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓂᒃ involve anyone when the bill was being ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑭᒃᑯᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᒃ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᕚᑦ, drafted? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᓲᕐᓗ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᓴᓇᔭᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. Minister Joanasie. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Hon. David Joanasie (interpretation): Thank ᐃᑦᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᓪᓛᒃᑯᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ, ᐃᒫᖔᖃᐃ you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning. ᐅᖃᖅᑳᕐᓗᖓ, ᓂᓪᓕᖅᑐᖃᑲᐃᓐᓇᕐᒪᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᑦᓴᒎᖅ Perhaps I will first address the comment that ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐅᐃᕖᒃᑯᑦ the CSFN was involved when the bill was ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᖃᑕᐅᓂᒃᑯᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ being drafting. That was not the case. I’ll ᑐᑭᓯᓇᖅᓯᑎᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓗᒍ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ make it clear that this is a government bill that ᒪᓕᒐᐅᒻᒪᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᓐᓄᑐᐊᖅ was drafted only by the government. ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ ᒪᓕᒐᑦᓴᖅ.

With respect to Mr. Quassa’s question, we ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᖓᓄᑦ ᒥᔅᑕ ᖁᐊᓴᐅᑉ wrote to Nunavut Tunngavik on July 26, 2018 ᑕᐃᒫᑦᓴᐃᓐᓇᖅᑕᐅᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᑦ and we informed them that we would begin ᑎᑎᕋᕐᕕᒋᓚᐅᕋᑦᑎᒍ ᔪᓚᐃ 26, 2018-ᒥ ᑐᑭᓯᑎᑦᓱᑎᒍᓪᓗ ᐅᑭᐊᑦᓵᖑᔪᒥᒃ ᓯᑉᑎᒻᕙᒥ consultations with Nunavummiut in ᐱᒋᐊᕐᓂᕋᑦᑕ ᑐᓴᕆᐊᖅᑐᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᒻᒥᐅᓂᒃ. September. We wrote them another letter on ᑭᖑᓂᐊᒍᓪᓗ ᐊᐅᒡᒍᓯ 31−ᒥ ᑎᑎᕋᕐᕕᒋᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔭᕗᑦ August 31 inviting them to attend the ᑐᓐᖓᓱᑦᑎᑦᓱᑎᒍᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐅᐸᓐᓂᐊᖅᑕᕗᑦ community consultations. We appreciate the ᐃᓚᐅᖃᑕᐅᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖁᔭᒋᔭᕗᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ fact that all the DEAs were involved during ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔩᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂ our consultation tour. They were involved ᐃᓚᐅᖃᑕᐅᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓄᓕᒫᖅ with all the community consultations since ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓅᖅᑎᓪᓗᑕ. ᓯᑉᑎᒻᕙ ᐃᓚᖓᓃᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ they began on September 11. After the ᐱᒋᐊᕐᒪᑦ, ᐃᓚᐅᖏᓐᓇᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᕐᒥ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ, consultations, we had a meeting on January ᐃᓛᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ 15, 2019 to discuss what we heard. They are ᓱᓕ, ᑭᖑᓕᐊᒍᓪᓗ ᑐᓴᕆᐊᖅᑐᖅᓯᒪᓂᕆᓚᐅᖅᑕᑦᑕ still involved in discussing what they have ᑲᑎᒪᓂᖃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᒍᑦ ᔮᓐᓄᐊᓕ 15, 2019 ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ heard and what they would like to be done. ᑐᓴᖅᓯᒪᔭᕗᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑖᓐᓇ Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐅᓪᓗᒥᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐃᓚᐅᖃᑕᐅᒋᕗᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᑐᓴᖅᓯᒪᔭᒥᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᕈᒪᒻᒪᖔᖅ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᓚᐅᖃᑕᐅᑎᑕᐅᓯᒪᒻᒥᔪᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᑦᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Quassa. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖁᐊᓴ.

Mr. Quassa (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. ᖁᐊᓴ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑐᑭᓯᓐᓇᖅᓯᔪᕐᖏᓛᖅ. Chairman. It is clear now. They don’t involve ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓ anyone else while they are drafting ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᓂᒃ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᑐᑭᓯᓐᓇᖅᐳᖅ. legislation. That’s clear. This has been ᐃᒻᒪᖃ, ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᖕᒥᖕᒪᑦ. brought up in the past. We have heard from ᓇᓗᓇᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ ᑐᓴᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᒐᕕᐅᒃ NTI that they are not involved in that process. ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖏᓐᓂᖏᑦ.

I’ll move on to something else and I will ask my question in English, Mr. Chairman. ᐆᒧᖓ ᓴᖑᓗᖓ, ᖃᓪᓗᓇᐅᔭᓚᐅᐱᓪᓚᓂᐊᕐᒥᒐᒪ (interpretation ends) The francophone ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᔅᓱᒧᖓ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᓂᐊᖅᑕᕋᓕ. community of Nunavut is granted specific (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᐃᕕᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑦ educational rights within the legislation ᐱᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᖕᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ because they are considered a language ᐃᓚᖏᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᐅᒐᒥᒃ. ᐅᓄᓐᖏᓛᖑᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ minority under section 23 of the Canadian ᑲᓇᑕᒥ 23-ᖓᓂ ᐃᓱᒪᖅᓱᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ Charter of Rights and Freedoms. By ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᐅᑎᓂᒃ ᐊᔾᔨᖏᓐᓂᒃ proposing that Inuit language speakers be ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᑖᖁᔭᐃᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᖃᖅᑭᓰᑦ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ granted the same rights, are you suggesting ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒃᑐᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᖃᔅᓰᓐᓇᐅᓂᖅᓴᐅᔪᑎᑐᑦ that Inuit language speakers also be ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕐᓂᕋᕐᓗᒋᑦ? (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) considered a language minority in Nunavut? ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᕋ ᑖᓐᓇ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. (interpretation) That’s my question. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐋᕆᐊᒃ. Arreak.

Mr. Arreak: Thank you for the question. Our ᐋᕆᐊᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᖕᓄᑦ. comment is around the situation of our ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕗᑦ ᐃᑯᖓ ᑐᕌᒪᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᓂᖓᓂᒃ language. At this point in the context of ᐅᖃᐅᓯᑦᑕ ᒫᓐᓇᐅᔪᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑲᓇᑕ ᑕᑯᓐᓈᖅᖢᒍ Canada, Inuit are very next to zero in ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐃᒫᓐᓇ ᐱᑕᖃᖏᑦᑎᐊᒻᒪᕆᑲᓴᒃᑐᑎᑐᑦ proportion to the rest of Canada in terms of ᑕᑯᒃᓴᐅᖕᒪᑕ. ᖃᓄᖅ ᑲᓇᑕᓕᒫᖅ ᑕᑯᓐᓈᖅᖢᒍ language. That’s one. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᓗᒍ.

Secondly, we think that because of the way ᑐᒡᓕᐊᒍᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᒐᑦᑎᒍ ᓲᖃᐃᒻᒪ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅ the language is situated in Nunavut, we may ᓇᓃᓐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐅᓄᓛᖑᔪᒃᓴᐅᒐᓗᐊᖅᑐᒍᑦ be a dominant part of the society, but we’re ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᓐᖏᓐᓂᖅᐹᖑᔪᒍᑦ. the least supported and developed part as one ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓯᒪᓐᖏᓐᓂᖅᐹᖑᓪᓗᑕᓗ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ of the language holders in Nunavut. This is ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᑕᕝᕙ ᑐᓴᖅᑕᐅᖁᓚᐅᕋᑦᑎᒍ the point that we wanted to make, that we ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ think that this government has to weigh this as ᐊᑑᑎᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖓ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐃᓗᐊᓂ, you consider Bill 25. Even though in Nunavut ᐃᒪᐃᒃᑲᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ Inuktitut is the dominant language, it is very ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒻᒪᕆᐅᓂᖅᓴᐅᒐᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ unique and it is not supported. ᐊᔾᔨᐅᖏᑦᑑᖕᒪᑦ, ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᖏᒻᒪᑦ.

When you look at the bureaucracy of ᑕᐃᒪ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖏᑦ ᑕᑯᒍᕕᒋᑦ, ᑭᓲᕙ government, what is the working language? ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᐅᑎ, ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑑᕐᒪᑦ. It’s English. Where is the Inuktitut flow? We ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᓪᓕ ᓇᒦᑉᐸ?

heard NTI’s president talk about the ᑐᓴᓚᐅᕋᑦᑕ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖓᑦ frustration around the lack of services, ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓗᐊᕆᔭᐅᓐᖏᓐᓂᖓᓂᒃ government services and programs that are ᐱᔨᑦᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᓐᖏᓗᐊᕐᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᓐᓂ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ delivered in Inuktitut. Can they be delivered ᐱᔨᑦᑎᖅᑐᑦ. ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᐱᔨᑦᑎᖅᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᐹᑦ? in Inuktitut? The government says they do, ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓐᓂᕋᖅᑑᒐᓗᐊᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑉᐹᑦ? but do they? We weighed this into our ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᖃᓯᐅᑎᓚᐅᕋᑦᑎᒍ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕐᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂ approach and we think that more needs to be ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᒃᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᖃᖅᑰᕋᓗᐊᕋᑦᑕ. ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ done to ensure that Inuktitut speakers, ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒃᑐᑦ ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ particularly Inuktitut-speaking teachers, need ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ, ᖄᒃᑲᓐᓂᐊᒍᑦ further support, extraordinary support to ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᓗᐊᕐᒪᑕ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᓪᓗᒍ weigh in, in the context of the bigger picture. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᖏᓂᖅᓴᖅ ᑕᐅᑦᑐᒋᓗᒍ.

ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᒐᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᐱᕕᒃᓴᖃᑦᑎᐊᖅᑰᕋᓗᐊᕐᒪᑦ We think Nunavut has a great opportunity ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᒃᑯᑦ ᓴᖅᑭᔮᖅᑎᑦᑎᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᔾᔨᐅᖏᑦᑐᒥᒃ. through this bill to showcase that a unique ᑲᓇᑕᐅᑉ ᐃᓚᒋᓂᖏᑦ ᓴᖅᑭᔮᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑦ part of Canada can be showcased through ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ language and through this bill and education ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ system that Inuktitut can become predominant ᐊᖏᓂᖅᓴᐅᓕᕈᓐᓇᕋᓗᐊᕐᒪᑦ. ᓴᖅᑭᔮᖅᑎᑦᑎᖕᒪᑦ because it’s reflective of the population. We ᐃᓄᖏᓐᓂᒃ. ᐃᓱᒪᒋᓪᓗᑎᒍᓪᓗ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ think that Inuktitut can become a great force ᐊᔭᐅᕆᔾᔪᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᒻᒪᕆᖕᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᑦᑎᒍᑦ. of part of our education system. ᐊᑯᓂᐅᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᑕᑭᔫᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᕗᑦ It’s long winded, I’m sorry, but this is part of ᐊᑑᑎᖃᖅᑎᓚᐅᕋᑦᑎᒍ ᒪᑐᐃᕈᑎᑎᒍᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ the thinking that we applied to our opening ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᑖᔅᓱᒧᖓ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᒧᑦ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. statements and the positions that we have taken with this bill. (interpretation) Thank ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖁᐊᓴ. you. ᖁᐊᓴ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᑐᑭᓯᑦᑎᐊᕐᒥᒐᒪ.

ᐊᓯᐊᓄᑦ ᓅᓚᐅᐱᓪᓚᖕᒥᓗᖓᐃᓛᒃ. ᐅᕙᓂ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᓂᐊᕐᒥᔭᕋ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᖕᒥ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖑᔪᑦ Quassa. ᑕᐃᒪ ᓴᓇᖃᑎᖃᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᓂᒃ, ᑖᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᓂ Mr. Quassa (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑕᐅᔪᑦ, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂᒃ Thank you for clarifying that for me. I will ᐊᐅᓚᒋᐊᖃᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒥ move on to something else. My question will ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᓯᒪᒐᓚᖕᒪᑕ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐱᔭᒃᓴᕆᔭᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᐃᑦ be about school principals. They work with ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᓐᓄᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪᓕᑭᐊᖅ district education authorities to administer ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖑᑎᓪᓗᓯ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᑎᓪᓗᓯ programs that will be used in schools. The ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ roles of school principals have changed in Bill ᒪᓕᒐᑦᓴᓐᖑᐊᓂ. ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᐅᔪᓃᓛᒃ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ 25. From the perspective of the coalition, ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᓇᓱᒃᑐᐃᑦ 25-ᒥ which advocates on behalf of district ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖑᐊᖅᖢᒋᑦ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᓇᓱᐊᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᓇᓕᐊᑭᐊᖅ. education authorities, are there any specific ᑕᐃᒪ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᓇᓱᖕᓂᐊᕈᒪᔪᖅ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᓂ areas of the current legislation or proposed ᐃᖢᕐᕆᔮᕈᑎᒃᑲᓐᓂᐅᓂᐊᖅᑰᔨᒋᕙᑦ changes in Bill 25 which you feel should be ᐃᖢᕐᕆᔮᕈᑎᒃᓴᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓂᒃ ᐱᕚᓪᓕᕈᑎᒃᓴᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓂᒃ amended to improve the working relationship ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᖕᓂ? ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖑᔪᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ between principals and the district education ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᓄᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ authorities? What areas do you think could be ᓴᓇᖃᑎᒌᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ, ᓇᓕᐊᖕᓂᑭᐊᖅ improved? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐱᐅᓯᕚᓪᓕᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᑎᒃᓴᒥᒃ ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᖃᖅᐸᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ. Merkosak. ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ. ᑕᑯᔪᒪᔭᕗᑦ Ms. Merkosak (interpretation): Thank you, ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂᓪᓗ ᑕᑯᔭᐅᔪᒪᔪᖅ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᓇᖏᕐᕕᒋᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂ Mr. Chairman. Now, what we wish to see and ᐃᓛᒃ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᒫᓐᓇᐅᔪᒥᒃ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᒐᓗᐊᕐᒪᑦ what our communities want to see in terms of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᖕᒪᑕ ᑖᔅᓱᒧᖓ the position we stand from and are using now, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᓄᑦ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ the language stipulates that the district ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓄᐊᖃᑦᑕᖅᖢᓂ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᕿᑎᕐᒥᐅᓄᐊᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᑕ education authorities are in charge of the local ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᑕᓗᕐᔪᐊᕐᒥᐅᖅᑰᖅᑐᕐᖏᓐᓇ, ᑖᓐᓇᒎᑦ schools and principals. However, when ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᖅ,ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ visiting various communities, for example, in ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖓ, ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᖃᕈᒪᓐᖏᑦᑎᐊᒻᒪᕆᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ the Kitikmeot where we travelled to and ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᓂᒃ. particularly in Taloyoak, if I am not mistaken, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᖢᕐᕆᔮᓐᖏᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ. the school principal had absolutely no interest ᑖᓐᓇᒎᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖓ ᑕᐃᑲᓂ in working with the local DEA. The local ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖏᓪᓘᓃᒡᒎᖅ ᐃᓂᖅᑎᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᓂᒋᑦ DEA had a problem with that. They said the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ principal there even told his staff not to deal ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᖃᖁᓐᖏᖦᖢᓂᒋᑦ. with the DEA. In talking with them, what we ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒡᕕᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᒫᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒃᑕᕗᑦ are following right now is the district ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖑᖔᕆᐊᖃᕋᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ education authority should be in charge of ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔪᓯ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ, ᐃᓕᔅᓯ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ. running the school and should be in charge of the principal. ᒫᓐᓇ ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓄᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᖅᑰᔨᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᒥ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᕐᔪᐊᒃᑯᑦ It seems to be different in some communities ᐲᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᒐᓗᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ since the board of education was dissolved. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᕘᒥ ᓄᓇᓕᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ Even though the DEAs are elected by their ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᖁᔭᐅᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᑐᕆᔭᐅᖅᑰᔨᓐᖏᑦᑐᑦ communities to represent them, they don’t ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓄᑦ. ᐅᖃᕋᓱᒃᑕᕋᓗᐊᖏᓪᓗ seem to make use of them and whatever they ᓱᕙᓕᑭᐊᕆᔭᐅᖅᑰᔨᔪᑦ. ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨᐅᔪᓄᓪᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ say is ignored by the regional school ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᓂᕐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᓄᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᕕᖕᓄᑦ. operations. It’s a problem in Nunavut. People ᐃᖢᕐᕆᔮᓐᖏᑦᑐᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ, ᓲᖃᐃᒻᒪᓕ don’t seem to want to run for DEAs anymore, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒧᑦ especially today since the changes in the ᓂᕈᐊᒐᒃᓴᓐᖑᕈᒪᖅᑰᔨᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓃᖦᖤᕋᒥᒃ. ᒫᓐᓇ education system were made and the dates for ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᕋᑖᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ the DEA elections were changed. They don’t ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᖅ, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᖓ seem to want to run for the DEAs because ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᓲᖃᐃᒻᒪᓕ they know they will just be ignored, even ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᓐᖑᕈᒪᖅᑰᔨᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓃᖦᖤᕋᒥᒃ when they are trying to represent their ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᒐᓗᐊᕈᑎᒃ ᓱᕙᓕᑭᐊᕆᔭᐅᖅᑰᔨᓂᐊᕐᒥᖕᒪᑕ communities and trying to serve their ᓄᓇᓕᖕᒥᐅᓄᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᓇᓱᒃᑲᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ communities. That needs to change. ᓂᐱᐅᓇᓱᒃᑲᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᔾᔨᓇᓱᒃᑲᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑦ.

We know our communities and we know what ᓄᓇᓕᐅᔪᒍᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒐᑦᑎᒍ, needs to change. He said they don’t seem to ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐅᓪᓗᑕᓗ ᓄᓇᓕᐅᖃᑎᒋᔭᕗᑦ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒃᑕᖏᑦ be welcomed in the schools. If you go into a ᖃᓄᐃᑉᐹᓪᓕᕈᒪᓂᕆᔭᖏᓪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒧᓪᓗ school, you will see a welcome sign. Even ᑐᓐᖓᓱᖅᑰᔨᖃᑦᑕᖏᓐᓂᕋᐃᖅᑲᐅᖕᒪᑦ, ᐄ, then you don’t feel welcome. As a parent, if ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᓪᓚᕆᒃᑐᖅ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ ᐃᓯᕈᕕᑦ you don’t go to the school often, you don’t ᑕᑯᒐᔭᖅᑐᑎᑦ, “ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᑦ” ᐃᒪᐃᓕᖓᔪᒥᒃ, ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᑦ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᒥᒃ−ᓚᓯᒪᐅᖅᑐᒥᒃ. ᑕᐃᒪᒃᑲᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ

want to enter the school even though there are ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ ᑐᓐᓂᐊᓇᓲᖅ ᖃᐅᔨᖔᕐᓗᓂ signs in the schools. That needs to change. In ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ ᐃᓯᒐᔪᓐᖏᓪᓗᓂ, ᐃᓯᓐᖑᓱᖕᓇᖏᑦᑐᖅ our communities, our children and ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ. ᑎᑎᕋᖃᐅᕋᓗᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ grandchildren want to have a full education ᐃᓗᐊᓂ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕆᐊᓕᒃ. ᓄᓇᒋᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂ like us. Outsiders are used to coming in and ᕿᑐᕐᖓᕗᑦ, ᐃᕐᖑᑕᕗᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᖁᒐᑦᑎᒍ making the decisions for us, which still takes ᐃᓗᐃᑦᑑᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᓯᒪᓂᖃᕐᒥᒐᑦᑕ. ᑖᓐᓇ place today. Our community members and ᐅᓇᓐᖓᑦ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᑎᑭᖦᖢᑎᒃ indigenous people don’t feel welcome. They ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓲᔾᔭᐅᕙᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᑦᑕ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᐊᖕᒪᑦ. just say yes because the school tells them to ᑐᓐᓂᐊᓱᒃᑐᑦ ᓄᓇᖅᑲᑎᒋᔭᕗᑦ, ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ. do this, even though the community should be ᐊᓐᖔᑐᐃᓐᓇᓗᐊᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᒪᐃᖁᔭᐅᖕᒪᑕ saying what to do. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᖁᔨᖔᕆᐊᖃᕋᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ.

I hope I didn’t make that too long. Thank you. ᑕᑭᓗᐊᖅᐸᕋᓗᑭᐊᖅ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. I still ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᐊᑎᖁᑎᖃᕋᒪ ᓱᓕ ᐊᒥᓱᓂᒃ. ᖁᐊᓵ ᐊᑕᐅᓰᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᐊᕐᓂᕈᕕᑦ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖁᐊᓴ. have a long list of names. Mr. Quassa, you can have one more. Mr. Quassa. ᖁᐊᓴ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᑦᑎᐊᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇᓕ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᕆᓕᕐᓗᒍᖃᐃ ᑖᔅᓱᒧᖓ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒧᑦ Mr. Quassa (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᓵᖅᑕᒪ Chairman. Thank you very much. My last ᐃᓚᒋᐸᓘᔭᕐᓂᐊᖅᑕᒃᓴᕆᖕᒪᒍ ᑖᓐᓇ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᓄᑖᖅ 25 question to the Minister will be related to the ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓵᖅᑕᑦᑕ ᒥᒃᓯᖓᓄᑦ, one I just asked. With respect to the new Bill ᖃᓄᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖑᐊᖅᐱᓯᐅᒡᓕ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᒪᓂᖓ? 25 that we just spoke about, how do you ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᑐᓴᖅᓯᒪᓵᕋᑦᑕ, ᐃᒪᖃ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ envision the structure of the bill? Some ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ district education authorities probably ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᒃᓴᐅᕗᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓵᖅᑕᖓᑕ experience the same situation that the ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᕆᐅᔫᑉ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓄᑦ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᖃᓄᖅ chairperson of the coalition just explained. I ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᒪᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ would like to hear from the Minister about ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᒪᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᑐᓴᕈᒪᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᐳᖓ, how the school principals will work with the ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ district education authorities and how it was ᓴᓇᖃᑎᖃᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ previously set up. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᓂᒃ ᒥᓂᔅᑕ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. Minister Joanasie. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Hon. David Joanasie (interpretation): Thank ᐃᑦᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒥ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᑦ you, Mr. Chairman. We want the ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐃᓛᒃ ᑕᒪᕐᒥᒃ responsibilities of school principals and ᐱᓕᕆᐊᑦᓴᖏᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᖅᓯᑦᓯᐊᖅᓯᒪᖁᔭᕗᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ district education authorities clearly outlined ᑐᑭᓯᐅᒪᖃᑦᑕᐅᑎᑦᓯᐊᕐᓗᑎᒃ and we want them to have a clear ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᒋᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᖏᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ understanding of how they should be ᐆᒃᑑᑎᒋᔭᐅᓐᖑᐊᑲᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᖅ ᑕᓗᕐᔪᐊᕐᒥ ᐃᒻᒪᖄ, operating. With the example that was given ᑐᓴᖅᓯᒪᔭᑦᓯᓐᓂᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓚᖏᖃᐃ regarding what we heard in Taloyoak, that ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᖃᐅᑕᒫᑦᓯᐊᒻᒪᕆᐊᓗᒃ maybe some district education authorities ᑕᕝᕗᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒧᑦ should direct school principals on what they ᑎᓕᐅᕆᔭᖅᑐᖃᑦᑕᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᓇᓐᖓᑦ should be doing, we envision the district ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒥ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᓂᒃ ᐃᒪᐃᓕᐅᖁᔨᓗᑎᒃ. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖑᐊᖏᑦᑐᒎᒐᓗᐊᖅ

education authorities operating in a different ᐊᓯᐊᒍᖔᖅ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᑎᒃ way. They don’t necessarily need to be in the ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᑕᒫᑦ schools on a daily basis, but they should ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒦᖏᒃᑲᓗᐊᕐᓗᑎᒃ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ follow up with the school principal or staff ᑐᓴᕆᐊᕐᕕᖃᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᓂ ᑖᑦᓱᒪᓐᖓᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ occasionally. There is a requirement for ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖓᓂᒃ. ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔨᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ monthly reporting on what is happening in the ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕐᕕᐅᖃᑦᑕᓲᖑᒋᐊᖃᕐᒪᑦ ᑕᖅᑭᑕᒫᑦ school. ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᖅᑐᖃᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ.

However, as to how the education system ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᖅ ᖃᓄᖅ should be running, as I stated yesterday, we ᐊᐅᓚᒋᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐅᖃᓚᐅᕋᒪ ᐃᑉᐸᔅᓴᖅ want standardized education, whether it’s in ᑖᑦᓱᒪᓐᖓᓴᐃᓐᓇᖅ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᑦᑐᒥᒃ Kugluktuk, Taloyoak, or Kimmirut. Even ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖁᔨᒐᓗᐊᕋᑦᑕ ᖁᕐᓗᖅᑑᒦᒐᓗᐊᖅᐸᑦ, though that’s the case, the district education ᑕᓗᕐᔪᐊᕐᒦᒐᓗᐊᖅᐸᑦ, ᑭᒻᒥᕈᒻᒥᐅᒐᓗᐊᖅᐸᑦ. authorities are the decision-making bodies for ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒃᑲᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ their communities’ priorities and it includes ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᑦᓱᐃᔨᐅᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓇᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᑎᒃ ᓱᓕ setting the curriculum and agreeing on how ᓄᓇᓕᒋᔭᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᓂᒃ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᒋᔭᖏᑦ the plans will be set. ᐃᓚᓕᐅᑎᖃᑎᓯᐅᑎᓗᓂ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᓪᓗᑕ Currently we want the district education ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑏᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ. authorities’ roles and responsibilities to carry on. For example, the appointment of the ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᒥᓱᑦ ᒫᓐᓇᐅᔪᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᕙᑦᑕᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᑐᖃᑦᑕᖅᑕᖏᑦ school principal will still be held by the ᑲᔪᓯᑎᑐᐃᓐᓇᕈᒪᔭᕗᑦ. ᐆᒃᑑᑎᒋᓐᖑᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓗᒍ ᑖᓐᓇ district education authority. We heard that ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒥ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᑎᒃᑯᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓ they want to keep that appointing power and ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᓄᑦ ᓱᓕ we have agreed with them. Thank you, Mr. ᑎᒍᒥᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᑐᓴᓚᐅᕋᑦᑎᒍ Chairman. ᐱᓯᒪᐃᓐᓇᕈᒪᓂᕋᖅᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᓂ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒋᓯᒪᔭᕗᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᑦᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Moving on. Ms. Nakashuk. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᑲᔪᕼᐃᓗᑕ. ᒥᔅ ᓇᑲᓱᒃ.

Ms. Nakashuk (interpretation): Thank you. ᓇᑲᓱᒃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᐅᓪᓛᒃᑯᑦ. ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᔅᓯ. Good morning and welcome. ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᖃᕈᒪᔪᖓ ᐃᑉᐸᔅᓴᖅ First of all, I would like to congratulate Ms. ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥᖃᐃ ᐃᓐᓇᑯᓗᒃ ᒥᔅ ᐃᓪᓚᐅᖅ Idlout. She completed her studies and was ᐅᐱᒋᔪᒪᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᓕᓴᕆᔭᐅᕋᑖᕐᓂᑯ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑕᖓᓂᒃ recently called to the bar. I had forgotten to ᐱᔭᕇᕐᓂᑯᑯᓘᓪᓗᓂ, ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᒋᐊᖅ ᐃᑉᐸᔅᓴᖅ congratulate her yesterday. We all ᐃᓱᒪᒋᓐᓂᓚᐅᓐᖏᓇᒃᑯ Congratulate-ᑎᑉᐸᒋᑦ. congratulate you. ᐊᑕᖏᖅᑐᑕ.

>>Applause >>ᐸᑦᑕᑐᖅᑐᑦ

Yesterday when you were talking about the ᐅᓇ ᐃᑉᐸᔅᓴᖅ ᐅᖃᓚᐅᕋᕕᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ concerns that the district education authorities ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ have, you said that the (interpretation ends) ᐅᖃᐱᓪᓚᓚᐅᕋᕕᑦ ᐃᓚᖏᑦ ᐅᖃᓚᐅᕋᕕᑦ Board of boards of education (interpretation) had been Education ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᐅᔪᓂᒃ discussed. Were there questions on whether ᐅᕝᕙᓗ ᑭᓐᖒᒪᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᒥᓱᐊᖅᑎᖅᑐᓂᖃᐃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑕᐅᓯᒪᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᑲ

the boards of education should be reinstated ᐅᕝᕙᓗ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᕙᓚᐅᖅᑲ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ or was it mentioned in the community ᐳᓚᕋᑦᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ? ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔪᒪᔭᕋ. consultations? That’s my first question. Thank ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. Idlout. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐃᓪᓚᐅᖅ.

Ms. Idlout (interpretation): Thank you for the ᐃᓪᓚᐅᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᐊᐱᕆᒐᕕᑦ. ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᒋᐊᕐᔪᒡᖢᒍ question. To start with a short response, I did ᐃᖅᑲᐃᑎᑦᑎᔪᒪᓕᓚᐅᖅᑐᖓᐃᓛᒃ ᐅᓂᒃᑲᐅᑎᒋᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂ wish to remind the parties about what we ᑎᑎᖅᑲᓕᐊᕆᓚᐅᕋᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᓲᖃᐃᒻᒪ ᓈᓚᖃᑕᐅᓚᐅᕋᑦᑕ presented when we drafted our letter. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑭᒃᑯᑐᐃᓐᓈᖅᑎᑦᑎᓚᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. 13-ᖑᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ Obviously we listened to the consultations ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᖅᑐᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ when they conducted their public tour. There ᒥᒃᓵᓄᑦ. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓯᒪᔪᒥᒃ were 13 recommendations related to the ᐃᖅᑲᐃᑎᑦᑎᖃᑕᐅᔪᒪᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᖢᑕ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ previous divisional boards of education. I just ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᒃᑯᑎᒍᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᐊᓂᒃᓯᒪᓐᖏᑕᕗᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ, want to reference part of the commentary we ᐃᓛᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖄᖏᖅᓯᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ. heard. However, the coalition hasn’t finalized its deliberation on these recommendations.

Nonetheless, it seems clear that when the coalition itself is an amalgamation of local ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᓇᓗᓇᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓃᓐᖔᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑖᓐᓇ DEAs that represent the views of the ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᐃᒫᑦᑎᐊᖅ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓃᓐᖔᖅᓯᒪᖁᔨᔪᖅ communities, it is the preferred option for ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖁᔭᓕᔭᐅᕙᒃᖢᑎᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᒃᑳᖓᒥᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ them. Further, they were appreciative of the ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᒃᑐᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂᖏᓛᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ collaborative work between their organization ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᓄᑑᔾᔨᕕᐅᓚᐅᕋᓗᐊᕐᒪᑕ and the coalition, especially as before the ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᓚᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒍᓐᓇᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ coalition, the local DEAs were singularly ᐱᖃᐃᓐᓇᕈᒪᔪᐃᑦ. working alone even within their regions. They want the coalition to continue.

Regarding your question, perhaps Jedidah or ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᐳᖃᐃ ᔨᑎᑕ James can explain further. ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᔭᐃᒥᓯᒧᑦ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ. Merkosak.

Ms. Merkosak (interpretation): I would like to supplement the response. After the dissolution of the divisional boards, ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ: ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᔭᕋ. ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ communities had no interaction or ᐲᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᒋᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔭᕗᑦ communication with others, even within our ᐱᑕᖃᕈᓐᓃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᐅᖃᑎᑦᑎᓐᓂ regions about what they were doing. During ᑐᓴᐅᒪᔪᓐᓃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᒍᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᖔᑕᓕ. the divisional board era, each community ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊᖑᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔭᖅᑐᓚᐅᖅᖢᑎᒃ member would relay all the information ᑎᑭᑦᑕᕌᖓᑦᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᒋᔭᕗᑦ locally upon their return, especially other ᓴᖅᑭᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᑦᑕ.

communities that had new initiatives or ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂᓕᒎᖅ ᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᓕᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᖃᓄᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅ success in providing support to their schools. ᐃᓗᐊᖅᓯᕚᓪᓕᕈᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑕ.

All schools require some support and assistance in smooth operation to ensure ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑕ students receive a proper education and to ᐃᓗᐊᖅᓯᕚᓪᓕᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ receive encouragement to succeed. Further, ᑲᔪᓯᑦᑎᐊᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑲᔪᖏᖅᓴᖅᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᖁᓪᓗᒋᓪᓗ. teachers also need support as we can’t just ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᓪᓗ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᒥᖕᒪᑕ treat them like daycare workers, babysitting ᐸᐃᕆᕕᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑎᑐᑦ ᐱᓐᖏᓪᓗᑎᒃ our students. They need to focus on the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓗᑎᒃ ᓯᕗᓂᒃᓴᓕᐅᕆᓗᑎᒃ curriculum and planning for the future paths ᐱᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑕ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ of our students, in partnership with the ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑕ. parents. When they receive unwavering ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᖅᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᕈᑎᒃᑕᐅᖅ ᑲᔪᖏᑦᑎᐊᕐᓗᑎᒃ support, they become more motivated to teach ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᑦᑎᐊᕈᒪᔪᓐᓇᕐᒪᑕ ᓱᕈᓯᑯᐃᓗᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ the students, and the students require better ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᒪᒃᑯᒃᑐᑦ Tools, ᓲᕐᓗ capacity to learn. ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᑖᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑕ. ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ.

When communities are aware of how other communities manage their challenges, it ᑐᓴᐅᒪᖃᑎᒌᒃᑎᓪᓗᑕ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ inspires the other DEAs to think of new and ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᕚᓪᓕᕐᓇᕐᒪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ innovative ways that would allow their ᐃᒪᐃᓕᐅᕈᒪᖃᐃ ᐃᒪᐃᓕᐅᕈᑦᑕᖃᐃ ᐱᕚᓪᓕᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑭᐅᑦᑎᐊᖏᒃᑯᓘᓐᓃᑦ, schools to function more smoothly. I don’t ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. know if I responded to your question or not.

Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᓇᑲᓱᒃ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᓇᑲᓱᒃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ Nakashuk. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑕᐅᑎᐊᕐᖓᑦ. ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓂᖅᓴᐅᔮᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᓂᑰᒻᒪᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 37 Ms. Nakashuk (interpretation): Thank you, ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔭᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑭᓐᖒᒪᒋᔭᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᓂᒥᓂᖓ Mr. Chairman. I also thank you for that ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᖅᑐᑎᒍ clarification. It seemed like that was one of ᐃᖅᑯᓪᓕᐅᑎᐅᓗᐊᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔫᔮᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ the major subjects during the review of Bill ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᖅᑕᑎᓐᓂ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔪᒪᓗᐊᕋᑖᖅᑕᕋ. 37. It hasn’t really been brought up with what 13-ᒪᕆᐅᒐᓗᐊᑦ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ. we’re reviewing right now and that’s why I asked about it. There are 13 communities that ᐊᓯᐊᓄᑦ ᓴᖑᒻᒥᓗᖓ, ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᖃᖅᑲᐅᒥᒻᒪᑦ ᒥᔅᑕ have stated they should like to see the ᐋᕆᐊᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᔭᔅᓴᕆᖃᑦᑕᖅᑕᖏᑦ divisional boards of education back. ᒫᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔪᖅ ᑕᑯᓐᓇᖅᑐᒍ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ 25 ᐃᓛᒃ ᐱᔭᔅᓴᔅᓯᓐᓂᒃ Going to another subject, Mr. Arreak ᐃᓚᓯᒃᑲᓂᓐᖑᓱᒻᒪᑦ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖅ indicated that the coalition is currently ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ responsible… . In looking at the current Act ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂ ᐃᑲᔪᖃᑦᑕᕐᒥᓗᓯ and Bill 25, it will give added responsibilities ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ to the coalition to provide training to DEAs ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᒍᑎᔅᓴᓂ ᐸᕐᓈᕆᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ and supporting DEAs in preparing school ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ programs, as well as giving orientation to new ᐱᒋᐊᓕᕋᑖᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᖅᑲᐃ ᑐᓐᖓᓱᑎᑦᑎᓂᑰᕙ ᓄᓇᓕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᖃᓄᖅ teachers on how the community operates. ᐊᐅᓚᓂᖃᕐᓂᕐᒪᖔᑕᓘᓐᓃᖃᐃ.

Since you will have added responsibilities if ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐱᔭᔅᓴᓯ ᐃᓚᑲᓐᓂᕋᔭᕐᖓ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑲᔪᓯᓐᓂᖅᑲᑦ. the bill goes ahead and as you indicated that ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᖃᖅᑲᐅᒐᔅᓯ you were not involved when the bill was ᐸᕐᓈᕆᔭᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᓯᒪᓚᐅᓐᖏᓇᔅᓯ. being drafted, did you already discuss the ᐱᒋᐊᓕᕋᑖᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ added responsibilities you’re going to be ᐃᓚᓕᐅᔾᔭᐅᓯᒪᑦᑕᐅᑎᒋᓕᓚᐅᖅᑳᑦ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᑯᐊ given? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓯᒪᕕᓯᐅᒃ ᐃᓱᒫᓗᑎᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓛᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐱᔭᔅᓴᕆᒃᑲᓂᓐᖑᓱᑦᑕᓯ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᑦᑕᐅᑎᒋᓯᒪᓚᐅᖅᑭᓯᐅᒃ ᑕᐃᑲᓐᖓᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐋᕆᐊᒃ. Arreak. ᐋᕆᐊᒃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᒪᒍᕋᑦ ᓇᑲᓱᒃ ᐊᐱᕆᑦᑎᐊᕋᕕᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓚᖓ ᑭᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᖢᒍ ᐃᓚᖏᑦ ᑭᐅᔪᓐᓇᓐᖏᖦᖢᒍ Mr. Arreak (interpretation): Thank you, ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᓕᕋᑖᓗᐊᒧᓪᓗ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ. ᑕᐃᓐᓇ Margaret Nakashuk, for that very good ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐱᓕᕆᓚᐅᕐᒥᖕᒪᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ question. I can respond to your question in ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᖃᕋᓱᒃᖢᓂ, ᐸᕐᓇᐃᓇᓱᒃᖢᓂ. ᐃᓚᖏᑦ part. I recently started working for the ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓕ ᐃᓕᕋᑖᖅᑐᕕᓂᐅᑎᓪᓗᖓ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ coalition and my predecessor was preparing to ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᑕ. ᐅᖃᐅᑎᔭᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᖏᖦᖢᖓᓕ respond to the proposal. I wasn’t informed or ᖃᓄᐃᒃᓴᕋᔭᖅᐱᑕᒎᖅ ᒪᑯᐊ ᐃᓚᔭᐅᒋᐊᖅᐸᑕ ᑕᐃᒫᒐᓚᒃ asked how we would feel about the added ᑖᒃᑯᓇᓐᖓᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᕐᔪᐊᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᕕᖕᒥ. responsibilities from the Department of ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑑᔮᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᑕᓕ ᑕᑯᔭᕗᑦ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᓕᖅᖢᑎᒍᑦ. Education. It seemed like they were just brought up. ᓇᖕᒥᓂᖅ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐃᓚᔭᐅᒋᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐅᖁᒪᐃᓗᐊᕐᓂᖅᐹᕆᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ While we were reviewing the bill, we found ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓐᓇᑯᓘᖕᓂᒃ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖃᕋᑦᑕ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓗ that one of the biggest challenges we have is ᐱᔭᒃᓴᐃᑦ, ᓲᕐᓗ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᖅ ᐆᒃᑑᑎᒋᓗᒍ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᕋᔭᕋᑦᑕ. we only have two employees and one of the ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓐᓇᐅᒍᑦᑕ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐅᓪᓗᓕᒫᖅ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓕᒫᖅ responsibilities, for example, is we have to ᐱᓕᕆᓗᒍ ᑭᓯᐊᓂᐅᖅᑰᕋᔭᕐᒪᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐆᒃᑑᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ. produce annual reports. If there are only two ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᒃᐸᑕ ᑕᐃᒫᒐᓚᒃ of us, we would have to work on it every ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᖅᓯᒪᓐᖑᐊᓚᐅᕋᓗᐊᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ single day of the year. That’s just an example. ᓇᓗᓈᕿᕈᔪᖕᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐃᓚᖓ. ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ We were considering what added ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᐱᐅᓯᕆᕙᓚᐅᖅᑕᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᓪᓗᒥ ᐱᐅᓯᕆᓕᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᖏᓪᓚᕇᒻᒪᑎᒃ. responsibilities we would have, but it’s still hard to tell. The way things were done in the ᐆᒃᑑᑎᒋᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓗᒍᓕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ past to the way they are being done now with ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑯᓗᖕᓂᒃ ᐆᒃᑑᑎᖃᕐᓗᖓ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᓐᓂᒃ. the DEAs is completely different. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ ᐱᑦᑎᐊᕈᓐᓃᕐᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᖃᐃᖁᔭᐅᓪᓗᓂ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᒧᑦ, ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖓᑕ I’ll use an example from my own experience. ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᓚᐅᖅᖢᓂᐅᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ If a student has behavioural problems, they ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᓕᕐᒪᑕ ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ. ᑕᑯᖕᒪᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᑖᑕᒥᓂᒃ ᐊᓈᓇᒥᓂᒡᓗ ᐅᖃᖃᑎᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ are asked to go to the principal’s office. After ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ, ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᐅᕙᓂ the principal has dealt with the student, the ᐅᖃᖅᑎᑦᑎᔨᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ matter is referred to the DEA and there are ᐱᖃᑕᐅᓪᓗᓂ. ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᑕᑯᖕᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑯᓗᒃ discussions between the DEA and the parents ᐱᑦᑎᐊᕈᓐᓃᕐᒧᑦ, ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ of the student. The former Speaker of this ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᓪᓚᕆᒃᖢᑎᒃ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᓪᓗ House was involved. Once the student saw the ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᑦ DEA, his or her parents, and the school ᐱᖃᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ, ᑖᓐᓇ principal working together, the student ᓱᕈᓯᑯᓗᒃ ᑕᑯᖕᒪᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑐᓂᒃ immediately corrected his or her behaviour ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᑦᑕᐅᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᑦ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᓯᐊᖅᖢᓂ. and changed completely. ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒃᑲᓐᓂᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᓐᓃᖅᖢᓂᓗ ᐱᑦᑎᐊᕋᓱᒃᑲᓐᓂᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᓐᓃᖅᖢᓂ ᑕᑯᖕᒪᑦ.

There are benefits of the district education ᑖᓐᓇ ᑕᕝᕙ ᐊᑑᑎᖃᕐᓂᖓ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ authority being involved within the school, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᒋᐊᖃᕐᓂᖓ the parents being fully engaged and able to ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᓪᓗ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ voice their concerns, and the principal ᐱᖃᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᖃᑦᑕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ working closely with them. There is an ᓂᐱᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕐᓗ, ᑖᓐᓇ opportunity for positive changes in order to ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᖃᑦᑎᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓗᓕᖃᕐᒪᑦ have a brighter future. Thank you. ᑕᑯᒥᓇᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐊᓯᔾᔩᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᓯᕗᓂᒃᓴᒥᒃ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. Nakashuk, are you done? Okay. Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᓇᑲᓱᒃ ᑕᐃᒫᖅᐱᑦ? ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ Ms. Towtongie. ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ.

Ms. Towtongie (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome. ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᑦᑎ.

I believed the chairperson, Jedidah, when she mentioned a school principal had no interest ᑕᐃᒪ ᐅᒃᐱᕈᓱᖅᑲᐅᒐᒪ ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᕆᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᔩᑎᑕ in cooperating with the district education ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒃᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ authority. As MLAs, we need to be cognizant ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᖃᕈᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ of that, and since I represent a smaller non- ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᒃ. ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎᐅᔪᒍᑦ decentralized community, and in many ᐅᔾᔨᖅᑐᕆᐊᖃᖅᑰᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᕋᓛᕐᒥᒃ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᒐᒪ smaller communities, at times non-Inuit who ᐊᒻᒪ ᓄᓇᓕᕋᓛᕐᒥᔅᓱᓂ ᐃᓛᓐᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓅᓐᖏᑦᑐᑦ arrive become dictatorial and tyrannical ᐊᑕᓂᓐᖑᑲᐅᑎᒋᓇᓱᓲᖑᖕᒪᑕ ᐃᓄᖕᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ towards Inuit. They become a clique, only ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᖃᓕᖅᓱᑎᒃ ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒋᓐᖏᑕᕐᒥᖕᓂᒃ working with other non-Inuit, such as the non- ᐃᓄᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ, ᐳᑭᖅᑕᓕᖕᓂᒃ, ᓇᔭᓐᖑᐊᓂᒃ, Inuit social workers, the RCMP, the nurses to ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᓪᓗᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᖅ domineer the Inuit students as the imperious ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ. principal.

My reason for believing that statement is ᐅᒃᐱᕈᓱᖅᑲᐅᒐᒪ ᑕᐃᔅᓱᒪᓂᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ because I went to the school to speak as I was ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒋᐊᖅᑐᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᒪ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ, ᓲᖃᐃᒻᒪ invited, and because I feel I am close to an ᑐᓐᖓᓱᖁᔭᐅᒐᒪ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓐᓇᐅᓇᓱᒋᓕᖅᑐᖓ elder now, due to my age and that I am a ᐃᓂᕐᓂᐅᓇᓱᒋᓕᖅᑐᖓ, ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓇᓱᒋᓪᓗᖓᑦᑕᐅᖅ fairly good seamstress, albeit I am aware I ᒥᖅᓱᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ. ᖃᐅᔨᒫᓂᓐᖏᒃᑲᓗᐊᖅᑐᖓ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ have still to learn some things, but I am ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓇᓱᒋᔪᖓ. ᑕᐃᑲᓃᑎᓪᓗᖓ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᖅ capable of sewing properly. When I arrived at ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ ᐅᖃᖅᖢᓂ, “ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒍᓐᓇᓐᖏᑦᑐᑎᑦ.” the school, the principal informed me that I ᑕᕝᕙ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᖅ “ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᑦᑎ” wouldn’t be able to speak to the students or “ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᑦᑎ ᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᒃ ᖃᐃᖁᔨᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᒍᑦ.” school body, even though a welcome sign was written in Inuktitut to welcome elders.

This individual said I couldn’t talk to the school as an audience, perhaps when they learned who I actually was. I then asked for a “ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒋᐊᖃᓐᖏᑦᑐᑎᑦ” ᐅᕙᖓᖃᐃ ᑭᓇᐅᓂᕋ written policy that stated that inability to ᖃᐅᔨᒐᒥ. ᐊᐱᕆᒐᒃᑯ ᐊᑐᐊᒐᖃᖅᐹ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ ᓇᐅᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑐᐊᒐᖃᖅᐸ speak to students, and if the school had any

policies barring Inuit elders from speaking to ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒋᐊᖃᓐᖏᓐᓂᕆᔭᕋᓂᒃ. ᑕᑯᔪᒪᓪᓗᖓ students and I wanted a copy of their policy ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᓲᖅ ᓄᓇᓕᕋᓛᕐᒦᑦᑐᖓ prohibiting this activity. Since I was in a ᐊᑐᐊᒐᖃᕐᒪᖔᑦ. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᓐᖏᑦᑐᖓ ᓄᓇᓕᒡᔪᐊᓂᒃ smaller community, I asked for this policy. I ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᐅᖕᒪᑕ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᒡᔪᐊᓂᒃ. am not speaking about our larger centres, as ᐊᑕᓂᐅᒐᒥ ᑕᐃᑲᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ ᑕᑯᑎᓐᓂᖅ Inuit are more active in the larger ᐊᔪᕋᒥᖓ ᐅᖃᖅᑐᖅ, “ᐆ, ᐊᑐᐊᒐᖅ ᐅᑉᓛᖅ communities. Since he was the principal and ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᖅᑲᐅᔭᕋ” ᐊᑐᓐᖏᖦᖢᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ couldn’t produce said policy, he stated that ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᖏᓐᓂᒃ. the policy had just been drafted earlier that morning, without informing the DEA committee.

This made me want to see a corresponding section within Bill 25, as it has been amended ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᓇᓕᒨᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᒪᓕᒐᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ 25 to specify who operates the (interpretation ᑕᑯᔪᒪᓇᔭᕋᒪ ᐅᓇ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ 25 ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᑦ ends) school programs (interpretation) and ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖓᑦ, ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᖕᒪᑦ they changed the wording to the Department ᑭᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᑎᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ of Education who will operate the system. If School Program. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᓗᓂ we imagined a skeletal frame for the ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᑎᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ. (interpretation ends) school programs, ᓴᐅᓂᓐᖑᐊᕐᒥᒃ ᑕᐅᑐᒐᔭᕈᑦᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ (interpretation) further inside would be the ᐃᓗᐊᓄᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓗᒃᑲᓐᓂᐊᓂ curriculum, and it changes the wording to ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᓯᕈᐃᓗᓂ limit this power to only the (interpretation ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓄᑦ ᑐᕌᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᒐᒃᓴᐃᑦ Local ends) local community programs. Community Programs. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᓕᖓᔪᑦ (interpretation) There are three types of ᐱᖓᓱᐃᓕᖓᔪᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇᒎᖅ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᖅᑐᖅ programs available. Broadly speaking, the ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒋᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᖃᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ Minister would have the responsibility for the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓕ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ education program while the (interpretation ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ends) district education authorities ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᖃᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓄᑦ (interpretation) would have the responsibility ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ. for local community programs.

My question is: what is the coalition’s position on the proposed division of ᐅᓇᓕ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᕋ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑎᒥᐅᔪᑦ Coalition, responsibilities between the Minister and the ᖃᓄᖅ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᖃᖅᐸᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ local district education authorities? What is ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑏᑦ ᐊᒡᒍᐃᔪᑦ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᐅᑉ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ your position on that? Do you agree with it or ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓄᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ? ᖃᓄᖅ would you like to see change? Thank you, Mr. ᐃᓱᒪᕕᓯ? ᑖᓐᓇ ᓈᒻᒪᒃᐹ? ᖃᓄᖅ Chairman. ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᐸ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐃᓪᓚᐅᖅ. Idlout.

Ms. Idlout (interpretation): Thank you for ᐃᓪᓚᐅᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᐊᐱᕆᒐᕕᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, asking the question. Thank you, Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐱᐅᒋᓗᐊᓐᖏᑕᕗᓪᓕ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ Chairman. We don’t really like it because it’s

confusing as to how the responsibilities are ᓇᓗᓈᓂᖕᒪᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᖔᑕ. divided. The communities have requested to ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᓯᒪᒐᓗᐊᕐᒪᑕ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐊᔪᕐᓇᖏᔾᔫᒥᓕᕐᓗᓂ make the Education Act easier to understand. ᑖᓐᓇ ᑐᑭᓯᓇᖅᓯᔾᔫᒥᓗᒍ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᖅ I was in Cape Dorset with Minister Joanasie ᒪᓕᒐᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ ᑭᓐᖓᕐᓃᖃᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᑕᕋ during the public consultations. The elected ᑭᒃᑯᑐᐃᓐᓈᖅᑎᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ DEAs made a presentation to the Minister. ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᖁᑎᖏᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᑖᔅᓱᒧᖓ. They don’t want the responsibilities divided. ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊᒎᖅ ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᖁᔭᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᑦ.

ᑭᓐᖓᕐᓂᒡᒎᖅ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ The Cape Dorset DEA gave copies of their ᐱᓕᕆᔨᖏᓐᓂᒡᓗ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ plan to the staff of the school and regional ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᖁᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖏᓐᓄᒡᒎᖅ school operations. The elected members had ᑐᓂᓯᒐᓗᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᒥᖕᓂᒃ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊᒎᖅ made a plan after consulting with the ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᒥᒃ ᓴᓇᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕᒡᒎᖅ community. They wanted to listen to their ᓄᓇᓕᒋᔭᕐᒥᖕᓂᒃ ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᕐᕕᒋᐊᓪᓚᓚᐅᖅᖢᓂᒋᑦ. community because they were elected by their ᓄᓇᓕᒋᔭᕐᒥᓂᒡᒎᖅ ᓲᖃᐃᒻᒪ ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᖕᒪᑕ community. They put it on paper and made a ᓄᓇᒋᔭᕐᒥᖕᓂᒃ ᓈᓚᒍᒪᒐᒥᒃ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᓕᐅᖅᖢᑎᒃ plan. They gave their plan to the principal and ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᓕᐅᑦᑎᐊᒻᒪᕆᒃᖢᑎᒃ. ᑖᓐᓇᒎᖅ the regional school operations and told them, ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᓕᐅᖅᑕᐅᔪᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒧᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ “In accordance with our authority, we want to ᐃᓱᒪᑕᖃᖓᓄᑦ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᖦᖤᖅᐳᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ use this plan. We want to add it to the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᖁᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ calendar.” They were denied. They told us ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᓪᓗᓂᓗ. ᐅᓇᒎᖅ ᑕᕝᕙ that the plan from the community can’t be ᐱᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᕆᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᖅᖢᑕ ᑕᕝᕙ ᑖᓐᓇ used. The school principal wouldn’t let the ᐊᑐᕈᒪᔭᕗᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᖅᓯᐅᑎᒧᑦ ᐃᓚᓕᐅᑎᖁᔭᕗᑦ. plan proceed and didn’t allow the staff to ᐋᒃᑳᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᐅᕙᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ, implement it. ᓱᓕᒎᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᓕᐅᖅᑕᐅᔪᖅ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᒦᓐᖔᖅᑐᖅ ᓱᓕᒎᖅ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ. When a plan is initiated by an elected DEA in ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖓᑦᑕ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖓ the community and they’re the last ones to be ᑲᔪᓯᑎᖃᑕᐅᓐᖏᖦᖢᓂᐅᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓᓗ heard or they keep getting denied, we don’t ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖏᓐᓄᓪᓗ ᖃᓄᖅ agree with that situation. Thank you. ᑲᔪᓯᑎᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖏᖦᖢᓂᓗ.

ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᓯᒪᒋᐊᕋᓗᐊᖅᐸᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖑᓗᑎᒃ ᑕᐃᒪ Towtongie. ᓈᓚᒃᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᒥᓗᑎᒃ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐋᒃᑳᖅᑕᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᓗᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ Ms. Towtongie (interpretation): Thank you, ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒋᓐᖏᒻᒥᔭᕗᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. Mr. Chairman. I would like to hear from the ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ. Minister of Education about what considerations were made when this was ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ: ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᑐᓴᕐᕕᒋᔪᒪᔭᕋ being set up. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᑕᒪᑐᒪ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᖅᓯᒪᓂᕆᔭᖓᓂᒃ ᖃᓄᖅ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᖅᑲᖅᓴᐅᑎᖃᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᖔᖏᑦᑕ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Minister Joanasie. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. Hon. David Joanasie (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As I stated earlier, each ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, school needs an education plan and as a ᐃᑦᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᖃᖅᑲᐅᒐᒪ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ department, we have to make sure this ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᖃᕆᐊᖃᓲᖑᒻᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᓕᕆᕕᐅᓪᓗᑕ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ

continues every year. The district education ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑲᔪᓰᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᑦᑕᕋᑦᑎᒍ authorities can create local community ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ programs. They come to an agreement on how ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᒻᒧᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᓂᒃ the calendar will be set up. We believe the ᓴᖅᑭᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᓈᒻᒪᑦᑐᒃᑯᑦ DEAs can make suggestions on how the ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᑖᑦᓱᒧᖓ ᐅᓪᓗᖅᓯᐅᑏᑦ calendar will be set. In Bill 25 we would like ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ. to divide up the responsibilities for the ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᑦᑎᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅᑑᔮᖅᑑᑎᒋᔭᕗᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ calendar and curriculum. We would like it set ᒪᓕᒐᑦᓴᖅ 25−ᒥ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᒡᒍᖅᑐᒃᑲᓐᓂᕋᓱᐊᕈᒪᔭᕗᑦ up that way in the future and improve it with ᓲᕐᓗ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᑦᓯᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᖁᒐᑦᑎᒍ the bill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᓂᕆᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᐅᓪᓗᖅᓯᐅᑏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᑎᒋ ᑭᓱᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᖓᒍᒪᔪᒍᑦ ᓯᕗᓂᑦᓴᑎᓐᓂ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ (interpretation ends) My understanding is that ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᒪᔭᕗᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᑦᓴᖅ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, was one of the big things that came out of the ᐃᑦᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Special Committee report was that there needs to be clarity on who does what, the coalition, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᑕᐃᒫᑦᑕᐅᖅ the DEAs, the department, and that’s what ᑐᑭᓯᓯᒪᖅᑲᐅᒻᒥᔪᖓ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᖏᔪᑲᓪᓛᓗᒃ you’re trying to do under Bill 25. That’s my ᓴᖅᑭᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᖑᑲᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᐃᑦ understanding anyway. ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᕆᔪᔭᖓᓂᒃ. ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑕᐅᑦᓯᐊᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᑭᒃᑯᑦ ᑭᓱᓕᕆᔨᐅᒻᒪᖔᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ (interpretation) Moving on. Mr. Qamaniq. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓪᓗ. ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᐅᕋᓱᑉᐳᓯ ᑕᕝᕘᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25−ᑯᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᓯᒪᔭᒃᑯᓪᓕ.

Mr. Qamaniq (interpretation): Thank you, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᑲᔪᕼᐃᓗᑕ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ. Mr. Chairman. Welcome to the Chamber.

ᖃᒪᓂᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ. ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᑦᑎ The first question I would like to ask is about ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ. the membership of the Coalition of Nunavut District Education Authorities that is listed on ᐅᓇ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔪᒪᔭᕋ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ. ᖃᕋᓴᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ your website. It includes representatives from ᐃᑭᐊᖅᑭᕕᔅᓯ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᓯᒪᖕᒪᑕ ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᔪᖁᑎᖏᑦ district education authorities, Nunavut ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᖅᑎᖓᑕ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ Tunngavik Incorporated, the Nunavummi ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᓚᖃᕐᒪᑕ Disabilities Makinnasuaqtiit Society, and the ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᒃ, Commission scolaire francophone du ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ, ᓄᓇᕘᒥ ᐊᔪᕈᑎᓖᑦ Nunavut. Can you explain how these ᒪᑭᒪᓇᓱᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᑎᒥᖓᓂᒃ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᐃᕖᒃᑯᑦ representatives work together to address ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕘᒥ. concerns regarding education throughout ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕆᔪᓐᓇᖅᐱᐅᒃ ᖃᓄᖅ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᑎᒥᐅᔪᓂᒃ Nunavut? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᖅᑎᐅᔪᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᒃᐸᖕᒪᖔᑕ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᓱᒫᓗᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᓕᒫᖅ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Arreak. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Mr. Arreak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᐋᕆᐊᒃ. Qamaniq, for that good question. I can respond by saying that we have ten board ᐋᕆᐊᒃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ, ᐊᐱᕆᑦᑎᐊᕋᕕᑦ. members on the coalition and those ᑭᐅᓂᐊᖅᖢᒍ ᐃᒪᐃᓕᖓᔪᒥᒃ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔩᑦ representatives that you mentioned are ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐃᒪᐃᓕᖓᓂᖓ ᖁᓕᐅᖕᒪᑕ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑕᐃᕋᑖᖅᑕᑎᓪᓗ

included there: NTI, the French commission, ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓃᖦᖢᑎᒃ. ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓪᓗ, ᐅᐃᕖᒃᑯᓪᓗ the disabilities society, and the Iqaluit DEA. ᐃᒃᓯᕚᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑎᒥᒥᒍᑦ ᐊᔪᕈᑎᓖᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ There are five other positions that are set ᐃᖃᓗᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ aside as observer seats. We also have an ᑕᓪᓕᒪᐅᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑕᓪᓕᒪᐅᑎᖦᖢᒋᑦ (interpretation ends) emeritus member ᐃᒃᓯᕚᕐᕕᐅᔪᐃᑦ. ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ ᐃᒪᐅᕆᑎᔅ−ᒥᐅᑕᖃᖅᖢᑕ (interpretation) and we take pride in that fact, ᐅᐱᒍᓱᓐᖑᑎᕗᑦ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑐᖃᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ and a person with that type of experience is ᐃᓕᓴᕆᔾᔪᑎᕗᑦ ᐃᒃᓯᕚᖃᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᖢᓂ acknowledged and can sit to discuss ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᕋᐃᒐᒥᒃ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ educational issues as a person familiar with ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐃᓛᓐᓂᒃᑯᑦ. school operations. The representatives work together on issues. ᓲᕐᓗ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) When we started our review on Bill 25, we ᐱᓕᕆᓇᓱᒃᖢᑎᒍᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ. ᔫᓂ were notified on June 11 that Bill 25 would be 11−ᒥ ᑐᓴᖦᖤᖅᐳᒍᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 reviewed. As a result, we conducted our first (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔭᐅᓂᐊᕐᒪᑦ. ᐊᓱᐃᓪᓛᒃ reviews by having the board meet, where they ᐱᒋᐊᖦᖤᖅᐳᒍᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᖃᑎᒌᖦᖤᖅᐳᑦ directed us to consult via emails with the ᑎᓕᓯᖦᖤᖅᐳᑦ. ᐊᓱᐃᓪᓛᒃ ᖃᕋᓴᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᑎᒍᑦ DEAs on their concerns on the proposed ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ legislation. After we compiled the ᑎᒥᖏᑦ ᑐᓴᕐᕕᒋᓇᓱᖦᖤᖅᐸᕗᑦ. ᑕᐃᒫᒃ information, we laid out a plan as a group. We ᑲᑎᖅᓱᐃᓚᐅᖅᖢᑕ ᐸᕐᓇᓯᖦᖤᖅᐳᒍᑦ. ᐸᕐᓇᓚᐅᖅᖢᑕ then presented the plan to the board, who ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐸᕐᓇᒃᑕᕗᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᑕᑯᓇᒃᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᖢᓂ. ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕗᑦ ᑕᑯᓇᓚᐅᖅᖢᑎᒃ reviewed the plan and upon approval, we ᓈᒻᒪᒃᓴᕐᒪᑕ ᐊᓱᐃᓪᓛᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐅᑎᕐᕕᒋᓪᓗᑎᒍ distributed it to the communities and to each ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᕋᓛᑦ. ᓲᕐᓗ of our DEAs. To use this example, when we ᐆᒃᑑᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑕᑯᓇᓕᕋᑦᑎᒍ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ reviewed the plan, we also laid out what we ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕐᕕᒋᓇᓱᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᓇᓱᖕᒪᖔᑦᑕ had planned as the coalition. ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᐅᔪᒍᑦ.

We kept the local DEAs appraised of our ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓃᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᓐᓇᓱᒃᖢᑎᒍᑦ plans specific to Bill 25 and what we would ᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᓕᖓᔪᒥᒃ ᑕᕝᕗᖓ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25−ᒨᖅᓯᒪᔪᒥᒃ present. We bared all of our action items and, ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᑎᓐᓂᐊᕋᑦᑕ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕐᕕᒋᑦᑎᐊᖅᖢᒋᑦ if they had any questions, we answered them ᐊᐱᖅᓱᕈᒪᒑᖓᑕᓗ ᐊᐱᖅᓱᕈᓐᓇᖅᑎᖦᖢᑎᒍᑦ and sent out information packages to keep ᑐᓴᐅᒪᑎᑦᑎᐊᕋᓱᒃᖢᑎᒍᑦ. ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ them informed. Further, in developing our ᐸᕐᓇᐃᓚᐅᕐᒥᔪᒍᑦ ᐃᓛᓐᓂᒃᑯᑦ plan, we included information that they could ᖃᐅᔨᒪᑎᑦᑎᓇᓱᓚᐅᕐᒥᔪᒍᑦ ᐊᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ contemplate, as most DEAs are shut down for ᓄᖅᑲᖓᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ the summer. This caused some problems for ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᕈᑎᒋᓚᐅᕐᒥᒐᑦᑎᒍ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ the coalition as most of the communities take ᓄᖅᑲᖔᕐᓂᖅᓴᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᐊᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ the summer off. After we submitted our plan, ᐱᓕᕆᓚᐅᖅᖢᑎᒍᑦ ᑕᐃᑲᓂ. ᐃᓱᐊᓂᒃ we included at the very end space an ᐱᕕᖃᖅᑎᑦᑎᓕᓚᐅᕐᒥᔪᒍᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐃᓪᓗᑕ. opportunity to review the draft, but that if they ᑭᐅᔪᓐᓇᖏᒃᑯᔅᓯ ᓇᖕᒥᓂᖅ ᐅᑯᐊ ᑕᕝᕙ couldn’t provide a response, we had a list of ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᒋᔪᓐᓇᕐᒥᔭᓯ. ᓲᕐᓗ prepared responses they could choose from. ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᒋᔪᓐᓇᕐᒥᔭᓯ. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ That’s how we put the plan together. I’m just ᐸᕐᓇᐃᔾᔪᑎᖃᓚᐅᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᐆᒃᑑᑎᒋᓇᓱᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᖢᒍ using that as an example in trying to answer ᑭᐅᓇᓱᒃᖢᖓ ᐃᓕᖕᓄᑦ. ᑭᐅᑦᑎᐊᖅᐸᒋᓪᓗᑭᐊᖅ your question. I hope I answered your ᐋᒃᑲᓗᑭᐊᖅ. question.

Further, related to the second part is our ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐊᐃᑉᐸᖓ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᒋᓗᒍ. response as the coalition is involved in the ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᕈᑎᖃᓕᕌᖓᑕ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ selection of (interpretation ends) principals ᐱᖃᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕋᑦᑕ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ and (interpretation) their vice-principals in ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᑐᒡᓕᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᓂᕈᐊᕋᓱᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. conjunction with the DEAs. When they run ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᕈᑎᖃᓕᕌᖓᑕ ᐅᖄᓚᕕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᒍᑦ. into issues, they tend to call our offices. When ᐅᖄᓚᕕᐅᒑᖓᑦᑕ ᑭᐅᓇᓱᒋᐊᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᒍ ᖃᓄᖅ called, we try to provide various options on ᐃᑲᔪᕈᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑦᑕ. ᓲᕐᓗ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐆᒃᑑᑎᒋᔪᓐᓇᕐᒥᔭᕗᑦ. how we can assist them. We can also use this ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊᓗ ᑭᓐᖒᒪᔪᐃᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᐊᐱᖅᓱᖃᑦᑕᕐᒥᔪᐃᑦ example. When communities require ᖃᓄᖅ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᕋᓱᓪᓚᕆᒃᑲᓗᐊᕋᑦᑕ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ something, they also submit queries on their ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᑭᓱᒥᒃ ᐱᔭᒃᓴᖃᕋᑦᑕ ᓲᕐᓗ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔪᓐᓃᖅᑐᓂᒃ mandates and the actual responsibilities they ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑐᓴᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᒍᑦ. are supposed to fulfill.

Some questions revolve around their duties within the school operations, as some DEAs ᐃᓚᖏᓪᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓕᓂᐊᓘᓪᓗᑎᒃ become overwhelmed and confused. Then ᐱᖃᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᐊᓗᐃᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᖓᑦ there are some communities that have vastly ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔪᕐᔪᐊᖑᓪᓗᑎᒃ. ᐅᓪᓗᒥ ᑎᑭᖦᖢᒍ ᓇᓗᓕᖅᑐᐃᑦ experienced board members well-versed in ᓲᕐᓗ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᓇᓱᒋᐊᒃᓴᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ managing school operations and issues. There ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᖅ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᓇᓱᒋᐊᒃᓴᖅ are some members who have been involved ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ. ᑕᐃᒫᒐᓚᒃ. from way back and who could even be called ᖃᐅᔨᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᒍᓪᓕ. experts, yet due to the changing parameters, they become confused as to how they can be involved within school operations and the proper way to represent the parents and students within the school policies. We have seen that. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑭᐅᑦᑎᐊᖅᐸᕋᓗᑭᐊᖅ ᐅᑎᖅᑎᑉᐸᕋ. I hope I responded properly to the question. I ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. give it back to you. Thank you.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ. Qamaniq.

Mr. Qamaniq (interpretation): Thank you, ᖃᒪᓂᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ Mr. Chairman. The Minister should know that ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᓕᖅᖢᒍ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓪᓗᐊᕐᒪᑦ ᔫᓐ, ᔪᓚᐃ, ᐋᒌᓯᓗ the months of June, July, and August are the ᓄᖅᑲᖓᓐᓇᐅᓕᓲᖑᖕᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᓂ. ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᑦ end of the school year. It’s a holiday. Why did ᔫᓂ 11-ᖑᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑦᑎᑕᐃᓐᓇᓕᓚᐅᖅᐱᓯ you finally announce on June 1 that there will ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᔪᐊᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᓯᕗᕐᖓᒍᑦ be a review of Bill 25? Could you not have ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑦᑎᔪᓐᓇᓚᐅᖏᓐᓇᔅᓯ ᔫᓂ ᑎᑭᓚᐅᖅᑎᓐᓇᒍ? informed the people before June? Thank you, ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ. Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Qamaniq, I believe the announcement you’re ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ asking about came from the Standing ᐅᖃᐅᕼᐃᕆᔭᑦ ᐅᕙᑦᑎᓃᓐᖔᓚᐅᖅᑰᖅᑐᖅ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᖑᓪᓗᑕ

Committee. The review started in June and ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᖑᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᕐᓂᒃ ᑐᒃᕼᐃᕋᖅᕼᐃᒪᓚᐅᕋᑦᑕ. the deadline for submissions was in ᔫᓐ−ᒥ ᐱᒋᐊᓚᐅᖅᖢᓂ ᓯᑎᕝᕙ−ᒥ ᑭᒡᓕᖃᖅᖢᓂ September. We requested submissions from ᑐᒃᕼᐃᕋᖅᕼᐃᒪᓚᐅᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᑐᕼᐊᕐᕕᒋᕼᐅᐊᖅᖢᑎᒍᑦ the people of Nunavut regarding Bill 25. I ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥᐅᑦ ᑕᒪᔅᓱᒪ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴ hope that you understand that. Mr. Qamaniq. 25 ᒥᒃᕼᐋᓄᑦ. ᑐᑭᓯᓇᕐᓂᖅᐸᑦ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ.

Mr. Qamaniq (interpretation): Why did you ᖃᒪᓂᖅ: ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᒃᑭᐊᕐᖓᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ inform the people after the school year was ᓄᖅᑲᖓᕙᓪᓕᐊᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ending? We only heard it from the Minister in ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑦᑎᑕᐃᓐᓇᓕᓚᐅᖅᐱᓯ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᐅᑉ June regarding Bill 25. I was not an MLA at ᖃᐃᓕᑕᐃᓐᓇᓚᐅᕐᒪᒍ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑕᖅᑭᖅ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ. that time. I would like to know why you ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔪᒪᓕᖅᖢᒍ. finally presented the letter when the school ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎᐅᓚᐅᓐᖏᓐᓇᒪ ᑕᐃᔅᓱᒪᓂ ᔫᓂᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ. year was ending. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᑐᑭᓯᑦᑎᐊᕈᒪᒐᓗᐊᖅᐳᖓ ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᑦ ᐅᐱᕐᖓᒃᓵᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓇᖅ ᓄᖅᑲᖓᕙᓪᓕᐊᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑎᑎᕋᑕᐃᓐᓇᓚᐅᕐᒪᖔᔅᓯ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you.

You’re asking me? ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᐅᕙᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᐱᕆᓐᓂᕈᕕᑦ?

>>Laughter >>ᐃᓪᓚᖅᑐᑦ

Yes, the bill was presented in the House in ᐄ, ᐄᑯᓗᒃ. ᑖᒻᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᕼᐊᖅ ᒪᐃᖑᑎᖦᖢᒍ May and it had second reading. After that it ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᕼᐊᖅᑭᑎᑕᐅᓚᐅᕐᒪᑦ was given to the Standing Committee for ᑐᒡᓕᕆᔭᖓᓂᓪᓗᒎᖅ ᐅᖃᓕᒫᖅᑕᐅᓂᖃᓚᐅᖅᖢᓂ. review and then we were given 120 days to ᑕᐃᒪ ᑭᖑᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᐅᕙᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᓄᑦ ᕼᐆᕐᓗ review it. The time was slowly ending and ᑐᓂᔭᐅᔪᖅ. ᑕᐃᑲᓐᖓᓂ ᐱᒋᐊᖅᖢᒍ 120-ᓂᒃ even though June was going to be in the ᐅᑉᓗᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᓕᓚᐅᕋᑉᑕ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᔫᓪᓗᐊᓕᖅᖢᑎᒍ spring or summer, we decided to inform the ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᕼᐊᕐᒃ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑕᕝᕙ ᐅᑉᓗᑕᒫᖅ ᑕᕝᕙ people of Nunavut at that time. Mr. Qamaniq. ᐱᕕᒋᔭᖅᐳᑦ ᓄᖑᕙᓪᓕᐊᖅ. ᕼᐆᕐᓗ ᐱᕕᖃᕈᓐᓃᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᕋᐅᔭᖅᑐᑎᑐᑦ ᐱᓚᐅᕋᑉᑕ. Mr. Qamaniq (interpretation): Thank you, ᐊᐅᔭᐅᓂᐊᕋᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐅᐱᕐᖔᖑᓂᐊᕋᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ Mr. Chairman, for answering the question. ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥᐅᓄᑦ ᑐᕼᐊᕈᐊᕈᑎᒋᓕᓚᐅᔪᒍᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ The question I have now is to the ᖃᒪᓂᖅ. representatives of the coalition of district education authorities. Can you provide details ᖃᒪᓂᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ ᑭᐅᒐᕕᓐᖓ. on any consultations that were specifically ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔪᒪᓕᕐᒥᔭᕋ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ conducted by your organization with respect ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᖅᑎᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ. to the Government of Nunavut’s proposed ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕈᓐᓇᖅᐱᒌᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᕐᓂᕕᓂᖅᓯ ᑖᓐᓇ ᖃᓄᖅ education legislation? Thank you, Mr. ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᐅᖕᒪᖔᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑕᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᔅᓯᓐᓂᒃ Chairman. ᑎᒥᖁᑎᖓᓄᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᖓᑕ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎᖓᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᒥᒃ? Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ. Merkosak. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ. Ms. Merkosak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We didn’t quite understand ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ. your question, so if you can repeat it, please. ᑐᑭᓯᑦᑎᐊᖏᓐᓇᑦᑕ ᐅᖃᑦᑎᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᕈᕕᐅᒃ. Thank you. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ. Qamaniq.

Mr. Qamaniq: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Can the Coalition of Nunavut District ᖃᒪᓂᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ Education Authorities provide details on any ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔩᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ consultations that were specifically conducted ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑐᐃᒍᓐᓇᖅᑳᑦ ᖃᓄᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅ by your organization with respect to the ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᕐᓂᖃᕐᓂᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓪᓗᒋᑦ Government of Nunavut’s proposed education ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᖏᑕ ᑐᔅᓯᕌᕆᔭᖏᑦ legislation? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐊᕆᒐᓱᐊᖅᑕᖏᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) This was mentioned a bit ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᓇᑯᕐᒦᒃ. earlier by Mr. Arreak. Mr. Arreak. ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑲᐅᒻᒥᔫᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᒥᔅᑕ ᐋᕆᐊᒃ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐋᕆᐊᒃ.

Mr. Arreak (interpretation): Thank you for repeating your question. To add to what I ᐋᕆᐊᒃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᐊᐱᕆᒃᑲᓐᓂᕋᕕᑦ. ᑕᐃᓐᓇ mentioned earlier, we had identified a plan. ᐃᓚᒋᐊᕐᓗᒍ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᖅᑲᐅᔭᕋ The members come from the communities ᐸᕐᓇᒃᐸᓪᓕᐊᓕᓚᐅᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊᑦᑕᐅᖅ and as representatives they have to consult ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓃᓐᖔᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᓪᓗᑎᒃ. with the public. Our members are also ᐱᔭᒃᓴᖃᖃᑦᑕᕐᒥᒐᒥᒃ ᑐᓴᕐᕕᖃᕆᐊᒃᓴᖅ ᐊᒻᒪ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᓇᖕᒥᓂᖅ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕗᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ knowledgeable about their communities. We ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᖕᒪᖔᑕ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑎᒋᖃᑦᑕᖅᑕᕗᑦ initiate our consultations with them. I used an ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ ᐆᒃᑑᑎᖃᖅᑲᐅᒐᒪ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 example of what our mandate is with respect ᑖᓐᓇ ᐱᓕᕆᓪᓗᑎᒍᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓵᕝᕕᒋᓚᐅᕐᒥᔭᕗᑦ to (interpretation ends) Bill 25. ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᖁᔨᖕᒪᖔᑕ. ᖃᓄᖅ (interpretation) We asked what the ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᕈᑎᖃᕋᔭᖅᐸᑦ ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ communities wanted and the problems they 25−ᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᕈᑎᖃᕋᔭᖅᐸᑦ had regarding (interpretation ends) Bill 25 ᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᓕᖓᔪᓂᒃ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕈᑦᑕ ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᑎᒍᑦᑕ (interpretation) and the reporting ᑖᔅᓱᒧᖔᖓᔪᓂᒃ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ requirements. We tried to give them ample ᐱᕕᖃᖅᑎᑦᑎᐊᕋᓱᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ. opportunity to voice their concerns.

One of the things that we find difficult is that ᐃᓛᓐᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᕈᑎᒋᖃᑦᑕᕐᒥᒐᑦᑎᒍᑦ they’re unsure of their roles are and that ᓲᕐᓗ ᓇᓗᓕᖅᓯᒪᓂᖏᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓃᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ. sometimes is an issue because they don’t ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᕈᑎᒋᖃᑦᑕᕐᒥᒐᑦᑎᒍ ᑖᓐᓇ speak up when they should be voicing ᓂᓪᓕᕋᔭᓐᖑᐊᓕᕋᓗᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᓂᓪᓕᖃᑦᑕᓐᖏᒻᒪᑕ. something. Perhaps they don’t always feel ᐃᓛᓐᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᓐᓂᐊᓱᒧᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᖃᓄᑭᐊᖅ. ᐃᓛᓐᓂᒃᑯᑦ like it’s their position to speak on behalf of ᐅᓂᒃᑲᐅᓯᕆᑦᑎᐊᖅᑲᐅᔭᖓ ᔨᑎᑕᐅᑉ their community. Jedidah clearly explained ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᖕᒪᖔᑕ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᐃᓛᓐᓂᒃᑯᑦ what it’s like in the communities when they ᑕᐃᒪᓕᖓᓕᕌᖓᑕ ᓂᓪᓕᕈᒪᔪᓐᓃᓲᖑᖕᒪᑕ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ run into that situation and Inuit in the ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓃᑦᑐᐃᑦ. ᑕᐃᒫᒃᑕᐅᖅ ᐅᕙᒍᑦ communities don’t want to voice their ᑐᒃᓯᕋᕋᓱᓕᕋᓗᐊᕌᖓᑦᑕ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᑦᑐᓂᒃ concerns anymore. In our case, when we ᐊᐳᕈᑎᖃᖃᑦᑕᕐᒥᒐᑦᑕ ᐊᒻᒪ ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓐᓇᐅᓪᓗᓄᒃ request feedback, we run into barriers. With ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᒃ ᐅᓪᓗᖅ ᐅᓪᓗᑭᓈᕆᖃᑦᑕᕐᒥᔪᒍᒃ just two of us on staff, sometimes our days fill ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᑐᓴᕐᕕᖃᕋᓱᓕᕌᖓᑦᑕ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. up quickly with a large workload. Thank you.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ. Merkosak.

Ms. Merkosak (interpretation): The coalition ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ: ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᒃᑯᑦ was invited by the Department of Education ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂ ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒃᑎᑕᐅᓯᒪᓚᐅᕋᑦᑕ to be engaged in the community consultations ᐃᓚᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᖢᑕ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓄᐊᑲᑕᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ and Inuit were asked to participate. We had ᑐᓴᕋᓱᒃᖢᑎᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ. ᐃᓛᒃ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ meetings and we heard the concerns from the ᖃᐃᖁᔭᐅᓯᒪᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᖃᑕᐅᖦᖤᖅᐳᒍᑦ people and what their thoughts were on this. ᑐᓴᕆᐊᕐᕕᖃᖦᖤᖅᐳᒍᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑭᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ We were writing down the responses during ᑎᑎᕋᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓪᓗᑕ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓇᓱᒃᖢᑕ ᐃᓄᖕᓂᒃ the consultations. We met with the district ᑐᓴᕈᒪᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐃᓛᒃᑯᑦ education authorities on occasion so that they ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᖃᑎᒋᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᕐᒥᔭᕗᑦ could hear what our thoughts were on the ᑐᓴᕐᕕᒋᓇᓱᒃᑭᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᐃᓕᓯᒪᖁᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ proposed bill. We also heard from them and ᒪᓕᒐᓐᖑᖅᑎᑕᐅᓇᓱᒃᑐᒥᒃ. ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᐅᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᑐᒍᑦ we gave them an opportunity to provide us ᐃᓛᒃᑯᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᑐᓴᕐᕕᒋᓇᓱᒃᖢᑎᒍᑦ ᐱᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ with any submissions or additional ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᕕᒃᓴᖃᖅᑎᑉᐸᒃᑭᓪᓗᑎᒍᑦ ᐃᑭᐊᖅᑭᕕᒃᑯᑦ information that can be posted on our website. ᑎᑎᕋᕐᕕᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᓇᒃᓯᐅᔾᔨᔪᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑕ Thank you. ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᓯᔪᒪᖕᒪᖔᑕᓘᓐᓃᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Qamaniq, do you have one more question? ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕈᕕᑦ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ. Mr. Qamaniq.

Mr. Qamaniq (interpretation): Thank you, ᖃᒪᓂᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ. Mr. Chairman. If it has already been asked, ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᐅᓯᒪᒍᓐᓇᖅᐸᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕐᓂᐊᕋᕕᖓ, maybe you can let me know. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ.

In Subpart 8 of Bill 25 they want to make two ᐃᓗᖃᕐᓂᖓ 8 ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒥ ᐊᓯᔾᔩᔪᒪᒻᒪᑕ amendments to the Education Act where the ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒥ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ coalition would be responsible for assigning a ᑭᒡᒐᑐᖅᑏ−ᖃᕆᐊᖃᕆᐊᖃᕋᔭᕐᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ registration and attendance policy or the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᕐᓂᐅᓪᓗ ᐃᓯᕈᑎᓂᒃ ᐊᑎᓕᐅᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᒃ Inuuqatigiitsiarniq policy “Where a district ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᐸᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᑐᐊᒐᕐᓂᒃ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ education authority fails to adopt a ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᑐᐊᒐᕐᒥᒃ. ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ registration and attendance policy as ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᒪᓕᒃᓴᖏᑉᐸᑕ required…” Are you in agreement with the ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᓇᓪᓕᐊᖕᓂᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅ ᐊᑐᐊᒐᕐᓂᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ proposed amendment and, if not, why not? ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᔪᒪᔪᑦ. ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒋᕕᒌᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐋᒡᒑᖅᐱᒌᑦ? That is my final question, Mr. Chairman. ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᕋ, Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ, ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ.

If I was not clear, I can ask the question in English. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᑐᑭᓯᓇᑦᑎᐊᖏᑉᐸᑦ ᖃᓪᓗᓇᐅᔭᕐᓗᖓ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᒥᔭᕋ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Arreak. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᐋᕆᐊᒃ.

Mr. Arreak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. ᐋᕆᐊᒃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓕ Qamaniq. We are responsible for those and ᐱᔭᒃᓴᕆᒐᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᓗ ᐱᓕᕆᓇᓱᖃᑦᑕᕋᑦᑎᒍᑦ we still continue to work on them. The district ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᕋᓛᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ education authorities are also responsible, for ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᖕᒪᒍ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐆᒃᑑᑎᒋᓗᒍ ᑕᖅᑭᖅᓯᐅᑎᑦ example, on setting the school calendar, ᖃᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ, ᖃᖓ ᐱᒋᐊᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ, including the start and end dates, and the daily ᖃᖓ ᐃᓱᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ administration of attendance for students, and ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᑦᑎᐊᓕᕋᓗᐊᖅᐹᑦ? ᖃᐅᑕᒫᖅᓯᐅᑎᕈᔪᐃᑦ so on. They are also required to use the ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᑎᒥᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᖅᐸᑦ ᑕᐃᒫᒐᓚᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ Inuuqatigiitsiarniq policy. That is something ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᒥᒃ ᐊᑐᕆᐊᖃᖦᖤᕆᕗᑦ. we agreed to as part of our role. ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐱᔭᒃᓴᐅᖕᒪᑕ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒋᓪᓗᑎᒍᓪᓕ ᒫᓐᓇ.

One of the issues we find is it seems ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐃᓛᓐᓂᒃᑯᑦ fragmented at this time. For example, if there ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᕈᑎᒋᖃᑦᑕᕋᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᓯᖁᒥᓯᒪᔫᔮᖅᑐᖅ is a directive communicated by (interpretation ᒫᓐᓇ. ᓲᕐᓗ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᓂᓪᓕᐊᔪᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ends) Department of Education ᑐᑭᒧᐊᒃᑎᑦᑎᔪᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐆᒃᑑᑎᒋᓗᒍ ᑕᕝᕗᖓ (interpretation) staff, there can be ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ miscommunication, particularly with ᓂᓪᓕᐊᔪᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓚᖏᑦ (interpretation ends) RSOs. (interpretation) ᑐᑭᓯᓂᕐᓗᒃᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᐃᓚᖓᓂᒃ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓗ RSO’s That is where some of our issues are. It seems ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐆᒃᑑᑎᒋᓗᒍ ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓄᑦ like they’re the ones who take the lead in ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᕈᑎᒋᖃᑦᑕᕋᑦᑎᒍᑦ directing the required policies. When that ᑐᑭᓕᐅᖅᑎᑦᑎᔨᐅᑐᐊᖑᔮᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᐅᖅᑐᖃᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ occurs, the communities don’t feel like they ᓂᓪᓕᕈᒪᔪᓐᓃᕐᔫᔮᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ. ᑭᐅᕙᕋᓗᑭᐊᖅ, have a voice anymore. I hope I answered the ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ ᐃᓕᖕᓄᑦ ᐅᑎᖅᑎᑉᐸᕋ. question. Mr. Chairman, I give the floor back ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. to you. Thank you.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᐃᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ (interpretation ends) The other question was ᐃᓗᓕᑯᓘᔭᖓ 81 ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ about clause 81 of the bill where the DEA ᓴᓐᖏᓂᖃᓕᕋᔭᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᒪᓕᒐᑯᓗᖕᓂᒃ coalition would be given powers to assign ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔪᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ. policies to communities. It appears to be a ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᓄᑖᖑᔮᕐᖓᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᓇᓱᒋᔭᖓᑦ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ new responsibility for the coalition. Minister ᔪᐊᓇᓯ, ᖃᓄᕐᓕ ᑭᐅᒍᓐᓇᕋᔭᕐᒪᖔᖅᐱᐅᒃ Joanasie, would you be able to comment on ᐃᓗᓕᑯᓘᔭᖅᑕᖓᑕ 81 ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᖅ clause 81 that Mr. Qamaniq was asking about ᒪᓕᒐᖅ. ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᒪᑯᓄᖓ ᐊᑎᓕᐅᕆᐊᖃᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖅ in terms of the Inuuqatigiitsiarniq policy and ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑑᔪᒧᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᓂᖏᓪᓗ the registration and attendance policies being ᐅᐸᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᓪᓗ? ᒥᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. given to the coalition? Minister Joanasie.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Chairman. Yes, this provision is to allow, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᑯᓄᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ where a local DEA does not have an ᒪᓕᒐᖅᑕᖃᓐᖏᑉᐸᑕ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ Inuuqatigiitsiarniq policy in place… . The ᑲᔪᓯᒋᐊᕈᑕᐅᒋᐊᖃᕋᔭᕐᒪᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᑎᒎᓇᖅ fallback is that the coalition would implement ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᒃᑯᑎᒍᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᖃᓐᖏᑉᐸᑕ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᒃ or make a recommendation to provide a ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓄᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. policy for that local authority. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ. Merkosak.

Ms. Merkosak (interpretation): I want Lori to respond to that. Thank you. ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ: ᓗᐊᕆᒧ ᑭᐅᔭᐅᖁᓪᓗᒍ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐃᓪᓚᐅᖅ. Idlout.

Ms. Idlout (interpretation): Thank you. I was ᐃᓪᓚᐅᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ pleased to hear Mr. Qamaniq’s terminology ᑐᓴᕐᓂᕆᖅᑲᐅᒐᒃᑯ ᐅᖃᖅᖢᓂ ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓕᒃ. ᑖᓐᓇ for the word “Chairman.” Thank you, Mr. ᑐᓴᕐᓂᕆᒐᒃᑯ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓕᒃ. Chairman. ᐊᐱᕆᔭᐅᓵᕋᑦᑕ ᖃᓄᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᒧᒪᒋᒻᒪᖔᑦᑎᒍ? We were just asked what our position is on ᑕᐃᑦᓱᒪᓂ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 37-ᒥᑦᑕᐅᖅ that. It is in the same section as Bill 37 that ᐃᓗᓕᕆᔭᐅᓚᐅᕐᒥᒻᒪᑦ. ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖑᖅᑎᑕᐅᒋᐊᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ was previously proposed. Section 190 is being 37 ᓈᓴᐅᑎᖓ ᐊᔾᔨᒋᑦᓯᐊᖅᖢᓂᐅᒃ, 190 ᐃᓚᖓ 1- replaced by 190(1). When the amendments ᖑᖃᑕᐅᒋᓪᓗᓂ. ᑕᐃᑦᓱᒪᓂ ᑖᓐᓇ were being proposed, we felt that we were ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᓴᒪᒋᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒻᒥᒐᑦᑎᒍᑦ being asked to do something on a whim ᑎᓕᐅᕆᔭᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᒍ, ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᒥᒃ without really being given authority. ᑐᓂᔭᐅᓪᓚᕆᖏᑦᑐᒍᑦ.

ᐃᖅᑲᐃᑎᑦᓯᔪᒪᓪᓗᖓ ᐅᐃᕖᒃᑯᑦ I would like to remind everyone that the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᖏᑦ ᑎᒥᖏᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓᓕ Commission scolaire francophone du Nunavut ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕆᓯᒪᑦᓯᐊᒻᒪᕆᑦᑐᑯᓗᓐᓂᒃ. ᐊᑐᐊᒐᕐᒥᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ has a very clear mandate and their existing ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕆᓯᒪᖏᑦᑐᑦ ᓇᓕᐊᓐᓂᒃ rights are not the same as ours. I wonder why ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᖁᑎᖃᕐᒪᖔᑦᑕ. ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᓪᓕᑭᐊᖅ the coalition is given the responsibility of ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓᑐᐊᑯᓗᒃ assigning such minor policies. The French ᐱᓕᕆᑎᑕᐅᒐᔭᖅᐸᑕ? ᐅᐃᕖᒃᑯᑦ ᑎᒥᖏᑦ school commission can create their own ᖃᓄᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅ ᐊᑐᐊᒐᓕᐅᕈᒪᑉᐸᑕ ᖃᓄᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅ policies at their discretion. The coalition ᐊᑐᐊᒐᓕᐅᕈᓐᓇᕐᒪᖃ. ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᒃᑯᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ should also be able to create policies and not ᐊᑐᐊᒐᓕᐅᕈᒪᓐᓂᖅᐸᑕ ᑕᐃᒫᑦᑕᐅᖅ just these ones. I hope that clarified it. Thank ᐃᓱᒪᖅᓱᖃᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᕆᐊᓕᑦ ᒪᑯᓂᖓᑐᐊᖑᖏᑦᑐᖅ. you. ᑐᑭᓯᓇᖅᓯᔾᔫᒻᒥᕙᖅᑲᐃ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. We ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᑕᐃᒪ ᐱᕕᖃᕈᓐᓃᐊᕆᐊᖅᖣᒐᑉᑕ are behind schedule and there are Members ᐅᑯᐊ ᕼᐅᓕ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᒍᐊᖅᕼᐅᑎᒃ, who still have questions. If you have one ᐊᑕᐅᓯᐊᕈᐊᕐᓂᕈᕕᑦ ᒥᔅᑐ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ. question, please go ahead, Mr. Lightstone.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ. have three topics that I was hoping to bring up ᐱᖓᓱᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᖃᕋᒪ ᓴᖅᑭᑦᓱᒪᔭᓐᓂᒃ for the coalition. They weren’t expressly ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᓄᑦ. identified in the coalition’s submission, but ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓪᓚᑦᑖᓚᐅᖏᑦᑑᖓᓗᐊᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᖏᓐᓂᒃ they were issues or concerns that were raised ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑕᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᓄᐃᑦᓯᔪᖃᓚᐅᕐᒪᑦ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ in other submissions that do have an effect on ᑐᓂᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᑦᑐᐊᓂᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᑦ DEAs. Mr. Chairman, I think that they are ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᖏᓐᓂᒃ. ᐃᓱᒪᕗᖓᓗ

quite important and, if you would allow me, I ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᖅᑰᕐᒪᑕ ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᓚᕿᕗᖓ ᓗᐊᕆᒥᒃ, would like to ask them and keep them very ᓇᐃᓈᓂᐊᖅᐳᖓ. ᐱᖓᓲᕗᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᔪᒪᔭᒃᑲ brief. The three topics are age of enrolment, ᐅᑭᐅᒋᔭᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦᓴᓄᓪᓗ ᐊᒻᒪ early childhood programs, and the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᓵᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐅᑎᐅᔪᐃᑦ, requirement for DEA member vulnerable ᒪᓕᒋᐊᖃᖅᑕᖏᓪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᓄᑦ. sector checks. Chairman, if you would allow, ᐃᓱᒪᒋᒐᒃᑭᓪᓗ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᐸᓗᖅᑰᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ, I would like to ask those three questions. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ, ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒻᒪᑦ ᐱᖓᓱᓂᒃ ᓗᐊᕆ Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᕙᕋ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ.

ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᑭᖑᕙᖅᓯᒪᓕᕇᕋᑦᑕ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᑲᑎᒪᐅᑎᑦᓴᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᒥᔅᑐ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ, ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒻᒪᑦ, (interpretation ends) We are already behind ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᖃᖅᑎᓂᐊᖅᐸᒋᑦ, ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ on our schedule, Mr. Lightstone, so I’ll allow ᓇᓕᑐᐃᓐᓇᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᐱᕆᓗᑎᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ you two. Pick your top two and ask those as ᓇᐃᓈᕐᔫᒻᒥᒋᐊᕐᓗᒋᒃ, ᐊᐱᕆᓂᐊᖅᐸᒃᑲᓗ briefly as possible, and I’ll ask the witnesses ᐊᐱᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᑭᐅᖁᓂᐊᕆᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᓇᐃᓈᖅᑐᒥᒃ. ᒥᔅᑐ to also answer briefly. Mr. Lightstone. ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒻᒪᕆᒃ. That’s much appreciated. ᓯᕗᓪᓕᐹᖅ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔪᒪᕙᕋ ᐅᑭᐅᖏᑦ The first question I would like to ask is the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᐊᓕᖅᑐᓪᓗ ᐱᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᐅᓪᓗᒥ age of enrolment. The current Education Act ᐃᓕᓐᓪᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒥ allows students to be enrolled between the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᕈᓐᓇᕈᑕᐅᕙᒻᒪᑦ ᐅᑭᐅᖃᖅᑐᓄᑦ 5-ᓂᑦ ages of 5 and 21. The Education Act grants 21ᒧᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ authority to DEAs to allow an exemption for ᐱᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᖃᖅᑎᑦᓯᕙᒻᒪᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᑦ students that are over the age of 21. There are ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᓯᔪᓐᓇᖅᖢᑎᒃ two issues there. There are issues that there ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓄᑦ ᐅᑭᐅᖃᖅᑐᓄᑦ 21 ᐅᖓᑖᓂᑦ. are adults attending school in class alongside ᒪᕐᕉᓪᓗᑎᓪᓗ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᐅᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᑕᒡᕙᓂ, much younger youth, which is a concern, and ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒃᓴᐅᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᓐᓇᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖃᑕᐅᕙᑦᑐᑦ I would like to ask for your input on that, but ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᖕᓂ ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᒪᒃᑯᓐᓂᓴᐅᔪᓄᑦ, there is also the opposite side of the spectrum. ᐃᓱᒫᓗᓐᓇᕐᒪᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔪᒪᓪᓗᒍ. ᐊᓯᐊᓂᒃᑕᐅᖅ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᕆᓪᓗᓂ.

Every jurisdiction in Canada does have ᑕᒪᕐᒥᒐᓴᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᐊᕕᑦᑐᖅᓯᒪᓂᐅᔪᓂ similar enrolment requirements, but they also ᐊᔾᔨᐸᓗᐊᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ have exemptions and give school boards the ᐊᑐᐊᒐᖃᐅᖅᖢᓂ ᒪᓕᒋᐊᓕᓐᓂᒃ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂᑦᑕᐅᖅ authority to allow parents to enrol their ᐃᓱᒪᖅᓱᖅᑎᑦᓯᔪᓐᓇᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᓂᒃ children early, if they so choose. I know that ᐱᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᖃᖅᑎᑦᓯᕙᒃᖢᑎᒃ ᐊᖏᔪᖅᖄᕆᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ there are pros and cons to early enrolment, but ᐱᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᑲᖅᑎᑦᓯᒋᓪᓗᑎᒃ I do believe that it should be the parent’s ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᖕᒧᐊᖅᑎᑦᓯᔪᓐᓇᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐅᑭᐅᑭᓐᓂᖅᓴᓂᒃ decision and not the government’s. In those ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᓱᒪᓐᓂᕈᑎᒃ. ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓪᓗᖓ jurisdictions they give their school boards the ᐃᖢᐊᕐᓂᖃᐅᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐃᖢᐊᖏᓐᓂᖃᑲᐅᕐᓂᖓᓂᓗ authority to allow the children under the age ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᖕᒧᐊᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂᓗ ᐅᐱᕆᒻᒥᒐᒃᑯ of five to enrol early given that they pass a ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᓕᐅᕈᑎᒋᒋᐊᖃᕐᒪᒡᔪᒃ certain standardized test to ensure that the ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑰᖏᑦᑐᖅ. ᑖᒃᑯᓇᓂ ᐊᕕᑦᑐᖅᓯᒪᓂᐅᔪᓂ children meet emotional and intellectual ᐱᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᑖᖅᑎᑦᓯᔪᓐᓇᖅᖢᑎᒃ maturity. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᓄᑕᖅᑲᑦ ᐅᑭᐅᖃᖅᑐᑦ 5 ᑐᖔᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᓵᓕᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᔪᖏᒃᑯᑎᒃ ᐃᒃᐱᓐᓂᐊᓂᕐᒥᒍᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒍᓐᓇᕐᓂᕐᒥᒍᓪᓗ.

That’s my first question about those two ᑖᓐᓇ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖑᓪᓗᓂ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑏᖕᓂᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ spectrums of the age requirements. Thank ᒪᕐᕉᖕᓂᒃ ᑕᐅᑐᒍᓐᓇᖅᑕᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ you, Mr. Chairman. ᐅᑭᐅᒋᔭᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓄᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦ ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᐋᕆᐊᒃ. Arreak.

Mr. Arreak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Lightstone, for your question. I will try to ᐋᕆᐊᒃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᒥᔅᑐ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ ᐊᐱᕆᒐᕕᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ respond in part with respect to the report of ᐃᓚᖓᒍᑦ ᑭᐅᓇᓱᖕᓂᐊᖅᐸᕋ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᑲᓇᑕᐅᑉ the (interpretation ends) Auditor General of ᑕᒻᒪᖅᓯᒪᔪᕐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖓᓄᑦ ᐆᒃᑑᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᒍ ᑕᒫᓂ Canada. (interpretation) A major barrier is we ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓐᓇᕐᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕋᓱᒃᑐᓄᑦ haven’t really prepared for adult education in ᐸᕐᓇᒃᓯᒪᓐᖏᓗᐊᕐᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕘᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ. ᑖᓐᓇ Nunavut. I think that was announced in May ᐊᒡᕕᐊᕈᑎᓪᓚᕆᐅᖕᒪᑦ. ᓂᓪᓕᕈᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᓂᐅᒡᓗ 2019 and it was released shortly thereafter. ᒪᐃ 2019 ᑕᒡᕙᓂ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᓴᖅᑭᑎᓚᐅᕐᒪᒍ We reviewed this report ourselves, and the ᑕᑯᓇᓚᐅᖅᖢᑎᒍ ᓇᖕᒥᓂᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ 21 ᓇᓗᓇᖏᑦᑐᖅ chosen age of 21 has led some communities to ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓂ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂᒃ try to manage students up to that age. We ᑲᒪᒋᔭᐅᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᑰᖕᒥᖕᒪᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ believe it requires further development and to ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᔭᐅᑦᑎᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᖃᕋᓱᒋᔭᕗᑦ flesh out (interpretation ends) adult education ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓗᓂ ᐃᓐᓇᕐᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ. (interpretation) whereby adults receive educational courses.

I wanted to supplement that to our response. I ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᕈᒪᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᖢᒍ ᑭᐅᔪᖓ. ᐃᓚᖏᑦ don’t think I adequately responded to that and ᑭᐅᔭᐃᓐᓇᕆᔪᓐᓇᖏᖦᖢᒋᑦ. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᒻᒪᖃᐃ I cannot answer them all. Perhaps the ᑭᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑕᖏᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. chairperson can respond. Thank you.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒥᔅ ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ, (interpretation ends) Ms. Merkosak, briefly, if ᓇᐃᓈᕐᓗᑎᑦ ᐱᒍᓐᓇᕈᕕᑦ. ᒥᔅ ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ. you can. Ms. Merkosak.

Ms. Merkosak (interpretation): Thank you. ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᑭᐅᒋᐊᕌᕐᔪᒍᒪᓪᓗᒍ I’ll respond further. I used to be a DEA ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓃᔅᓲᔭᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᒪ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ member and something we thought about in ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᒋᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᑦᑎᒍ our communities is when someone reaches the ᓄᓇᓕᒋᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ 21 ᐅᖓᑖᓄᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᖃᓕᖅᑐᑦ age of 21 or over, they want to return because ᐅᑎᕈᒪᖃᑦᑕᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ. ᓲᕐᓗ they left school for whatever reason as a ᓄᖅᑲᓚᐅᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᖁᑦᑎᖕᓂᖅᓴᒦᓕᕋᓗᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ younger person and as they matured, they ᒪᒃᑯᖕᓂᕐᒥᓄᒃ, ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᖅᓱᓚᐅᑲᒍᒪᓂᕐᒥᓄᑦ want to come back. We used to think about it ᓄᖅᑳᓪᓚᓚᐅᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐅᑎᕈᒪᓕᖅᑐᓂᒃ at the DEA level, whether they can return or if ᐱᑕᖃᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᑦ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᓪᓗ ᑖᓐᓇ they’re too old in terms of their maturity ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᒋᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᑦᑎᒍᑦ, ᐅᑎᕐᓖ compared to the age group. ᐅᕝᕙᓗ ᐃᓚᐅᓪᓗᐊᓕᖅᐸ?

We lead different lifestyles and sometimes as a young person, you find that there are so ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᐃᓅᓯᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑰᕋᑦᑕ ᐃᓛᓐᓂᓪᓗ

many factors that get you out and then you ᐃᓱᒪᑦᑎᐊᕚᓪᓕᓕᕋᑦᑕ ᐅᑎᕐᓗᑕ ᐃᓗᐊᕐᓂᖅᓴᐅᓪᓗᓂ. seem to want to come back to school. It’s very ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᑕᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᓂ 21 much a source of pride for us when they do ᐅᖓᑖᓃᓕᕋᓗᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ come back to school and complete their ᐅᑎᒃᑲᓐᓂᕋᒥᒃ ᐱᔭᕇᖅᓯᓕᖅᖢᑎᒃ. education. It also shows the younger people ᐅᐱᓐᓇᓗᐊᓐᖑᐊᖃᑦᑕᖅᖢᑎᒃ that they should stay in school and that they ᐱᕕᒃᓴᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᒪᑕ. ᐊᒻᒪ, ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ shouldn’t just quit, but sometimes young ᓄᑲᖅᖠᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᑕᑯᔾᔪᑕᐅᓕᖅᖢᑎᒃ, “ᐊᓱ, people think that if they reach a certain age ᓄᖅᑲᕆᐊᖃᖏᑦᑐᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ.” “ᐊᓱ, like 14, 15, or 16, they can do whatever they ᑲᔪᓯᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᖓ.” ᑕᒫᓂ ᐃᓅᓱᒃᑐᑦ ᑕᒫᓂᖃᐃ 14, want and leave school. It’s obvious that that’s 15, 16, ᑕᒫᓂᖃᐃ ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᖃᖅᖢᑎᒃ a mistake. Sometimes they change their minds ᐃᓐᓇᐅᓇᓱᒋᓕᕋᒥᒃ ᐃᓱᒪᖅᓱᕈᒪᓕᖅᖢᑎᒃ and they’re able to come back to school, so ᓄᖅᑲᕈᒪᓕᓲᖑᖕᒪᑕ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑕᒻᒪᖅᑐᑦ they become a role model because they ᓇᓗᓇᖏᒃᑲᓗᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ. ᐅᑎᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅᑐᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ decided to return. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᐅᑦᑎᐊᕈᒥᓇᖅᑰᔨᓕᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐋᓯᑦ This is something we thought about as DEA ᓄᖅᑲᕆᐊᖃᖏᑦᑐᖔ−ᓚᔾᔪᑕᐅᓕᕈᓐᓇᓲᖑᖕᒪᑕ. members. It’s a good when they return to school. Even though the age of 21 is ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᒋᕙᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔭᕗᑦ specified, it would be nice to allow anyone ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᐅᓪᓗᑕ. ᐅᑎᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅᐸᑦ over the age of 21 to go back to school and ᐱᐅᖅᑰᔨᓪᓗᓂ. ᑖᓐᓇ 21 ᑕᐃᔭᐅᓯᒪᔫᒐᓗᐊᖅ. although it may not be appropriate in some ᐱᕕᒃᓴᖃᖅᑎᑦᑎᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᒥᓇᖅᑐᕐᓕ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐅᑎᕈᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐃᓚᖓᒍᑦ ᐃᓗᐊᑦᑎᐊᖅᑰᔨᖏᒃᑭᓪᓗᓂ ways, we want to welcome them and we don’t ᐅᑎᕆᐊᖃᖅᑰᔨᔪᓃᖅᖢᓂ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ, want to stop people from returning to school. ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒃᑎᑦᑎᔪᒪᒐᑦᑕ ᓄᖅᑲᖅᑎᑦᑎᔪᒪᓐᖏᓐᓇᑦᑕᓗ That’s what I wanted to add. Thank you. ᐅᑎᕈᒪᔪᒥᒃ. ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᕌᕐᔪᒃᐸᕋ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒡᓗ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒥᔅᑐ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑ (interpretation ends) Mr. Lightstone, your ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᑦ ᐊᐃᑉᐹ ᕿᓚᒥᐅᒍᓐᓇᕈᕕᐅᒃ. ᒥᔅᑐ final question briefly, please. Mr. Lightstone. ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ. would like to pose the same question to the ᐊᔾᔨᓴᐃᓐᓇᖓᓂᒃ ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᕗᖓ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒥᒃ. Minister. A constituent of mine had tried to ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᕝᕕᒋᔭᕐᓃᑦᑐᖅ ᕿᑐᕐᖓᒥᓂᒃ enrol their child early into the school system ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᖕᒧᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓇᓱᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᑦ ᕿᑐᕐᖓᒥᓂᒃ and they were told they were denied because ᐅᑭᐅᑭᑦᑐᒥᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐋᒡᒑᖅᑕᐅᓪᓗᓂ the Education Act does not allow for that. In ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᒡᒎᖅ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᐊᔪᕈᑕᐅᖕᒪᑦ. my mind, if a child is emotionally and ᐊᒻᒪᓗ, ᐃᓱᒪᒃᑯᑦ, ᓄᑕᖅᑲᖅ ᐃᒃᐱᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒥᒍᑦ intellectually advanced at a young age, I think ᐃᓱᒪᒍᓐᓇᕐᓂᕐᒥᒍᓪᓗ ᐊᔪᖏᒃᑯᓂ ᐅᑭᐅᑭᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ there should be some sort of parameters to ᐃᓱᒪᔪᖓ ᐱᕕᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᒋᐊᖃᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓄᑕᖅᑲᓄᑦ 5- allow for children who do not meet that five ᓂᒃ ᓱᓕ ᐅᑭᐅᖃᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᖃᓂᒃᓴᓕᕋᓗᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ. years of age but are close into it. I think that ᐃᓱᒪᔪᖓ ᐃᓱᒪᓕᐅᕈᑕᐅᒋᐊᖃᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ decision should be made by the parents and ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᓐᓅᖏᑦᑐᖅ not by the government and the Department of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᕐᔪᐊᒃᑯᓐᓂ. Education.

I would like to ask the Minister: why is it that ᑕᒡᕙ ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᕙᕋ ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᓱᒻᒪᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ the DEAs are allowed to provide exemptions ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᑦ ᐊᔪᓐᖏᑎᑦᓯᔭᕆᐊᖃᓲᖑᕙᑦ

for children or students above the age of 21 ᐅᑭᐅᖁᖅᑐᓗᐊᖅᑑᔪᑦ ᐱᓪᓗᒋᑦ 21 ᐅᖓᑖᓂᒃ but not below the age of 5? Thank you, Mr. ᐅᑭᐅᖃᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᔪᖅᑎᑦᓯᓪᓗᑎᒃ 5 ᑐᖔᓂ Chairman. ᐅᑭᐅᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Minister Joanasie. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is our position that the DEAs ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, continue developing their attendance and ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᕗᓪᓕ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ registration policies and they are best suited to ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐅᐸᖃᑦᑕᖅᑕᖏᑦ make those calls. The Education Act doesn’t ᐊᑐᐊᒐᖅᑐᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊᓕ ᐋᖅᑭᑦᓯᔪᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑕ ᑖᓐᓇ stipulate the earliest age when a student or a ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ, child can be entered into the school system ᓱᕈᓯᓛᖑᔪᓂᒃ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᓱᕈᓯ from my understanding. Thank you, Mr. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓕᐊᕈᒪᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑐᑭᓯᐅᒪᔭᒃᑯᓪᓕ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Chairman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) The Education Act does, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ under registration and attendance, mention the ᐅᐸᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ minimum age at least; six years of age. Maybe ᓱᕈᓛᕆᔪᓐᓇᖅᑕᖓ 6-ᓂᒃ ᐅᑭᐅᖃᕆᐊᖃᓲᒃ, ᐃᒻᒪᖃ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑐᑭᓯᓇᖅᓯᒋᐊᕈᓐᓇᕈᕕᐅᒃ ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. ᑖᓐᓇ if you can clarify that, Minister Joanasie. ᓈᓴᐅᑎᖓ 30 ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᔅᑑᓐ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᔭᖓ. ᑕᐃᑲᓂ Section 30 of the Education Act is what I ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᒃᑯᓛᕆᔪᓐᓇᖅᑕᖓ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓯᒪᖕᒪᑦ. ᑭᐅᔪᒪᕕᑦ believe Mr. Lightstone is referring to. That is ᒫᓐᓇ, ᐅᐊᑦᑎᐊᕈᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑕᒪᑐᒧᖓ ᒥᑦᓵᓄᑦ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ where is it has a minimum age set. Minister, ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. would you like to respond now or later on this issue? Minister Joanasie.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Chairman. We will have to look at this ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᑕᑯᓇᒋᐊᖃᕋᔭᕋᒃᑯ ᑖᓐᓇ provision and see if there is a happy medium ᐱᔪᓐᓇᖅᑎᒋᑦ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᑦᑎᐊᕈᓐᓇᕈᑦᑕ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ that we can come to in regard to what the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᑦᓯᔪᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑕ local authorities can put in place in terms of ᐊᑐᐊᒐᖅᑎᒍᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ policies and what the Act stipulates. Thank ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑎᑦᑎᔪᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᖅ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) (interpretation ends) We will add it to the list ᐃᓚᒋᐊᕈᑎᒋᓂᐊᖅᑲᕗᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔾᔪᑎᒃᓴᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ of items for Thursday morning when we will ᕿᑎᖅᑰᒻᒥ ᐅᓪᓛᒃᑯᑦ ᓵᑦᑎᓐᓃᓕᕈᕕᑦ. ᓵᑦᑎᓐᓃᓕᕐᒥᔪᖅ have you in front of us. Moving on. Ms. ᒥᔅ ᖃᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ. ᑲᔪᓯᒋᐊᕐᓗᑕ. Kamingoak.

Ms. Kamingoak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᖃᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Welcome. ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᑦᑎ.

One question I have, the Minister indicated ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒃᓴᖃᖅᑐᖓ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᐅᖃᖅᑲᐅᒻᒪᑦ

that DEAs will keep the power to appoint ᑎᒃᑯᐊᖅᓯᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕᒎᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᑦ principals and vice-principals. In Kugluktuk ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑐᖓᓕᖏᓐᓂᓪᓗ ᖁᕐᓗᖅᑐᒥ this recently caused great division in my ᒫᓐᓇᕋᑖᕈᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᕕᒍᑕᐅᔪᒻᒪᕆᐅᓚᐅᕐᒪᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ community. I wanted to know: what is your ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔪᒪᖅᑲᐅᒐᒪ ᖃᓄᕐᓕ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᒻᒪᖔᖅᓯᐅᒃ position on the DEA power and what is your ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑕ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᖏᑦ. role in helping with all these kinds of ᐃᓕᑦᓯᓕ ᖃᓄᕐᓕ ᐃᑲᔪᕐᕕᖃᓲᖑᒐᑦᓯ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᓐᖏᖅᑕᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. conflict? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐋᕆᐊᒃ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Arreak. ᐋᕆᐊᒃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᒥᔅ ᑲᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᑦᑎᐊᖅᑕᕗᑦ, ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓪᓕᐅᕈᑎᖃᓚᐅᕋᑦᓯ Mr. Arreak (interpretation): Thank you, Ms. ᓄᓇᑦᓯᓐᓂ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᑲᒪᒋᓪᓚᕆᐊᓗᒡᓗᑎᒍᑦ Kamingoak. We are quite aware that there ᑲᒪᒋᔪᓐᓇᓚᐅᓐᖏᑕᕗᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐅᖃᖃᑎᒋᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᑕᒃᑲ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᕝᕕᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ was a problem in your community. We ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᕝᕕᐊᓂ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖏᑦ couldn’t deal with it directly, but I had ᐅᖃᖃᑎᒋᕙᒃᖢᒋᑦ ᖃᓄᖅᑑᖃᑎᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑎᑐᒥᒃ conversations with the DEA and Department ᓄᓇᓕᔅᓯᓐᓂ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᑎᑭᑦᑐᒪᓪᓗᑕ of Education staff. We were especially ᐃᑲᔪᕆᐊᕈᒪᓪᓗᑕ. available to your community. We wanted to go to your community and help. ᐅᐱᕐᖓᒃᓵᖑᖅᑰᖅᑐᕐᖏᓐᓇ ᑐᓴᕆᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᒪᐃᖑᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑐᒃᑰᕐᓂᔅᓯᓐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᔅᓯᓐᓂ ᐊᒻᒪ I think it was during the early spring in May ᐅᖄᓚᕕᒋᑦᑕᐅᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᖃᐅᔨᑐᐊᕋᒪ that we first heard about the situation in your ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖓᑦ. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖓ ᑕᐃᑲᓂ community. I called the chairperson as soon ᑐᓴᕐᕕᒋᓇᓱᓕᓚᐅᖅᑕᕋ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᖕᒪᖔᑕ ᒫᓂ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᔪᓚᐃ ᕿᑎᐸᓗᐊᓂ ᑭᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᓯᑕᐃᓐᓇᓚᐅᕐᒪᑦ as I found out and I wanted to hear from them. ᐅᖃᖃᑎᒋᑦᑎᐊᓕᑕᐃᓐᓇᓚᐅᖅᑕᕋ ᑕᐃᑲᓂ. It was around mid-July that the chairperson ᑕᑯᓇᓚᐅᖅᖢᒍ ᖃᓄᖅᑑᖃᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ was able to respond. We had a good ᓯᕗᓕᖅᑎᕗᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ, ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓄᑦ conversation. After our chairperson ᖃᓄᖅᑑᖃᑎᒋᔭᐅᓚᐅᖅᖢᓂ ᐸᕐᓇᓚᐅᖅᑐᒍᑦ deliberated with your DEA, we were planning ᐅᐸᒃᓯᔪᒪᓪᓗᑕ ᓄᓇᓕᔅᓯᓐᓂᒃ. ᑕᐃᑲᓂ on going to your community. Once we were ᐅᖃᖃᑎᒋᓕᕋᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ face to face, we informed them that we were ᓂᓪᓕᐊᖃᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᑕᒃᑲ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᓂᕋᖅᖢᑕ. available to assist them. We planned it with ᑭᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᓚᐅᖅᑐᓪᓕ ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓗ ᐸᕐᓇᖃᑎᒋᓪᓗᑎᒍ officials from the Department of Education. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖏᑦ.

The thinking was maybe things would change ᓂᕈᐊᓛᓕᕐᒪᑕ ᑖᓐᓇ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᔭᐅᖕᒪᖔᑦ after the election. We had deliberations on ᓂᕈᐊᓚᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᖅᑲᐃ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑐᖃᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᕐᖓᐃᑦ. ᖃᓄᑭᐊᖅ ᑕᐃᒫᒐᓚᒃ. ᖃᓄᖅᑑᕈᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔭᕗᑦ that. There was a real concern and we didn’t ᑕᐃᒫᑎᒋ ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᐊᑦᑕᕐᓇᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐃᓚᖓᓂᒃ really want to touch it with the end of their ᓂᓪᓕᓗᐊᕈᑎᒋᔪᒪᓚᐅᓐᖏᖦᖢᑎᒍᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ terms approaching. That’s how we dealt with ᐊᒃᑐᓗᐊᕈᒪᓇᑎᒍᑦ ᐃᓱᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᕐᓂᖓ ᑕᐃᑲᓂ it. We have to provide assistance and we ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ. ᑕᐃᒫᒐᓚᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ understand that our members are ready to help ᐅᕙᒍᑦ ᓇᖕᒥᓂᖅ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᐃᑲᔪᕆᐊᖃᕋᑦᑕ. out. When we are informed of that, we try to ᑐᑭᓯᐅᒪᑦᑎᐊᖅᖢᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓗ ᐸᕐᓇᒃᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ get the proper information. Thank you. ᐃᑲᔪᕈᒪᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕗᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓇᖕᒥᓂᖅ ᐅᕙᒍᑦ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᒑᖓᑦᑕ, ᖃᐅᔨᑎᑕᐅᒑᖓᑦᑕ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᑐᓴᕐᕕᖃᑦᑎᐊᕋᓱᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᒍᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. (interpretation ends) I gave Mr. Lightstone two questions, but you said that you’re done, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ ᐊᐱᕆᔪᓐᓇᖅᑎᖅᑲᐅᒐᒃᑭᑦ.

Ms. Kamingoak. (interpretation) Thank you. I ᒥᔅ ᖃᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ ᐱᔭᕇᖅᐲᑦ? (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) have no more names on my list. As the ᒪ’ᓇ. ᑕᐃᒪ ᐊᑎᖁᑎᖃᕈᓐᓃᕋᒪ ᒪ`ᓈᕼᐃᓐᓇᓕᖅᐳᒍᑦ Standing Committee, we thank you for ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᖅᐳᒍᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᖑᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᑎᒍᑦ appearing before us, Ms. Merkosak, as well as ᑕᒪᐅᖓᖅᑑᓪᓗᐊᓚᐅᕋᕕᑦ ᒥᔅ ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ ᒪ’ᓇ, Ms. Idlout and Mr. Arreak. (interpretation ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᒥᔅ ᐃᓪᓚᐅᖅ, ᒥᔅᑕ ᐋᕆᐊᒃ. ends) Ms. Merkosak, if you have a one- (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒥᔅ ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ 1 ᒥᓂᔅᓯᒥᒃ ᒪᑐᔾᔪᑎᖃᕈᕕᑦ, ᐱᕕᖃᖅᑎᓐᓂᐊᖅᐸᒋᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ. minute closing comment you would like to make, then I’ll give you that opportunity now. ᒥᖅᑯᓵᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ ᔮᓐ ᒪᐃᓐ. Ms. Merkosak. ᐃᓕᔅᓯᓗ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎᐅᔪᓯ ᑕᕝᕗᖓ ᑐᓐᖓᓴᐃᓯᒪᒐᔅᓯ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓪᓗ Ms. Merkosak (interpretation): Thank you, ᓯᕗᓕᖅᑎᖓ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᕙᑦᑎᓐᓃᑦᑑᒃ ᓗᐊᕆᒃᑯᒃ, Mr. Chairman, John Main. I thank all of you ᔭᐃᒻᔅᑯᒃ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᑦᑎᐊᕆᓪᓗᒋᒃ as Members for inviting us and the Minister ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᕐᒪᑎᒃ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ, of Education. I thank Lori and James, who are Lawyer−ᖑᕋᑖᖅᖢᓂᓗ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ sitting beside me. They are educated. Lori is a ᓯᓚᑦᑐᖅᓴᕐᕕᖕᒧᑦ ᐃᓯᖅᓯᒪᒋᓪᓗᓂ. ᐃᒃᐱᒋᑦᑎᐊᖅᑖᒃᑲᒃ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖃᑎᒋᒐᒃᑭᒃ, ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒋᒐᒃᑭᒃ. new lawyer and James attended Arctic College. I appreciate working with them. ᐊᒻᒪ ᐊᑯᓂᐊᓗᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᒪ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓂᒃ 17-ᓂᒃ ᐅᖓᑖᓄᑦ. ᕿᑐᖓᒃᑲ 6-ᖑᔪᑦ I have been a member of the DEA for over 17 ᐱᔭᕇᖅᓯᖕᒪᑕ 12-ᒥᒃ. ᓄᖅᑲᖓᓚᐅᑲᒍᒪᓕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᖓ years and my six children have graduated ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ. ᐅᑎᖁᔭᐅᓕᕐᒥᒐᒪ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑦ grade 12. I wanted to take a break from the 7 ᐊᓂᒍᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐅᑎᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᒪ ᑕᕝᕗᖓ DEA for a while and I came back after seven ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ. ᓱᓕ ᑐᓵᔪᖓ ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓᑦᑕᐃᓐᓇᖅ years to the coalition. I’m still hearing the ᓄᓇᓕᖕᓂ, ᑕᑯᔪᒪᔭᒥᖕᓂᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᒪᓂᕆᔪᒪᔭᕐᒥᓂᒡᓗ. same issues from communities on what they ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓᑦᑕᐃᓐᓇᖅ ᑐᓵᔪᖓ, ᐊᕐᕌᒍ 7 want to see and I still hear the same concerns ᐊᓂᒍᕋᓗᐊᕐᒪᑕ. ᓱᓕ ᓯᑯᓯᒪᔪᖅᓯᐅᖅᑐᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ even after seven years. It’s blocked. It’s like ᐱᑕᖅᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖏᑦᑐᑎᑐᑦ ᐱᔪᖅ ice that you can’t penetrate because they’re ᑐᓵᔭᐅᖅᑰᔨᓐᖏᓗᐊᕐᓂᑯᒧᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᒃᑲᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ not being heard. Even though that’s the case, ᓴᐱᓕᕈᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᒍᑦ ᑲᔪᓯᔪᒪᔪᒍᓪᓗ. we don’t want to give up. We want to ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖃᑎᒌᑦᑎᐊᕈᑦᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ ᓯᕗᓕᖅᑎᐅᔪᖅ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ continue to work well together with the ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑏᑦ. Minister of Education and the elected Members of the Legislative Assembly. ᓲᕐᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᒐᕙᒪᑐᖃᒃᑯᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓄᖕᓄᑦ, ᐃᓛᒃ ᑎᑭᒻᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ ᓄᓇᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᑎᑭᒻᒪᑕ ᑕᐃᑲᓂ 1961-ᒥ When the outsiders or the federal government ᓄᓇᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᐱᒋᐊᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᖅᑰᕐᒪᑕ. ᓲᕐᓗ came in with the teachers and the teachers ᐊᓐᓄᕌᕆᓐᖏᑕᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᑎᔭᕆᐊᖃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᑦᑕ. came up, I think they started in 1961 in my ᐊᓯᑦᑕ ᐊᓐᓄᕌᖓᓂᒃ ᐊᑎᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑰᔨᓕᖅᖢᑕ. community. It’s as if we had to put on clothes ᐅᕙᒎᔪᓐᓃᖅᖢᑕ. ᒫᓐᓇᒧᑦ ᐃᓗᕐᕆᔮᓐᖏᑦᑐᒍᑦ that we didn’t own. It seemed that we had to ᐊᓐᓄᕌᕆᓐᖏᑕᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᖅᑰᔨᒐᑦᑕ. ᐊᓐᓄᕌᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ put on somebody else’s clothing and not be ᐊᑎᔭᕆᐊᖃᓕᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᐃᓂᓪᓚᖓᖁᓪᓗᑕ ᑕᒫᓂ ourselves. Today we have to put on our own ᓄᓇᑦᑎᓐᓂ. ᐃᓗᐃᑦᑑᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ clothing now so that we can be settled in our ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖃᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᑕ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᒫᓐᓇᒧᑦ ᑎᑭᖦᖢᒍ. own land. Inuit have a full education today. ᐊᐱᔭᕌᖓᑦ ᓯᓚ ᑭᓱᑐᖃᓐᖑᐊᔮᓐᖏᑦᑐᒥᒃ ᑭᓱᑐᕐᓇᖅᑐᑦ. When the snow comes, they can survive if ᐃᓅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᓐᓄᕌᖅᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᐃᑉᐸᕆᔭᖏᑕ they have their own warm clothing made by ᓴᓇᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᖅᑰᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᓂᒃ. ᐃᓗᐃᑦᑑᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ their spouse because they have a full ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᑕ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ. ᒪᓕᒐᖏᓪᓗ education and they have their own laws. ᑕᕝᕙᐅᔭᕇᑦᑎᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ. ᐃᓗᐃᑦᑑᑦᑎᐊᕆᓪᓗᑎᒃ.

When we’re trying to introduce modern ᒪᓕᒐᒥᒃ ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᑎᓇᓱᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᑕ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ legislation, it has to be made for everyone. ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᒪᔪᒥᒃ, ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓄᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ You are elected officials. You say that you ᐱᔭᕆᐊᖃᕋᓗᐊᖅᑐᒍᑦ. ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓯ represent your communities and the person ᐱᔪᒥᓇᖅᓴᐅᑎᔅᓯᓐᓂᒃ ᓴᖅᑭᑦᑎᔭᕌᖓᔅᓯ ᓄᓇᓕᓯ running is desirable to elect, but once they’re ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᕐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕋᖃᑦᑕᖅᑕᓯ. ᐱᔪᒥᓇᖅᓯᓪᓗᓂᓗ ᑖᓐᓇ elected, it seems that we have a barrier and we ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᐅᓐᓂᐊᖅᑰᔨᓕᖅᖢᓂ. can’t reach them. We have expectations for ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᒻᒪᕆᒑᖓᒥᒃ ᑐᓗᖅᑕᖅᑐᑎᑐᑦ the people we elect and we’re not here for ᐱᓕᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᒍᑦ, ᑎᑭᑕᒃᓴᐅᖅᑰᔨᔪᓐᓃᖅᖢᑎᒃ. personal reasons. Well, it’s partly personal ᓂᕈᐊᓚᐅᖅᑕᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᑲᖔᖅᑰᔨᓕᖅᖢᑕ ᐱᕙᒃᑐᒍᑦ. because we want to better the education ᐅᕙᒍᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᑕᒫᓂ ᐃᒃᓯᕚᖅᑐᒍᑦ, ᐅᕙᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ system. The schools in Nunavut should be ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᓐᖏᖦᖢᑕ, ᐃᓛᒃ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᖅᓯᓐᓈᕋᓗᐊᖅᑐᒍᑦ able to operate properly and not just be ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᓗᐊᖅᓯᕚᓪᓕᖁᓪᓗᒍ, directed. They need to have their own desires ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ for their community. Let’s not forget why ᐃᖢᕐᕆᔮᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᔪᓐᓇᑦᑎᐊᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ, we’re elected and what our positions are. ᐃᒪᐃᓕᐅᖁᔭᐅᓕᕐᓂᕐᒥᓂᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ. We’re here because of the children and youth ᐃᒪᐃᓕᐅᕈᒪᓂᕐᒥᓄᖔᖅ ᓄᓇᓕᒃᑎ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ who are in school. ᐱᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᒍᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐳᐃᒍᖅᑕᐃᓕᓚᕗᑦ. ᑭᓱᒧᑦ ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᕕᑕ? ᑭᓱᒧᓪᓗ I’m 61 years old now and I probably won’t ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᔾᔪᑎᖃᕈᒪᓚᐅᖅᐱᑕ? ᓱᕈᓰᑦ, ᒪᒃᑯᒃᑐᑦ live very much longer. We can die at any ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᒫᓃᑦᑐᒍᑦ. time, but sometimes they seem closer to death 61-ᖑᓕᕋᒪ ᐃᓅᖏᓐᓇᔾᔮᖅᑐᒃᓴᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᖓ. when they become adults. With the things I ᖃᖓᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅ ᑐᖁᓲᖑᒐᓗᐊᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑐᖁᒧᑦ have learned and experienced in sewing and ᖃᓂᓐᓂᖅᓴᐅᖅᑰᔨᓕᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᐃᓐᓇᐅᓕᕌᖓᒥᒃ. other things, I want to educate younger ᐃᓕᓯᒪᔭᒃᑲ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᖅᓯᓯᒪᔭᒃᑲᓗ, ᖃᐅᔨᓯᒪᔭᒃᑲ children even if I don’t get paid. ᒥᖅᓱᕐᓃᕐᓗ ᑭᓱᑐᐃᓐᓇᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᓯᒪᔭᒃᑲ ᓄᑲᕆᖔᖅᑕᓐᓄᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᑎᑦᑎᔾᔪᑎᒋᔪᒪᔭᒃᑲ I would like to speak in English because I was ᐊᑭᓕᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᖏᖦᖤᕋᓗᐊᕈᒪ. taught English and I was told not to speak my language in school. As I was taught English, I ᖃᓪᓗᓇᐅᔭᕈᒪᒋᓪᓗᖓ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ will speak it too. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᒪ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᖃᑦᑕᖁᔭᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ (interpretation ends) We heard you, our ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᖕᒥᒐᒪ, lawmakers, struggling with the disparity ᖃᓪᓗᓇᐅᔭᓚᐅᕐᒥᓚᖓᑦᑕᐅᖅ. between Bill 25 and what Nunavummiut are asking of you. I’m sure you are burdened with (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑏᑦ ᑕᐃᒪ being told that leading up to Bill 25 was very ᐊᔾᔨᒌᖏᓐᓇᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᖅ 25, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ expensive. This is not your fault. It is the ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥᐅᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎᒋᔭᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᔅᓯ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ Department of Education who says they have ᐊᒃᓱᕉᑎᒋᔭᔅᓴᕆᒐᔅᓯᐅᒃ ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᖅ 25 ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᓪᓗᒍ listened, but the Department of Education is ᐊᑭᑐᔪᔅᓴᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ, ᐱᔭᕇᓐᖏᑕᓯᑖᒃᑯᐊ not acting on what they heard. They must be ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᕕᖏᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ held to account. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔪᑦ ᑐᓴᓚᐅᖅᑕᒥᓂᒡᒎᖅ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑭᐅᔪᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑕ.

We heard from the Minister of Education, that ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒥᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᓴᓚᐅᖅᑐᒍᑦ they are not willing to unify our education ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᒪᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ system when he was asked about unifying our ᐊᐱᕆᔭᐅᒐᒥ, ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᕗᑦ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ rights. He read our prepared statement from ᑎᑎᕋᖅᐸᒌᖅᓯᒪᔪᒥᒃ

his staff about how section 23 of our ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᔪᐊᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᐅᑉ constitutional documents does not protect our ᑐᓐᖓᕕᖓᓄᑦ 23-ᒥᑦ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᕗᑦ. Inuktitut rights. He did not refer to President ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᓚᐅᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑰᑦᑎᖅ Kotierk’s reminder about the Nunavut Land ᐃᖅᑲᐃᒋᐊᕈᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᑕᖓᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᑖᕈᑎᓂᒃ Claims Agreement Article 32 and that our ᓈᓴᐅᑎᖓ ᐃᓗᓕᖓ 32-ᒥᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᓄᓇᑖᕈᑎᕗᑦ land claims agreement is constitutionally ᑲᓇᑕᐅᑉ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᕐᔪᐊᖓᓂᒃ ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ. protected.

You lawmakers have the ability to make sure our language rights are protected. You as our ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎᐅᓪᓗᓯ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᕗᑦ lawmakers allow the communities to make the ᓴᐳᒻᒥᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᖅ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᓯ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ decisions they’re asking be returned to them. I ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᔪᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑕ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎᒋᔭᒥᒃ ᑕᐃᑯᖓ encourage you to have courage because it will ᐅᑎᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ. ᑲᔪᖏᖅᓴᖅᐸᔅᓯ ᐃᓕᕋᓱᖁᓇᓯ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ take courage to bring about the kind of change 25 ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᑦ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅᐳᑦ Bill 25 needs to take to address our education ᐋᖅᑭᒍᑎᒋᓗᒍ ᐊᒃᓱᕈᕐᓇᕐᓂᒃᑰᕐᓇᕋᓗᐊᕐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ. challenges.

(interpretation) We have to be our own leaders. Now is the time. (interpretation ends) (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᐃᒻᒥᓂᒃ ᓯᕗᓕᖅᑎᒋᒋᐊᖃᓕᕋᑦᑕ. We have to make Nunavut’s unique culture (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᐅᖏᓐᓂᖓ, ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖏᓪᓗ and language priority. You have every means ᓯᕗᓪᓕᐅᑎᔭᕆᐊᖃᕋᑦᑕ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᖃᑦᑎᐊᕋᔅᓯ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᑕᖃᓚᐅᖅᑎᓐᓇᒍ to make that happen. Inuit, before ᐊᓐᓇᐅᒪᔪᓐᓇᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᑦᑎᐊᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ governments came, survived because they ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᑐᑎᒃ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᓪᓗᑎᒃ. ᑕᐃᒪ made the right decisions and they made ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎᐅᑎᓪᓗᓯ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓕᖅᑎᑦᑐᓐᓇᕋᔅᓯᐅᒃ decisions together. You as our lawmakers are ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ. ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥᐅᓕᒫᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᒥᒃ in a position to unify our education system so ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᐅᑉ ᒥᒃᓵᓄᑦ. that all Nunavummiut can enjoy the same decision-making abilities in the area of education.

Education is an important foundation for our ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᓗᓂ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᐅᒻᒪᑦ children to become healthy, productive adults. ᕿᑐᖓᑎᓐᓄᑦ. ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐃᓐᓇᐅᓗᑎᒃ Let us raise our children with our Inuit ᐱᓕᕆᑦᑎᐊᕈᓐᓇᖅᐳᑦ. ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ wisdom, through our language, through our ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓂᖏᑦ−ᑎᓐᓂᑦ ᑐᓂᓚᐅᕐᓚᕗᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅᑎᒍᑦ, teachings, through our cultural practices. Let ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᐱᖅᑯᓯᑦᑕᓗ ᐱᖅᑯᓯᖅᑎᒍᓪᓗ us have children grow in the education system ᐃᓕᖅᑯᓯᖅ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᕿᑐᕐᖓᕗᑦ ᐱᕈᑦᑎᐊᖅᑎᓚᐅᕐᓚᕗᑦ to be truly bilingual linguistically and with an ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒃ ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ Inuit worldview. ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑕᐅᑐᒍᓯᖓ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᒍ.

Inuit have always been inclusive. The ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐊᑕᖏᓐᖐᓐᓇᐅᔭᕐᒪᑕ. ᑕᐃᒪᓕ evidence is the choice we made when Inuit ᐋᖅᑭᒍᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓄᑦ chose a public style government. When we ᒐᕙᒪᑖᕈᒪᕙᒃᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᑕᐅᑐᒐᖃᕐᓂᖓ demand an Inuit worldview to be taught ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᑭᑭᑦᑎᖁᓇᑕ. ᑭᓇᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅ primarily, we know that no one will be left ᐱᖅᑯᓯᓖᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐊᓯᕗᑦ ᐱᖃᓯᐅᔾᔭᐅᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕ. out. We know that all other cultures will be included.

Be our leaders. Listen to your constituencies. ᓯᕗᓕᐅᖅᑎᐅᔪᑦ. ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑎᒋᓯᒪᔭᓯ ᓈᓚᒡᓗᒋᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ Unify and simplify our education system. ᐱᔭᕐᓂᖅᓯᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᓄᐃᓪᓗ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᖏᑦ, ᐅᐃᕖᑦ Make Inuit general rights equal to French ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓇᓕᒧᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ. rights in Nunavut. Inuit are capable. How can ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐊᔪᓐᖏᑦᑎᐊᕐᒪᑕ. ᖃᓄᕐᓕ ᐅᐱᒋᔪᓐᓇᕋᑦᑎᒍ we be proud with a government which does ᒐᕙᒪᐃᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᒃᑎᑦᑎᓐᖏᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐅᕙᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ? ᑖᓐᓇ not treat us as equals? Please, this is what we ᑕᕝᕙ ᓂᕈᐊᕈᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᑐᒋᔭᔅᓯᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᖃᕋᔅᓯᓗ elected you to do and you have the power to ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᔪᒪᕗᖓ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. do it. Qujannamiik, thank you.

>>Applause >>ᐸᑦᑕᑐᖅᑐᑦ

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Thank you for your one- ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. 1 minute speech. ᒥᓂᔅᓯᒥᒃ ᓂᓪᓕᐊᔪᓐᓇᕋᕕᑦ.

Just to clarify, this also came up yesterday, as a Committee we don’t have the ability to ᐃᑉᐸᒃᓴᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᓴᖅᑭᓚᐅᕐᒥᒻᒪᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᓂᒃ introduce legislation. That’s the government’s ᓴᖅᑭᑦᑎᔪᓐᓇᖏᓐᓇᑦᑕ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᖔᖅ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ right and the government has the right to ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔪᓐᓇᓂᕐᒥᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᓴᖅᑮᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ govern. I think that needs to be clarified ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᓂᒃ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑐᑭᓯᓇᕆᐊᖃᖅᑰᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ because yesterday there was talk of an ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ independent member’s bill and whatnot, a ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖅᑐᕈᑎᒋᒃᑲᓐᓂᔮᓐᖏᑉᐸᒍᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ. private member’s bill. We don’t have that ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᓂᓪᓕᐅᑎᒋᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᖅᑲᐅᓪᓗᒍ. ability if it’s going to cause the government to spend money, just to clarify that on the record.

Again thank you very much for coming here ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᖃᐃᖅᑲᐅᒐᔅᓯ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᓪᓗ and we really appreciate your submission and ᐅᕙᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᓚᐅᕋᔅᓯ, ᑭᐅᔪᓐᓇᕋᔅᓯᓗ. the answers to our questions. (interpretation) (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᐅᑉᓗᖃᑦᓯᐊᕐᓂᐊᖅᐳᕼᐃ. Have a good day. ᓄᖅᑲᖓᓚᐅᑲᖕᓂᐊᕋᑉᑕ ᐅᕙᑦᓯᐊᕈ We will take a break and after our break, the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ teachers association will make their ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕆᐊᕐᓂᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ. ᒪ’ᓇ. presentation. Thank you.

>>Committee recessed at 10:41 and resumed >>ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ ᓄᖅᑲᑲᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ 10:41ᒥ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ at 11:01 ᑲᔪᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅᑐᑎᒃ 11:01ᒥ

Chairman (interpretation): The Standing ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᐆᑭ, ᐅᑎᖅᓯᒪᓕᕐᒥᒐᑦᑕ Committee on Legislation has reconvened the ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᖑᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᐱᖁᔨᒃᓴᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ hearing on Bill 25. There are presenters from 25 ᒥᒃᓵᓄᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᓯᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪ ᐅᑯᐊ the Nunavut Teachers Association. Welcome. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᑎᑦᓯᔩᑦ (interpretation ends) Welcome to the ᑎᒥᖁᑎᖓᑦ, ᑎᒥᖁᑎᓃᓐᖔᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ Assembly and thank you for your submission. ᑕᕝᕙᓃᑦᑐᖃᓕᕐᒪᑦ, ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᑦᑎ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) Mr. Fanjoy. ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᑦᑎ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᕐᕕᒻᒧᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᓪᓗ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕆᓯᒪᔭᔅᓯᓐᓂᒃ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Chairman. I want ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. to recognize, before I begin, our member ᐱᒋᐊᓚᐅᓐᖏᓐᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᓪᓚᑎᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ services administrator and assistant executive ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᒋᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᕐᓗ director, Amy Hodgers, who is joining us here ᑕᕝᕙᓃᖃᑎᒋᒐᒃᑯ. today as well.

Hon. Members of the Standing Committee on ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑏᑦ, ᒪᓕᒐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ Legislation, I want to thank you very much ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᕐᔪᐊᖅ ᓵᑦᑎᓐᓃᑦᑐᓐᓇᕋᑦᑕ ᐅᓪᓗᒥ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ for having us here to present today and to ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᔅᓴᖃᕈᔅᓯ ᑭᐅᓇᓱᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᒍᑦ. answer any questions that you may have. I ᐅᓪᓗᒥ ᓵᔅᓯᓐᓃᑉᐳᒍᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ want to thank you for the opportunity to ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ 25, present to you today the Nunavut Teachers ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕆᔾᔪᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ Association’s submission and opinion with ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ respect to Bill 25, An Act to Amend the ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓᑕ ᓴᐳᒻᒥᐅᓴᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ. Education Act and the Inuit Language ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᕗᑦ ᐱᒋᐊᓕᓵᖅᑐᒋᑦ 12 Protection Act. As the professional ᒪᑭᑎᖦᖢᒍ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᔭᒃᓴᖅᑖᕆᓯᒪᔭᕗᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ association representing all K to 12 teachers ᐱᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᖏᑦᑐᖅ. ᐊᔭᐅᖅᑐᐃᔨᐅᕗᒍᓪᓗ in Nunavut, the NTA takes very serious our ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᖅ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ duty to provide a collective voice for our ᑐᑭᒧᐊᕈᑎᒋᔭᐅᓂᐊᕐᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᓄᑦ members and our responsibility to advocate ᑲᒪᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᐊᕐᓗᑎᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᒻᒥᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᒥᓪᓗ. for a public education system that will guide our students in their development as strong and caring members of their communities and of Nunavut.

The NTA believes that our students deserve a ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᓐᓂᒃ fully bilingual, Inuktut-English education ᐊᑐᕈᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎᒃ, ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ system that is developed and delivered using ᐅᖃᕆᐅᖅᓴᖁᔭᕗᑦ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᑉᐱᕆᔭᖏᑦ. Inuit societal values. Inuktut needs to be the ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᐅᔾᔭᐅᒍᓂ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᒃ prevalent language throughout our students’ ᓄᓇᕗᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᒍᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᕗᑦ journey within Nunavut’s education system. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᖅᑕᖃᕆᐊᓕᒃ Our students deserve it; the future of Inuktut ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᒪᒃᑯᒃᑐᑦ ᓯᕗᒃᓴᕆᒐᑦᑎᒃᑯ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ in Nunavut requires it. The NTA believes that ᐃᓱᒪᖃᖅᐳᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᕗᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓐᖑᓛᖅᑐᑦ our students today should be our teachers of ᓯᕗᓂᔅᓴᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᔨᐅᓗᑎᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ the future, educators working in an ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᖅᑯᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᖃᕐᓗᑎᒃ environment that is immersed in Inuit culture ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᕐᓗᓂᓗ ᓄᓇᕗᒥ ᑕᑯᓐᓇᖅᑕᐅᓐᖑᐊᖅᑐᖅ. and language and supports the vision of ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐅᕙᒃᑯᓪᓕ ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ Nunavut. The proposed legislation contained ᑕᑯᓐᓇᓐᖑᐊᖅᑕᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᓐᖑᑎᔾᔮᖏᑦᑐᖅ. in Bill 25, in the NTA’s opinion, is not sufficient in meeting the above vision.

Bill 25 would further increase the already ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᒫᓐᓇ heavy reporting workload of school ᐅᖃᒪᐃᓇᖅᑎᑦᑎᓐᓇᕋᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ administrators while at the same time offering ᐅᖁᒪᐃᒃᓴᕆᐊᓪᓚᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᒻᒥ no new support mechanisms. By essentially ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨᐅᔪᑦ ᓄᑖᒥᒃ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓰᕈᑎᓂᒃ doubling the amount of official reports ᐱᑕᖃᓐᖏᓐᓂᖅ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ. ᐅᓄᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅᑐᐊᓗᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ

principals have to complete, on top of regular ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᑦ monthly reporting to district education ᑕᖅᑭᑕᒫᖅᓯᐅᑎᖃᕋᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ authorities and regional school operations, ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᕆᖃᑦᑕᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ principals will not have enough time to serve ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ. ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᒻᒥ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ in their role as the educational leader in their ᓯᕗᒃᑲᖅᑕᖅᑎᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᓯᔾᔮᖏᑦᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᒪᐃᒃᓴᓗᐊᕐᓂᖅ schools. ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ.

The NTA believes that the Education Act should be amended to place the authority of ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᖃᖅᐳᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ decision-making on the appointment and ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᖁᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᓱᒪᓕᐅᕐᓂᖅ, contract renewal of school administrators ᑎᒃᑯᐊᖅᓯᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖅ ᑳᓐᑐᕌᓂᓪᓗ within the Department of Education. ᓄᑖᖑᕆᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ Principals and vice-principals, to our ᑐᓐᓂᖅᑯᑕᐅᒃᑲᓐᓂᖁᓪᓗᒍ. ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᒻᒥ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᑦ knowledge, are the only public service ᑐᖏᓕᖏᓪᓗ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᒃᑯᑦ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᓐᓂ employees in Nunavut whose job status is ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᐅᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᑕᑎᖃᕆᐊᓖᑦ dependent not on their employer but by an ᐃᖅᑲᓇᖅᑎᑦᑎᔨᐅᓐᖏᑕᒥᓐᓂᒃ ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ elected local political body. District education ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ authorities play a vital role in representing ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᕗᑦ ᓄᓇᒥᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ their communities and should continue to be ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᕋᓱᓕᕌᖓᑕ involved in school administrator hiring and ᑳᓐᑐᕌᒃᓯᓇᓱᓕᕌᖓᑕᓗ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ contract renewal but should not be the sole ᐃᓄᑑᔾᔪᑎᔭᕆᐊᖃᓐᖏᑦᑐᑦ. decision-maker.

Bill 25 would absolve the Department of ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂ ᓵᓐᖓᔭᖅᑐᑦ Education in the delivery of early childhood ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᓵᖅᑐᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒥ. education programming in Nunavut. The ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᓐᖑᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᖅ ᓈᒻᒪᓐᖏᓗᐊᖅᑐᖅ proposed legislation would allow for ᐊᔾᔨᒌᑦᑎᖅᑎᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂᒃ inequitable ECE programming in our ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐅᖅᓴᕐᓂᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᑎᑕᐅᓗᓂ communities. Early childhood education ᐊᐅᓚᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᓄᓇᕘᓕᒫᒥ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓᑦ programming should be delivered equally ᐊᑐᕐᓗᒍ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ across all our communities in Inuktut by ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᐅᔪᓄᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᖏᑦᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ qualified ECE instructors who are public ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓕᓪᓚᕆᒋᐊᓕᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᐅᑉ service employees. ECE programming needs ᐃᓗᐊᓂ. to be fully integrated into our public education system.

The proposed changes to inclusive education contained in Bill 25 are problematic. If Bill 25 ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ passes as written, student support teachers ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25−ᒦᑦᑐᑦ ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᕈᑕᐅᔪᑦ. ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ would be stripped of most of their 25 ᐊᓂᒍᖅᑎᑕᐅᑉᐸᑦ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᓗᓂ responsibilities, which would fall on the ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑏᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐱᔭᒃᓴᒥᓐᓂᒃ already overworked classroom teachers. ᐲᔭᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᒻᒥᒃᑰᓕᕐᓗᑎᒃ Student support teachers receive specialized ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᖃᕈᓐᓃᕐᓗᑎᒃ. ᐊᔾᔨᐅᖏᑦᑐᒥᒃ training in developing and implementing ᐱᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᖏᑦᑐᒥᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ individual student support plans, otherwise ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑏᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑏᑦ known as ISSPs, and currently are given the ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑦ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᑎᒃ

time and a workspace to focus on specialized ᒫᓐᓇ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᕐᕕᖃᑦᑎᐊᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓ services to support students with ᐱᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᐱᔨᑦᑎᕈᑎᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕ exceptionalities. A classroom teacher with ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒋᔭᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᑦ. numerous ISSP students under their charge ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ will not be able to provide the level of ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᑖᓕᐅᖅᑲᓂᐊᖅᑐᐃᑦ planning development and support that those ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᒍᓐᓃᕐᓗᑎᓪᓗ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᓱᕈᓰᑦ children require. Bill 25 would also not make ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᓪᓚᕆᑦᑐᑦ. ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 the support and expertise of trained specialists ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᓂᐊᓐᖏᒻᒥᔪᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ available to schools unless an ISSP review is ᐱᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᖏᑦᑐᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓄᑦ initiated. It would be more beneficial to ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕈᖅᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᑦᑎᓐᓂ connect with specialists in the areas of student ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓇᒃᑕᐅᓂᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᖏᑉᐸᑦ. needs and accommodations when the plans ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐱᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᖏᑦᑐᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᑦ are being constructed. ᐃᑲᔫᑎᓪᓚᕆᐅᒐᔭᖅᐳᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑏᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ Dealing with the implementation of Inuktut ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. education, we agree with the Department of ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ Education that moving to a capacity-based ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒋᕙᕗᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᕕᐊ model where the Minister must report ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒥᓂᔅᑕ annually on each school’s ability to deliver ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᖅᓯᐅᑎᓂᑦ ᐅᓂᑳᓕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᑐᓂ bilingual education is appropriate. Where we ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᑎᑦ differ from the department is the ᐋᖅᑭᑦᑎᐊᖅᒪᒐᓗᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ. ᐃᓱᓕᑦᑐᑦ implementation deadlines found in the ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᓱᓕᑦᑕᕐᕕᖏᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ schedule to the Act in section 43. We believe ᐅᐃᒍᖓᓃᑦᑐᑦ ᓈᓴᐅᑎᓕᒃ 43−ᒥ ᐊᔾᔨᒋᓐᖏᑕᖓᓂᒃ. the proposed timeline is not ambitious ᐃᓱᒪᖃᖅᐳᒍᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᒃᓱᕈᓐᖏᓗᐊᕐᒪᑕ enough, and the department has provided no ᐃᓱᓕᑦᑕᕐᕕᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑭᓱᓂᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓵᑦᑕᐅᑎᒋᓂᕐᒥᒃ research or evidence to support them. ᐱᑕᖃᕋᓂ ᓱᓕᓂᐊᕈᑎᓂᓪᓗ.

With a significant infusion of funding, the ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᒃ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᐃᑦ ᐅᓄᑲᓪᓚᑦᑐᑦ continued reformation of the NTEP program, ᐃᓕᔭᐅᑲᓪᓚᑦᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒃᓴᓐᖑᕆᐅᖅᓴᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ a concerted effort to recruit Inuit into the ᐊᒃᓱᕈᒃᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᐃᓄᓐᓂᑦ education profession, and new supportive ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᔨᑖᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᑖᓂᒃ programs put in place for teachers in their first ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓲᑎᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᐅᖅᑲᐃᓗᑕ ᐊᑐᕋᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ five years of work in a Nunavut school, ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ ᑕᓪᓕᒪᓄᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓄᑦ bilingual education can be achieved. ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᓕᓵᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖏᓐᓂ Educational stakeholders like the NTA want ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᑎᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒥ to work together with the Government of ᓴᖅᑭᑦᑎᔪᓐᓇᖅᓯᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ Nunavut as partners in producing and ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᓐᓂ supporting bilingual Inuit educators at a much ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖃᑎᖃᕈᒪᔪᑦ ᑕᐱᕇᓪᓗᑎᒃ more substantial rate. Our children deserve to ᓴᖅᑭᑦᑎᓂᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᓂᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᓪᓗ ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᑦ. be taught by qualified and certified bilingual ᓱᕈᓯᕗᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᕆᐊᓖᑦ Nunavummiut. ᐱᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᖃᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᒃᑯᓯᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᓪᓗ

ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓐᖑᕋᔭᖅᑐᑦ When considering the proposed amendments ᓄᓇᕗᒥᐅᑕᐅᓗᑎᓪᓗ. found in Bill 25, Members of the Legislative Assembly should keep in mind the current ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᔪᒪᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑏᑦ recruitment and retention crisis that is taking ᐳᐃᒍᔾᔭᐃᖅᓯᒪᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐸᐸᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᖅᑲᖅᓴᕋᐃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᑦ

place in Nunavut. Some would have you ᐅᓄᖅᓯᕙᓪᓕᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᒪᑕ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ. ᑲᓇᑕᓕᒫᒧᑦ believe that this is a nationwide problem, a ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᕈᑕᐅᓂᕋᖅᑕᐅᕙᑦᑐᖅ ᑲᓇᑕᓕᒫᒥ trend across Canada. Nunavut’s teacher ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᖓᓂᕋᖅᑕᐅᒻᒪᑦ. ᓄᓇᕗᒥ recruitment and retention issues are much ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕐᓂᖅ ᐸᐸᑦᑎᓂᕐᓗ worse than what is happening in any other ᐱᐅᓐᖏᓐᓂᖅᓴᓪᓚᕆᒃ ᐊᓯᕗᑦ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ territorial or provincial jurisdiction. ᐊᕕᑦᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᓪᓗ ᒐᕙᒪᖃᕐᕖᑦ ᑕᑯᓐᓇᕈᑦᑎᒃᑯ.

Every year Nunavut loses approximately 35 ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒥᐅᑕᐃᑦ ᑕᒫᓂ 35 percent of its teachers and almost 50 percent ᐳᓴᓐᑎᖏᓐᓃᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖏᑦ ᓄᖅᑲᖅᐸᑦᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ of its school administrators. Nearly half of our ᓇᑉᐸᓪᓗᐊᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓂ ᐊᓪᓚᕕᓐᓂ NTEP graduates are leaving the teaching ᔭᒐᐃᕙᒃᖢᑎᑦ. ᓇᑉᐸᓪᓗᐊᖏᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ profession within the first five years of ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᔅᓴᓐᖑᕆᐅᖅᓴᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᓕᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᔪᑦ employment. Many of our communities ᓄᖅᑲᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᑕᓪᓕᒪᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓂᑦ cannot fill the amount of teacher vacancies it ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᓚᐅᖅᖢᑎᒃ. ᐊᒥᓱᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖁᑎᕗᑦ faces with qualified professionals, all to the ᐃᓐᓄᐃᔪᓐᓇᐃᓕᐅᖅᑲᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ detriment of our students. Teachers in ᐃᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᖃᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ Nunavut are leaving the profession in large ᐃᑲᔫᑎᖃᕋᓂ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᓄᑦ. ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ part because they are overworked and ᓄᖅᑲᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᕗᑦ ᐅᓄᖅᑐᐊᓘᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐱᔭᒃᓴᒥᓄᑦ underappreciated by our government. Any ᐊᒃᓱᕈᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ amendments made to the Education Act or the ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᓐᖏᑎᓪᓗᒋᓪᓗ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ. Inuit Language Protection Act should be ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᑉᐸᑦ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖏᑕ made with the goals of facilitating more Inuit ᓴᐳᒻᒥᐅᓴᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ entering the teaching profession and providing ᑐᕌᒐᖃᕆᐊᖃᖅᐳᖅ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ increased supports and services for all ᐅᓄᖅᓯᕙᓪᓕᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕ students and educators currently in the ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓐᖑᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᔪᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᒃᑲᓐᓂᖁᓪᓗᒋᓪᓗ system. ᐱᔨᑦᑎᕈᑏᓪᓗ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᓈᒪᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᔨᐅᔪᓄᓪᓗ. I want to end my statement today by thanking the teachers in our schools that work with our ᐃᓱᓕᑦᑎᓕᕐᓗᖓ, ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒥ students every day. Despite the challenges we ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᕈᒪᕙᒃᑲ ᖃᐅᑕᒫᑦᑎᐊᖅ face, teachers continue to provide a ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ. ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᐳᖅᑕᐅᑏᑦ welcoming and caring environment to our ᐅᓄᕋᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᓱᑦᑎᑦᑎᕗᑦ students and strive to help them achieve their ᑲᒪᒋᔭᖃᑦᑎᐊᖅᐳᓪᓗ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ goals. We, the teachers of Nunavut, ᑐᕌᒐᕆᔭᒥᓄᑦ ᑎᑭᐅᑎᑦᑎᓇᓱᖃᑦᑕᖅᖢᑎᒃ. ᐅᕙᒎᔪᖅ understand the duty our communities have ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᐅᒪᕗᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖁᑎᕗᑦ entrusted us with in caring for and educating ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᒃ ᑕᑎᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᒪᑕ ᐅᕙᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ all of our children. The NTA’s hope is that ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᑎᓪᓗᑕ ᑲᒪᒋᔭᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᑕᓗ any amendments made to the Education Act ᕿᑐᕐᖓᑎᓐᓂᒃ. ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᓂᕗᑦ ᓂᕆᐅᓐᓂᖃᖅᐳᑦ or the Inuit Language Protection Act will ᓇᐅᒃᑯᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅ ᐋᖅᑭᐊᖅᑕᐅᑉᐸᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᕆᓂᖅ further support teachers with this important ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ responsibility. ᓴᐳᒻᒥᐅᓯᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓂᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ. Thank you to the Standing Committee on Legislation for inviting the Nunavut Teachers ᒪᓕᒐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᖅᐸᕗᑦ Association to appear today and I look ᑐᓐᖓᓱᑦᑎᑕᐅᒐᑦᑕ ᓵᑦᑎᓐᓃᑦᑐᓐᓇᕋᑦᑕᓗ ᐅᓪᓗᒥ. forward to answering any questions you may ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᔅᓴᖃᕈᔅᓯ ᑭᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᖓ.

have. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᐅᕙᒍᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐅᔪᑎᒍᑦ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. As the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᓯᔨᓂᖅ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᖅᓯᒪᔪᒍᑦ ᒪ’ᓈᖅᓯᒪᔪᒍᑦ Committee, we also thank the teachers in ᐱᓕᕆᕐᔪᐊᖅᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᓄᓇᓕᒋᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂ Nunavut for educating and taking care of our ᒪ’ᓈᓯᒪᓪᓚᕆᑦᑐᒍᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᓄᑕᖅᑲᑎᓐᓂᒃ children. Ms. Towtongie. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᓯᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᒥᐊᓂᖅᓯᑕᖅᑐᑎᒡᓗ. ᒥᔅ ᑕᐅᑐᓂᖏ. Ms. Towtongie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation) We are proud of all the ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. teachers and school staff. We appreciate them (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᓯᔪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ for taking care of our children all year round. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒥ ᐱᓕᕆᕙᑦᑐᑦ ᐅᐱᒋᑦᑎᐊᖅᑕᕗᑦ. ᐅᑭᐅᓕᒫᑦᑎᐊᖅ ᓄᑕᕋᖅᑎᓐᓂ ᒥᐊᓂᕆᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ. My question is in regard to clause 31 of Bill 25. It proposes to amend section 20 of the Act ᑭᓯᐊᓂᓕ ᐅᓇ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔪᒪᔭᕋ ᑕᐃᓐᓇ to require a principal to “provide any ᓇᐃᓴᐅᑎᖃᖅᑐᖅ 31 ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᒥ 25 reasonable support that the district education ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᒋᐊᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᒡᒎᖅ ᓇᐃᓴᐅᑎᖃᖅᑐᒥᒃ 20(2) authority requires in developing the school ᒪᓕᒐᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᑐᓂᓯᔪᓐᓇᕐᒪᑕ improvements plan.” In your view, how ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒥ, ᖃᓄᖅ would this requirement in clause 31 affect the ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒃ. ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᑖᓐᓇᖃᐃ principal’s workload? Thank you, Mr. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᓐᓄᑦ Chairman. ᐱᓕᕆᑎᑦᑎᓗᐊᕐᓂᐊᖅᐸ? ᑖᓐᓇ ᓇᐃᓴᐅᑎᖃᖅᑐᖅ 31. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. In our view this is happening in practice ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. currently. Depending on the capacity in a ᐃᓱᒪᒃᑯᓪᓕ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐊᑐᓕᕇᖅᑐᖅ. DEA and a community, the DEA right now ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓖᑦ has responsibility for school improvement ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᒫᓐᓇ ᑕᐅᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ plans, but depending on the capacity within ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᑦᓴᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓂᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᖏᓐᓂᑦ the community, the principal is taking either a ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᐃᔨᐅᔪᑦ ᓯᕗᒃᑲᖅᑕᖅᑎᒋᔭᐅᓪᓗᑎᑦ leading role or a supporting role. We believe ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᔨᒋᔭᐅᓪᓗᑎᓪᓗ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓱᒪᖃᖅᑐᒍᑦ that to entrench this in Bill 25, to place this in ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᐸᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐃᓗᐊᓂ. the Education Act, would be basically ᒫᓐᓇ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᑦᑎᓐᓂᑦ codifying a practice that is happening in many ᐅᖁᒪᐃᒃᓴᓕᖅᑎᒃᑲᓐᓂᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ of our communities currently where the ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᔨᐅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᐅᑉ supporting role is in fact happening, although ᒪᓕᒐᕐᔪᐊᖅ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᖅᑎᒎᖅᑐᒍᑦ. in the current Education Act it is the duty of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ ᑖᓐᓇ the district education authority. The current ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᔨᓪᓚᕆᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᒻᒥ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ. practice in many of our communities is the ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. principals playing a major supporting role in that development currently. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ. Towtongie.

Ms. Towtongie (interpretation): Thank you, ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐅᓇ Mr. Chairman. This will be my final question. ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᕆᓪᓗᒍ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᓂᐊᕋᒃᑯ. ᑕᐃᒪ I will speak English as I was taught in ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᖕᓂᐊᕋᒪ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦᑕᐅᖅ English. (interpretation ends) Under the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᓯᒪᒐᒪ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᐊᑖᓂ current Act, district education authorities are ᒪᓕᒐᐅᑉ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ responsible for the school program. Bill 25 ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖃᕐᖓᑕ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒥ proposes to divide the school program into the ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᑎᐅᔪᓂᒃ. ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᖅ 25 ᐊᕕᒃᓯᒍᒪᒻᒪᑦ education program and local education ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕋᔅᓴᕈᖅᑎᑕᐅᖔᖅᑐᑎᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ program enhancements and school ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕋᔅᓴᓄᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᑏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ improvement plans, with the Minister, district ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒥ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕆᔾᔪᑏᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑏᑦ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒧᑦ education authorities, and principals assuming ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕖᑦ different responsibilities. Do you support the ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᐱᔭᔅᓴᑖᖅᑐᕐᓗᑎᑦ, proposed redistribution of responsibilities? ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᖅᑭᐅᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑐᒃᓯᕌᖑᔪᖅ ᐊᒡᒍᐃᓂᐅᒐᓱᑦᑐᖅ Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My final question. ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔭᕆᐊᓕᓐᓂᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒐ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Fanjoy. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. We do support the proposed amendments in ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓰᔪᒍᑦ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᒐᓱᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᖅ 25−ᒥᑦ, Bill 25. We believe that local education ᐅᑉᐱᕈᓱᒃᑲᑦᑕ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᑎᐅᔪᐃᑦ enhancements and local education ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕋᔅᓴᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᓴᖅᑭᖅᑕᐅᔪᐃᑦ programming should have greater authority ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕋᔅᓴᐃᑦ ᓴᓐᖏᓂᖅᓴᐅᑎᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ within the hands of the district education ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ authority. We do believe that curricular ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕋᔅᓴᓕᐅᕐᓃᑦ, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᔅᓴᓕᐅᕐᓃᑦ programming for core courses throughout the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐸᕐᓇᑕᐅᓂᖓ, system, that planning should be the primary ᐸᕐᓇᑕᐅᓂᖓ ᑲᒪᒋᔭᐅᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᓕᒃ responsibility of the Department of Education. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᕕᖓᓄᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. Towtongie, are you done? Yes. Mr. Rumbolt. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ, ᑕᐃᒫᖅᐲᑦ? ᐄ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕋᒻᐴᑦ. Mr. Rumbolt: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ᕋᒻᐴᑦ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐅᓪᓛᒃᑯᑦ. start off my questions by going to page 34 of ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ, ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑳᕈᑎᖃᕈᒪᔪᖓᓕ ᒪᑉᐱᒐᖓᓄᑦ the Minister’s opening comments from 34-ᖓᓅᕐᓗᖓ ᐃᑉᐸᔅᓴᖅ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᐅᑉ yesterday and on that page the Minister stated ᒪᑐᐃᖅᓯᒍᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᑦ. ᑕᐃᑲᓂ ᒪᑉᐱᒐᕐᒥᑦ that “I would like to take some time to speak ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ ᐱᕕᖃ, ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖃᑲᐃᓐᓇᕈᒪᔪᖓ directly to the issue of social promotion. We ᐊᕐᕌᒍᖃᑎᒌᓂᑦ ᒪᓕᔅᓴᖅᑎᑦᑎᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᓂᒃ have heard this issue come up in every ᖁᑦᑎᓐᓂᓄᑦ. ᓄᓇᓕᓕᒫᓂᒃ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ community across the territory.” And then he ᐃᓱᒫᓗᒋᔭᐅᓕᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪ. ᐅᖃᕆᓪᓗᓂᓗ goes on to say, “Let me make it perfectly ᒪᑐᐃᖅᓯᒍᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ, “ᓇᓗᓇᐃᑦᑎᐊᓚᐅᕐᓚᒍ:

clear: my department does not support the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓰᖃᑦᑕᖏᑦᑐᑦ practice of social promotion.” From the ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᖁᕝᕙᕆᐊᖅᓯᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᐅᔪᓂᒃ.” NTA’s point of view, why is it that the ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᓪᓕ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓃᓐᖔᕐᓗᓯ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ government says it doesn’t exist or it’s not ᐱᑕᖃᓐᖏᓐᓂᕋᐃᑦᑕᖅᑯᑦ, happening, yet the perception in all our ᒪᓕᔅᓴᑐᐃᓐᓇᑎᑦᑎᓂᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ ᑭᓯᐊᓂᓕ communities says it does exist? I wonder if ᓄᓇᓕᓕᒫᓪᓚᕆᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᐱᑕᖃᕐᓂᕋᐃᒻᒪᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᒥᒃ, we can get your point of view on that. Thank ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᒻᒪᖔᔅᓯᐅᒃ ᑐᓴᕈᒪᒐᓗᐊᖅᑐᖓ. you, Mr. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Fanjoy. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. We believe that it does exist under the term ᐅᑉᐱᕈᓱᒃᑐᒍᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᒋᓪᓗᒍ “continuous progress.” That is the buzzword ᑲᔪᓰᓐᓇᑎᑦᑎᒍᑎᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ that is used to describe social promotion. ᐊᕐᕌᒍᖃᑎᒌᓂᑦ ᒪᓕᔅᓴᑐᐃᓐᓇᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᖁᑦᑎᖕᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ, ᖁᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᒧᑦ. We do know there are studies that do show that the social and emotional development of youth is better served when they are working ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔪᒍᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖅᑕᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ within their peer group. That is the research ᒪᒃᑯᒃᑐᐃᑦ ᐱᕈᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᐊᓂᖅᓴᐅᓲᖑᒻᒪᑕ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᖃᑎᒥᓂᒃ that is behind the push for continuous ᑲᑎᒪᒃᑎᑎᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᑕᕝᕙ ᑲᔪᓰᓐᓇᕈᑎᓄᑦ progress where accommodations are made ᒪᓕᒃᑕᐅᒐᓱᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᖁᑦᑎᖕᓂᖏᑦ throughout different grade levels. That’s the ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐅᓪᓗᓂ, ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ theory. The practice is that it’s happening in ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᕗᑦ. ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐊᒥᓱᐊᖅᑎᐊᓗᒃ our communities, and unfortunately many ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᑕᐅᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᑎᔅᓴᖏᑦ ᐱᑕᖃᖅᐸᒐᑎᑦ. times the required accommodations and ᐅᑉᐱᕈᓱᒃᑐᒍᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᒃ ᐋᖅᑮᒋᐊᖃᖅᑐᒋᔭᕗᑦ supports are not in place. We believe that a ᓱᕈᓯᖁᑎᖏᑦ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᕐᒧᑦ community should decide if their children ᖁᕝᕙᕆᐊᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᐊᕋᓗᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, should be progressing to the next grade level. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕋᒻᐴᑦ. Rumbolt.

Mr. Rumbolt: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I ᕋᒻᐴᑦ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ thank you for that explanation. It goes to show ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᖅᑕᕋᑦᑕᐅ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑐᐃᒻᒪᑦ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ. ᑕᐃᒪ that 25 communities are stating something, so ᑕᑯᔅᓴᐅᑎᑦᑎᕗᖅ 25 ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐅᖃᖃᑦᑕᕐᖓᑕ obviously they see something that’s ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᖅᑕᖃᕐᓂᕋᐃᓪᓗᑎ ᑕᑯᖃᑦᑕᕐᖓᑕ happening out in our communities and it ᓄᓇᓕᖏᓐᓂᑦ, ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᒃ. needs to be corrected. ᐊᒻᒪᓗᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᓄᑖᒥᒃ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᒥᑦ 25-ᒥᑦ In the new bill, in Bill 25 it talks a lot about ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕐᖓᑦ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᑦ. inclusive education. Let’s start with, from the ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑎᖃᓚᐅᖅᑕ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ NTA’s point of view, give us a definition of ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓃᓐᖔᕐᓗᓯ. ᖃᓄᖅ ᑐᑭᓯᒻᒪᖔᔅᓯᐅᒃ inclusive education. Thank you, Mr. ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᖅ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕆᒍᓐᓇᖅᑭᐅ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ,

Chairman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy. ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐊᐱᕆᒐᕕᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᑭᐅᔭᕐᓂᖏᑦᑐᖅ Thank you for the question. That is a very ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎ, ᐊᕙᑎᓂᑦ ᐊᐱᕆᒍᔅᓯ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ difficult question to answer. If you ask 20 ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᖅ ᑭᓲᒻᒪᖔᖅ ᐊᕙᑎᓂᑦ people what is inclusive education, you will ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᑭᐅᔭᐅᒐᔭᖅᑐᑎᑦ. ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ receive 20 different answers. I just returned ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᕐᔪᐊᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔪᓃᕋᑖᓚᐅᕐᒥᒐᒪ from a board of directors meeting of the ᐱᓇᓱᐊᕈᓯᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᒥ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓂᒃ Canadian Teachers Federation just this past ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᖅ ᐱᖓᓱᓄᑦ week where inclusive education was a ᐅᓪᓗᓄᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓚᐅᕐᖓᑦ. ᐅᓪᓗ ᐱᖓᓱᑦ discussion for three days. After three days, no ᐊᓂᒍᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᑐᑭᖃᕐᒪᖔᖅ conclusive definition was achieved. ᖃᐅᔨᒍᓐᓇᓚᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᒍ.

If you had asked me to define inclusive ᐊᐱᕆᒍᕕᓐᖓᓕ ᖃᓄᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑐᑭᖃᕐᒪᖔᖅ 15 education in 15 seconds in Nunavut, I would ᓯᑲᓐᓯᒥᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕋᓱᓐᓂᐊᕈᒃᑯ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ say that inclusive education is providing the ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᖅ ᑖᓐᓇᐅᕗᖅ, required support for students with ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᓕᓐᓂᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓰᓂᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓂᑦ exceptionalities in our schools so that they ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᓕᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᔾᔨᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᒃᑯᑦ. ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᑲᔪᓰᓐᓇᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᖓᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖃᑕᐅᓗᑎᒃ may continue to work in our schools in their ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᒥᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒋᓲᖏᓐᓂᒃ regular classroom environments with their ᐊᕐᕌᒍᖃᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᓗᑎᒃ, peers, with added supports and a strong ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᑕᐅᒃᑲᓐᓂᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓛᒃᑯᑦ individual support plan in place that ᓴᓐᖏᔪᐊᓗᒻᒥᒃ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᖅᑕᐅᒍᑎᔅᓴᖏᓐᓂᒃ recognizes the individual needs of that ᐋᖅᑭᕕᐅᓯᒪᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᓯᓯᒪᔪᒥᒃ ᖃᓄᖅ student. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᑕᐃᓐᓇ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Rumbolt. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕋᒻᐴᑦ.

Mr. Rumbolt: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I ᕋᒻᐴᑦ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ ᐊᒻᒪ thank him for that explanation. It goes to ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᒻᒪᑦ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ. ᑕᕝᕙ show that it’s a very difficult definition to ᑕᑯᔅᓴᐅᑎᑦᑎᕗᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑐᑭᓯᒐᓱᒋᐊᖓᐃᓛᒃ define. ᑐᑭᑖᖅᑎᒐᓱᒋᐊᖓ ᐱᒡᒐᓇᖅᑐᐊᓗᒃ.

Throughout Bill 25 it has talked a lot about the inclusive education and it talks about the ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᖅ 25 ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕕᐅᑎᒻᒪᑦ roles and responsibilities of different people, ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᒃ. including the schools, the parents, and so on. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᖅᑐᓂᓗ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ My understanding is if you are in a particular ᐱᓕᕆᐊᔅᓴᕆᓕᕋᔭᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᐃᓪᓗ grade and you don’t have the credentials to ᐊᓈᓇᒃᑯᒋᔭᐅᔪᐃᓪᓗ. ᑐᑭᓯᓯᒪᒐᒪᓕ move to the next grade, they set up a plan ᖁᑦᑎᖕᓂᓕᖕᒦᒃᑯᕕᑦ ᓇᓕᐊᓐᓂᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ between the parents and the school so that you ᖁᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᒨᕈᓐᓇᓂᐊᖅᑑᔮᓐᖏᒃᑯᕕᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᓕᐅᓲᑦ can go on to the next grade but you have some ᐊᓈᓇᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑖᑕᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᓪᓗᑎᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒧᑦ kind of make-up plan to catch up with the ᐊᖑᒻᒪᑎᒋᐊᕈᑎᒋᓂᐊᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ.

programs. Now you have to do two years at ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᐊᕐᕌᒎᓐᓂ ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᒐᓱᒋᐊᖃᖅᑯᑎᑦ once, basically, is the way I see it. You have ᐊᕐᕌᒍᒥᒃ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ, ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᐊᓂᒍᓚᐅᓐᖏᑕᐃᑦ to complete your previous grade and now you ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᖁᑦᑎᖕᓂᕆᓂᐊᖅᑕᖓ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅ also have to do the requirements for the ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᒐᓱᔅᓯᓈᕐᒥᓗᒍ. following grade.

With that being said and the amount of information that’s in here about this, I don’t ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᑐᑭᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᑎᔅᓴᐃᑦ ᐅᕙᓃᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᑕᑯᓪᓗᒋᑦ see anywhere in here where it talks about the ᓇᓂᓯᒍᓐᓇᖏᓐᓇᒪ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ consequences if a student doesn’t catch up. ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑐᖃᕋᔭᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᐊᓐᖑᑎᔪᖃᕐᓂᖏᑉᐸᑦ Nowhere do I see in here where it says, “You ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎ ᐊᓐᖑᑎᒍᓐᓇᓂᓐᖏᑉᐸᑦ. ᐅᕙᓂ moved on to grade 6, but you know what? ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ ᖁᑦᑎᖕᓂᖓ 6−ᒨᖅᓯᒪᓕᕋᓗᐊᖅᑐᑎᑦ You are not cutting the class” for whatever ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᐱᔭᕇᖅᐸᓕᐊᓐᖏᒥᑉᐸᒍ ᑭᓱᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᒥᑦ reasons. I don’t see where a point comes ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᕐᓗᓂ ᓇᓂᔭᔅᓴᐅᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᐅᓇ where a student is told, “You have to repeat ᖁᑦᑎᖕᓂᖓ ᐱᒃᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᐊᖅᑕᐃᑦ. ᑕᐃᒫᒃ this grade.” Is it your opinion that students ᐃᓱᒪᖃᖅᑭᓰ ᒪᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᖁᑦᑎᖕᓂᓕᖕᒥᒃ should be made to repeat grades if they are ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓᔅᓴᐃᓐᓇᖅ ᓅᑎᑕᐅᓐᖏᓪᓗᑎᑦ not advanced to the point where they can ᑭᖑᓪᓕᕐᒨᕆᐊᖃᖅᑑᔮᓐᖏᒐᐃᑉᐸᑕ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, continue on to the next? Thank you, Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. If ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. the Member is asking about my personal ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᖃᖅᑲ ᐅᕙᖓ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᖓᓂᒃ? opinion, I have worked in multiple schools in ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᖓ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒐᓚᓐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ, Nunavut. In the past, in one school I worked ᐊᒻᒪ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒃ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᕐᕕᒋᓯᒪᔭᕋ in, there was the policy of students being held ᐊᑐᐊᒐᖃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᖁᑦᑎᖕᓂᓕᖕᒧᑦ back if they did not achieve a certain level. ᖁᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᒨᕆᐊᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᒐᑎᑦ That is a long time ago. That does not happen ᑲᔪᓯᑦᑎᐊᖅᓯᒪᓐᖏᑉᐸᑕ. ᑖᓐᓇᓕ in that school any longer. ᐅᐊᑦᑎᐊᕈᑲᓪᓛᓘᓕᔪᔪᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒥ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᖃᖅᑑᔮᖅᐸᒍᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ. I believe, if a student is going to be held back based on their progress, it has to be an ᐅᑉᐱᕈᓱᒃᑲᒪᓕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᓄᖅᑲᖓᑎᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑲᑦ exceptional circumstance. I do not believe, if ᖁᑦᑎᖕᓂᓕᖕᒥᒃ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᖏᓐᓂᖓ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ a student receives a mark of 42 when they ᐊᔾᔨᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᒻᒪᕆᐊᓗᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒋᐊᓕᒃ. need a mark of 50 to advance from grade 5 to ᐅᑉᐱᕈᓱᓐᖏᓐᓇᒪᓕ 42-ᒥᑦ ᓈᓴᐅᑎᑖᖅᑲᑦ, 50- grade 6, that that student should be held back. ᑖᕆᐊᖃᕐᓗᓂ ᓈᓴᐅᑎᓂᒃ ᖁᑦᑎᖕᓂᓕᒃ 5-ᒥᑦ 6- That is the old system. Studies have shown ᒨᕐᓂᐊᕐᓗᓂ, ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᓄᖅᑲᑎᑕᐅᒋᐊᓕᒃ ᖁᑦᑎᖕᓂᓕᒃ that students who are held back and kept away 5-ᒥᑦ. ᐅᐊᑦᑎᐊᕈ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᕙᔪᔪᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ. ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓃᑦ, from their peer group, it does affect their ᖃᐅᔨᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᕿᒪᒃᑕᐅᑎᑕᐅᒐᐃᒻᒪᑕ social and emotional development. However, ᐊᕐᕌᒍᖃᑎᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᓲᖑᒐᓗᐊᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒃᑯᑦ, there are exceptional circumstances where a ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᓄᖅᑲᖓᑎᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᑎᑦ student may need to be held back. I recognize ᐊᒃᓱᕈᕐᓂᖅᓴᐅᓚᐅᕋᓗᐊᖅᑐᑎᑦ ᑲᔪᓯᓂᖅᓴᐅᓲᖑᒻᒪᑕ. that.

I do believe that there should be a community ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐃᓛᒃᑯᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑎᕆᓯᒪᒋᐊᖃᖅᑐᒋᔭᒃᑲ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ standard set in place where the community ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐊᓈᓇᒃᑯᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐊᑖᑕᒃᑯᒋᔭᐅᔪᐃᑦ and the parents can make the decision of what ᐋᖅᑮᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᑭᓱᓂᒃ ᒪᓕᒋᐊᖃᕋᔭᕐᒪᖔᑕ that standard would be for their community, ᖁᕝᕙᕆᐊᖅᓯᖃᑦᑕᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, but that option should be open to them. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕋᒻᐴᑦ. Rumbolt.

Mr. Rumbolt: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᕋᒻᐴᑦ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Also, on pages 35 and 36 of the Minister’s ᑕᕝᕙᓂᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᒪᑉᐱᒐᖓᓂᑦ 35-ᖓᓂᑦ, 36-ᖓᓂᓗ opening comments from yesterday, he talks ᒥᓂᔅᓴᐅᑉ ᒪᑐᐃᖅᓯᒍᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐃᑉᐸᔅᓴᖅ about…I’m sorry. I think it is on pages 34 and ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕐᖓᑦ ᒪᑉᐱᒐᖓ 34, 35-ᒥᖔᖅ, 35. Sorry. It talks about “Our policy on ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᑐᐊᒐᕉᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ student placement, promotion and retention ᖁᕝᕙᕆᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ allows the school team to retain students at ᖁᑦᑎᖕᓂᖓᓃᖏᓐᓇᖅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᐃᑦ their current grade level if a parent requests ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᖁᔨᑉᐸᑕ. it.” Is it a common practice, if a parent ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᖃᔾᔮᓲᖑᕚ ᒪᑯᐊ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᐃᑦ requests that their child repeat a grade, is it ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖁᑎᓖᑦ ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓᔅᓴᐃᓐᓇᖅ 100 percent of the time that schools agree ᖁᑦᑎᖕᓂᓕᖕᒥᒃ ᐱᒃᑲᓐᓂᖁᔨᑉᐸᑕ ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒃ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᖃᐃᓐᓇᓲᖑᕙ ᐊᓈᓇᒃᑯᖏᓐᓂᒃ? ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ with the parent or if not, why not? Thank you, ᑕᐃᒪᐃᖏᓐᓇᖏᑉᐸᑕ ᓱᒻᒪᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᖏᓐᓇᓐᖏᓚᑦ? Mr. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. It is not common practice that this happens throughout our schools. It is very rare that a ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. request is made for a student to be held back ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᒐᔪᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒥ. ᐅᐊᑦᑎᐊᖅ if they miss a substantial amount of ᖃᑯᑎᒃᑯᐊᓘᓕᕋᐃᒻᒪᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᓈᓇᒃᑯᒋᔭᐅᔪᐃᑦ instructional time. Our understanding is that ᓄᖅᑲᖓᑎᑦᑎᑲᐃᓐᓇᕈᔨᓲᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖁᑎᒥᓂᑦ the current practice would be that the request ᐅᐸᖃᑦᑕᓐᖏᓗᐊᖅᓯᒪᑉᐸᑦ. ᒫᓐᓇᓕ would come from a parent. It would go ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᓈᓇᒃᑯᒋᔭᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑲᑕ through the school and the district education ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒃᑰᕐᓗᓂ, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ authority to the department. That creates ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑎᒎᖅᑳᓚᐅᕐᓗᓂ problems if the school is not in agreement, if ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓅᕋᔭᖅᑐᖅ. the school administrators in particular are not ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᓕᐅᕈᑎᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᒥᔪᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒃ, ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒥᑦ in agreement with a parent’s request that their ᐊᐅᓚᒃᑎᔩᑦ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᖃᓐᖏᑉᐸᑕ ᐊᓈᓇᒃᑯᒋᔭᐅᔪᐃᑦ own child is held back. We believe that a ᑐᒃᓯᕌᖓᓂᒃ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᓱᕈᓯᖓ ᕿᑐᕐᖓᖓ parent should have that right, but a parent also ᓄᖅᑲᑎᑕᐅᖁᔭᐅᑉᐸᑦ. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ should need to follow the guidance of the ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᖃᐃᓐᓇᖁᔭᕗᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᒪᓕᒍᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎᒃ educators in the school on whether the ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᓱᖁᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᐅᑉ educators and the school administrator believe ᐊᐅᓚᒃᑎᔨᖏᑦ ᐅᑉᐱᕈᓱᒐᐃᑉᐸᑕ ᑖᓐᓇ that their child can be successful in the next ᑲᔪᓯᑦᑎᐊᕈᓐᓇᓛᕐᖓᑦ

grade if provided with further supports. ᖁᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᕆᔭᖓᓂᒃ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᑕᐅᒃᑲᓂᕐᓗᓂ. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕋᒻᐴᑦ. Rumbolt.

Mr. Rumbolt: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On ᕋᒻᐴᑦ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. page 7 of your submission, you suggested ᒪᑉᐱᒐᖓᓂᑦ 7-ᖓᓂᑦ ᑐᓂᓯᒪᔭᔅᓯᓐᓂᑦ further amendments to clause 32 of Bill 25, ᐊᓯᔾᔨᑲᓐᓂᖁᒐᔅᓯᐅ ᓈᓴᐅᑎᓕᒃ 32, ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᖅ 25-ᒥᑦ, which proposes to change section 74(1) of the ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᓯᔾᔩᒐᓱᑦᑐᖅ ᓈᓴᐅᑎᓕᒃ 74(1)−ᒥᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᒃ Act regarding Nunavut-wide student ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᓄᓇᕘᓕᒫᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ assessments to assess literacy and numeracy ᐃᓕᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖃᑦᑕᓂᕐᒥᒃ, skills, as well as other learning outcomes. Can ᐅᖃᓕᒫᕈᓐᓇᑦᑎᐊᕋᓗᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ you elaborate further on your proposed ᐃᓕᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᒐᓗᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ. additional wording and specifically what you ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑐᕆᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᕿᐅᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ mean by the term “relevant Nunavut-wide ᐃᓚᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᖁᓯᒪᔭᓯ? ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᓂᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ assessments”? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᑐᑭᖃᖅᑎᒻᒪᖔᔅᓯᐅᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒧᑦ ᐊᑑᑎᖃᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᐅᔪᓂᒃ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Fanjoy. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ.

ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᐃᓚᔭᐅᖁᔨᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ. We’re proposing that added language. We are ᐃᓱᒫᓗᒃᑲᑦᑕ worried about the creep of assessments, ᓴᖅᑭᐸᓪᓕᐊᕌᕐᔪᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ−ᕆᓛᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ possibly in the future, being written from ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓃᑦ ᐃᓕᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᒐᓗᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ private companies, consulting firms outside of ᓇᒻᒥᓂᖃᐅᑎᓕᓐᓂᒃ, ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑎᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ Nunavut, or Nunavut further adopting other ᓯᓚᑖᓃᓐᖓᖅᑐᓂᒃ, ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ provincial assessments and implementing ᑎᒍᓯᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᐊᖅᑐᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᑲᓇᑕᐅᑉ them on students in Nunavut. Those ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᓂᖏᑕ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ assessments do not have the appropriate or ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᓯᕆᕙᑦᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ required cultural context to help our students ᐃᓕᑉᐸᓕᐊᒻᒪᖔᑕ. ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊᓕ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᖏᑦ succeed. ᓈᒻᒪᖏᒻᒪᑕ ᐱᖅᑯᓯᕐᓂᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᖃᕆᐊᖅᓯᒪᓐᖏᒻᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᑲᔪᓯᑦᑎᐊᕈᑎᒋᔪᓐᓇᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ. If the department chooses to move forward with standardized assessments in literacy or ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓪᓕ ᑲᔪᓯᒐᓱᓐᓂᐊᓂᖅᑲᑕ numeracy, they should be co-constructed with ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓕᖅᑎᒐᓱᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᓕᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᐅᔪᓂᒃ teachers in Nunavut. It should be a made-in- ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᓕᒫᕆᐅᖅᓴᓂᕐᒧᑦ, ᓴᓇᔭᐅᒋᐊᓖᑦ Nunavut assessment. We’re worried about the ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᓴᓇᖃᑕᐅᓗᑎᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᒻᒪ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ possibility that assessments from outside of ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᓴᓇᔭᐅᓗᓂ ᐃᓕᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᓂᒃ Nunavut, that our students may not be able to ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ. ᐃᓱᒫᓗᒃᑲᑦᑕ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ relate to, being implemented upon them. ᓯᓚᑖᓂᒥᐅᑕᕐᓂᒃ Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᓛᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᒋᑦᑎᓪᓗᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖁᑎᕗᓪᓗ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᒍᑎᔅᓴᐅᒐᔭᓐᖏᒻᒪᑕ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᑕᐅᓇᓐᖔᖅᑐᓄᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Rumbolt. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕋᒻᐴᑦ.

Mr. Rumbolt: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ll ᕋᒻᐴᑦ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. just ask one more question and then I’ll give ᐊᑕᐅᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᔅᓴᖃᓕᖅᑐᖓ other Members an opportunity. ᐊᓯᒃᑲᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐊᐱᖅᓱᕈᒪᒻᒪᑕ..

Concerns have been raised with respect to the ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᑕᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ standard of education across Nunavut ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᐅᑉ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ, ᐊᒻᒪ ᖁᑦᑎᓐᓂᕆᔭᖏᓐᓂᑦ compared to the standards of education in ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᐅᑉ ᓄᓇᕘᒥ, ᐊᒻᒪ ᖁᑦᑎᕐᓂᕆᔭᖏᓐᓂᑦ other jurisdictions of Canada. In your view, ᐃᓕᓴᔭᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᓂ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓯᒪᓂᖏᑦ are student assessments an appropriate tool to ᐅᖃᕆᐅᖅᓴᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᓴᓂᓕᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᓯᐊᓂᒃ compare the literacy and numeracy skill levels ᖃᓄᐃᑉᐸ, ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᒐᕙᒪᖃᕐᕕᐅᔪᓂᒃ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, of Nunavut students to skill levels of students ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. in other jurisdictions? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐅᕙᒍᑦ Our view is that assessment, and particularly ᑕᑯᓐᓈᖅᑕᖓᒍᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖃᑦᑕᕐᓃᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ for literacy and numeracy, should be authentic ᐃᓕᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᓯᒪᒻᒪᖔᑕ ᐅᖃᓕᒫᕆᐅᖅᓴᓂᖅ and ongoing. We do not believe that a ᓈᓴᐅᓯᕆᓂᕐᓗ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ ᑲᔪᓰᓐᓇᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐱᓪᓚᕆᐅᖏᓐᓇᕆᐊᓖᑦ, ᐃᒫᒃ snapshot standardized assessment, which is ᐊᔾᔨᓕᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑲᓪᓚᕈᓗᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᔮᓐᖏᑦᑐᒥᒃ basically a snapshot taken at a certain point of ᐃᓚᐃᓐᓇᑯᓗᐊᓂᒃ ᑕᑯᓯᒪᔪᒥᒃ ᐃᒫᒃ ᐅᓪᓗᐃᓐᓇᑯᓗᒻᒥᒃ time, is not comparable and is not useful in ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᒥᒃ ᐊᑑᑎᖃᕋᔭᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ, comparing the success rate of Nunavut ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᑲᔪᓯᑦᑎᐊᖅᓯᒪᒐᓗᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ students to other jurisdictions across Canada. ᓴᓂᓕᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥᐅᖑᖃᑎᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Before we move on to ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) the next Member, Minister, we were under a ᓅᒋᐊᓚᐅᓐᖏᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎᑲᓐᓂᕐᒧᑦ, ᒥᓂᔅᑕ different Standing Committee, actually. We ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᓃᑦᑐᑕ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᐅᓯᐊᕋᑖᔪᒻᒥᒐᑦᑕ ᐅᑐᐱᕆ recently received a letter from you October 25 25-ᖑᑎᓪᓗᒍ, ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᓂ ᑕᐃᑲᓂ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᕐᒥᒃ and it mentions on the first page of that letter, ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᒋᔭᓐᓂᒃ ᑲᓇᑕᐅᑉ ᑕᒻᒪᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅᓯᐅᖅᑎᖓᑕ it’s in response to the Office of the Auditor ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᒥᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᖅᑕᐅᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ General’s report on support for high school ᖁᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᒥᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᔪᐃᑦ, ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᒐᕕᑦ students, and you mentioned that the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᓲᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᒃ department participates in the Council of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ Ministers of Education Assessment ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑏᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᒃ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ Committee. Maybe if you can just give us a ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕌᕐᔪᑲᐃᓐᓇᕈᓐᓇᖅᑭᒌᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ brief summary of what the department is ᒫᓐᓇ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᐃᓕᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ doing right now in terms of assessments in the ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒥ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑐᑎᑦ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. schools. Minister Joanasie.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, we are participatory in the ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᒫᓐᓇ ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᔪᒍᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ

Council of Ministers of Education. This is an ᑎᒥᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐅᔪᐃᑦ, ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖑᔪᐃᑦ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᐅᑏᑦ ongoing discussion we have been having and ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᑲᑎᒪᕕᒋᔭᐅᓲᖑᔪᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ this is even at the international level, looking ᐅᖃᓪᓚᓐᓂᕐᒦᖏᓐᓇᐅᔭᖅᐳᒍᑦ ᓯᓚᕐᔪᐊᕐᒥᐅᖃᑎᒌᑦ, at different assessment tools and practices that ᒐᕙᒪᐅᖃᑎᒌᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᐅᑉ ᒥᔅᓵᓄᑦ are used. ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ.

However, in the Nunavut context we are ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐅᕙᒍᑦ ᑎᑭᐅᑎᕙᓪᓕᐊᒍᒪᕗᒍᑦ working towards having an assessment, ᖃᓄᖅ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᐊᒻᒪ evaluation and reporting policy framework ᐊᑐᐊᒐᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᑕᒪᐅᖓᒨᖓᔪᒥᒃ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ handbook that will be distributed to schools ᑐᓂᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᓗᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᕐᕌᒍ for the next school year, for 2020. This is 2020-ᒧᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᓗᓂ under development and we are working on a ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᓕᕐᓗᓂ. literacy framework action plan in addition to ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᖅᐳᒍᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᖅ this. This would guide the processes and ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᒋᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᖅᑕᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᑐᕈᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎᒍ contribute to the implementation of support ᑲᔪᓯᒍᑎᒋᔪᒪᓂᐊᖅᑕᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᑲᔪᕆᐊᖃᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᑎᓐᓄᑦ and a consistent classroom assessment across ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖃᑦᑕᕈᑎᐅᒍᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ. the territory. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) That gives me more ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) questions, but I won’t ask them right now; ᐊᐱᕆᔾᔮᓐᖏᑲᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᖓ. ᑎᓴᒻᒥᕐᒥᖃᐃ ᐊᐱᕆᓛᖅᐸᒋᑦ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ. maybe on Thursday. Mr. Lightstone.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Good morning and welcome to the Assembly. ᐅᓪᓛᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᔅᓯ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᕐᕕᒻᒧᑦ, ᓇᑯᕐᒦᒃ Thank you for making your submission and ᑐᓂᓯᓚᐅᕋᔅᓯ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᕐᒥᑦ ᐅᕙᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ thank you for your opening comments. ᒪᑐᐃᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᑎᓪᓗᓯ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᔅᓴᕆᕋᑖᖅᑕᓯᓐᓂᒃ There’s a great deal of information in both ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕋᑖᕋᔅᓯ. ᐊᐱᕆᔭᔅᓴᖃᖅᐳᖓ. and I have several questions.

My first question will be regarding one of your comments on page 2 in the last ᐊᐱᕆᔭᕋ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ ᒪᑉᐱᖅᑐᒐᖓᓂᒃ 2, ᖃᓄᖅ paragraph about teacher recruitment and ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᕆᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ retention. Mr. Fanjoy made a comment that ᐊᑕᒍᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᓪᓗ ᐊᑕᐃᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ every year Nunavut loses approximately 35 ᓇᑉᐸᑲᓴᖏᑦ 35%−ᖏᑦ ᐊᒃᓱᕈᕐᓇᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ percent of teachers and almost 50 percent of ᑐᓴᖅᑐᒍ ᐊᒃᓱᕈᖃᑦᑕᕋᑦᑕ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᑎᒋ administrators. I find it to be shocking that our ᐊᓯᐅᔨᖃᑦᑕᕋᑦᑕ ᓄᖅᑲᖅᑐᒥᓂᐅᒑᖓᑕ, ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᑎᒋᑦ education system is suffering with losing so ᐊᒥᓲᑎᒋᔪᓂᒃ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᐊᖏᖅᐸ ᑖᓐᓇ ᓱᓕᔫᕚ? ᐅᕙᒍᑦ many of our invaluable teachers. I would like ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᑎᒋᑦ ᐊᒥᓲᑎᒋᔪᒥᒃ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ ᓄᖅᑲᖃᑦᑕᖅᐹ? to ask first to the Minister if the Minister ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. agrees with that statement. Is our education system currently losing 35 percent of its teachers every year? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ.

Minister Joanasie. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Chairman. This is what the NTA has brought ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᓱᓕᔪᕆᔭᕋ with them, so I’ll take their word for it, but ᑖᔅᓱᒧᖓ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᒻᒪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓱᓕ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᒋᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ again, we are working on a ten-year ᓯᕗᒧᐊᓐᓂᐊᕆᕗᒍᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᓐᓂᐊᕆᕙᕗᑦ recruitment and retention strategy and we ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᓯᕗᒧᐊᒃᑎᓪᓗᒍ. hope to engage the NTA in that process as ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. well. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Lightstone. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Once again, those are some shocking figures ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᓇᑯᕐᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐄ, and just recently when we had the OAG ᖁᐊᖅᓵᓇᒻᒪᕆᑦᑐᖅ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᑎᒋ ᐊᒥᓲᑎᒋᔪᓂᒃ before us, we had some more shocking figures ᓄᖅᑲᓲᖑᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓵᒃᓯᑎᓐᓂᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᖃᓄᑎᒋ with the rates of student dropouts in our ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᓄᖅᑲᓲᖑᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦᑕᐅᖅ schools. When it comes to language of ᑕᐅᑐᒻᒥᒐᑦᑕᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓂ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ instruction, recruitment and retention of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕋᑦᑕ, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᖅᑲᑕ teachers is going to be crucial in our ability to ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᒪᑯᐊ ᑕᒪᒃᑮᓂᓗ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᓂᒃ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂᖏᓛᒃ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇᑦᑕᐅᖅ achieve bilingual education. Shocking figures ᐃᓱᒫᓗᓐᓇᕈᔪᒻᒥᒻᒪᑦ. ᑕᐃᒫᒃ like these aren’t stuff that we would like to ᑕᑯᔪᒪᓲᖑᓐᖏᒃᑲᓗᐊᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᔪᖅ see, but I think it is crucial that the ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕆᔭᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᐸᑕ ᓈᓴᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᓂᖏᑎᒍᑦ Department of Education reports on these ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑑᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᓕᕐᒪᖔᑕ? ᐊᒻᒪᓗ types of statistics. I know it’s not completely ᑲᔪᓯᒍᒪᒍᑎᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᑲᔪᓯᒍᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂᖏᓛᒃ related with Bill 25, but I would like to ask if ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐸᕐᓇᒃᓯᒪᑎᒋᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ the Minister would be willing to commit to ᖃᐅᔨᒍᒥᓇᖅ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. including that type of information, teacher retention and teacher loss, in reports going forward. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. Minister Joanasie.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. Chairman. I think this is something that, when ᐄ, ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᓪᓚᕆᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᐸᕐᓇᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᐊᕋᑦᑕ we’re developing the ten-year strategy, we ᐸᕐᓇᒃᓯᒪᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᒋᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ can build in around the figures that have been ᓈᒻᒪᒃᑐᓂᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓯ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊᖑᒻᒪᑕ provided to date and how we can minimize or ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓯᕗᒧᐊᒍᑎᔅᓴᓂᒃ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓ make some headway on reducing those. Yes, ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᒍᑎᐅᔪᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᒃᓱᕈᕐᓇᖅᑑᒐᓗᐊᖅ we agree that they’re really hard numbers to ᑐᑭᓯᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᑎᒋᐊᓘᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ. look at and we want to make progress on ᐅᒡᒍᐊᕐᓇᖅᑑᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᓈᓴᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ. reducing those unfortunate statistics. Thank ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ. Lightstone.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. My next question is for the NTA. Just a few ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᕗᖓᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ moments ago, I asked a question to the ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓄᑦ. ᑕᒃᑯᐊᑦᑕᐅᖅ coalition of DEAs regarding age restrictions ᒫᓐᓇᓵᖑᖅᑲᐅᔪᖅ ᐊᐱᕆᖅᑲᐅᒻᒥᒐᒪ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔩᑦ or age of enrolment for our students. There ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᖏᓐᓂᒃ are arguments on both ends of the spectrum ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐃᓯᕈᒪᓲᖑᔪᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖃᑕᐅᓗᑎᑦ whether students should be permitted an ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᑕᒪᒃᑮᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᐃᕙᒍᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᕐᒪᑦ ᐃᓪᓗᐃᓇᕐᒧᑦ exemption over the age of 21 to be in our ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᖃᑖᓄᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐃᒻᒪᖄ classes alongside much younger students as ᐅᖓᑖᓂ ᐅᑭᐅᓕᒃ 21 ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖃᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑕ well as on the other side, allowing early ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑭᐅᔭᐅᖅᑲᐅᒻᒪᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑐᒥᒃ, ᐊᒻᒪ enrolment of children under the age of five. I ᐅᑭᐅᑭᑦᑐᑯᓗᐃᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ 5-ᖑᓐᖏᓗᐊᖅᑐᐃᑦ would like the NTA’s opinion on those two ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᓐᓇᖁᔭᐅᑉᐸᑕ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᓐᓄᑦ, items. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᑕᒪᓐᓇᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᖅᑲᐅᒻᒥᒐᒃᑯ. ᐃᓕᔅᓯᓕ ᖃᓄᐃᒋᕕᓯᐅᒃ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Fanjoy. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Chairman. I will ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. answer those two in reverse order, beginning ᐊᐱᕆᓂᐊᕋᒪ ᐃᓛᒃ ᑭᐅᓂᐊᕋᒃᑭ ᐃᓪᓗᐊᓄᖔᖅᓯᒪᓗᒍ with the early admission into school. ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᕋᑖᖅᑕᖓ.

We believe that if a parent feels that their ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᐅᑉᐱᕆᔭᖃᖅᐸᑦ ᒥᑭᑦᑐᖁᑎᖓ child should be admitted to school early, that ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᓕᓵᖁᒍᓐᓇᕈᓂᐅᒃ ᐱᕕᖃᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᐃᑦ opportunity should be there, provided there is ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᑉᐸᓯᓛᒥᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᐅᓲᖑᔪᓂᒃ ᓲᕐᓗ baseline testing available to show that that ᓈᒻᒪᒃᑐᒥᒃ ᖃᓄᐃᓐᖏᑉᐸᑦ ᐱᖅᑯᓯᕐᒥᑎᒍᑦ student is showing high cognitive ability. We ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑑᔮᓚᖓᓐᖏᑉᐸᑦ ᑎᒥᖓᓗ also have to remember that there also has to ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑑᔮᓚᖓᓐᖏᑉᐸᑦ ᐸᖅᑭᑦᑎᐊᕈᓐᓇᕈᓂ ᐃᒻᒥᓂᒃ be physical ability in terms of motor skills; ᐊᔪᓐᖏᑦᑐᑯᓘᒍᓂ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑕᕝᕙ ᐊᑉᐸᓯᓛᒥᑦ ability to care for themselves to a certain ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᓂᒃ ᐱᑕᖃᖅᐸᑦ extent. There should be baseline testing for ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑑᒍᑎᒋᓂᐊᖅᑕᖓᓂᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᖃᕐᓂᐊᕈᓂ those early entrants. If that testing exists and ᑕᒫᓂ, ᐊᒻᒪ ᖃᓄᐃᒋᔭᐅᓐᖏᑉᐸᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᑎᒎᓇᖅ those prospective students meet that baseline, ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᖅ ᒥᑭᓛᒧᑦ then we have no issue with a student entering ᓱᓕ 5-ᖑᓐᖏᓗᐊᒐᓛᒃᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᓲᕐᓗ 4-ᓂᒃ school a year early at the kindergarten level, ᐅᑭᐅᖃᖅᐸᑦ. ᒫᓐᓇ ᐱᑕᖃᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ provided there is that testing which would ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᐅᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ. have to be developed that currently does not exist in Nunavut.

In terms of the overage students past the age of 21 in schools, we believe that 21 is an ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᖓᑖᓂᑦ ᐅᑭᐅᖃᓕᓲᑦ 21-ᒧᑦ ᐅᖓᑖᓂ appropriate age level for adults to move on to ᐃᓐᓇᓛᑦ, ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐅᑉᐱᕆᔭᕗᑦ 21-ᓂᒃ ᐅᑭᐅᓖᑦ an adult education program and not be in a ᓈᒻᒪᒃᑐᐃᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐃᓐᓇᕐᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖔᓄᑦ regular education program in a high school ᐊᓪᓗᕆᐊᖔᓕᖅᐸᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐊᓗᒻᒦᓐᖏᖔᓕᕐᓗᑎᑦ

with minor students. We believe that each ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᓕ ᐃᓱᒪᖃᖅᐳᒍᑦ, ᐅᑉᐱᕆᔭᖃᖅᓱᑕ community should have, through their NAC ᓄᓇᓕᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᑐᓂ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᐃᓯᒪᒋᐊᖃᖅᑐᐃᑦ campus, a vibrant adult basic education ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᓯᓚᑦᑐᖅᓴᕐᕕᔪᐊᖏᑎᒍᑦ, ᐃᓐᓇᕐᓄᑦ program that they can access and that they can ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᔅᓴᓄᑦ ᐊᓚᒃᑲᐃᕕᐅᒍᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ achieve their high school graduation from, but ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᖁᔭᐅᒍᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ we do see issues and we have had issues with, ᐱᔭᕇᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᒍᑎᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓄᑦ. I will call, mature students over the age of 21 ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᒪᓂᒪᕕᐅᒍᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᖓᑖᓂᓖᑦ in schools and their interactions with minor 21-ᒥᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐃᓕᖅᑯᓯᖃᑎᒌᖏᒻᒪᒋᑦ students, nothing criminal, just issues that a ᐅᑭᐅᑭᑦᑑᓂᖅᓴᐃᑦ, ᐱᕋᔭᓐᓂᕐᒨᔭᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᓲᕐᓗ school administrator would have to deal with. ᐊᒡᓚᕕᒻᒥ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᐅᔾᔨᕈᓱᒋᐊᖃᖃᑦᑕᕋᔭᕐᒪᑦ ᐅᑭᐅᖃᑎᒌᓐᖏᓐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐅᖓᓯᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ. The vast majority of our overage students that we see are mothers who have had children in their teenage years and they want to achieve ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐊᓈᓇᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᐅᕕᒃᑲᓂᒃ their high school graduation. They’re ᕿᑐᕐᖓᖅᑖᕐᓂᕈᓂ ᒪᒃᑯᓗᐊᖅᑐᓂ ᓇᔾᔨᔪᕕᓂᐅᑉᐸᑦ. returning to school after the age of 21 to ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᓕᕐᓂᖅᐸᑦ 21-ᖑᓕᕈᓂ achieve their graduation. We want to support ᐱᔭᕇᕈᒪᓪᓗᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑕᓂ them in achieving that goal, but we believe ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒃᑎᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐃᓐᓇᕐᓄᑦ there should be a well-funded and well- ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᑎᒍᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐃᓛᒃᑰᖓᔪᒥᑦ working adult basic education program in ᐱᔭᕇᕈᓐᓇᕈᓐᓇᐅᑎᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐱᑕᖃᕆᐊᓖᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, their community that is separate from the high ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. school for them to achieve that. Qujannamiik,

Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐊᒻᒪᓗ (interpretation ends) It’s interesting that you ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕆᒐᕕᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ mention a well-funded adult basic education ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓐᓇᕐᓄᑦ program because we had a hearing on that ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ very subject not too long ago. I think many of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᓈᒻᒪᒃᑐᒥᑦ. the Committee Members share that view, that ᒫᓐᓇᒫᕈᓘᔪᔪᖅ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓚᐅᕐᒥᒐᑦᑎᒍ. ᐊᒥᓱᐃᑦ we need a well-funded basic education ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑏᑦ ᑕᒪᔅᓱᒥᖓ, ᐄ, program. Minister Joanasie. ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᔅᓴᐃᑦ ᐃᓐᓇᕐᓄᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᐃᑦ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just while we are on this topic, ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, earlier on the registration piece, the Education ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑕᒪᑐᒥᖓᓕᕆᑎᓪᓗᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒧᑦ Act under section 30 says registration, ages 6 ᐃᓯᕈᒪᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐊᑎᓕᐅᖃᑕᐅᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᑖᓃᑦᑐᖅ 30 to 18, “The parents of a child who is entitled ᐊᑎᓕᐅᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᖅ, 6-ᓂᑦ ᐅᑭᐅᓖᑦ 18-ᒧᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ under section 2 to attend school shall ensure ᐃᓗᓕᑯᓘᔭᖓᓂᒃ 2 ᐊᑖᓃᑦᑐᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖁᒋᐊᖃᕈᓂ the child is registered with a school if the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖁᒍᓂᐅᒃ 6-ᓂᒃ ᐅᑭᐅᖃᕆᐊᓕᒃ child is at least 6 years of age or will become ᐅᖓᑖᓂᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ, 6-ᓂᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐅᑭᐅᖃᕋᔭᖅᑐᒥᑦ 6 years of age on or before December 31 of ᑎᓯᐱᕆ 31-ᖑᓚᐅᓐᖏᓐᓂᖓᓂᒃ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ 18- the school year and is less than 18 years of ᓂᒃ ᐅᑭᐅᖃᕈᓂᓗ ᐱᔭᕇᖅᓯᒪᓐᖏᑉᐸᑦ 12-ᒥᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ age on that date and has not graduated from ᑕᒪᑐᒥᖓᓕᕆᑎᓪᓗᒍ. grade 12.”

Despite that, if you go farther down in the ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᒫᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᐊᑖᓃᑦᑐᖅ 32, ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᒻᒥᒻᒪᑦ current Act, section 32 says enrolment of ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᖃᕈᒪᑉᐸᑦ others, “A district education authority may ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑎᒍᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᑖᓃᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ allow an individual who is not entitled to be ᐊᑎᖃᖃᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᑎᒎᓇᑦᑕᐅᖅ registered with a school under its jurisdiction ᐃᓚᓯᒪᒋᓪᓗᓂ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᖅᑕᖏᑦ, ᐊᑖᓃᓐᖔᖅᓱᓂ 21- to register with a school under its ᓂᑦ ᐅᑭᐅᖃᕈᓂ ᐅᖓᑖᓂᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ 6-ᓂᑦᑕᐅᖅ jurisdiction…” and the example is used of a ᐅᑭᐅᑭᓐᓂᖅᓴᐃᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᑐᑭᒋᒻᒥᔭᖓ child who is 21 years of age or older, but this ᐊᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᓯᒪᓂᖓ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᖅᑕᖏᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, also includes if they are younger than six. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Minister Joanasie and I ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ would just like to point out for everybody in ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕆᔪᒪᓪᓗᖓᓗ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᒍᑦ the room that it’s official: we are getting ᐅᕙᒍᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒧᑦ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒧᑦ. ᐄ, educated on the Education Act by the ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕆᔪᒪᕗᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᒐᑦᑕᑦᑕᐅᖅ Education Minister today. ᒪᓕᒐᐅᑉ ᒥᔅᓵᓄᑦ.

>>Laughter >>ᐃᓪᓚᖅᑐᑦ

Thank you, Minister. Mr. Lightstone. ᓇᑯᕐᒦᒃ, ᒥᓂᔅᑕ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᓇᑯᕐᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ Thank you for that response, both from the ᑭᐅᔭᐅᒐᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᑖᒃᑯᓇᓐᖓᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ NTA and the Minister, on that matter. ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒧᑦ.

Further, as the Minister had indicated, the DEAs have the authority granted to them to ᓱᓕ ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕆᖅᑲᐅᒻᒥᒻᒪᑦ allow the enrollment of others, but nowhere in ᓴᓐᖏᓂᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐱᕕᖃᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ the current Act or in Bill 25 does it state who ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᒫᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᖅ 25- has the authority to allow for children under ᒥᑦ ᑭᒃᑯᑦ ᓴᓐᖏᓂᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᑭᐅᓖᑦ 5 ᐊᑖᓂ the age of five to be enrolled in advance of ᐊᑎᖃᖃᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᓯᕗᕙᓯᒡᓗᑎᒃ ᓲᕐᓗ that requirement. I think that it is absolutely ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᓕᓵᕈᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᓯᕗᓂᐊᓂ ᐅᑭᐅᖏᑦ necessary that something as crucial as that ᓈᒻᒪᒃᓯᓚᐅᓐᖏᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᕕᖃᕈᓐᓇᖅᐸᑕ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ really needs to be incorporated into an ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᔪᖅ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ Education Act if it is to be abided by. ᒪᓕᒐᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᓚᓕᐅᑎᓪᓚᕆᒋᐊᓕᐅᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑲᔪᓯᓪᓚᕆᓚᖓᑉᐸᑦ. My next question is that the NTA had stated that there are no… . To ensure that parents ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᕋᑖᕐᒪᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ make the right decision in enrolling their child ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᑦ ᓈᒻᒪᒃᑐᒥᒃ early, there needs to be some standardized ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᕐᒥᓂᒃ ᑲᔪᓯᒍᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕ testing in place and currently, as the NTA ᖃᓄᖅᑑᕈᒪᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᔫᒥᔪᒥᑦ stated, there is no such thing existing in ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᐊᑐᖃᑦᑕᖁᒍᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᒫᓐᓇ Nunavut. I would like to ask the Minister of ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐱᑕᖃᓐᖏᒻᒪᑕ. Education if that has been brought to his ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᕗᖓ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒧᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ attention and if the Minister is working to ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕐᕕᐅᓯᒪᔪᔅᓴᐅᒥᒻᒪᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᕆᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ

correct that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᐃᕙᓪᓕᐊᒥᒻᒪᑕᑦᑕᐅᖅ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. Minister Joanasie.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We would agree along the lines of ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, what the president of the teachers association ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐄ, ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᖓᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ had recommended that there be some ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒋᕙᕗᑦ, ᓲᕐᓗ cognitive testing done prior to a child…if they ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐊᔪᓐᖏᑎᒋᒻᒪᖔᑕ ᐅᑭᐅᖏᑦ are under the age of six. There is some testing 6-ᖑᓚᐅᓐᖏᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓂᕐᒦᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᒍᑦ, that is done in some communities regarding ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑐᖃᓲᖑᒋᓪᓗᓂᓗ ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓂᒃ prekindergarten. They do have some level of ᓄᓇᓕᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᓕᓴᒻᒪᖅᑐᓄᑦ testing that we are able to do, but I believe it ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᓚᐅᓐᖏᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᒥᑭᓛᒧᑦ is limited. We can look at this further on how ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᖃᕇᖅᑐᐃᑦ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐱᕕᖃᓪᓚᕆᓐᖏᒻᒥᔪᒍᑦ we can expand it, perhaps, and in line of what ᐃᓚᐃᓐᓇᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓲᖅ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ has been discussed today. Thank you, Mr. ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᔭᐅᕋᑖᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᐸᓗᖓᓂᑦ. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Mr. Lightstone, let’s ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ ᐊᓯᐊᓄᑦ ᓴᖑᓚᐅᕐᒥᑕ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ. move on to a different topic. Mr. Lightstone.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. I’ll move on to my next question. It’s going to ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᓯᕗᖓ ᒪᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᓕᓴᒻᒪᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ be regarding early childhood education. The ᒥᑭᓛᒨᓚᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᓱᓕ, information that we received from the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᕋᔭᕋᓗᐊᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᕆᐊᖃᓲᖑᒻᒪᑕ. Nunavut Teachers Association as well as the ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᒃ opening comments, the NTA has a very ᑖᒃᑯᓇᓐᖔᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᓴᓐᖏᔪᒥᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᔅᓴᖃᕐᒪᑕ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ strong position on this matter in that the ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᒐᔭᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒨᖓᔪᓄᑦ proposed legislation, Bill 25, would allow for ᑎᑎᖅᑲᖅᑕᖏᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᖃᕐᒥᒐᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ. inequitable early childhood programming in our communities. This is something that I’m very concerned about.

When children are entering kindergarten, ᒪᑯᐊ ᐃᓯᕐᓂᐊᕈᑎᒃ ᒥᑭᓛᒧᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ there is a vast discrepancy between those ᐱᕕᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐸᐃᕆᕕᒻᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ children who have had the opportunity to go ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᖅᑕᐅᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ to daycare and preschool and those who have ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐅᖅᓴᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᑎᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊᑦᑕᐅᖅ not. That’s quite obvious in the case in Pond ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᒻᒥ, ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐆᑦᑑᑎᔅᓴᑦᑎᐊᕙᒻᒥ Inlet with the early childhood program that ᐱᖃᕐᒥᒻᒪᑕ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᓲᕐᓗ ᓴᓂᐊᓂ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ they have there where they team up ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᖅᑕᐅᓲᓐᖑᓐᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᓴᓂᐊᓂ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ kindergarten students who have gone to the ᐅᖓᓯᒌᓕᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ. preschool with students that have not.

In the NTA’s submission they state that early ᑕᒪᓐᓇᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᒪᑯᐊ

childhood programming should be “universal, ᐊᔾᔨᒌᑦᑐᒥᒃ ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓄᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ publicly funded and directed by the ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ Department of Education, and delivered by ᐊᒻᒪᓗᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐊᔪᓐᖏᑦᑐᓄᑦ ᐱᔭᕇᕈᑎᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᓄᑦ qualified, bilingual Early Childhood ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔪᔅᓴᐅᒍᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᐅᓗᑎᓪᓗ Education teachers who are Government of ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᐃᓯᒪᒐᔭᖑᐊᕋᓗᐊᕐᖓᑕ Nunavut Employees. The proposed ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᔭᐅᓂᖓ. amendment would make Early Childhood ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᒃᓱᕈᖅᑎᑦᑎᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᓐᖏᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ Education programming inequitable across ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ our communities, and place further burden on ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᕗᖓ ᖃᓄᖅ ᑭᐅᒍᒪᒐᔭᕐᒪᖔᖅ, our District Education Authorities.” I would ᖃᓄᐃᒋᔭᐅᒻᒪᖔᖅ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. like to ask the Minister of Education if you would like to respond to that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. Minister Joanasie.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We believe this is kind of outside ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, of the scope of Bill 25 and more looking at ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐅᑉᐱᕆᔭᕗᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᖅ 25 the Child Day Care Act that we are planning ᓯᓚᑖᓂ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᐸᐃᕆᕕᒻᒥᐅᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᑦ ᑕᑯᓐᓇᖔᖅᑐᒍ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓂᖅ ᐸᕐᓇᒃᓯᒪᓗᑎᒍ to review once we’re done with the Education ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓂᐊᕐᓗᓯ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ Act. This is something that we want to look at ᐊᓂᒍᖅᓯᒪᓕᖅᐸᑦ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᑕᑯᓇᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᔭᕗᑦ further and we have received letters from ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑦᑐᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑦᑎᒍ ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓅᖓᔪᒥᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ daycares about implementing universal ᐱᕋᔭᓐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑕᑯᔭᕆᐊᖃᕋᔭᕋᑦᑎᒍ programs in Nunavut. We have to look at the ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᒪᓂᓕᒫᖓ ᐊᑕᖏᕐᓗᒍ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᒐᕙᒪᕗᑦ whole scope of it in its entirety and whether or ᑲᔪᓯᔪᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᓯᕗᓂᔅᓴᒥᒃ ᖃᓂᔾᔫᒥᔪᒥᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ not this government can proceed with that in ᒥᓂᔅᑕᐅᖃᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᐅᖃᖃᑎᖃᕐᓂᐊᕐᒥᔪᖓ ᑕᒪᑐᒧᖓ. the near future. This is something that I would ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. have to bring up with my cabinet colleagues as well. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Thank you for clarifying ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᑐᑭᓯᓇᖅᓯᑎᒃᑲᕕᐅᒃ. that because it is something that the teachers ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ association has mentioned, and it’s important ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᕙᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᒍᑦᑎᒍ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᒻᒪᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ for us to understand what’s within the scope ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᒪᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓗᐊᓃᑦᑐᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᖅ, of the bill and what’s outside of the scope of ᓯᓚᑖᓃᒃᑲᔭᕐᒪᖔᕐᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕆᐊᖁᔭᕗᑦ, bill in terms the changes that we can propose ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕋᔅᓴᐅᒐᔭᖅᑐᓂᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ. or can be made. Mr. Lightstone.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will remain within the scope of the bill and ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ my next question is going to be regarding ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓃᔾᔪᒥᓂᐊᕐᖓᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒐ clause 29, which is on page 8 of Bill 25 and ᓇᓴᐅᑎᖓᓄᑦ 29 ᒪᑉᐱᒐᖅ 8-ᖓᓂᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᖅ 25 it’s regarding early childhood programs. Bill ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᓂᐅᑉ ᒥᒃᓵᓄᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᖅ

25 is placing the responsibility of early 25 ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᓂᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ childhood education on the DEAs, which in ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ, ᐃᓱᒪᒃᑯᓪᓕ ᑖᓐᓇ my mind is putting a further burden on our ᐊᒃᓱᕈᕐᓇᖅᓯᖁᔨᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ DEAs and providing inequitable access to our ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ, ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑐᒥᑦ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ communities. I would like to ask: why is it ᓄᓇᓕᖁᑎᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ. ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᔪᖓ ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᑦ that the Department of Education is placing ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᒪᑎᑦᑎᓇᓱᑉᐸᑦ the responsibility on our DEAs? Thank you, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Just to clarify, the ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᑐᑭᓯᓇᖅᓯᑎᒋᐊᕐᓗᒍ question is for the Minister? Minister ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒧᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑏᑦ? ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. Joanasie.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Chairman. I believe this was proposed as a ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐅᑉᐱᕆᒐᒃᑯ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑕᐅᖂᕐᒪᑦ way to have DEAs take a lead on Inuit ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ language and cultural programming for ECE ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᖅᑯᓯᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ purposes. As we know, some schools do have ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᒥᔅᓵᓄᑦ, ᐃᓛᓐᓂᑦ daycares or preschools. For example, if a ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ ᐸᐃᕆᕕᖃᕐᒪᑕ DEA wanted to implement a language nest, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᕕᖃᖅᑐᑎᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᖃᖅᑎᑦᑎᔪᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ this would allow for that. Thank you, Mr. ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᑲᔪᓯᑎᑦᑎᔪᒪᓐᓂᖅᐸᑕ ᑖᔅᓱᒧᖓ ᑕᕝᕙ Chairman. ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᖃᕋᔭᖅᑐᖅ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ. Lightstone.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑕᐃᒪ On the same topic of questioning, on page 8 ᒪᑉᐱᒐᖅ 8 ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒥᑦ ᑕᒪᑐᒧᖔᖓᔪᖅᑕᐅᖅ of Bill 25 it states that DEAs have the ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ authority to provide early childhood ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᖃᕐᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ education, and subsection 2, limitations, states ᓈᓴᐅᑎᒃᑲᓐᓂᖓ 2 ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᖅ that “A program provided under subsection ᐃᓗᓕᒃᑲᓐᓂᖓᑕ 1, ᐃᓱᓕᑦᑕᕐᕕᖃᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᕐᓃᑦ (1),” early childhood education, “may be ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᑦ limited to such number of children as the ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᓗᓂ ᓇᓕᐊᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᔪᑎᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᕐᒥᓂᐅᒃ. district education authority may determine or ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒐᓕ, ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᑦ ᐃᓱᖃᖅᑎᑦᑎᕙ? ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᑦ to such class or classes of children as it may ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ determine.” My question is: why is the ᑲᑎᒪᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᓕᒃᑕᕐᕕᖃᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᑎ, ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᓪᓕ Department of Education giving the DEAs the ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᓄᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ authority to set the limit? Why is the ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᓯᒪᓐᖏᓚᑦ ᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐅᑭᐅᖏᑦ Department of Education not setting the limit ᓈᒻᒪᒃᑎᐊᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓄᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, to equal that of the appropriate age to children ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. in that specific community? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ.

(interpretation ends) Mr. Lightstone, we have (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ the Minister of Education here on Thursday ᒥᓂᔅᑕᖓ ᑕᒫᓃᓛᕐᒪᑦ ᑎᓴᒻᒥᐅᓕᖅᐸᑦ ᐅᓪᓛᒃᑯᑦ, morning and we can focus questions to the ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑦ ᑐᕌᖅᑎᔪᓐᓇᓛᖅᑐᑎᒍ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒻᒪᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᑦ Minister. Do you want to rephrase your ᐅᖃᕆᐊᑦᓯᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᐱᐅᒃ ᐅᑎᕐᕕᐅᔪᓐᓇᓛᕐᒪᑦ question in a way that brings us back to the ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᓪᓗ ᑲᑐᑎᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᕆᓛᕐᒪᔾᔪᒃ subject matter and which is the Nunavut ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐱᓪᓗᒍ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ. Teachers Association’s submission regarding Bill 25? Mr. Lightstone.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will move on to my next question. Going back ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ. to teacher recruitment and retention issues in ᐊᐱᖅᑯᒻᒪ ᐊᐃᑉᐹᓄᐊᓕᕐᓚᖓ. ᐅᑎᕐᓗᖓ the NTA’s opening comments on the second ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᕙᑦᑐᒧᑦ ᓇᕝᕚᕈᓐᓇᓂᕐᒥᒃ page, the NTA states that “…the proposed ᐱᓯᒪᑦᓯᑦᓴᐃᓐᓇᕈᓐᓇᓂᕐᒥᓗ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᒃ, timeline is not ambitious enough” and that ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᕐᔪᐊᒃᑯᑦ ᒪᑐᐃᕈᑎᒋᖅᑲᐅᔭᒥᓂ with sufficient “infusion of funding, the ᒪᑉᐱᒐᐅᑉ ᑐᒡᓕᐊᓂ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᕐᔪᐊᒃᑯᑦ continued reformation of the NTEP program, ᐅᖃᕐᒪᑕ, ᐅᓗᖅᓯᐅᑎᓄᑦ ᑭᒡᓕᒋᔭᐅᖁᔭᖏᑦ a concerted effort to recruit Inuit into the ᐊᔪᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᖃᓐᖏᓗᐊᕐᒪᑕᒎᖅ education profession, and new supportive ᑮᓇᐅᔭᑭᒃᓴᐃᓐᓇᓂᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᓯᓚᑦᑐᓴᕐᕕᒥᓪᓗ programs put in place for teachers in their first ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᖅᑐᑦ. ᐃᓄᐃᑦ [five] years of work…bilingual education can ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᓂᖏᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᒥ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥ be achieved.” I would like to ask my next ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ, ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ question for the NTA. What exactly do you ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᔭᕇᕈᑎᒃ. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ mean? Are you suggesting creating new ᑲᑐᑎᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒐ ᖃᓄᓪᓚᑦᑖᖅ supportive programs to put in place for ᐅᖃᕋᓱᒃᑲᕕᑦ? ᓴᖅᑭᑦᓯᖁᔨᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᓂᕐᒥᒃ teachers in their first five years of work? If the ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᒃ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓄᑦ ᑕᓪᓕᒪᓄᑦ NTA could provide some examples. Thank ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᔾᔪᑎᑦᓴᖏᓐᓄᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ. you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ. Currently we feel there is inadequate support ᒫᓐᓇᐅᔪᖅ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᐃᕈᑎᖃᓗᐊᖅᑐᕆᓐᖏᑕᕗᑦ for teachers who are entering the profession in ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖑᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᔪᓂᒃ ᐅᑭᐅᑦ ᑕᓪᓕᒪᑦ their first five years. We are focusing mainly ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖏᓐᓂ. ᑕᐅᑐᓐᓂᖅᓴᐅᓪᓗᑕᓗ ᓯᓚᑦᑐᓴᕐᕕᖕᒥ on NTEP graduates when they enter our ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᓕᒪᒃᓴᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᔭᕇᖅᓯᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ schools. There is a combination of issues that ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᓐᓃᓕᕌᖓᑕ. ᐊᑕᐅᓯᐅᓐᖏᓚᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑕᐅᔪᑦ lead to that. Primarily what they are currently ᑕᒪᑐᒧᖓ ᑐᕌᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᕈᑕᐅᕙᑦᑐᑦ ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᖃᓄᖅ receiving for education in the NTEP program ᑭᑐᒥᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑕᐅᕙᒻᒪᖔᑕ ᒫᓐᓇᐅᔪᒥ is not properly preparing them for the realities ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᓯᓚᑦᑐᖅᓴᕐᕕᖕᒥ they will face in terms of the workload and ᐅᐸᓗᖓᐃᕈᑕᐅᓗᐊᖏᒻᒪᑕ ᐊᑐᓪᓚᑦᑖᕋᔭᖅᑕᒥᓐᓄᑦ the issues they will be dealing with their ᐱᓕᕆᐊᑦᓴᖃᖅᑎᒋᒐᔭᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ students when they do come into the ᐊᑐᕆᐊᖃᕋᔭᖅᑕᒥᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦ ᐱᓪᓗᒋᑦ classroom. There needs to be a formalized ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᖕᒦᓕᕈᑎᒃ. ᐃᓂᓪᓚᖓᑦᓯᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ mentoring program for all new teachers as ᓴᖅᑭᖅᑐᖃᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᔭᐅᖅᑎᕈᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᓕᓵᖅᑐᓕᒫᓄᑦ

they enter into our schools and that program ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᑎᓐᓃᓕᕌᖓᑕ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇᓗ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᖅ should be delivered at the school level by ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᑎᑕᐅᒋᐊᖃᕐᓗᓂ ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᖕᓂ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓄᑦ other qualified professionals in their schools, ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᐅᔪᓂ with overriding support by the department. ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᒃᑲᓂᖅᓯᒪᓗᑎᓪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᕐᔪᐊᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ. For our teachers who are not originally from Nunavut, there needs to be an enhanced ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᖃᕆᐊᖃᕐᒥᔪᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖁᑎᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ mentoring program on the community they ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒦᓐᖔᖅᓯᒪᖏᑦᑐᓄᑦ, are moving to and how they need to adapt to ᐊᔭᐅᖅᑐᐃᕈᑎᖃᑦᓯᐊᕐᓗᓂᓗ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᐅᐸᒃᑕᒥᓐᓂ the standards of the community that they are ᖃᓄᕐᓗ ᓱᖏᐅᑎᒋᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᐊᑐᐊᖅᑕᐅᖁᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ serving and the students they are working ᓄᓇᓕᐅᔪᒥ ᐱᔨᑦᓯᕐᕕᒋᓕᖅᑕᒥᓐᓂ, ᖃᐅᑕᒫᓪᓗ with every day. There was some development ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓂᒃ ᐱᓴᓱᖃᑎᒋᕙᑦᑕᒥᓐᓄᑦ. ᑕᒪᑐᒧᖓᓗ for that program in the past. There was a ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᒧᑦ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᖃᖅᓯᒪᔫᒐᓗᐊᖅ mentoring and induction website which no ᓯᕗᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂ, ᐊᔭᐅᖅᑐᐃᕈᑎᐅᔪᓂᒃ longer exists, which was co-funded through ᐱᑕᖃᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᓂᓗ ᖃᕆᑕᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ the professional development fund for the ᐱᑕᖃᕈᓐᓃᖅᖢᓂ ᑲᑐᑕᐅᔪᒥᒃ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᓂ staffing for that position. The website itself ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖃᐅᑎᑎᒍᑦ and the program were operated by the ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᒃᓴᖃᖅᖢᓂ ᑕᒪᑐᒧᖓ ᖃᕆᑕᐅᔭᕐᒧᑦ Department of Education. That program no ᑐᖅᑲᑕᕐᕕᐅᔪᒧᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᐅᔪᒧᓪᓗ ᐊᐅᓚᑕᐅᓪᓗᓂ longer exists. I could not speak to you on why ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᕐᔪᐊᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ the decision was made to no longer fund that ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᑎᑕᐅᒍᓐᓃᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ. ᐅᖃᕈᓐᓇᖏᓚᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓄᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᓱᒪᓕᐅᕆᔪᖃᓐᓂᕐᒪᖔ program, but we do believe that there needs to ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᖁᕈᓐᓃᖅᖢᒍ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ be a concerted effort to support the new ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒃᓴᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐅᑉᐱᕈᓱᑉᐳᒍᑦ ᓱᒻᒪᑦ teachers in their classroom in their first five ᐊᒃᓱᕈᕈᑕᐅᒋᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ years. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᓕᓵᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᒥᖕᓂ ᐅᑭᐅᑦ ᑕᓪᓕᒪᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᓕᓵᕐᓂᕐᒥᓂᒃ. There also needs to be… . My apologies. I’m trying to find out what’s happening over ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᐃᓂᖃᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᕐᒥᔪᖅ... ᒪᒥᐊᓇᖅ there. ᓱᔪᖃᓕᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᐊᕙᓂ ᖃᐅᔨᓇᓱᒃᑐᖓ

>>Laughter >>ᐃᓪᓚᖅᑐᑦ

There also needs to be continuous support for teachers, especially our new teachers, when ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓗᑦᑖᓂᒃ ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ they are looking at curricular documents and ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖁᑎᒋᓕᓵᖅᑕᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᕌᖓᑕ resources. There is a real struggle at the ᐃᓕᓴᐅᑎᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐱᓇᓲᑎᑦᓴᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᓪᓗ. school level to access those. The Department ᐅᖁᒪᐃᒃᓴᕈᑕᐅᕙᒻᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᓐᓂ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ of Education, in particular with literacy, has ᓇᕝᕚᕐᕕᒋᒋᐊᖏᑦ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᕐᔪᐊᒃᑯᑦ done a better job of that in the last few years, ᑲᒪᓪᓗᐊᑕᒃᓯᒪᒐᓗᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐅᖃᓕᒫᒋᐅᖅᓴᓂᕐᒧᑦ but more work needs to be done to support ᑐᓐᖓᔪᓂᒃ. ᑕᒪᑐᒪᓐᖓᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᑦᑎᐊᓂᖅᓴᐅᓯᒪᕗᑦ those teachers. Our teachers in our schools ᐅᑭᐅᓂ ᐊᓂᒍᓵᖅᑐᓂ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ and in particular our teachers who are ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᖅ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑦ working in Inuktut and teaching in Inuktut to ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᕗᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᑎᓐᓂ our students are still forced to construct and ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐃᓄᒃᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᕙᑦᑐᓂᒃ develop their own resources at a rate much ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᓱᓕ ᓇᒻᒥᓂᖅ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ higher than their counterparts in other ᐃᓕᓴᐅᑎᓕᐅᕆᐊᖃᖅᐸᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᐅᓄᓐᓂᖅᓴᓂᒃ ᐊᓯᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑦ ᓴᓂᐊᓐᓂ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂ

jurisdictions in Canada, and they need more ᑲᓇᑕᒥ ᐊᕕᑦᑐᖅᓯᒪᓂᐅᔪᓂ. ᑕᒪᑐᒧᖓᓗ support for that. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᒃᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᐃᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Lightstone, you said you were done. Minister ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ ᑕᐃᒫᕐᓂᕋᕋᕕᑦ. Joanasie, I believe this is being worked on ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ ᐅᓇ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᖅᑰᖅᑑᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᒫᓐᓇ right now, how recruiting teachers… . Let me ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᔨᒃᕼᐊᓂᒃ ᖃᓄᖅ speak English. (interpretation ends) The ᖃᑉᓗᓇᐅᔭᓚᐅᕐᓚᖓ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᒃ educator recruitment and retention strategy is ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᐃᓐᓇᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᓪᓗ something that has come up and it’s in the ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎ ᓴᖅᑭᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ ᒫᓐᓇᓗ current Education Act. Can you give us an ᒪᓕᒐᕐᓃᖅᐸᒌᑦᑐᓂ. ᑐᓴᖅᑎᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᐱᑎᒎᑦ update in terms of where the department is ᐱᓕᕆᕝᕕᓯ ᓇᓃᓕᕐᒪᖔ ᓄᑖᒧᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᒻᒥᒃ? ᒥᓂᔅᑕ with the new strategy? Minister Joanasie. ᔪᐊᓇᓯ.

Hon. David Joanasie (interpretation): Please ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ: ᐅᑕᖅᑭᓚᐅᑲᒍᔅᓯ. wait a moment. Thank you. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ.

(interpretation ends) Thank you, Mr. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑦ Chairman. The strategy is still under ᒫᓐᓇ ᓱᓕ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᒻᒪᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂᓕ development. However, just to speak on the ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓗᒋᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ orientation and mentorship for Nunavut ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᕐᒥᔪᒍᑦ ᐃᑭᐊᖅᑭᕕᒻᒥ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᒍᓪᓗ. ᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᓯᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᔪᓄᑦ teachers, we are also working towards having ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᕙᔪᒐᓗᐊᕐᒪᑕ a website. It was mentioned about an ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒨᐸᓪᓕᐊᔪᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᑦ induction program that teachers used to have. ᑕᑯᓐᓈᒐᖃᕋᔭᖅᑐᓂ ᐱᖓᓲᓕᖅᑲᖓᔪᑦ There’s another one under development which ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᖓ, ᐊᔪᕆᖅᓱᐃᔾᔭᐅᓂᖓ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ would focus on three components, which are ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᓕᒻᒪᑦᑎᑕᐅᓂᖏᑦ. ᐃᒫᒃ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᒐᔭᕐᒪᑦ orientation, mentorship, and professional ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᓕᕋᑖᕐᓂᑰᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ development. We hope these would support ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᕋᓗᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔾᔪᑎᔅᓴᑦᑎᓐᓂ teachers early on in their careers and ensure ᐅᖓᑎᒃᑲᓐᓂᐊᔪᓄᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᕝᕕᒻᒦᓚᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ. that they’re well supported beyond their initial time in the department. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᒃ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᓕᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᐃᓐᓇᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᕿᓚᐅᒥᔪᒃᑯᑦ The teacher recruitment and retention strategy ᐊᑯᓐᓂᖅᓱᖅᑐᒃᑯᑦ ᓯᕕᑐᔪᒃᑯᓪᓗ ᑐᕌᒐᖃᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑦ. is going to have short-, medium- and long- ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᑐᓐᖓᔪᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖃᕐᓂᖅ ᑖᓐᓇᓗ term goals to have Nunavut-based teachers. ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᓇᓱᒃᑭᓪᓗᓂ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᔪᓕᒪᖅᓴᐃᓕ Looking at the revised NTEP program, we are ᓯᓚᑦᑐᓴᕐᕕᒻᒥ ᐃᓱᒪᓇᕋᓗᐊᖅᐳᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ very eager and hopeful that that program will ᑲᔪᓯᓂᐊᕆᐊᖓ. ᓴᖅᑭᑦᑎᕙᓪᓕᐊᓗᑕ ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ continue producing bilingual teachers in our ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓖᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ. ᑕᐃᒪ territory. There are a bunch of initiatives such ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᒐᓚᐅᑕᖃᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑦ ᑕᑯᓐᓈᒐᖃᖅᑐᒍᑦ as that that we will be looking towards in ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ having more Nunavut-based teachers and well ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖃᕈᒪᓪᓗᑕ. supported. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᑕᒪᑐᒥᖓ Minister, for that explanation. At this time we ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᐃᒐᕕᑦ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᑕᐃᒻᒪ ᒫᓐᓇ will take a break for lunch. We will return at ᐅᑉᓗᕈᕐᒥᑕᕐᓇᖅ ᖃᒡᓕᕼᐃᒪᓚᐅᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᓄᖅᑲᖓᓚᐅᑲᖕᓂᐊᕋᑉᑕ. ᐅᐊᑦᓯᐊᕈ

1:30 p.m. and we will continue with questions 1:30 ᐅᑎᕐᓂᐊᖅᖢᑕ. ᐅᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᑎᑦᑎᔩᑦ to the teachers association. Mr. Quassa, you ᑎᒥᖁᑎᒋᔭᖓᑦ ᕼᐅᓕ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑕᖅᑑᓗᐊᕐᓂᐊᕋᑉᑎᒍ. will begin asking questions at 1:30 p.m. We ᒥᔅᑕ ᖁᐊᓴ ᐊᐱᕆᐊᕈᒫᕋᕕᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᕼᐅᕆᐊᕈᒫᕋᕕᑦ will see you later. Thank you. 1:30 ᐱᒋᐊᕐᓗᒍ. ᐅᕙᑦᓯᐊᕈᑦᑕᐅᖅ. ᒪ’ᓇ.

>>Committee recessed at 11:58 and resumed >>ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ ᓄᖅᑲᖓᑲᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ 11:58ᒥ at 13:30 ᑲᔪᓯᓪᓗᑎᓪᓗ 13:30ᒥ

Chairman (interpretation): Good day. The ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᐅᓪᓗᑦᑎᐊᖅ ᐅᑎᖅᓯᒪᓕᕐᒥᔪᑦ Standing Committee on Legislation has come ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᖑᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᑦᓴᓕᕆᓂᐅᑉ ᒥᑦᓵᓄᑦ, back to our hearing on Bill 25. This morning ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᒥᑦᓵᓄᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᑕ ᐅᓪᓛᖅ. we had the teachers association at the witness ᑕᐃᒪ ᐅᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᓯᔩᑦ ᑎᒥᖁᑎᒋᔭᖓᓐᓂ table and we will proceed from there. I ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔪᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᓂᖃᓚᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ currently have three names on my list. Mr. ᓄᖅᑲᓚᐅᕋᑉᑕ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑲᔪᓯᓂᐊᖅᖢᓂ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᐅᔪᖅ. Quassa will start. ᐱᖓᓱᓂᒃ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐊᑎᓕᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅᑕᓕᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓂᒃ. ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑎᑦᓯᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂ, ᒥᔅᑐ ᖁᐊᓴ. Mr. Quassa (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) First of all, I ᖁᐊᓴ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) just wanted to applaud the NTA for believing ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥᒃ ᖁᕕᐊᓲᑎᒋᔪᒪᔭᒃᑲ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ that students deserve fully bilingual Inuktut- ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᑎᒃ English education system that should be ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᖁᔭᐅᒻᒪᑕ ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᓪᓗ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᑉᐱᕆᔭᖏᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒋᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ developed and delivered using Inuit societal ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓᑦ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᐅᔾᔭᐅᓯᒪᐃᓐᓇᐅᔭᕐᓗᓂ values. Inuktut needs to be prevalent ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ throughout our students’ journey. I applaud ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᖅᖢᒋᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᓱᒪᖃᕐᒪᑕ ᐅᑯᐊ the NTA for believing in that. I believe we all ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ have that belief and certainly that was the ᑕᑯᓐᓇᓐᖑᐊᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᑦᑕ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ vision when Nunavut was being created. I ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖁᕕᐊᓲᑎᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᓱᒪᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᒪᑕ. applaud the NTA for believing in that. ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᔅᓴᓄᑦ ᒪᑉᐱᖅᑐᒐᖅ 7 ᑖᒃᑯᓇᓂ Going to the questions, on page 7 of your ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔭᔅᓯᓐᓂ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᖅᑲᐅᒐᔅᓯ submission, you question the accuracy of the ᐱᔭᕇᖅᑕᐅᕕᔅᓴᖏᑕᒎᖅ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒋᒐᔅᓯᐅᒃ timelines for phasing in the application of ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑐᑦ ᑕᑯᓐᓇᕐᓗᒋᑦ Inuit language provisions as laid out in the ᓈᓴᐅᑎᓕᒃ 43−ᒥ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25−ᖑᖅᑎᑕᐅᓇᓱᒃᑐᒥ. schedule under clause 43 of the proposed Bill ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᐲᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑐᓂᒃ 25. Can you elaborate further on the type of ᓱᓕᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᓂᑦ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓵᖑᔪᕕᓃᑦ evidence level of detail or research ᑎᑎᖅᑲᖏᓐᓂ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᕕᑦ documentation that you feel should be ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᖃᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ considered when determining the timelines for ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ the phasing in and the application of the Inuit ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓃᑦᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ language provisions of the legislation? ᖃᓄᖅ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᐱᔭᕇᖅᑕᐅᕕᔅᓴᖏᑦ. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ.

Qujannamiik, Mr. Quassa, for the question. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᒥᔅᑐ ᖁᐊᓴ We believe that no evidence to this point has (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᓐᓄᑦ. ᓱᓕᔪᕐᓇᐅᑎᓂ been provided to substantiate the date of 2039 ᐱᑕᖃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᑕᑯᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᓐᖏᓐᓇᑦᑕᓗ for full bilingual education from kindergarten 2039 ᑭᓱᒥᒃ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᔭᐅᓪᓗᓂ to grade 12 in our schools. We feel there ᐅᓪᓗᓕᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᖔᑦ ᐱᒋᐊᓕᓵᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ should be more research done on how many ᖁᑦᑎᓐᓂᓕᒃ 12 ᑎᑭᓪᓗᒋᑦ NTEP graduates can be graduated each year if ᖃᐅᔨᓵᖑᒃᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᖃᕋᓗᐊᕐᒪᑦ ᖃᔅᓯᑦ funds are put in place to increase enrollment ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᔅᓴᓐᖑᕆᐅᖅᓴᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᓱᓕᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᖔᑦ and increase supports for NTEP students, as ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖅᑕᖃᓕᖅᐸᓪᓗ ᐅᓄᖅᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ well for Inuktut language programming in ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓐᖑᕆᐅᖅᓴᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ NTEP. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᔅᓴᓕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᖏᑦ. A great move was made this year by NTEP at the Iqaluit campus to have the first year NTEP ᑕᒪᑐᒪᓂ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᔅᓴᓐᖑᕆᐅᖅᓴᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ program in Inuktitut for first-language ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂᑦ ᐊᒃᓱᐊᓗᒃ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ learners. Next year, I believe, they are on ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᖓᐅᑎᐅᑎᓪᓗ track to have an Inuktut program for first ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᖏᓐᓂ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ years as an ISL program. We believe that is a ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᓵᖅᑐᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᐅᑎᒋᔭᐅᓗᑎᒃ great change. Some research should be done ᐋᖅᑭᑦᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᒪᑦ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐱᕚᓪᓕᐅᑎᒃᓴᖅ in terms of projecting with those changes ᐱᕚᓪᓕᐅᑎᓪᓚᕆᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ implemented and with increased enrollment. ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᖏᑕ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᑉᐸᑕ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐊᓗᒻᒧᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓐᖑᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ That would mean promoting NTEP to our ᐅᓄᖅᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᕋᔭᖅᑐᑦ ᑕᒫᓂ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ. high school students at a much greater level than is currently happening in Nunavut.

Whether those dates can be moved forward from 2039, we have not been provided with ᐊᒻᒪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ 2039−ᓚᓯᒪᔪᑦ any evidence of why 2039 is an appropriate ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᖁᓪᓗᒍ ᓱᓕᔪᕐᓇᐅᑎᓂᒃ figure. We believe the government should be ᓴᖅᑭᕝᕕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᑕ ᑖᓐᓇ ᓇᓕᖅᑯᑎᓯᒪᒐᓗᐊᕐᒪᖔᑦ more ambitious and if there is an influx in 2039. ᑮᓇᐅᔭᐃᑦ ᓱᕐᕋᖏᑉᐸᑕ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ funding, if NTEP continues to be reformed ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓐᖑᕆᐅᖅᓴᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ and there is strong recruitment effort on ᐅᓄᖅᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᑎᑦ behalf of the government in collaboration ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᔪᓐᓇᖅᓯᓴᕋᐃᓐᓂᓴᐅᒐᔭᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ with its stakeholders, we should be able to ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᐸᑦ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, reach bilingual education right up to grade 12 (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. at a sooner date. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᖁᐊᓴ. Quassa. ᖁᐊᓴ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐄᑦᑎᐊᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ Mr. Quassa (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓛᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᑕ Chairman. The Department of Education has ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒋᓐᖏᐊᕐᔪᒃᑕᖓᓂᒃ stated something slightly different. NTI has (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓪᓗ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) stated that they would like to see more ᐅᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᑕ ᑕᒪᑐᒥᖓ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ Inuktitut-speaking teachers. That is what I ᐅᖃᕈᓐᓇᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᒃ believe Nunavut Tunngavik was saying. ᐱᑕᖃᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᖔᕐᓗᓂ ᑖᑯᐊ ᑕᐅᑐᒃᑕᐅᖔᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᒻᒪᓐᓇ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᖅᑰᔨᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᑦ.

I’ll ask this question in English. ᐅᒥᖓᖔᖅ ᐊᐱᕆᓂᐊᕐᒥᒐᒪ ᖃᓪᓗᓇᐅᔭᕐᓂᐊᕐᒥᒐᒪ (interpretation ends) As I just stated in my ᑕᐃᒪ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᒃ ᐅᖃᓵᕋᒪ preamble, I do believe that NTI had some ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᖓᐅᑎᓂᒃ. ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓂᒃᑯᐊ suggestions that Inuit employment plans ᖃᓄᖅᑑᕈᑎᒃᓴᓕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ should be more focused on when we’re ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᖏᑦᑕ ᒥᒃᓵᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ looking at the timing of the language of ᐃᓱᓕᑦᑕᕐᕕᖏᑕ ᒥᒃᓵᓄᑦ. ᖃᓄᖅᑑᕈᑎᒃᓴᓕᐅᖅᑐᖃᕐᒪᑦ instruction. It has been suggested that the ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᐃᑦ timelines for determining the phasing in and ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᖏᑦ. application of Inuit language provisions ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᖏᓪᓗ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᖃᕆᐊᓖᑦ should be based primarily on the Department ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ of Education’s Inuit Employment Plan. Do ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᖏᑕ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ. you agree with this suggestion? ᑕᒪᓐᓇᖃᐃ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒋᕕᐅᒃ? (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Fanjoy. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. I believe that yes, it should be tied to a vigorous ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐄ, Inuit employment plan. I could not make any ᑕᕝᕗᖓ ᐊᑕᓂᖃᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ comment on what the plan looks like. I have ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᖏᑦ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕐᕕᒋᔪᓐᓇᖏᑕᒃᑲ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ not seen it. It has not been shared with us to ᐸᕐᓇᐅᓯᐊᕆᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑕᑯᓚᐅᓐᖏᓐᓇᑦᑎᒃᑯᑦ this point. What the plan entails, the ᖃᐅᑕᐅᓚᐅᓐᖏᒻᒪᑕᓗ. ᐃᓗᓕᑯᓘᔭᖃᐅᕐᓂᖏᑦ department’s Inuit Employment Plan, that ᐃᓄᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᓄᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑏᑦ ᑑᒃᑯᓄᖓᖃᐃ would be a great question for the department, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᐅᑉᐸᑕᑦ but I believe that a strong, ambitious and ᐱᐅᓂᖅᓴᐅᔪᑦ ᐃᓄᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑕᐅᔪᓂᒃ vigorous Inuit employment plan should be in ᐆᒻᒪᕆᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᐱᑕᖃᕆᐊᓕᒃ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) place. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᖁᐊᓴ. Quassa. ᖁᐊᓴ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇᐃᓛᒃ Mr. Quassa (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᓵᖅᑕᕋ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᖅᑲᐅᒐᒃᑯ Chairman. That’s what I was thinking. The ᖃᓄᕐᓕᑭᐊᖅ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ, Department of Education and Nunavut ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᓪᓚᕆᖕᒪᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᓄᓇᕗᑦ Tunngavik have two totally different points of ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓪᓗ (ᑐᓵᔨᒃᑰᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᐊᒻᒪᓗ view. It has been mentioned by some of the ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᔭᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐊᐱᖅᓱᕆᐊᖅᑐᖅᑕᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ witnesses that Inuit language use in our ᖃᓄᖅ ᐊᓯᐊᒍᖔᖅ ᑕᐅᑐᒋᐊᖃᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ schools should be looked at from a different ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖓ angle. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᑦᑎᓐᓂ.

I would first like to hear from the Department ᐃᒻᒪᖄ ᑐᓴᕈᒪᕝᕕᒋᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᐸᒃᑲ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥᒃ of Education about what their view is on the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᓄᕐᓕ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᖕᒪᖔᒍ need for more teachers. In some cases they ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑕᖃᒃᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ.ᐃᓛᒃ ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓂᒃ state the reasons why they are focusing on the ᐅᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔫᒐᓗᐊᑦ ᐅᑯᐊᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ target date of 2039. I would like to get more ᑖᒃᑯᐊ 2039−ᒧᑦ ᑎᑭᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᓛᕐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ.

information because the ability to have ᑐᓴᒃᑲᓐᓂᐊᕐᔪᒍᒪᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᐳᖓᓕ adequate teaching staff is going to have a ᓲᕐᓗ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖃᑦᑎᐊᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ major impact. Maybe I’ll ask the Minister ᐊᑑᑎᖃᓪᓚᕆᖕᓂᐊᕐᒪᑦ. ᐃᒻᒪᖄ ᒥᓂᔅᑐᒧᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ what his view is on this subject. Was that ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᒋᐊᕐᔪᒃᑯᒃᑯ ᖃᓄᕐᓕ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᖕᒪᖔᒍ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ clear? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᓱᒪᒋᖃᑦᑕᖅᖢᒋᑦ. ᑐᑭᓯᓇᖅᐸ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᓂᔅᑐ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. Minister Joanasie. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Hon. David Joanasie (interpretation): Thank ᐃᑦᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᑉᐸᑦᓴᐃᓛᒃ ᐅᖃᓚᐅᕋᒪ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ you, Mr. Chairman. As I indicated yesterday, ᐃᓄᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᕋᓱᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᕗᑦ we would not agree with having our Inuit ᐱᑐᑦᓯᒪᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐅᕗᖓ ᒪᓕᒐᑦᓴᖅ 25−ᒧᑦ employment plan tied to Bill 25, but at this ᓈᒻᒪᒋᒐᔭᓐᖏᑕᕗᑦ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐅᖃᕈᓐᓇᖅᓱᖓ time I can say that we do have an Inuit ᓲᕐᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐸᕐᓇᑎᖃᕋᓗᐊᕋᑦᑕ employment plan and those government-wide ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᓄᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ plans are adjusted on an annual basis. ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᖏᓐᓂ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕆᖃᑦᑕᕋᑦᑕ.

NTEP was renewed by Arctic College. We ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᓯᓚᑦᑐᓴᕐᕕᒃᑯᓐᓂ usually give funding for the teacher education ᓄᑖᕈᖅᑎᑕᐅᒋᐊᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᓄᓇᕗᑦ program on a yearly basis at $2.26 million. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᔅᓴᓐᖑᖅᑎᑦᑎᔨᒃᑯᑦ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) On top of that, Nunavut Arctic College sets ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓂᒃ ᑐᓂᓯᒋᕙᒃᑲᑦᑕ ᑕᐃᑯᖓ aside a certain amount of funding for NTEP. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑦᓴᓐᖑᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂᒃ We will probably have to review the funding ᑐᕌᖓᔪᓂᒃ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ $2.26 ᒥᓕᐊᓂᒃ and see if there has to be an increase. It was ᑐᓂᕙᑦᑕᕗᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖄᒃᑲᓐᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ stated earlier that we will need to recruit many ᓯᓚᑦᑐᓴᕐᕕᒃᑯᑦ ᓇᒻᒥᓂᖅᑕᐅᖅ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓂᒃ teachers, which requires tremendous amounts ᓴᓂᕐᕙᐃᖃᑦᑕᕆᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᑕᐃᑦᑐᓱᖓ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) of funding for curriculum development and ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᔅᓴᓐᖑᖅᑎᑦᑎᔨᒃᑯᓅᖓᔪᓂᒃ. staff resources. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᒃᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᖃᖅᑰᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᐃᒻᒪᖄ This amount was projected based on this ᐊᖏᓪᓕᒋᐊᕆᐊᖃᒻᒪᖔᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᖃᖅᑐᖃᖅᑲᐅᒻᒪᑦ chosen target date of 2039, but it needs much ᓲᕐᓗ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᑖᕆᐊᖃᓕᕋᑦᑕ ᐊᒥᓱᓂᒃ ᑖᑦᓱᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ more detail such as when the work would ᓴᓂᕌᒍᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᑦᓴᐃᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓂᑦᑕᐅᖅ commence and when it would end. This is a ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐱᓕᕆᔨᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᕆᐊᖃᕋᔭᕐᒪᑕ ᐊᖏᔪᑲᓪᓚᒥᒃ. ballpark amount at this time and will need a ᑖᓐᓇ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᒋᐊᒃᑲᓂᕐᓗᑎᒍ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᑐᓂᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ lot more work to flesh out the actual amounts ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᕗᑦ 2039-ᒧᑦ ᑎᑭᐅᑎᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕆᓯᒪᔪᑦ as it is implemented. Thank you, Mr. ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓐᓂᓖᑦ ᓇᒥ Chairman. ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᒐᔭᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᖃᖓᓗ ᐃᓱᓕᒐᔭᕐᒪᖔᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓇᓚᐅᑦᑖᖅᓯᒪᔭᕗᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᑯᓂᑲᓪᓚᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᒃᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᖃᕋᔭᖅᑕᕗᑦ Quassa. ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Mr. Quassa (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖁᐊᓴ. Chairman. This will be my last question because I’m sure there are other Members ᖁᐊᓴ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ who would like to ask questions. ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᕆᓕᕐᓗᒍ ᐊᐱᖅᓱᖅᑐᖃᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᓂᐊᖅᑐᒃᓴᐅᒐᓗᐊᕐᒪᑦ.

On the issue of languages again, it indicates ᐃᓛᒃ ᐅᓇ ᑕᕝᕙᓃᓛᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ that (interpretation ends) Bill 25 ᑕᕝᕙᓃᔅᓴᐃᓐᓇᕐᓗᖓ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ (interpretation) has a target date of 2039. 25 ᑕᐃᑲᓂ 2039-ᒥ ᓲᕐᓗ ᑖᓐᓇᔅᓇᐃᓐᓇᖅ They are only talking about (interpretation ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖑᐊᕐᒪᑕ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐆᒥᖓ ends) Inuktut Language Arts. (interpretation) I ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᖢᑎᒡᓕ ᐃᓄᒃᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᕆᓂᕐᒥᒃ. would like their view on that. They’re only ᑖᓐᓇ ᑐᑭᓯᔪᒪᑦᑎᐊᓪᓚᕆᒃᑕᕋᓕ ᑖᒃᑯᓇᓐᖓᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ focusing on (interpretation ends) Inuktut ᐃᓱᒪᖕᒪᖔᑕ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐃᓄᒃᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᕆᓂᖅ Language Arts. ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓᑐᐊᖅ ᑎᒃᑯᐊᖅᓯᒪᖕᒪᑕ ᐃᓄᒃᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᕆᓂᕐᒥᒃ. (interpretation) We keep referring to bilingual education. If we are going to be focusing only ᑖᓐᓇ ᐅᖃᖅᐸᑦᑎᓪᓗᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒃᐳᑦ Bilingual on (interpretation ends) Inuktut Language Education ᓲᕐᓗ ᒪᕐᕉᖕᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᖕᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᑎᒃ Arts, (interpretation) could we also see strong ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᖅᐴᓚᓯᒪᑎᓪᓗᒍ, ᑖᓐᓇ bilingual education (interpretation ends) by ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᕆᓂᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᒥᒃ 2039? (interpretation) I’m asking what they ᑕᐅᑐᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕈᑦᑕ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅ ᒪᕐᕉᖕᓂᒃ think about that or if it came across. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᓴᓐᖏᓪᓚᕆᒃᑐᒥᒃ (interpretation ends) Inuktitut Language Arts ᑕᑯᔪᓐᓇᕋᔭᖅᐱᑖ 2039-ᖑᓕᖅᐸᑦ? ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᐱᕆᕙᕋᓕ (interpretation) is a subject on its own, if I ᖃᓄᖅ ᐃᓱᒪᖕᒥᖕᒪᖔᑕ ᓲᕐᓗ ᑐᑭᓯᓇᖅᐸᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ understand correctly. ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᕆᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐅᕙᖓᓕ ᑐᑭᓯᐅᒪᔭᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᓰᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᒻᒪᑕ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐅᕙᓂ Does my question make sense? What do they ᐃᒻᒥᒎᑯᓗᒃᖢᓂᐅᖅᑰᔨᒋᒐᒃᑯ. ᑐᑭᓯᐅᒪᒍᒪ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ. think of that? Would we be able to have ᑐᑭᓯᓇᖅᐹ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᓇᓱᑦᑕᕋ? ᖃᓄᕐᓕᑭᐊᖅ bilingual education (interpretation ends) by ᐃᓱᒪᕙᑦ Bilingual−ᓚᕆᓐᖑᕋᔭᖅᐱᑖ 2039- 2039 (interpretation) if (interpretation ends) ᕈᓚᐅᓐᖏᓐᓂᖓᓂ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᕆᓂᕐᒥᒃ Inuit Language Arts (interpretation) is the ᑎᒃᑯᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᑐᐃᓐᓇᕈᓂ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ 25-ᒥ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓ only focus in Bill 25? I hope I came across. ᒪᓕᒡᓗᒍ? ᑐᑭᓯᓇᕐᓂᕈᒪ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. I’m not sure if that question was for me or for ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. the department, but I would state that we ᖃᓄᑭᐊᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐅᕙᓐᓄᓘᓐᓃᑦ believe that Inuktut should not be, for the lack ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓄᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᒻᒪᖔᑦ of a better word, pigeonholed to an Inuktut ᓇᓗᔪᖓ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓᑦ Language Arts class. For a language to be ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒧᑐᐊᑯᓗᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᒪᔭᕆᐊᖃᓐᖏᑕᕗᑦ taught vibrantly, it should be cross-curricular. ᐃᓘᓐᓇᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᔭᕆᐊᓕᒃ. ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓ There is no core subject in our schools that ᐊᑐᕐᓗᒍ ᑭᓱᓕᒫᑦᑎᐊᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ. could not be taught in Inuktitut. All subjects ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓᑦ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᒍ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᒪᑕ could be taught in Inuktut. As the capacity ᐅᓄᖅᓯᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᑐᐊᖅᐸᑕ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑑᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ increases in terms of educator staffing in the ᖃᓪᓗᓇᐅᔭᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᓪᓗ. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᒍᓗᖕᒧᑦ territory, our hope would be that Inuktut ᐃᒡᓗᕈᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᓐᖏᑦᑐᑦ wouldn’t be left to only a language arts class ᐃᓘᓐᓇᓐᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ but that it would become a cross-curricular language throughout our school system in

multiple subjects. Qujannamiik, Mr. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᓕᒫᓂᓪᓗ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓗᓂ. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) The Committee did have similar questions to the teachers association in ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐄ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ terms of how these timelines were established ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᐸᓗᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᖃᓚᐅᕐᒥᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ and the whole issue of “Is it just going to be ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᖃᓄᕐᓗ ᐅᑯᐊ 2039 ᖃᓄᖅ language arts and that’s it?” It’s my ᐋᖅᑭᑦᑕᐅᓚᐅᕐᒪᖔᑦ. ᑕᐃᒃᑯᓄᖓᑐᐊᖅ Language understanding that that’s not the case. I’m Arts−ᓄᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᔫᓱᕆᔭᕗᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᓯᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐅᑯᐊ looking at this new document that we got ᓄᑖᑦ ᖃᐃᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓇᒃᑲᒃᑭᑦ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ from the department. Minister Joanasie, do ᑖᓐᓇ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᒃᑲᓐᓂᕉᒃ ᒪᒃᐱᖅᑐᒐᖅ 13 ᐊᒻᒪᓗ 14 you want to clear the air on that? I’m looking ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓇᒃᑲᒃᑭᒃ ᓇᓕᐊᓐᓂ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᓂᒃ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᓂ at pages 13 and 14 of this language of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᖅ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. instruction implementation document that you provided yesterday. Minister Joanasie.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, I referred to it yesterday and a huge focus is on the language arts piece. This ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, entails not just for first-language learners but ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐄ, ᐃᒃᐸᔅᓴᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ ᓂᓪᓕᐅᑎᒋᒐᓚᓚᐅᖅᑕᕋ. ᓵᓐᖓᓗᐊᖅᑐᕐᖑᓇ second-language learners. On top of this, Language Arts ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᓐᓂ alongside developing these language arts in ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᖓᐅᑎᒥᓂᓪᓗ ᐊᑐᖅᑐᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᓱᐃᓗᑎᑦ different areas, we are proposing and planning ᐅᑯᓂᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᓂ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ to also deliver Nunavusiutit, the different ᐸᕐᓇᐅᓯᐅᖅᓯᒪᒻᒥᔪᒍᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᓯᐅᑎᓂᑦ ᖁᕝᕙᕇᖅᑐᓂᒃ strands of core subjects in the Inuit language. ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑦᑎᓗᑎ ᓄᓇᕗᓯᐅᑎᓂᑦ ᑕᐃᔭᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᔮᖅᑐᑦ Nunavusiutit, Aulajaaqtut, ᐱᒃᑲᖅᕈᓗ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊᓕᒫᑦ ᐃᓘᓐᓇᖏᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ Iqqaqqaukkaringniq, social studies, health, ᑐᕌᖓᔪᐃᓐᓇᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᔅᓴᓄᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑐᔅᓴᐃᑦ. physical ed., and math sciences, all of these ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. are alongside the language arts curriculum. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) I hate to keep doing this, but I’m trying to keep the focus on the ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒪᒥᐊᓇᐅᒐᓗᐊᖅ teachers association. I would imagine there ᐅᑎᔭᒃᑲᒪ ᐅᑯᓄᖓᓗ ᓵᖓᐃᓐᓇᕋᓱᒃᓱᖓ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ are a lot more questions from Members ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᑕᖃᐅᖅᑐᔅᓴᐅᔪᖅ. specifically on what the Minister just ᓯᑕᒻᒥᕐᒧᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᑕᖅᑭᐅᑎᒍᑦᑎᒍ ᐅᑯᓄᖓ mentioned, but we will try to keep those for ᓵᖓᓈᕋᓱᒃᑲᒪ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᓐᖏᓐᓄᑦ. Thursday as much as possible.

(interpretation) Mr. Quassa, you are done? Thank you. Ms. Angnakak. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᒥᔅᑕ ᖁᐊᓴ, ᑕᐃᒫᖅᐲᑦ? ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ. Ms. Angnakak (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) I have a question based ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᔅᓴᖃᖅᑐᖓ

upon your opening comments. In the second ᒪᑐᐃᖅᓯᒍᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᑕᓐᓂ. ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ ᑲᑎᓐᖓᔪᐃᑦ paragraph you say that “The NTA believes ᐊᐃᑉᐹᓂ ᐊᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖁᑎᕗᑦ ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ that our students deserve a fully bilingual, ᐅᖃᐅᓰᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓗᐃᑦᑑᔪᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ Inuktut-English education system...” My ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᓪᓗ. ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒐᓕ ᑖᓐᓇᐅᕗᖅ. question is, in light of what NTI had in their ᐃᓱᒪᒋᓗᒋ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕆᓚᐅᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂ opening statements where they said that ᒪᑐᐃᖅᓯᒍᑎᖏᓐᓂ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᖃᓚᐅᕐᖓᑕ ᐃᓄᑦᑐᑦ Inuktut must be the language of instruction in ᑖᓐᓇ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᒋᐊᓕᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᑎᑦᑎᔾᔪᑕᐅᓗᓂ all grades and in all subject areas, not just ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓐᓂᓕᒫᖑᔪᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᔭᐅᔪᓕᒫᓂ language arts, what the position of the ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᕆᓂᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᒥ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓕ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ Nunavut Teachers Association is on what ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᖃᖅᑲᑦ NTI’s position is because they are two very ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᒪᕐᕉᒃ ᑐᕌᒐᖏ different goals. One is what the Department of ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑐᒻᒪᕆᐊᓘᒻᒪᑎ ᐊᐃᑉᐹ Education has stated is a bilingual education. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᔭᖏᑦ ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ In your opening comments you say that’s ᐅᖃᐅᓰᓐᓂ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᑎ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᓂᐊᕐᓗᑎ. what you want to see as well. NTI has come ᒪᑐᐃᖅᓯᒍᑎᔅᓯᓐᓂ ᐅᖃᕐᒥᒐᔅᓯ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᓂᑦᑕᐅᖅ out and said, “No, we want total Inuktitut.” ᑕᑯᔪᒪᒐᔅᓯ. ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓪᓕ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ I’m curious what your thoughts are on that ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᖁᔨᓪᓗᑎ. ᖃᓄᕐᓕ and what kind of implications does that have ᐃᓱᒪᒋᒻᒪᖔᔅᓯᐅᒃ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᖃᐅᔨᒍᒪᑦᑕᖅᑯᖓ? ᖃᓄᕐᓗ on students wanting to further their education ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᖃᕋᔭᖅᑲ ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᖃᕋᔭᖅᑲ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ by going to university in the south. Thank ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᕈᒪᔪᓂ you, Mr. Chairman. ᖁᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᒧ ᓯᓚᑦᑐᓴᕐᕕᒻᒨᓪᓗᑎ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᓄᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᐅᖃᕋᐃᒐᑦᑕ ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᒥ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᓂ When we say bilingual education, we do ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ ᑐᑭᖃᖅᑎᑕᕗᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᖓᓂ mean that particularly in the early years of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᓕᕋᑖᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅ education the majority language should ᐊᖏᓂᖅᓴᐅᒋᐊᖃᖅᑐᒋᔭᕗᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕗᑦ Inuktut. Research has shown that in early ᖃᐅᔨᑎᑦᑎᓯᒪᒻᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᓕᕋᑖᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ childhood grades, in elementary, is when ᒥᑭᔫᑕᐅᓂᖅᐹᖏᓐᓂ ᑕᐃᑲᓂ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᒥ language acquisition is cemented the most. ᑎᒍᓯᓪᓚᕆᓲᖑᒻᒪᑕ. We believe there should be a strong Inuktut ᐅᑉᐱᕈᓱᑉᐳᒍ ᓴᓐᖏᔪᐊᓗᒻᒥ ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ focus in each community at those grade ᓵᓐᖓᓂᖅᑕᖃᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᓕᒫᓂ levels. We also believe that Inuktut should be ᒥᑭᔫᑕᐅᓂᖅᐹᖏᓐᓃᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᑉᐱᕈᓱᓪᓚᕆᒻᒥᔪᒍᑦ a primary language of instruction throughout ᐃᓄᒃᑐᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓪᓗᐊᑕᐅᒋᐊᓕᒃ school right until grade 12. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᑎᑦᑎᔾᔪᑕᐅᓗᓂ ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓐᓂᓕᓐᓄᑦ 12-ᒧᑦ.

For a bilingual education system to work, ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᓐᓂ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᓂ English language courses must be available as ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓂᖅᑕᖃᕐᓂᐊᖅᑲᑦ well, in particular for students who are ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᖅᑕᖃᓂᐊᖅᑲᑦ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦᑕᐅᖅ looking at post-secondary opportunities where ᐃᓕᓴᔭᔅᓴᖅᑕᖃᕆᐊᖃᕋᔭᕐᒥᔪᖅ. ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ they cannot receive those post-secondary ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᓯᓚᑦᑐᓴᕐᕕᓕᐊᕈᒪᓛᖅᑐᐃᑦ opportunities delivered in Inuktut, but we do ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᓂ ᓯᓚᑦᑐᓴᕐᕕᒻᒨᕈᑎᔅᓴᓂ ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ believe that bilingual education does not mean ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕋᔅᓴᖃᓐᖏᑉᐸᑕ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐅᑉᐱᕈᓱᑦᑐᒍᑦ 50-50 right from grade 1. We believe that the ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐃᒫᒃ ᐊᕝᕙᓪᓗᐊᖏᓐᓂ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑑᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎᑦ.

primary language acquisition of Inuktut has to ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑑᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐱᒋᐊᕐᖓᕐᓂᖓᓂ be concentrated on in early grades and there ᑎᒍᔭᐅᓂᓪᓚᕆᖓ ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅ would have to be a progression into English ᐱᒋᐊᓐᖓᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓴᔭᐅᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ Language Arts with still a strong course load ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕙᓪᓕᐊᓕᕐᓗᑎ ᓴᓐᖏᔪᐊᓗᒻᒥ in Inuktut throughout, right up until ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᑎᑕᐅᓂᖃᐃᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎ ᑕᑉᐸᐅᖓ graduation in grade 12. Qujannamiik, Mr. ᐱᔭᕇᕐᓂᖓᓄᓕᒫᖅ ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓐᓂᓕᓐᓄᑦ 12-ᒧᑦ. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. Angnakak. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ.

Ms. Angnakak: Thank you. I’m just looking for the models. I can’t remember which ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ document… . Oh here it is. ᐆᒃᑐᕋᐅᑎᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᐸᔅᓴᖅ ᕿᓂᑲᐃᓐᓇᕋᒃᑭ.

The Department of Education has come out with language of instruction requirements; the ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓴᖅᑮᓯᒪᒻᒪᑕ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᒥ Qulliq Model, the Immersion Model, the Dual ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᓕᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᖁᓪᓕᕐᓗ Model, most of them by grades 10 to 12. ᒪᓕᑦᑕᐅᔪᖅ ᒪᓕᑦᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᖓᑦ Inuktitut is 50 percent, English is 50 percent, ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓐᓂᓕᓐᓂ 10-ᒥ 12-ᒧᑦ ᐊᕝᕙᓪᓗᐊᖏᑦ which kind of goes against what you just said. ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ ᐊᕝᕙᓪᓗᐊᖏ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑑᕙᑦᑐᑎ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᔾᔨᐸᓗᖓ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᕋᑖᖅᑕᕕᑦ. ᖃᓄᕐᓕ ᑖᓐᓇ What are your thoughts on that and is that ᐃᓱᒪᒋᕕᐅᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ something that you would bring up with the ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᒍᒪᒐᔭᖅᑭᐅᒃ ᖃᖓᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Department of Education at any point? Thank ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑕᕝᕙᓕ The dream would be to have a 50-50 model in ᑕᑯᔪᒪᒐᔭᖅᑕᕗ ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂ ᐅᖃᐅᓰᓐᓂ grade 12 available to students who would ᐃᓕᓴᑎᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎ ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓐᓂᓕᓐᓂ 12-ᒦᑦᑐᐃᑦ need that for post-secondary education for the ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᓯᓚᑦᑐᓴᕐᕕᓕᐊᕈᒪᓛᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐱᓪᓗᒋᑦ requirements entering whether it’s college or ᓯᓚᑦᑐᓴᕐᕕᒻᒧᑦ ᓯᓚᑦᑐᓴᕐᕕᔾᔪᐊᒧᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐃᓯᕈᒪᓛᖅᑲᑕ university, if that’s what their program ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᒪᔭᖏᑦ ᒪᓕᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᔪᓐᖏᒋᐊᓕᒃ requires, but we believe that capacity should ᖁᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂ. ᐊᒥᓱᑲᓪᓚᐃᑦ be in place at the high school grades where ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᔅᓴᐃᑦ ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ multiple courses can be offered in Inuktut or ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᓗᑎ ᐊᓈᓇᒃᑯᒋᔭᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᐊᑖᑕᒃᑯᒋᔭᐅᔪᓄᑦ English at the decision of the parents or the ᓂᕈᐊᕐᕕᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓄᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ. student. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ. Angnakak.

Ms. Angnakak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. would like to go to your opening comments ᒪᑐᐃᖅᓯᒍᑎᒋᖅᑲᐅᔭᓐᓄᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᒐᒪ

on the second page at the bottom where you ᒪᒃᐱᒐᖓᓄᑦ ᐊᐃᑉᐹᓄᑦ ᐊᑖᓄᑦ. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕋᕕᑦ talk about “Teachers in Nunavut are leaving ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᐅᓪᓛᖃᑦᑕᕐᖓᑕ the profession in large part because they are ᐃᓄᒋᐊᕌᓘᓪᓗᑎ ᐱᔭᒃᓴᖃᓗᐊᖅᑎᑖᓗᖃᑦᑕᕐᖓᑕ overworked and underappreciated by our ᖁᔭᓕᔭᐅᓐᖏᓗᐊᖅᑐᑎᓪᓗ ᒐᕙᒪᑦᑎᓐᓄ. ᐊᓯᔾᔨᔪᖃᖅᑲᑦ government. Any amendments made to the ᑕᐃᒪ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᓂ Education Act or the Inuit Language ᓴᐳᔾᔨᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᑐᕌᒐᖃᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐃᓄᓐᓂ Protection Act should be made with the goals ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᕈᖅᑎᑦᑎᒐᓱᐊᕖᓐᖓᕐᓗᑎ. ᖃᓄᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ of facilitating more Inuit entering the teaching ᑐᑭᖃᖅᑎᑉᐱᓯᐅᒃ ᐃᒫᒃ ᐃᓄᓐᓂ profession…” I’m wondering what you really ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᕈᖅᑐᖃᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑲ mean by that. Does having Inuit enter the ᐱᔭᔅᓴᖃᓗᐊᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓃᕋᔭᖅᑲᖅᑲᐃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ teaching profession take away the fact ᖁᔭᓕᔭᐅᓂᖅᓴᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. teachers are overworked and underappreciated? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Fanjoy. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. We believe that fewer Inuit are choosing the ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. profession to begin with or are remaining in ᐅᑉᐱᕈᓱᑦᑐᒍᑦ ᖃᑦᑏᓐᓇᐅᓂᖅᓴᐃᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ their profession in their early years because of ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᕈᕈᒪᕙᓕᕐᖓᑕ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᑯᑖᖅᐸᒐᑎᑦ ᐱᔭᔅᓴᑖᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᐊᕐᓂᐊᓗᒋᕙᑦᑕᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ the workload they are receiving when they ᐱᔭᔅᓴᑖᒃᑲᓂᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᐊᖅᑐᐊᓗᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᔮᖃᑦᑕᕋᒥ. begin or the workload they perceive that they are going to receive when they begin.

A lot of this goes back, when we speak to our ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐅᑎᕐᕕᖃᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᕗᑦ teachers, to the loss of regional consultant ᐅᖃᖃᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᐊᕕᑦᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᕐᕕᔅᓴᓂ positions at our regional school operations. ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑕᖃᖃᑦᑕᔪᒐᓗᐊᕐᖓᑦ There was reorganization in the Department ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ of Education a couple of years ago where the ᐊᕐᕌᒎᖅᑲᐃ ᒪᕐᕉᖃᐃ ᐊᓂᒍᓕᖅᑑᒃ. ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ regional consultant positions were eliminated ᐊᕕᑦᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᕐᕕᔅᓴᐃᑦ in favour of an Educator Development ᐲᔭᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑕ ᐋᖅᑭᑦᑎᕆᖔᖅᑐᑎ Division that does have offices in multiple ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᓄᑦ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᑦᑎᕕᖔᒥ. communities but for the most part is ᐃᖃᓗᓐᓂ ᑖᓐᓇ ᓴᖅᑭᔮᓗᐊᐸᓗᑦᑐᖅ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ centralized here in Iqaluit. It has taken away ᓴᖅᑭᔮᕈᔪᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᓗ. ᐊᖅᓵᖅᓯᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑦᑕ the ability of our teachers in terms of the ᐱᒍᓐᓇᕐᓂᕆᕙᓚᐅᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂ ᐱᔭᔅᓴᖏᑦ ᑕᑯᓐᓈᖅᑐᒋᑦ workload and the lack of support in receiving ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᑕᐅᓐᖏᓂᖅᓴᐅᖃᑦᑕᓕᖅᑐᑎᓪᓗ ᑕᐃᑲᓐᖓᑦ that from their RSO office. ᐊᓪᓚᕕᒻᒥ.

We have teachers who do not know where to go when they are looking for curricular support; when they are looking for resource ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖁᑎᖃᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂ support. The answers are there where they can ᓇᒧᓐᖓᕆᐊᔅᓴᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᓕᐅᕋᓱᑦᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ go, but they are more difficult now. It used to ᐃᑲᔪᕈᑎᔅᓴᖅᓯᐅᕋᓱᑦᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᓇᒧᓐᖓᕆᐊᕈᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑕ be you contact your program consultant, ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓂᖅᓴᐅᕙᓕᖅᑑᒐᓗᐊᑦ either as a teacher yourself or through your ᐱᔭᕆᐊᑐᓂᖅᓴᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᐸᓚᐅᕐᖓ.

school administrator. Now there is confusion ᐃᓕᓴᕕᐅᑉ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨᖓ ᐊᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᐅᓪᓗᓂ. ᒫᓐᓇ based on the region on where you go. There ᓇᓗᒋᔭᐅᖃᑦᑕᓕᕐᒥᔪ ᓇᓕᐊᓐᓄ ᐊᕕᑦᑐᖅᓯᒪᓂᕐᒧᑦ are generic email addresses that teachers can ᑐᕌᖅᑐᖃᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᕋᓴᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᕌᕈᑎᓂ use to ask a question, but the personal aspect ᐱᑕᖃᖅᑐᓂ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᖃᕋᒪ ᖃᓄᖅ is taken away of “I’m looking for support. ᐃᑲᔪᕈᓐᓇᕿᓐᖓ? ᑕᐃᒫᒃ How can you support me?” That feeling is ᐊᐱᕆᑐᐃᓐᓇᕋᔅᓴᖅᑕᖃᕈᓐᓃᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ. ᑕᐃᓐᓇᓗ gone. A lot of our teachers do not know who ᖃᕋᓴᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᖅ ᓇᒧᓐᖓᕐᒪᖔᖅ that email is even going to. It is going to ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓇᖅᐸᒐᓂ ᑭᐅᓗ ᑭᐅᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᒍ. ᐊᒻᒪ multiple people. Who is going to answer it? ᖃᐅᑉᐸᒧᑦ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕈᐃᓯᒪᒍᓐᓇᖅᐸᓚᐅᕐᒥᒻᒪᑦ “There is no one I can call because I need ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒍᓐᓃᑕᖅᑯ ᐊᖏᖅᔪᖅᑳᖏᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ support for tomorrow.” That’s no longer ᐊᕕᑦᑐᖅᓯᒪᓂᐅᑉ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᓯᐊᓄᑦ there, with the exception of the ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᒥ ᕿᓂᕆᐊᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ superintendents at the regional school ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᔅᓴᖓᓂ. operations, who would then in turn have to turn around and contact educator development or another division within the department to look for that support on behalf of a principal or a teacher.

The other issue we are seeing in terms of the lack of support is the retention and ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᑕᐅᓐᖏᓗᐊᕐᓂᕗᑦ ᑕᕝᕙᐅᒻᒥᔪᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᕋᓱᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᑕ recruitment crisis we are facing is really ᐱᒡᒐᓇᖅᑐᔅᓯᐅᕖᓐᖓᐸᒃᑲᑦᑕ. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑦᑕ ᐱᔭᔅᓴᖏᑦ exacerbating the amount of work that our ᒫᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖁᑎᑦᑕ ᐱᔭᔅᓴᑖᒃᑲᓐᓂᕖᓐᖓᖃᑦᑕᕐᖓᑕ teachers that are in the schools are doing right ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑭᔅᓱᕐᓂᕗᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ. ᑕᐃᒫᒃ now to make up for the vacant positions in our ᐱᔭᔅᓴᖃᓗᐊᕐᓂᕋᖃᑦᑕᖅᑯᑦ. ᐅᓐᓄᓰᒻᒪᕆᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ school. I receive many phone calls from ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒥ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᓇᓱᐊᕈᓯᐅᑉ ᓄᓐᖑᐊᓂ teachers who feel overworked. They are into ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒦᒋᐊᖃᖅᐸᑦᑐᑦ. ᐊᑕᐅᓯᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᒥ the school late in the evening. They’re into the ᐃᓕᓴᑎᑦᑎᔪᑦ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᒥ school on the weekends. They are teaching ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᕐᒨᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓚᖏᑦ ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓰᑦ multiple subjects, multiple classrooms. Some ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖏᑦ of their classroom assignments are changing ᖃᐅᑕᒫᑦ ᐱᓇᓱᐊᕈᓯᓕᒫᕐᓗᓐᓃᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖓ by the day or by the week depending on ᐊᓯᔾᔨᑕᖅᑐᑦ. ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᕐᓂ ᑲᑎᑦᑎᒋᐊᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᒍᑦ shortages in the school. We do have combined ᐊᑕᐅᓯᖅ 40-ᕈᒪᖅᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑎ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥ classes. We have some classes that have ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᕐᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑭᔅᓱᓗᐊᕐᓂᑯᒧᑦ. upward to 40 students because of a vacant ᐊᖏᕐᕋᑐᐃᓐᓇᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᕈᒪᓐᖏᓇᑦᑕ ᑕᐃᒫᓪᓕ ᑕᕝᕙ teaching position. There is no alternative. We ᑲᑎᑎᑦᑎᕙᑉᐳᒍᑦ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᕐᓄᑦ. do not want to see students at home, so those ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖓᓗ ᑕᐃᓐᓇ students are placed into another classroom, ᐱᔭᔅᓴᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᐊᕖᓐᖓᓕᖅᑐᓂ. further overburdening that teacher.

That’s happening across our territory. In some communities it’s happening much worse than ᓄᓇᕗᓕᒫᒥ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᑦ. ᐃᓚᖏᑦ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ in others. It’s happening a lot at our ᐱᐅᓐᖏᓂᖅᓴᒦᑦᑐᒻᒪᕇᑦ ᒥᑭᔫᑕᐅᓂᖅᓴᓂ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᓐᓂ elementary level where there would be, ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᕕᔾᔪᐊᕌᓗᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ. ᐃᓄᑦᑎᑐᑦ hopefully, Inuktut education classes ᐃᓕᓴᖁᓇᕋᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕋᔅᓴᓕᒫᖏᓐᓂ. happening, cross-curricular. Those are the ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ

gaps that we are facing right now where our ᐊᒥᒐᖅᓯᓂᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖁᑎᕗᓪᓗ teachers are honestly burned out from the ᑕᖃᓗᐊᓪᓚᕆᖃᑦᑕᓕᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᖄᖓᒍᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅ amount of extra work that is placed on their ᐱᔭᔅᓴᑖᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᐊᖃᑦᑕᕐᖓᑕ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ shoulders because of the vacant positions that ᐃᓐᓄᑦᑕᐅᓯᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒥ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᑦ are happening in many of our communities. ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. Angnakak. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ.

Ms. Angnakak: Thank you. That’s very concerning to hear. ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᓱᒫᓗᓇᓪᓚᕆᑦᑐᖅ ᑐᓴᕆᐊᖓ. Before I get to the burnout, I would like to ask you a little bit more about that, but before ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᑕᖃᓗᐊᖅᑐᑎ ᓄᖅᑲᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ that, when you talk about confusion where ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᓚᐅᕐᓇᒋ, ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᖅᑲᐅᒻᒥᒐᕕᑦᑕᐅᖅ people don’t really know who to turn to, has ᓇᓗᓕᕈᑎᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒡᒎᖅ ᑭᒃᑯᑦ ᓇᒧᑦ ᓵᒋᐊᔅᓴᖅ this been brought up with the Minister’s ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒐᓐᓃᕐᖓᑕᒎᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒧᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓯᒪᕚ? office? Are you trying to deal with this? Is ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᒐᓱᐊᖅᑳ ᑲᒪᒋᔭᐅᒐᓱᑉᐹ? this something that has been addressed or ᑲᒪᒋᔭᐅᑎᒐᓱᐊᖅᓯᒪᕕᓯᐅᒃ ᑲᒪᒋᔭᐅᒍᓐᓇᖅᓯᒪᓐᖏᓛᖅ? have you tried to get it addressed and it ᓇᒦᓕᖅᑭᓯ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. hasn’t, or where are you with that? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. It ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ has been discussed with the department on ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ numerous occasions about the frustrations that ᐊᒥᓱᐊᖅᑎᑦᑐᓂ ᖁᓅᕐᒥᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᓂᖏᓐᓂ our teachers are facing. The department is ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᕗᑦ ᓴᐱᓕᕈᔪᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᓂᖏᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ facing capacity issues in many of their ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑭᔅᓴᓗᐊᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐊᒥᓱᓂᒃ divisions, vacant positions, as well as I would ᐊᕕᑦᑐᖅᓯᒪᓂᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᑦ say that this reorganization, this is my ᐃᓐᓄᑦᑕᐅᓯᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ opinion, happened too soon. The consultant ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕆᒃᑲᓐᓂᓴᕋᐃᓗᐊᔪᒻᒪᑕ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᖅᑏᑦ positions were eliminated before the new ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᕐᕖᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᖏᑦ ᐲᔭᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑕ. educator development positions were staffed, ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓇᖐᓂᐊᖅᑐᐃᑦ which had left a gap. I believe the department ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᓚᐅᖅᑎᓐᓇᒋᑦ. ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᑕᕝᕙ is doing the best that they can to fill those ᐊᓪᓗᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᕗᖅ ᐊᓪᓗᐃᓯᒪᕗᑦ. positions, but at this moment that frustration ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓐᓄᐃᒐᓱᓪᓚᕆᑦᑑᒐᓗᐊᑦ still exists in our classrooms where they feel ᐅᑉᐱᕆᔭᒃᑲ ᑭᓯᐊᓂᓕ ᒫᓐᓇ ᓱᓕ that the amount of support they are receiving ᕿᓄᓐᖓᑦᑐᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑯᒍ ᖁᓄᕐᒥᖅᑐᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑯ from the department is not as substantial as it ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᑕᐅᓐᖏᓗᐊᕐᓂᑯᒧᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ. was three years ago when those consultant ᑕᐃᒫᑎᒋᐅᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᐱᖓᓱᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑦ ᐊᓂᒍᓕᖅᑐᖅ positions existed. Qujannamiik, Mr. ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᖅᑕᐅᓂᕆᖃᑦᑕᖅᔪᔭᖓ Chairman. ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᕐᕕᑦᑕᖃᖃᑦᑕᑎᓪᓗᒍ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ. Angnakak.

Ms. Angnakak: Thank you. Before I go on to ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. my other questions, Mr. Fanjoy, I would like ᐊᓯᐊᓅᓚᐅᓐᖏᓂᕐᓂ ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ, ᒥᓂᔅᑕ to ask the Minister if he could respond to this ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᔭᕋ ᑭᐅᔪᓐᓇᕋᔭᕐᒪᖔᖅ frustration and what is the department doing ᓴᐱᓕᕈᔪᓐᓂᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᓕᖅᑐᓂ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ to try to address this. Thank you, Mr. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᖔᑕ? Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) I would ask the Minister, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᓚᒍᒪᒐᔭᖅᑕᕋᓕ specifically with regard to Bill 25, how that ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᐊᐱᕆᓗᒍ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᑕᐃᓗᒍ ᑖᓐᓇ ᖃᓄᖅ issue is connected to Bill 25 or if that ᐊᒃᑐᐊᓂᖃᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᐃᓱᒫᓗᒋᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒧᑦ. connection exists. I’m just reminding the ᐃᖅᑲᐃᑎᒋᐊᖅᑲᒃᑲ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ ᑕᕝᕙᓃᒍᑎᒋᒐᑦᑎᒍ Committee that that is why we’re here. I ᒪᑐᐃᖅᓯᒍᑎᖓᓃᓚᐅᕐᖓᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑕ understand it was in the opening comments ᒪᑐᐃᖅᓯᒍᑎᖏᓐᓂ ᐃᖅᑲᐃᑎᒋᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᔅᓯ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ from the teachers association. It’s just a ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. reminder. Minister Joanasie.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Chairman. I got questioned in the House in ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᕐᕕᒻᒥ ᐃᔅᓯᕚᖅᑎᓪᓗᑕ our most recent sitting about vacancies. At ᐊᐱᕆᔭᐅᓚᐅᕋᒪ ᐃᓐᓄᑦᑕᐅᓯᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂ that time I explained about some of the things ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑐᐃᓚᐅᖅᑐᖓ ᑕᐃᔅᓱᒪᓂ ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓂ that we try to do to minimize impact on ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᒐᓱᔅᓯᒪᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂ students. In addition to that, I think this points ᐊᒃᑐᐃᖏᔾᔫᒥᑎᑕᐃᓕᒪᒐᓱᓐᓂᕆᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂ to even what was discussed by Nunavut ᐃᓅᓴᒃᑲᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓄᓪᓗ Tunngavik in terms of we sometimes rely on ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ ᐃᓛᓐᓂᒃᑯᑦ substitute teaching given our limited capacity ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᑲᐃᓐᓇᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂᒃ to fill all vacancies. ᑐᕚᖃᕆᐊᖃᑲᐃᓐᓇᓲᖑᒐᑦᑕ. ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓐᓄᑦᑕᐅᓯᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᐃᓐᓄᑦᑕᐅᒐᓱᑦᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. I think this is even something we are struggling with in terms of I think we’re ᑕᒪᓐᓇᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐊᓪᓛᑦ ᐱᒡᒐᓇᖅᑐᔅᓯᐅᕈᑎᒋᖃᑦᑕᕐᒥᔭᕗᑦ challenged with finding suitable substitutes in ᕿᓂᕋᓱᑦᑐᑕ ᑭᖑᕝᕕᑕᖅᑎᐅᖃᑦᑕᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂ the time being until we can fill the vacancies. ᐃᓐᓄᐃᓚᐅᓐᖏᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᖏᓐᓂ. This is something perhaps we need to spend ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᒐᓱᒋᐊᓕᕗᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ some effort on and not just recruiting full-time ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᕋᓱᑐᐃᓐᓇᓐᖏᓪᓗᑕ teachers but interim substitutes that can take ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᖏᓐᓇᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓᓗᑦᑕᐅᖅ on the workload that the NTA is expressing, ᑭᓐᖑᕐᕕᑎᐅᖃᑦᑕᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂ. that the huge workload could be too much for ᑎᒍᓯᑲᐃᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓇᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ many of the teachers. ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑕ ᐱᔭᔅᓵᓘᓂᕋᖃᑦᑕᕋᑖᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂ ᑎᒍᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ. We have to commend our teachers for the job that they do day in and day out. I don’t know ᖁᔭᓕᒋᐊᓕᕗᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᕗᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᖃᑦᑕᖅᑕᖏᓐᓄᑦ if I could do it, but I know that many of our ᖃᐅᑕᒫᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᒍᓐᓇᕋᔭᖅᐸᓚᐃᓐᖏᑦᑐᖓᓕ ᐃᓛᒃ teachers are doing a tremendous job in ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᖓ. ᐊᒥᓱᐊᓗᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖁᑎᕗᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᑦᓯᐊᖅᑐᕕᔾᔪᐊᕌᓘᒻᒪᑕ

keeping things together. We applaud them, we ᑲᑎᒻᒪᑎᑦᑏᓇᖅᑐᑎᑦ ᖁᔭᒋᔭᕗᑦ, ᐅᐱᒋᔭᕗᑦ thank them, and we can’t commend them ᖁᔭᒋᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖏᒻᒪᕆᑦᑕᕗᑦ ᑕᒪᐅᓇ enough. Not just with finding substitute ᑭᖑᑉᕕᑕᖅᑎᐅᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ teachers, but I think the retention and ᓇᓂᓯᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᓂᒃ recruitment strategy will also need to specify ᓄᖅᑲᑎᑦᑎᑦᑕᐃᓕᒪᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᓇᓂᓯᖃᑦᑕᓂᕐᒧᓪᓗ how we can best minimize vacancies in our ᑲᒪᒐᓱᑦᑎᐊᒋᐊᖃᖅᑐᒍᑦ. ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ schools. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᓐᓄᑦᑕᐅᓯᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᐊᑦᑐᐃᓗᐊᖅᑎᑦᑕᐃᓕᒪᒐᓱᐊᖃᑦᑕᖅᑕᕗᑦ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᓕᓴᕕᑦᑎᓐᓂ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Angnakak. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ. Ms. Angnakak: Thank you. When I think about this topic, I’m also thinking about ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᐊᒻᒪ student-teacher ratios. I think that has been ᐃᓱᒪᒋᒑᖓᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊᑦᑕᐅᖅ talked about in regard to the bill as well. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖁᑎᒋᔭᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ ᖃᑦᓯᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ. When I read your statements in your opening ᑕᒪᓐᓇᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ. ᐃᓱᒪᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᐅᖃᓕᒫᕐᓱᒍ, comments, it’s quite concerning. For those of ᐃᑉᕕᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᖅᑲᐅᔭᑎᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐃᓱᒫᓗᓐᓇᕐᒪᑦ us who sit here, because we’re not in a ᑕᑉᕙᓃᑦᑑᔪᑎᒍᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᕐᕕᒻᒥ ᖃᐅᑕᒫᑦ classroom and it’s not an everyday thing that ᖃᐅᔨᖃᑦᑕᓐᖏᓐᓇᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑑᒻᒪᖔᑕ we’re dealing with, although we hear the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᐱᔭᕆᐊᑐᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑦ ᐅᕙᒍᑦ concerns about education, sometimes it’s hard ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑐᓪᓚᕆᐅᒻᒪᖔᑕ ᖃᐅᔨᖃᑦᑕᓐᖏᓐᓇᑦᑎᒍᑦ. ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒋᕙᕋ ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐱᔭᕆᐊᑐᔫᒻ. to put ourselves into what’s really going on. I ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᓕᒫᑦ ᑭᒃᑯᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᑦᓱᕈᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᒍᑦ agree with the Minister. I’m sure this is a very ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ difficult job, with lots of pressures on ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᖅᑕᐅᑦᓯᐊᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥᐅᑕᓕᒫᑦ everybody to try to meet the responsibility of ᐱᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᓕᒫᑎᒍᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᐅᑉ educating all Nunavummiut through the best ᐃᓗᐊᓃᑦᑐᓕᒫᑦ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᖅᓯᖁᔨᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ possible way. ᑲᔪᓯᑎᑦᓯᐊᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᖓᑕ.

In terms of burnout, this is my last question ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᖁᒪᐃᑦᑐᒥᒃ ᐊᖏᔪᐊᓗᒻᒥᒃ because it is concerning and we want our ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᑕᖃᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᑎᒍᑦ teachers to stay. Hopefully we have a lot more ᐃᓛᒃ ᓂᕆᐅᓇᖅᑑᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓐᖑᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ people from Nunavut to become teachers, but ᑕᒫᓐᖔᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒦᖔᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᒻᒪᖃ people have to want to become a teacher. You ᑲᑦᓱᖓᐃᓕᖅᑎᑦᑎᒍᒥᓇᕋᔭᕐᐳᒍᑦ ᑭᒃᑯᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᒃ can’t make somebody become a teacher. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓐᖑᕈᒪᓇᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ. ᑎᑭᐅᑎᓚᐅᖅᑳᖅᑎᓐᓇᒍ Hopefully we can really inspire those who are ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᖃᖓᐅᓕᕋᔭᖅᐸᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᖅ going through the education system now to ᐊᒥᓱᕐᖑᓂᕐᓴᐅᓕᖅᐸᑕ ᐃᓄᒋᐊᖕᓂᕐᓴᐅᓕᕋᔭᕐᖓᑕ want to become a teacher, but until we get to ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓐᖑᕋᔭᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐃᒻᒪᖃ ᑖᓐᓇ that time, what is your position on how… ? I ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖅᑎᒍᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᓯᐊᑎᒍᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ know providing more support is one way, but ᐊᔭᐅᕆᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᐱᑕ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᔪᓂᒃ what are some other ways you feel are very ᒫᓐᓇ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᒍᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ important to keep the teachers we have now ᐱᔪᒥᓇᕐᓂᕐᓴᐅᒍᓐᓇᕆᐊᖏᑦ ᓯᕗᓂᑦᓴᑎᓐᓂᒃ and to try to make the teacher environment ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. more appealing so that more people want to become a teacher? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. I ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᒫᓐᓇ can share with the Committee, when we ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕆᔪᓐᓇᕐᐳᖓ ᐊᐱᕐᓱᓲᖑᒐᑦᑕ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑐᑎᒍ receive our exit surveys from teachers, the ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᑦ ᕿᒪᐃᓕᕐᒪᖔᕐᒥᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥᓗ primary reasons why teachers in general are ᐊᓯᐊᓅᓕᕌᖓᑕ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒧᑦ choosing to leave the profession in Nunavut, ᑐᕌᖓᓲᖑᓐᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ. ᐃᒡᓗᑭᑦᓴᕐᓂᖅ ᓄᓇᓕᐅᔪᓂᒃ some of them do not apply to Bill 25; issues ᐃᓪᓗᖃᕈᓐᓇᖏᓐᓂᖏᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐱᔾᔪᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᒥᔪᖅ of staff housing in the communities is a major ᐊᔾᔨᒌᑦᑎᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᖏᓐᓂᖏᑦ ᓇᓕᒧᑦᑐᒥᒃ issue; the quality and availability of staff ᐃᓪᓗᖃᕈᓐᓇᖏᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ housing for our Inuit culture and language ᐱᖅᑯᓯᓕᕆᓂᖅᑎᒍᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᕆᓂᖅᑎᒍᑦ specialists; the fact that staff housing for the ᑕᒪᓐᓇ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐃᓐᓄᒍᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ most part is not available for those positions ᐃᓪᓗᖃᕈᓐᓇᖏᓐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ. needs to change. ᐃᓪᓗᒃᓴᖃᕈᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᖏᓐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ.

There are members who are becoming Inuit culture and language specialists and are ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔨᒋᔭᐅᓕᓲᑦ struggling with their housing and they would ᐊᑦᓱᕈᓕᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᐃᓪᓗᖃᓕᕈᓐᓇᐃᓪᓕᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ like to have the same benefit that other co- ᐊᔾᔨᒌᑦᑐᒥᒃ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖃᑎᐅᖃᑎᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ workers in the education system in their ᓇᓕᒧᒌᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᑕᐅᑐᒃᑕᐅᔪᒪᔫᒐᓗᐊᑦ ᐃᑉᐱᒍᓱᑦᑐᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᓯᐊᓄᑦ school are receiving. It also means that a ᓄᑦᑎᕈᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᑦ, ᓄᑦᑎᕈᒪᓕᓐᓂᕈᑎᒃ culture and language specialist, for example, ᐊᑭᓕᖅᑐᐃᓕᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᓪᓗᒥᒃ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᖔᕈᒪᒍᑎᒃ for the most part, unless they want to move to ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᒍᒪᓐᖏᑯᑎᒃ ᓄᓇᒋᔭᕐᒥᓂᒃ another community and pay market rate if ᕿᒪᐃᒍᒪᓐᖏᒃᑯᑎᑦ ᐃᓪᓗᒥᒃ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑕᑉᕙ they’re renting a place or buy a home, they’re ᐱᔾᔪᑎᐅᓯᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᔪᕐᓴᖃᑦᑕᕐᓱᑎᒃ basically forced to work within their own ᓇᓂᓯᓇᓱᐊᕆᐊᖏᑦ ᐃᓛᒃ ᐊᑦᓱᕉᓴᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ. community where they already have some ᑕᒪᓂᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐃᖃᓗᓐᓂ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔨᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ sort of housing available to them. For ᐱᖁᑎᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᑦᓱᕈᕈᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ example, here in Iqaluit it is very hard to hire ᓯᓚᑖᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐃᓪᓗᑖᖅᑎᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᓂᕐᓴᐅᓲᖑᒻᒪᑕ culture and language specialists. Our schools ᑕᒪᓃᖔᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᑭᓖᔪᓐᓇᓲᖑᓐᖏᒻᒪᑕ ᐊᑭᖏᓐᓂᒃ trying to hire culture and language specialists, ᑕᒫᓂ, ᑕᒫᓃᖔᓚᖓᓐᓂᖅᐸᑕ ᐃᖃᓗᓐᓂ. many times you have to go outside of the community, but no housing is applicable for those positions, which really cancels out a lot of those applications.

Our teachers are feeling for the most part overworked when it comes to the amount of students that they are working with in their classrooms every day in targeted schools ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᑦᓯᐅᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᖃᓄᑎᒋ where there are multiple vacant positions. The ᐊᒥᓲᑎᒋᒻᒪᖔᑕ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓛᓐᓂᒃᑯᑦ student-educator ratio which is currently in ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᕆᔭᐅᓂᕐᓴᐅᓲᖑᒻᒪᑕ the Education Act looks like an excellent ᐃᓄᒋᐊᕐᓂᕐᓴᐅᒑᖓᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓴᓂᐊᓂ number. Compared to some jurisdictions in ᑲᓇᑕᐅᑉ ᒐᕙᒪᐅᖃᑎᒋᔭᑦᑕ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂ ᑕᐅᑐᒡᓗᒋᑦ Canada, it’s not a bad number, but it’s also ᖃᑦᓯᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ

not an indicative number of how many ᐅᔾᔨᕐᓇᓗᐊᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᓲᕐᓗ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᓪᓚᕆᐅᒻᒪᖔᑕ students are in each classroom because that ᐊᓯᕗᑦ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓲᕐᓗ ᓴᓂᐊᒎᖓᔪᐃᑦ student-educator ratio includes many of what ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓄᑦ, ᐃᓛᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᐅᓲᑦ we would call non-direct contact teaching ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᓯᖔᖏᓐᓂᓪᓗ ᐃᓐᓄᑦᑕᐅᓯᒪᓲ positions within your school: your principal, ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᕆᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ. your vice-principal, your student support teacher, other positions as well.

We believe that the student-educator ratio should be applicable to classroom teachers. That’s how that ratio should be applied. That ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᖃᑦᓯᐅᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓄᒋᐊᖕᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ would alleviate some of that concern for our ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᖃᑦᓯᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑖᓐᓇᑦᑕᐅᖅ members. It’s not that our members do not ᐊᔾᔨᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᔭᖓᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒋᔭᐅᔪᑎᑐᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ like teaching students; it’s that the more ᐊᔾᔨᑐᐃᓐᓇᖓᓂᒃ ᒪᓕᒐᔭᓐᖑᐊᕋᓗᐊᕐᓱᑎᒃ students you have in your class, the greater ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒍᒥᓇᕐᓱᓂᓗ. ᐊᑦᓱᕈᕈᑕᐅᓯᖃᑦᑕᕐᖓᑕ ᐃᒻᒥᓂᒃ strain is placed on your own resources and ᓴᓇᒋᐊᓕᒻᒥᓂᓪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᖏᓐᓂᒃ. your time management in terms of conducting ᐃᑲᕐᕋᖃᑦᑎᐊᖏᓐᓂᖏᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇᐅᓯᖃᑦᑕᕐᒥᒻᒪᑦ. proper lessons for those students. ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓂᓪᓗ ᐊᑭᓕᖅᑕᐅᔾᔪᑎᒃᓴᕆᔭᖏᑦ Financial compensation, the cost of living that ᐅᓪᓗᒥᓯᐅᑎᓄᑦ ᐊᖑᒻᒪᒋᐊᓕᒃ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ is in Nunavut right now that everyone feels is ᐊᑭᓕᖅᑕᐅᒍᑎᖏᑦ ᐊᖑᒻᒪᑎᓐᖏᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑕᐅᖏᓐᓇᕐᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ felt by teachers as well and that is something ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᔭᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ that will have to be addressed through the ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᖏᑎᒍᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓄᖓ next round of collective bargaining, hopefully. ᓂᓪᓕᐊᔾᔪᑕᐅᓯᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᒥᓂᐅᒑᖓᑕ

ᓇᓕᒧᒌᓐᖏᓗᐊᖃᑦᑕᕐᖓᑕ Those are the main issues that our teachers are ᐊᑭᑦᑐᕆᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᒥᓇᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃ. facing. As well, there is a significant increase that is being reported to us of violence in our ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᒥᓱᕐᖑᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᔪᐃᑦ ᓂᓐᖓᐅᒪᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐅᔪᖅ schools that is creating much stress on our ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᓲᖑᓵᕆᔪᐃᓐᓘᓐᓃᑦ teachers. The majority of the violence that’s ᓂᓐᖓᐅᒪᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐱᑦᓯᐊᓐᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ being reported is student-on-student violence. ᐊᒥᓱᕈᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᒻᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᓐᓂ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ We can’t underestimate the impact that that ᑐᑭᓯᐊᓕᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᔭᕗᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᐊᓂᖃᕐᒪᑦ has on the students but also on the teachers in ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ, ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ trying to help the students through those ᐃᑲᔪᕐᑐᐃᓐᓇᓱᐊᕋᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ violent, traumatic incidents for those children. ᐅᖁᒪᐃᓪᓕᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᓂᖓᕐᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ Violent incidents against teachers are also ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥ ᐱᒋᐊᖅᓯᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖅ increasing. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ.

There is a joint safe school and antiviolence committee that is outlined in our collective agreement between the Nunavut Teachers ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑕᐅᓯᒪᓕᕐᒥᔫᒐᓗᐊᑦ Association and the Government of Nunavut. ᖃᓄᖅᑑᕈᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᒍᑎᒋᔭᐅᔪᐃᑦ, That committee is actually going to be ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐊᑖᒍᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᒪᓕᕐᓱᑎᒃ meeting later this week. That committee right ᖃᓄᖅᑑᕈᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ. ᒫᓐᓇ ᐊᐅᓚᔾᔭᐃᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ now is tasked with coming up with a way of ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ ᖃᓄᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᓖᑦ reporting violent incidents in the school, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓂ ᖃᐅᔨᒑᖓᒥᒃ

hopefully to both the department and the ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᖏᓐᓂᒃ Nunavut Teachers Association, respecting the ᑲᓐᖑᓇᖅᑐᓕᕆᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᑭᓯᐊᓂᐅᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ privacy of all those involved and also to look ᑭᓯᐊᓂ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᖃᕆᐊᓕᒃ at some antiviolence measures that can be put ᖃᓄᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅ ᐃᑲᔪᕈᑎᐅᔪᓐᓇᕋᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ in place to help alleviate this problem in our ᐊᑉᐸᓯᑉᐹᓪᓕᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ. schools.

I can say that within the last five years the amount of teachers who have told us that ᐊᕐᕌᒍᐃᑦ ᑕᓪᓕᒪᓂᒃ ᓈᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ. ᖃᐅᔨᓯᒪᓕᖅᑐᒍᑦ they’re leaving the profession directly because ᕿᒪᐃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᒥᓂᒃ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ of specific violent incidents in their schools ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋ76ᓪᓗᓂᐅᒃ, ᓂᖓᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒥ has increased. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓄᖓᓕᕆᔪᑎᒍᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. Angnakak, you said that you were done. Are ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ, ᑕᐃᒫᒥᐊᓚᐅᕋᕕᑦ. you done? (interpretation ends) Okay, one ᑕᐃᒫᖅᐲᑦ? (ᑐᓵᔩᑎᒍᑦ) ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ ᓱᓕ. ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ. more question. Ms. Angnakak.

Ms. Angnakak: Thanks. I just want to know if that’s tracked; the violence that has ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᖃᓄᖅ. escalated tracked by the department. Is it ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᓲᖑᕚᑦ ᓂᓐᖓᐅᒪᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᓂᖓᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᕐᒨᖓᔪᐃᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑐᖃᓕᕌᖓ tracked? Is there anybody tracking this trend? ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑐᖃᓲᖑᕚ ᑕᒪᑐᒪᐅᑉ ᒥᑦᓵᓄᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Thank you. That’s it. Thank you, Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. I could not speak to the department, whether ᕚᓐᔪᐃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ they are doing any internal tracking of that. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᔪᓐᓇᓐᖏᑕᕋ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ There is no external tracking. We are hoping ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᒪᖔᑕᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᓯᓚᑖᒍᖔᖅ that the safe school and antiviolence ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑎᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓇᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ committee will be tasked with coming up with ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑕᖃᕐᒪᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ ᖃᓄᖅ a system where that can be tracked, where ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᓐᓇᕈᑎᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᑦᓱᐃᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᐃᑦ both the department and the Nunavut ᐸᕐᓇᒃᑐᐃᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ Teachers Association can have those statistics ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᖏᓐᓂ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᐊᕐᖓᑕ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ available and also look at the underlying ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᓪᓗ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᓴᖅᑭᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. causes of why these issues may be happening. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Moving on. Mr. Akoak. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᑲᔪᓯᓗᑕ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐋᖁᐊᖅ.

Mr. Akoak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome to the Nunavut Teachers ᐋᖁᐊᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᑦᓯ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ

Association. ᑲᑎᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ.

My first question is from your comments, the ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᕋ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ. ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᑦᓯᓐᓂᒃ last paragraph where you say, “District ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖓᓂ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᓴᕆᔭᕐᓂᒃ education authorities play a vital role in ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑑᑎᓕᒻᒪᕆᐅᒻᒪᑕ representing the communities and should ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ continue to be involved in school ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᕐᓂᐊᕌᖓᑕ administrator hiring and contract renewal but ᓄᑖᖑᖅᑎᑕᐅᒋᐊᖃᓕᕌᖓᑕᓗ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖏᑦ. should not be the sole decision-maker.” ᑖᒃᑯᐊᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐃᒻᒥᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᖃᓄᖅᑑᕆᔨᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᓐᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᑑᓗᑎᒃ. On pages 10 and 11 of your submission, you note that during consultations on education in ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑐᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᐅᑉ Nunavut, a proposal had been put forward that ᒥᑦᓵᓄᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ the Department of Education be the lead on ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᑦ the administration of principal and vice- ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᒻᒥ ᑳᓐᑐᓛᖏᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊᑐᐊᖅ principal contracts, with a member of the ᑲᒪᔪᒃᓴᐅᒻᒪᖔᑕ ᐊᒻᒪ ᓴᓂᕐᕙᐃᖔᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᓲᕐᓗ district education authority on the decision- ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ making panel. This proposal was not adopted ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᕐᓂᐊᕌᖓᒥᒃ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ in Bill 25. You state further that the ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓚᐅᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒥ. ᑕᐃᒫᒃ Department of Education should be the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖑᔪᐃᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ authority on the principal and vice-principal ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᖅ ᓄᖅᑲᖅᑎᑦᓯᓂᐊᖅᐸᑕ ᐅᑉᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᕐᓂᐊᖅᐸᑕ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᒐᕕᑦ appointments, reappointments, and dismissals. ᖃᓄᓪᓚᕆᒃ ᓯᕗᒧᐊᒋᐊᖃᖅᐱᑕ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ.

Can you elaborate further on this issue and what specific factors should be taken into ᖃᓄᖅ ᓇᓪᓕᐊᓪᓚᕆᒃ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐱᔭᕇᖅᓯᓪᓚᕆᓚᖓᕙ consideration with respect to which entity ᐊᖏᖅᑎᐅᓚᖓᕙ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᑐᖏᓕᖏᑦ should have the final authority with respect to ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ, ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. the employment of principals and vice- principals? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᑲᔪᓯᓗᑕ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. We agreed with the department’s original ᐊᖏᓚᐅᕐᐳᒍᑦ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖓᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ proposal during the community consultation ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᒋᐊᓐᖓᓚᐅᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓛᒃ process that school administrator positions ᓴᖅᑭᓚᐅᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ should be appointed by the Department of ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᒋᔭᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᑦ, Education in consultation with district ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ education authorities. ᐋᔩᖃᑎᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑎᒥᖁᑎᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᒃ. We do believe that district education authorities should be the main policy and ᐅᑉᐱᕆᔭᖃᕋᑦᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᑐᐊᒐᓕᕆᔨᐅᒻᒪᑕ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ planning oversight for principals in terms of ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑎᐅᒻᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᐃᑦ the school program plan; the community ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ education program plan. We are not in favour ᑎᒥᖁᑎᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᕙᒍᑦ ᑕᑯᓐᓈᖏᑦᑐᒍᑦ.

of the DEA having any authority taken away ᐲᖅᓯᒍᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᒍᑦ, ᐲᖅᓯᖁᔨᒐᔭᓐᖏᑦᓱᑕᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ in terms of the school budgeting process, the ᑮᓇᐅᔭᐃᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑭᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᐸᑦᑕᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ attendance and discipline policies, the ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᑦᓯᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᑐᐊᒐᓕᕆᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ. Inuuqatigiitsiarniq policies.

We do believe that the human resource role of ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐅᑉᐱᕆᔭᖃᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ appointing and choosing to either reappoint or ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᐅᑉ ᒥᒃᓵᓅᖓᔪᐃᑦ not reappoint school administrators should be ᑎᒃᑯᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖏᑦ. ᓇᓪᓕᐊᓐᓂᒃ made by the department in consultation with ᑎᒃᑯᐊᖅᑕᐅᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᖃᖅᐸᑕᓘᓐᓃᑦ district education authorities, with the final ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᒋᔭᖏᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓᖔᖅ say being with the Department of Education. ᑎᒍᒥᐊᖅᑕᐅᖁᒐᓗᐊᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ Principals and vice-principals are employees ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐋᔩᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ of the Government of Nunavut. Their ᐱᑕᖃᕋᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᖁᑦᓯᓂᖅᐹᓂᒃ employer is the Department of Education ᐊᖏᖅᑎᐅᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ. ᓄᓇᕗᑦ within the Government of Nunavut. The ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᒋᔭᐅᒻᒪᑕ employer should be playing the human ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑖᓃᒻᒪᑕ. ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ resource role. They are currently playing the ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑐᓕᕆᔭᐅᓂᕆᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ assessment role for those positions and they ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑎᐅᓪᓗᑎᓪᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐊᒻᒪᓗᑦᑕᐅᖅ should also be the final decision-maker on the ᖃᓄᖅᑑᕆᔨᐅᒋᐊᖃᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐃᒻᒪᖃ ᐱᒋᐊᓐᖓᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ reappointment or the initial appointment of ᑎᒍᒥᐊᖅᑕᐅᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᓐᖑᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᑎᒃ school administrators. ᐅᑉᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᓄᖅᑲᖅᑎᑕᐅᒋᐊᖃᖅᑲᑕ.

We do believe that district education authorities should be consulted prior to any ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐱᔭᕇᓚᐅᓐᖏᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂ ᐋᔩᖃᑎᖃᕐᓗᑎᒃ decision being made by the department, and ᖃᓄᐃᒋᔭᐅᒻᒪᖔᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ district education authorities should be ᑎᒥᖁᑎᒋᔭᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐊᓛᖏᓐᓄᑦ involved in the decision-making. The final ᖃᓄᐃᒋᔭᐅᒻᒪᖔᑕ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᐱᕆᔭᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎᒃ. decision should be made on the part of the ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. department. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Akoak. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐋᖁᐊᖅ.

Mr. Akoak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With ᐋᖁᐊᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. the member of the district education authority, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐊᑐᓂᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᐅᔪᐃᑦ would it be per community or would that be ᐅᑉᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᖏᑎᒍᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑎᒎᑦ? with the CNDEA? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. If I understand the question correctly, in terms of ᕚᓐᔪᐃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ the appointment or reappointment panels, I ᑐᑭᓯᐊᒐᒃᑯ ᐃᒪᖃ ᖃᓄᖅ ᑎᒃᑯᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ believe it should be a community DEA ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᑐᓂᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᐃᒻᒥᒃᑯᑦ member that should be on the community ᓄᓇᓕᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᒋᔭᖏᑦ, ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᑦ,

appointment or reappointment panels. It ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖓᑕ ᑐᖏᓕᖓᓘᓐᓃᑦ should not be somebody in the coalition ᑕᐃᒃᑯᓇᓐᖓᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᖏᓐᓂᓘᓐᓃᑦ office. I believe that community input is vital ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᒻᒪᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ and it should come from each individual ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐋᔩᕋᕐᕕᐅᓗᑎᒃ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. district education authority. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐋᖁᐊᖅ. Akoak.

Mr. Akoak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My ᐋᖁᐊᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. last question would be, you talk about a ᐊᐱᕆᓂᐊᖅᑐᖓ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥ. ᒫᓐᓇ current recruitment and retention crisis within ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᓲᕐᓗ teacher education. “Nearly half of our NTEP ᐊᒥᒐᖅᓯᓪᓚᕆᒐᑦᑕ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐊᒥᒐᓪᓚᕆᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ graduates are leaving the teaching profession ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᑎᒍᑦ ᓇᑉᐸᒐᓚᖏᑦ within the first five years of employment.” ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᔫᒐᓗᐊᑦ ᓯᓚᑦᑐᕐᓴᕐᕕᑎᒍᑦ That is in your statement on the second page ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒃᓴᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᑲᐃᓐᓇᓚᐅᕋᓗᐊᕐᓱᑎᒃ in the last paragraph. ᕿᒫᕈᑎᖃᑦᑕᓕᕐᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᖃᐅᔨᓯᒪᒐᑦᑎᒍ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ Have you ever talked to the department to ᐊᑕᒍᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ. find ways in trying to keep NTEP graduates ᐅᖃᖃᑎᒋᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᕕᒌᑦ, within the system? Have you ever made any ᐅᖃᖃᑎᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᒋᕕᓯᐅᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ. ᓲᕐᓗ suggestions like incentives to stay on the job? ᐊᑕᐃᓐᓇᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᒥᓂᒃ They do pay teachers coming into the ᕿᒪᕉᑎᓐᖏᓪᓗᑎᒃ. ᐊᑭᓖᓲᖑᕙᓪᓚᐃᒐᓗᐊᕐᖓᑕ communities from the south, maybe as far as ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓄᑦ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ Newfoundland, and NTEP students don’t get ᑕᒫᓃᒍ79ᓇᕈᑎᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ any benefits like that. If you did give them a ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ, ᓯᓚᑦᑐᓴᕐᕕᑦᑎᒍᑦ paid trip out, maybe something like that ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᕕᓃᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᑦᑕᐅᖃᐃ would be an incentive. Have you made any ᐊᑕᕈᓐᓇᕈᑕᐅᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᑲᔫᑎᓂᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ suggestions of something like that to the ᑐᓂᔭᐅᒍ79ᓇᕋᔭᓐᖏᒻᒪᖔᑕ department? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᖅᑐᖃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᕚ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᕋ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Fanjoy. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. We have made many suggestions in the past ᐊᒥᓱᐊᓗᓐᓂᒃ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕆᓯᒪᔪᒎᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓄᑦ in terms of financial compensation. A lot of ᐃᑲᔫᑎᒃᓴᐅᔪᓐᓇᕋᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᓲᕐᓗ those suggestions have been in the form of the ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᒍᑎᐅᑉ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ collective bargaining process. A lot of those ᐊᖏᖃᑎᖏᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᔾᔪᓯᕆᔭᖏᓐᓄᑦ suggestions in the collective bargaining ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᓂᑰᓐᖏᒻᒪᑕ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ process were not accepted by the Government ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᕕᑦᑐᖅᓯᒪᓂᖏᑦ of Nunavut’s side. That’s not the Department ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓅᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ of Education in particular; that’s the ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᖏᓐᓄᑦ. Government of Nunavut.

We’ve also had multiple conversations with ᐊᒥᓱᐊᖅᑎᐊᓗᒃ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᖅᓯᒪᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ the Department of Education on how NTEP ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ graduates in the system can be retained over ᓯᓚᑦᑐᕐᓴᕐᕕᑎᒍᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕇᕇᖅᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ the years. We’ve had those conversations with ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒃᓴᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᒐᓴᓐᓂᒃ ᕿᒪᑦᑕᑎᓐᓂᒃ numerous leaders within the Department of ᖃᓄᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅ ᐊᑕᒍᓇᕋᔭᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᓯᕗᓕᐅᖅᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ Education. We haven’t spoken about the exact ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑎᒍᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᑎᒍᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ, form that you have just mentioned, but we ᖃᑦᓯᓪᓚᕆᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᑉᕕᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᔭᖓᓂ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ have discussed financial compensation for ᑮᓇᐅᔭᑎᒍᑦ ᐃᑲᔫᑎᐅᒍᓐᓇᕋᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᔪᓄᑦ teachers in the system, both NTEP and non- ᒫᓐᓇᐅᓂᖓᓂ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐱᔭᕇᖅᑐᕕᓂᕐᓂ NTEP grads, in terms of the possibility of ᓯᓚᑦᑐᓴᕐᕕᑎᒍᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓐᖑᕈᒪᔪᐃᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ retention bonuses, whether that would come ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᑎᒍᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑎᒍᑦ through a collective bargaining process or ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐋᔩᕋᕈᑕᐅᒋᐊᖃᓲᖑᒐᔭᕐᒪᑦ. another process.

We have also spoken about in terms of recruiting and retaining our new teachers from ᖃᓄᑎᒋ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ ᐊᑕᒍᓐᓇᕋᔭᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ NTEP, offering supports through our ᓄᑖᓂᒃ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ ᑕᐃᑲᓐᖓᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ professional development fund to staff ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒃᓴᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᑎᒍᑦ positions not based at the Department of ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ ᐅᕙᒍᑦ Education; based at the Nunavut Teachers ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᐃᓂᖏᑎᒍᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖁᑎᒋᔭᑦᑕ ᐅᕙᒍᑦ Association. One position in particular would ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑕ ᐊᑖᒍᑦ, ᐊᑕᐅᓯᖅ ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᑐᕌᖓᒐᔭᕐᒪᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᓂᒃ ᐊᑕᒍᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ be focused on the recruitment and retention of ᐱᓕᖕᒪᒃᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᕆᔭᖓᒍᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ Inuit teachers into our system, working in ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑦᑎᐊᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᒃ particular with our high school students and ᖁᑉᕙᓯᓐᓂᕐᓴᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐊᓗᒃᑎᒍᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ targeted high school teachers who could serve ᐊᑕᒍᓐᓇᕐᓗᓂ. ᐅᕙᒍᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖁᑎᑦᑕ as mentors in our communities. That would be ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᐃᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᔪᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᑕᐃᑦᓱᒪᓂ funded from our professional development ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᑖᒍᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ fund. That proposal was turned down by the ᐊᑭᓕᐅᑕᐅᒋᐊᖃᕋᔭᓚᐅᖅᑑᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᑎᒎᓇ department at the time. Our professional ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᓐᓂᔪᓐᖏᓇᑦᑕ. development fund would have completely paid for that position and it was not accepted.

We also offered to fund through our professional development fund an Inuktut support coordinator position which would be focused on providing support for our teachers ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᓚᐅᖅᑐᒎᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓᑦᓴᐃᓐᓇᖅ in their first five years of education in Inuktut, ᐃᓄᒃᑐᑦ ᑐᑭᒧᐊᒃᑎᑦᑎᔨᐅᒐᔭᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᑐᕌᒐᕆᒐᔭᖅᑕᖓ. so a primary point of contact in Inuktut for ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᐃᒍᓇᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ, ᐊᕐᕌᒍᐃᑦ our teachers when they are contacting the ᑕᓪᓕᒪᓂᒃ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᕆᐊᓐᖓᖅᑕᖓᓂᒃ ᐃᓄᒃᑐᑦ Nunavut Teachers Association, with the idea ᑖᓐᓇ ᑐᕌᒐᕆᔭᐅᓗᓂ ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᑐᑭᒧᐊᒃᑎᒋᔭᐅᒐᔭᖅᑐᖅ of assisting our new teachers in applying for ᓲᕐᓗ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᐅᓗᓂ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᔪᓄᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ their Inuit language allowances, helping them ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᐸᑦᑐᐃᓪᓗ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᒥᒃ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᒥᓂᒃ in terms of their resource development and ᓲᕐᓗ ᐃᑲᔫᑎᒋᓲᕆᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ. ᖃᓄᖅ finding the proper resources, giving them ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᒍᓐᓇᕐᓂᕆᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ general support through their first five years, ᓇᓂᓯᐅᕋᕈᑎᒐᓱᐊᓚᐅᖅᑕᕘᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᖃᓄᖅ with a specific focus on professional ᐃᑲᔪᕈᑎᐅᒃᑲᓐᓂᕋᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ

development in their first five years on the ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓄᑦ ᑕᓪᓕᒪᓄᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ job. ᐋᖅᑭᑦᓱᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᓪᓗᓂ.

It wouldn’t be 100 percent professional development; there would also be some ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑕᒪᒃᑭᓕᒫᑦ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔨᓕᕆᔨᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᓗᓂ membership support services there available ᐱᓕᖕᒪᒃᓴᐃᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᐃᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᓂ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ as well. That position was not accepted by the ᑕᐃᒫᑦᓴᐃᓐᓇᖅ ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᔪᓐᖏᒻᒥᒐᑦᑕ Department of Education as well. We would ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ have funded that through our professional ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖃᖅᑎᑦᓯᒐᔭᕋᓗᐊᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᐅᕙᒍᑦ ᓇᖕᒥᓂᖁᑎᑦᑕ development fund, but in accordance with ᐱᓕᒻᒪᑦᓴᐃᓂᒃᑯᑦ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᒍᑎᐅᑉ Article 16 of our collective agreement, any ᐃᓗᓕᖓᓂ 16 ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᒍᑎᐅᓲᖅ use of that fund that is outside of specific ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᓄᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᓯᓚᑖᓃᖓᔪᒧᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ articles has to be agreed upon equally by the ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᒍᑕᐅᒋᐊᖃᓲᖑᒻᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ department and the Nunavut Teachers ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑎᒍᑦ. Association. We could not reach that ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᒍᓐᓇᓚᐅᓐᖏᓇᑦᑕ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ agreement. ᑲᔪᓯᓚᐅᓐᖏᑦᑑᒃ.

Those are just two examples of what we have done to try to support teachers in their first ᒪᕐᕉᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐆᑦᑐᕋᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔭᕋᓗᐊᕗᑦ ᖃᓄᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅ five years. We’re going to continue to try to ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᒍᓇᕋᔭᕆᐊᖏᑦ. ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖓᓂ support teachers and come up with new ways ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓐᖑᕈᑏᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᒥᓄᑦ ᐃᓐᓄᑦᑕᖓᓄᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓄᑦ ᑕᓪᓕᒪᓄᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᕈᑎᒃᓴᐅᒍᓐᓇᕋᔭᖅᑐᓂᒃ that we can do so and we also believe that the ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᓯᕕᐅᒐᓱᐊᓚᐅᕋᓗᐊᕋᑦᑕ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, department, through their plan, is looking to ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. focus on this as well. Qujannamiik, Mr.

Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ, ᒫᓐᓇ Minister Joanasie, I will give you an ᐱᕕᖃᖅᑎᑦᑐᐊᕋᓗᐊᖅᐸᒋᑦ ᐅᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ opportunity to speak about the school ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓂ ᐃᓱᒪᑕᑦ, ᐃᓱᒪᑕᖏᑦ principals. The teachers association has stated ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᐃᓱᒪᑕᐃᑦ ᐅᑯᐊ that (interpretation ends) their position is that ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᑎᑦᓯᔩᑦ ᑎᒥᖁᑎ ᐃᓚᖓ ᐅᖃᕐᖠᒪᑦᓱᑎᓪᓗ, the hiring and firing should rest with… . Sorry (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᕆᐊᖅᑐᖅᑐᓂᒃ to say it that bluntly, but that’s what I’ll refer ᓄᖅᑲᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᕆᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ to it. Hiring and firing should rest with the ᓄᖅᑲᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᕐᓗ Department of Education and there are other ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓃᖏᓐᓇᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᐊᐃ ᑕᐃᕕᑦ. positions that have been put forth. Bill 25 ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᓯᖏᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᑦ basically keeps that relationship the same as it ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᑖᓐᓇ is right now, to my understanding. I wonder if ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᖓᑎᑐᐃᓐᓇᓐᖑᓱᒻᒪᑦ you can speak a bit as to your department’s ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒐᓛᒍᓐᓇᕈᕕᐅᖃᐃ ᐱᓕᕆᔨᓯ ᖃᓄᖅ thinking on this issue, specifically dealing ᐃᓱᒪᒋᒻᒪᖔᒍ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑖᑦᓱᒥᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ with the principals. Minister Joanasie. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖓ ᐱᓗᐊᕐᓗᒋᑦ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, we heard through the ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, community consultations and the DEA ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᕐᓂᒃᑯᑦ coalition stating that that decision rests best at ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑕ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᖅᑎ ᑖᓐᓇ

the local level. We’re proposing to maintain ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᐋᖅᑭᑦᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ that. However, we are proposing to include a ᑲᔪᓯᑐᐃᓐᓇᐃᓪᓕᕗᖅ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ provision in cases where the hiring panel is ᑐᓴᒃᑲᓐᓂᓚᐅᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᐃᓚᓕᐅᔾᔨᒍᒪᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᒪᓕᒐᐅᑉ not coming together in an expedient time as ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᓕᖅᑎᑦᑎᔩᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ we can. We are proposing after two days that ᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᓈᒻᒪᓈᖅᑐᒃᑯᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᑦᓯᖃᑦᑕᖏᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ. we can assign someone else to fill in on those ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐅᓪᓘᒃ ᒪᕐᕉᒃ ᐊᓂᒍᕌᖓᑎᒃ panels in the interest of filling those positions ᑎᒃᑯᐊᖅᓯᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᐊᓯᐊᓂᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓂᒃ as quickly as we can. As we have talked about ᐃᓇᖏᖅᓯᖔᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ vacancies for not just teachers but even ᐃᓐᓄᒐᓱᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑐᐊᕕᕐᓇᖅᑐᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᑦ ᑕᐃᒪ sometimes our administrators, we want to fill ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᖃᑦᑕᕋᑦᑕ ᐃᓐᓄᑦᓯᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᐃ, them as quickly and as efficiently as we can. ᑕᐃᓐᓇᑑᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨᖏᓐᓄᓪᓗ ᐃᓐᓄᒍᒪᒐᑦᑎᒍ Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᑐᐊᕕᕐᓇᖅᑐᒃᑯᑦ ᓈᒻᒪᓈᖅᑐᑯᓪᓗ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Just one further thing to ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) get clarification on from the teachers ᑐᑭᓯᓇᖅᓯᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓗᒍ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ association, 50 percent of administrator ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓂᒃ. ᐊᑉᕙᓪᓗᐊᖏᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᓯᔩᑦ turnover that you mentioned in your opening ᓄᖅᑲᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᐅᖃᖅᑲᐅᒐᕕᑦ ᒪᑐᐃᕈᑎᓐᓂ, comments, very briefly, why do ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔩᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᒃ administrators have a higher turnover than ᓄᖅᑐᑲᒐᔪᓐᓂᕐᓴᐅᕙᑦ? ᑕᐃᒪ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ teachers as a whole? Is this HR relationship ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᖃᕐᓂᖅ ᑖᑦᓱᒧᖓ ᐃᓚᓕᐅᑎᓯᒪᕚ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. part of that turnover issue? Mr. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ The number fluctuates between 40 and 50 ᐊᔾᔨᒋᒍᓐᓃᖅᑕᖓ ᑕᒫᓂ 40 ᐳᓴᒥᒃ 60-ᒧᑦ, 45-ᓗ percent; many years north of 45. That’s why ᐅᖓᑖᓃᑦᑐᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᕋᓴᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᕐᕙᓪᓗᐊᑲᓴᖏᑦ we say close to 50 percent of our ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨᖏᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇᓕ administrators. This human resource role has ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓂᒃ been a factor in some of our communities. ᐱᔾᔪᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ.

We do know there was one community that was mentioned this morning where it was very public in the media where there was ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓪᓗᑕ ᓄᓇᓕᒃ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ questions over the principal not being ᑐᓴᐅᑎᓐᖏᑦᑐᒻᒪᕆᐅᓚᐅᕐᒪᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒃᑯᑦ reappointed, questions from the community, ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖓ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑕᐅᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓗᓂ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ even though the DEA had made that decision. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ That made the media. There has been other ᐋᖅᑭᑦᑕᐅᓚᐅᕋᓗᐊᖅᑐᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑐᓴᐅᑎᑎᒎᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ instances in the past where that has played a ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᒪᐃᓕᓪᓗᓂ. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᑕᑉᕙ role as well, where a district education ᐱᔾᔪᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ authority has made the decision not to ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᑎᒃᑯᐊᖅᓯᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᓪᓗᑎᒃ reappoint a principal, where many people in ᐋᖅᑭᑦᓯᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑕ. ᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑐᑦ, the community thought that principal was ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑐᓪᓕ ᐱᓕᕆᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᐊᓘᒐᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ doing good work, and no specific reason was ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖓᓂᓪᓗ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᑦᑖᖅᑐᖃᓚᐅᕋᓂ. ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᑦ given about why that principal was not ᑎᒃᑯᐊᖅᑕᐅᑲᓐᓂᓚᐅᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ reappointed. I would say that that’s not the ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖓ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᐊᑕᓐᖏᑕᖓᓂᒃ main reason why we see the turnover rate we ᓄᖅᑲᕈᑕᐅᖃᑕᖅᑐᖅ

do in school administrators. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒥ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨ.

Our school administrators are overworked, just as our teachers are overworked. The ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᒻᒥ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨᕗᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᑎᑕᐅᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ, amount of reporting that’s required of our ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐱᓕᕆᑎᑕᐅᓗᐊᕐᒥᒻᒪᑎᒃ school administrators has increased ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒥ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔩᑦ exponentially in the last 10 years. Bill 25 ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖅᑐᐊᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐅᓄᖅᓯᒋᐊᖅᓯᒪᔪᒻᒪᕆᐅᒻᒪᑕ would further increase the amount of ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓂ ᖁᓕᐅᕋᑖᖅᑐᓂ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ reporting to the department to the point where ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ it seems like the reporting would be ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐅᓄᖅᓯᒋᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ redundant. The amount of reporting that’s ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖅ ᐊᑑᑎᖃᕈᓐᓃᕋᔭᖅᑰᔨᒻᒪᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ happening currently is more than sufficient, as ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕐᓂᕆᖃᑦᑕᖅᑕᖓ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᑦ ᓈᒻᒪᑲᓚᐅᕐᓕᑦ well as the introduction, in the last three ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓂᖓ. ᒪᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ years, of teacher professional development ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᐃᔭᐅᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ frameworks. There are many positives to ᓈᖕᒪᓐᓂᖃᐅᖅᑐᒻᒪᕆᐅᒐᓗᐊᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᖏᔪᒻᒪᕆᒻᒥᒃ those professional development frameworks, ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᒃᓴᒥᒃ ᑎᖅᑎᑲᓐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑑᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ, but it does significantly increase the workload ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᓪᓗ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᓐᓄᑦ not only on our teachers but on our principals ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑕ ᐊᕐᕌᒍ ᐊᒥᓱᐊᖅᑎᖅᑐᒍ who do have to review those multiple times ᕿᒥᕐᕈᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᒃ. ᑕᐃᒪᓕ throughout the year with our teachers. What ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᒪᓐᓇ we’re getting back from our principals is that ᐸᐃᑉᐹᓕᕆᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖓ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᖏᓪᓕᕚᓪᓕᖅᓯᒪᓕᕐᒪᑦ ᑕᓪᓕᒪᓂᒃ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓂᒃ. their, for lack of a better term, clerical workload has become very burdensome in the last five years.

I would also say that if more principals were made-in-Nunavut principals over time, you would see that retention rate reduce a bit. For that reason, when the Department of Education is looking for school administrators, many times school ᐅᖃᕐᒥᓗᖓᓗ ᑕᐃᒪ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᑦ administrators are being hired who may be in ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒦᖔᖅᓯᒪᑉᐸᑕ ᑖᓐᓇ ᓄᖅᑲᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖓ the twilight of their careers. That just further ᐊᒃᑎᑦᓯᕚᓪᓕᐊᕐᔪᓪᓗᓂ. ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ increases the rotation of principals moving in ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᓐᓂ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᓯᔨᓯᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᓐᓂ and out of the communities. There are some ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᒥᒃ ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᑎᒪᑦᓯᐊᕐᖢᑎᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ great principals, many great principals who ᓄᒃᑕᒃᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᑦ have come from other jurisdictions and who ᐅᓄᖅᓯᔪᐃᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᒻᒥ have been here for many years. I’m speaking ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᑦᑎᐊᕙᒻᒪᕆᐊᓗᐃᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᓯᓚᑖᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᑦ of the one- or two-year principals who are ᐊᕐᕌᒍᒐᓴᓐᓂᒃ ᒫᓃᑦᑐᑦ. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᔭᒃᑲ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᒥᒃ coming in to fill that gap and who are doing a ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑕᒫᓂ tremendous job for the most part while they ᐱᓕᕆᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᒻᒪᕆᐅᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᑕᒫᓃᓐᓂᕐᒥᓂ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ are here, but the expectation is that they’re not ᓂᕆᐅᒋᖃᑦᑕᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᐊᑯᓂᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᒫᓂᒃᑲᔭᕆᐊᖏᑦ going to be here long term. That’s perhaps ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦᑕᐅᖃᐃᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᒃ even the expectation of the DEA believing ᓂᕆᐅᒋᔭᐅᒻᒥᔪᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒎᓐᓂᒃ ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓈᓐᓂᒃ that that principal is going to step in for only a ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖑᓂᐊᖅᑐᐃᑦ couple of years until somebody from the

community may be available. ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂᖔᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕈᖅᑐᖃᕋᓱᓐᓂᖓᓂ.

Principal positions are all term positions. We are not saying that principal positions should ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖓᑕ ᐃᓱᓕᑦᑕᕐᕕᓖᑦ ᐃᒪᓐᓇ be indeterminate, but we are saying that if you ᑖᕗᖓᓕᒫᖅ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖁᔨᓗᑕ ᐅᖃᓐᖏᒃᑲᓗᐊᖅᑐᒍᑦ have term positions, there just naturally ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᐃᓱᓕᑦᑕᕐᕕᖃᐅᖅᐸᑕ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᖐᑦ bounds to be a greater rate of turnover as well. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᓄᖅᑲᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᒦᓲᖏᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Thank you for answering ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ in a way that brings us back to the bill in front ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᑦᒧ ᐅᑎᕐᕕᒋᑦᑎᐊᕋᕕᐅᒃ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ. of us today. Mr. Qamaniq.

Mr. Qamaniq (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) In your ᖃᒪᓂᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᑕᐃᒪ opening statement on the last page it says that ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔭᖓᓂ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥ ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᑐᐃᕈᑎᒥ “The NTA’s hope is that any amendments ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥ, ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥᐅᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ made to the Education Act or the Inuit ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ Language Protection Act will further support ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕈᑕᐅᔪᖅ, ᐃᓄᐃᓪᓗ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓᑕ teachers with this important responsibility.” ᓴᐳᑎᔭᐅᓯᒪᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᕐᓱᐃᒃᑲᓐᓂᕋᔭᕐᒪᑕ ᑖᑦᓱᒧᖓ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᔪᒧᑦ ᑲᒪᒋᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑕᖏᓐᓄᑦ. I’m not sure which amendments you are ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓪᓚᑦᑖᖏᕐᖢᖓ ᓇᓕᐊᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕆᐊᕈᑕᐅᔪᒥᒃ referring to, but maybe perhaps you are able ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕐᒪᖔᖅᐱᑦ. ᐅᓇᖃᐃ ᑭᐅᔪᓐᓇᕋᔭᖅᐱᐅᒃ to answer this question when I ask these other ᒪᕐᕉᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑏᒃᑲ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᑎᑦ two questions. The introduction of your ᑕᑯᓐᓈᒐᖃᓪᓗᐊᑕᕐᒪᑎᒃ ᑕᑉᕙᓂ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕆᐊᕈᑕᐅᔪᒥᒃ submission notes that your responses are only ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᒃᖠᔪᖅ ᑕᐃᓐᓇ focused on proposals for changes that are ᐃᓗᓕᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᒫᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᐅᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ included in Bill 25 and you disagree with. Are ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᒋᔭᐃᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ there any specific sections or parts of the 25-ᒥ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓯᒪᓐᖏᒻᒪᑕ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. current legislation, the Education Act currently in force, that you feel should be changed but are not addressed in Bill 25? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. In terms of the current Education Act and that ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. are not offered as amendments in Bill 25, we ᑕᒪᑐᒧᖓ ᒫᓐᓇᐅᔪᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒧᑦ believe that the main change that should ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕆᐊᕈᑕᐅᓯᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒥ happen is the student-educator ratio and how ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕐᓂᕐᓴᐅᖁᔭᕗᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓄᑦ that is calculated and who is included into that ᐅᓄᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒧᑦ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒧᑦ. ᖃᓄᕐᓗ formula. We believe it should be codified ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑕᐅᓂᖓ. ᑭᒃᑯᓪᓕ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᖔᑕ within the Education Act what positions in ᓈᓴᐅᑎᖏᑎᒍᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᒪᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᒋᔭᕗᑦ particular should be included in the student- ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ. ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎ ᐅᓄᕐᓂᖏᑦ

educator ratio and that those positions should ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒧᑦ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᑕᑯᓗᒍ, only be the direct contact classroom teachers. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓪᓚᑦᑖᓄᑐᐊᖅ ᑐᕌᒐᔭᕆᐊᓕᒃ It should not include school administrators, ᐱᖃᓯᐅᔾᔨᓯᒪᔭᕆᐊᖃᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᐃᑲᔪᕐᓱᐃᔨᒥᒃ student support teachers, or subject teachers ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᔨ ᐅᑉᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᓇᖕᒥᓂᖅ that do not have homeroom classes at the ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᖃᓐᖏᑦᑐᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ. elementary grade levels.

For example, if some school does have an elementary phys. ed. teacher who is not teaching in a homeroom with 15 to 20 ᑕᐃᒪ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᒻᒥ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐃᖃᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᓕᕆᓂᖅ, students to 25 students through the majority of ᐃᒪᓐᓇ 15-ᓂᒃ 25-ᓄᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ the day, it should be the main classroom ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖃᓐᖏᑦᑐᒧᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᓕᒫᖅ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂᓕ teacher who is the only position in that ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑐᐊᖅ ᑕᑉᕙᓂ student-educator ratio. That would be the ᓈᓴᐅᑎᖏᓐᓃᑦᑐᑐᔭᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ main amendment that we would like to see in ᐃᓗᐊᓃᑦᑐᑐᔮᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᖁᒐᔭᖅᑕᕗᓪᓕ the Education Act that’s not currently found in ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒦᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂ. ᐅᓪᓗᓕᒫᖅ Bill 25. I could sit here all day and talk about ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᓂᒃ ᐅᓪᓗᓕᒫᖅ many little tweaks that could be had, but if we ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕈᓐᓇᕋᓗᐊᖅᑐᖓ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᓯᔾᔨ want to see one amendment that is not ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒦᑦᑐᖅ ᑕᑯᔪᒪᓗᐊᓚᐅᖅᑕᕋ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑕᒡᕙ contained in Bill 25, it would be the ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᖁᒐᔭᖅᑕᕗᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. amendment that we are looking for.

Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ. Qamaniq.

Mr. Qamaniq: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᖃᒪᓂᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. My second question is on page 4 of your ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒃᑲᓐᓂᕋ ᑖᑦᓱᒪ ᒪᑉᐱᒐᖅ 4−ᖓᓂ ᑖᓐᓇ submission. You note that clause 27 of Bill 25 ᓈᓴᐅᑎᖓ 27 ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 14-ᖓᓂ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ would amend section 14 of the Act, in part by ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕋᓱᑦᑕᐅᔪᖅ ᐃᓚᖓᒍᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓗ requiring principals to report four times a year ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᒻᒥ ᓯᑕᒪᐃᕐᓱᓂ to the district education authority instead of ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒪᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ twice a year, as is currently required. Your ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ. ᒫᓐᓇ ᒪᕐᕈᐊᖅᑎᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑕ comment regarding this proposed amendment ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᑐᖅᑕᐅᖁᔭᐃᑦ ᑕᖅᑭᑕᒫᖅ notes that principals also meet monthly with ᑲᑎᖃᑎᖃᖃᑦᑕᖁᔨᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ their local district education authority and that ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᕆᔭᖏᑦ adding additional reporting obligations would ᐱᔭᒃᓴᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕋᔭᕐᒪᑕ. ᑕᐅᑐᑦᑕᐅᒪᓪᓕ increase principals’ workload. In your view, ᖃᓄᖅ ᐱᐅᓂᖅᐹᖑᕙ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᑦ, what is the best way for principals to keep ᑐᓴᐅᒪᑎᑦᑏᓇᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ district education authorities up to date on the ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᑦ, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᑦ ongoing effectiveness of local community ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ, ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔪᓂᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ programs, the education program, and the ᐱᓕᕆᔪᓂᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᒻᒥ ᐱᐅᓯᕚᓪᓕᕈᑎᔅᓴᒧᑦ school improvement program? Thank you, ᐱᓕᕆᐊᒧᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. We believe that adding those extra two reports ᐅᒃᐱᕆᒐᑦᑎᒍ ᒪᕐᕉᒃ ᐱᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓗᓂ is basically redundant and that the amount of ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖅ. ᐊᑑᑎᖃᖅᑐᕆᖏᑕᕗᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ official reporting that a principal is currently ᒫᓐᓇ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕆᐊᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐸᐃᑉᐹᑎᒍᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ doing is keeping both district education ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᑕᒪᕐᒥᑦ authorities and the department up to date ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᓪᓗ ᐊᖑᒻᒪᑎᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓗᒋᑦ sufficiently on what is happening in the ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᕐᓂᕆᔭᖏᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ. school in terms of the educational program ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᖏᓐᓃᑦᑐᓂᑦ plan, which is submitted in the springtime, as ᐅᐱᕐᖔᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ well as the official report in the fall. I do not ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖓᓪᓗ ᐅᑭᐊᑦᓵᒃᑯᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑕᖅᑭᑕᒫᑦ want to discount the monthly reports to ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓪᓗ district education authorities by school ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖓ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᒃ administrators. That’s required. That should ᑲᔪᓯᔭᕆᐊᓕᒃ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ. continue.

We do believe that there is opportunity there for more authentic and informal reporting ᐅᑉᐱᕆᒐᑦᑎᒍ ᐱᕕᖃᖅᑐᕆᒐᑦᑎᒃ ᐱᓪᓚᑦᑖᕐᔫᒥᔪᒥᑦ between principals and district education ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖃᑦᑕᕋᔭᕐᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᑦ, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓪᓗ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᑦ, ᐊᔾᔨᒌᔾᔫᒥᔪᒥᑦ authorities on a more common basis. We do ᓇᓕᒧᔾᔫᒥᔪᐃᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ believe that district education authorities ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ, ᑕᑯᑦᓴᐅᔪᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑕ. should be a visible presence in our school and ᑕᖅᑭᑕᒫᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᐃᒪᓐᓇ that our principals should be in not just ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑦᓯᓯᒪᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᓕᐅᒍᓗᐊᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓂᑦ, monthly but regular communication with our ᖃᓄᐃᔨᐅᖅᑕᐅᔪᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓄ.. DEAs on events and programs that are ᐃᓱᒫᓗᒋᔭᐅᔪᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᓐᓂ, ᑖᓐᓇᓗ happening in the school, issues that are ᑐᓴᐅᒪᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᓇᓕᒧᑦᑐᒥᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑕᖅᑭᑕᒫᑦ happening in the school, and that ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖅ ᓯᓚᑖᓃᓪᓗᑎᒃ. communication should be regular and it should happen outside of the monthly reporting.

If a district education authority is only hearing ᑕᐃᒪ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ from a school once a month, it is an issue that ᐊᑕᐅᓯᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᑕᖅᑭᕐᒥ ᑐᓴᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ. the DEA has to work with the school principal ᑖᓐᓇᓖᓛᒃ ᐊᖅᑭᑦᓱᐃᖃᑎᖃᕆᐊᓕᒃ to have that informal reporting happening ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ more regularly. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖓᓄᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᐅᖃᑦᑕᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᓖᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Minister Joanasie. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Chairman. Just to clarify, we aren’t proposing ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑐᑭᓯᓇᖅᓯᑎᒐᕕᐅᒃ. to add additional reporting requirements. ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᓯᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᖏᑦᑐᖓ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᕐᒥᑦ. What we’re asking is the monthly reporting to ᐃᒪᓐᓇᓕ ᑭᓪᓕᓯᒋᐊᖅᐳᒍᑦ ᑕᖅᑭᑕᒫᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖅ

continue to happen. However, the quarterly ᑲᔪᓰᓐᓇᕐᓗᒍ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂᓕ ᑕᖅᑭᑦ ᐱᖓᓱᑦ ᑭᒃᑯᓕᒫᓂᑦ reports on inclusive education would replace ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓂᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓇᖐᒐᔭᖅᑐᑦ ᑎᓴᒪᓂᑦ four of those reports that would have ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᐅᔪᓂᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑕᖅᑭᑕᒫᑦ happened on a monthly basis, if that’s ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᖅᑎᒡᓗᒋᑦ, agreeable. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒋᔪᓐᓇᕈᔅᓯᐅᒃ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister. (interpretation ends) I think we will ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ, ᒥᓂᔅᑕ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᑖᓐᓇ flag that as yet another issue to discuss further ᕿᑎᖅᑰᒥ ᐅᓪᓛᒃᑯᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᒃᑲᓂᕐᓂᐊᕐᓗᑎᒍᑦ on Thursday morning because we did have ᑎᑎᕋᕐᓂᐊᕐᒥᔭᕗᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᓄᑦ some indications in your recent letter to the ᑎᑎᕋᕋᑖᓚᐅᖅᑕᓐᓂᑦ ᑕᒪᑐᒪ ᒥᒃᓵᓄᑦ, ᒫᓐᓇ Committee on that subject and I just don’t ᐱᓯᒪᖏᑲᓚᐅᕋᒃᑯ. have it in front of me right now.

Moving on. Mr. Qamaniq. This is 2.1. Mr. Qamaniq. ᑲᔪᓯᒋᐊᕐᓗᑕ, ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ. 2.1-ᖑᓕᖅᑐᖅ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ. Mr. Qamaniq: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My last question to the Nunavut Teachers ᖃᒪᓂᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Association: do you feel that the delivery of ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒐ, ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ universal early childhood education programs ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓄᑦ. ᐃᑉᐱᒍᓱᑉᐱᓰ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᓕᒫᒥ across Nunavut should be included under a ᐱᖃᓯᐅᑎᓯᒪᔭᕆᐊᖃᒪᖔᖅ, ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕆᐊᖅᓯᒪᔪᒥᑦ revised Education Act or should it be ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥ? ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ governed by separate legislation, such as the ᐊᐅᓚᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᐸ ᓯᓚᑖᓅᖓᔪᑦ ᐊᓯᖏᑎᒍᑦ revised Child Day Care Act? Thank you, Mr. ᒪᓕᒐᖅᑎᒍᑦ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐸᐃᕆᕕᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅᑎᒍᑦ? Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy. ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᐅᒃᐱᕆᔭᕗᑦ. ᐄ, ᒫᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒦ We believe that what is currently written in ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᓂᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᖕᒪᒃᓴᓂᖅ Bill 25 on early childhood education is not ᓈᒻᒪᑦᑐᕆᖏᓇᑦᑎᒍ. ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ sufficient. If it’s going to be embedded in the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒦᓐᓂᐊᖅᐸᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ Education Act as written in Bill 25, it should ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒦᑦᑐᖅ ᐲᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᒃ be deleted from the Education Act and dealt ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥ ᐊᓯᐊᒍᑦ with in another Act. ᑲᒪᒋᔭᐅᖔᕐᓗᓂ.

We believe that early childhood education is ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᓂᖅ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᓱᕆᔭᕗᑦ. vital. It should be delivered universally across ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓕᒫᒥᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᓕᒫᒥ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᕋᓗᐊᕐᒪᑦ the territory in Inuktut as a public service ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᐱᔨᑦᑎᕋᕈᑕᐅᓗᓂ. ᐄ, ᑕᐃᒪ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ delivered by public service employees. We ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖏᓐᓂ ᐊᐅᓚᑕᐅᓗᓂ. ᑖᓐᓇ believe that scope is so large, vitally ᐊᖏᔪᒻᒪᕆᐅᓱᕆᒐᑦᑎᒍ ᐋᖅᑭᑦᓯᒪᓂᖓ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐅᓪᓗᓂ, important, but so large that it should not be ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᖏᔪᐊᓘᓂᖓᓄᑦ ᑲᒪᒋᔭᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᒃ. ᐃᒪᓐᓇ dealt with in a few points in the Education Act ᖃᔅᓰᓐᓇᑯᓗᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᖅᑎᒍᑦ whereas district education authorities would ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ. ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ

have that responsibility, but community A ᑕᒪᑐᒥᖓ ᑲᒪᒋᔭᖃᕋᔭᕐᒪᑕ. ᑕᐃᓐᓇᓕ ᓄᓇᓕᐅᑉ ᐅᓇ may have a very vibrant ECE program ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᐅᔪᒻᒪᕆᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ whereas community B has a limited space ᑖᓐᓇ ᐱᖓᔪᐊᑦ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ program, community C, the district education ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᓂᖃᖅᑰᔨᖏᓪᓗᓂ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᓈᒻᒪᖏᒻᒪᑦ authority has chosen not to have an ECE ᕿᑐᕐᖓᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᓄᓪᓗ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ. program. That’s not fair to our children and ᐅᒃᐱᕆᒐᑦᑎᒍ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᑦᑐᓕᒫᒥᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᓐᓂᑦ our parents across the territory. We believe ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᓂ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑑᕐᓗᓂ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ that it should be universally publicly funded, ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖏᓐᓂᑦ. delivered in Inuktut by public service employees.

That is, I would say, our vision. It would give a scope large enough that it should not be ᑖᓐᓇᓕ ᑕᕝᕙ ᑕᐅᑐᒐᕆᔭᕗᑦ, ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐊᖏᔪᐊᓘᓂᖓ dealt with specifically in the Education Act. ᑕᑯᓪᓗᒍ ᑕᕝᕘᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅᑎᒍᑦ Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. ᑲᒪᒋᔭᐅᖏᒃᑲᓗᐊᕐᓗᓂ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

>>Applause >>ᐸᑦᑕᑐᖅᑐᑦ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Moving on. Ms. Towtongie. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᑲᔪᕼᐃᓗᑕ. ᒥᔅ ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ.

Ms. Towtongie (interpretation): Thank you, ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Mr. Chairman, for recognizing me again. I ᐃᓕᑕᕆᒃᑲᓐᓂᕋᖕᒪ. ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᖃᕈᒪᔪᖓ. have one question I would like to ask. As ᑕᐅᑑᔭᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᒐᑦᑕ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᒍᑦ ᑕᒪᑯᐊ Inuit we have seen school principals who are ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓚᖏᑦ very productive, as you indicated, very good ᐱᓕᕆᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᕐᔪᐊᕌᓗᐃᑦ, ᐅᖃᖅᑲᐅᒐᕕᑦ ᐱᐅᔪᑦ school principals and who have been up here ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᖕᒥ ᓄᓇᕗᑦᒦᑦᑐᑦ in Nunavut for a very long time. They are a ᐊᑯᓂᒻᒪᕆᐊᓗᒃ. ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒐ, ᐊᑯᓂᐊᓗᒃ part of the school team and though they have ᓄᓇᕗᑦᒦᒃᖢᑎᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑕᐅᓪᓗᑎᒃ been here for a very long time, they never ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖑᓪᓗᑎᒃ. ᑕᐅᑑᔭᖃᑦᑕᕋᑦᑕ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ learned how to speak our language. They ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒍᓐᓇᖏᑦᑐᑦ, ᑐᑭᓯᐊᔪᑦ. ᐅᕙᒍᖅᑲᐃ might understand, but they don’t speak it or ᖃᓐᖑᓵᕆᓂᑦᑎᓄᑦ ᓂᑉᓕᕆᐊᕌᖓᑕ ᐱᔾᔪᑕᐅᕕᑖ? maybe we make fun of the way they speak Inuktitut.

You indicated here that “With a significant ᐅᕙᓂ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᒥ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᒐᕕᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᒎᖅ infusion of funding, the continued reformation ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖅᑖᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᐸᑕ ᑖᓐᓇ of the NTEP program, a concerted effort to ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᖅ, ᓄᓇᕗᑦᒧᑦ recruit Inuit into the education profession, and ᐃᓕᓲᓯᓐᖑᖅᓴᓂᕐᒧᑦ, ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒃᓴᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ new supportive programs put in place for ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓂᕐᒥ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊᒎᖅ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒧᑦ teachers in their first five years of work in a ᐃᓕᓲᓯᓐᖑᕐᓗᑎᒃ. ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᖅᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᕈᓐᓇᖅᐸᑕ Nunavut school, bilingual education can be ᐃᓕᓲᓰᑦ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᕐᒥ ᐅᑭᐅᓂᑦ ᑕᓪᓕᒪᐅᔪᓂᑦ. achieved. Educational stakeholders like the ᑖᓐᓇᒎᖅ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᓪᓗ ᖃᑉᓗᓈᑎᑐᓪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ NTA want to work together with the ᓴᖅᑭᑦᑎᐊᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᖅ. ᐱᒥᖏᒡᒎᖅ ᐃᓕᓲᓰᑦ Government of Nunavut as partners in ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᖃᑦᑎᐊᕈᒪᖕᒪᑕ producing and supporting bilingual Inuit ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᓐᓂᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᕐᓗᑎᒃ. ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᓴᖅᑭᒃᑲᓐᓂᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᖃᑉᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ

educators at a much more substantial rate.” ᐃᓕᓲᓰᑦ ᓱᑲᓂᖅᓴᕐᒥᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᑦᑐᓗᑦᑖᖑᒍᒪᔪᒍᑦ. We would all like to see that.

Now my question is: is it possible for long- time school principals in Nunavut to be taught ᒫᓐᓇᓕ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒐ, ᓲᕐᓕ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᑯᓂ to speak the Inuktitut language? What is ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖑᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ, preventing them from being taught to speak ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖏᓛᑦ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᕆᐅᕐᓂᕐᒥᑦ? Inuktitut? It was said that they will try to train ᓄᓇᕗᑦᒥᐅᑕᐅᒥᒻᒪᑕ. ᓱᓇᐃᓐᓇ ᐱᔾᔪᑕᐅᔪᖅ? ᐃᓄᐃᑦ Inuit to become teachers. Those who have ᐃᓕᓲᓯᓐᖑᖅᑎᑕᐅᓇᓱᓐᓂᐊᑐᒡᒎᖅ. ᒧᒥᑦᑎᓪᓗᒍ. resided in our communities for a long time ᓄᓇᑦᑎᓃᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᑯᓂ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᑦᑎᓐᓂᑦᑕᐅᖅ should also become proficient in our ᐊᔪᕈᓐᓃᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᑦ, ᓇᐅᒃᑯᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᓐᓇᖅᐸ ᑖᓐᓇ? language. Where can it be improved? Thank ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ, ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒐ. you, Mr. Chairman. That’s my last question.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the question. There are barriers ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ in place for our school administrators not ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᒐᓐᓂ. ᐊᐳᖅᑕᐅᑎᓂᑦ originally from Nunavut in terms of learning ᐱᑕᖃᐅᒻᒪᑦ. ᐊᒡᓚᕕᒻᒥ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥᐅᑕᐅᖏᑦᑐᑦ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑑᕈᓐᓇᐃᓕᐅᖅᑲᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ Inuktitut. There is funding there through the ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓕᐅᒐᓗᐊᖅ. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑏᑦ professional development fund whereas our ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖁᑎᖏᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᖢᒋᑦ. ᑕᐃᒃᑯᓇᖓᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓂᑦ teachers and our school administrators can ᑎᒍᓯᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑑᕆᐅᖅᓴᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑎᒃ. access funds to learn Inuktut. That can be ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓕᖓᓗᓂᓗ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐋᖅᑭᔅᓯᒪᓂᖓ. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᑦ done in two ways. In the past we’ve had ᐅᓄᖅᑐᓂᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖕᒥᐅᑕᓂᒃ groups of teachers in some communities ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᐃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐱᕈᕕᒃ ᐊᖅᑯᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ organize Inuktut courses with Pirurvik and the ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ professional development fund has paid for ᑲᔪᓯᑦᑎᐊᖅᓯᒪᒡᓗᓂ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ. ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖅᑕᖃᕐᒥᔪᖅ those courses and we have seen success with ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᖏᑦᑕ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖁᑎᖏᑦ that. As well, there is funding in place through ᐊᑐᖅᖢᒋᑦ. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓂᑦ ᑎᒍᓯᔪᓐᓇᖅᖢᑎᒃ the professional development fund for ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕋᒥᑦ. ᐊᑕᐅᓯᖅ individual school administrators for teachers ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᓂ. where they can access money to be taught ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖅᑖᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ Inuktut at a one-on-one level from a ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᔅᓴᖏᑕ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖏᓐᓂ ᐊᑐᕋᔭᒃᖢᒋᑦ. community member where the salary for that community member or the amount they can receive for that will be covered by the professional development fund.

What we hear from our school administrators and our teachers is the difficulty is the time to ᐊᒡᓚᕝᕕᒻᒥ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖏᓪᓗ learn Inuktut is not being provided for by the ᑐᓴᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᒍᑦ ᐱᕕᖃᖏᓗᐊᕐᓂᕉᖅ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ employer during the workday whereas some ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᓐᓇᐃᓪᓕᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ departments, we do see, there is Inuktut ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᕐᓇᐅᑉ ᐅᓪᓗᖏᓐᓂ. language training, for example, in the ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᔪᖅᑕᓕᐅᒐᓗᐊᖅ

afternoon and a workday. We understand that ᐅᓐᓄᒃᓴᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑐᑭᓯᓪᓗᑕ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑐᖁᑎᖃᐅᕋᑦᑕ we have students in our classrooms and that ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᖁᑎᖃᐅᕋᑦᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒥ. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ might not be a viable option for teachers. ᐱᕕᑭᑦᑑᓗᐊᒧᑦ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᖏᓐᓂᓗ There is a professional development week in ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᓐᓃᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᑕ. ᐃᓛᓐᓃᒃᑯᐊ ᐋᒃᑑᕝᕙᒥ most communities in February each year, in a ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᒥᑦ couple of communities it’s in October, but ᐃᓕᑦᑐᓐᓇᖏᑦᑐᒍᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᖃᕐᕋᖅ I’m confident in saying that you cannot learn ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. a language one week a year. That time is not sufficient to become proficient in Inuktut.

We need to come up with a way where…and the increased workload, I should mention as well, on principals and teachers. We have ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᖃᓄᖅᑑᕈᑎᒋᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑕᕗᑦ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ principals and teachers who would like to ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᑦ ᐅᓄᖅᓯᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᑦ work on Inuktut courses in the evenings, but ᐅᖁᒪᐃᓪᓕᕙᓪᓕᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ, ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ with the increased workload our teachers have ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᒻᒥ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᑦ ᐅᓄᒃᑯᑦ been facing in recent years, their evenings are ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᓐᓇᖅᑑᒐᓗᐊᑦ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ taken up with lesson planning for their ᐅᓐᓅᓕᕋᓗᐊᖅᑎᒡᓗᒍ ᐱᓇᐊᓱᐊᕈᓯᐅᓪᓗ ᓄᖑᐊᓂ students, the majority of their weekends are ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᓕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓃᒡᓗ taken up with lesson planning for their ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᕆᐊᖃᖅᖢᑎᒃ. ᐄ, students. There is not a whole lot of ᐱᕕᖃᖅᑎᑦᑐᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓᓐᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ downtime. We need to come up with a system ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᐃᕖᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᖓᐅᑎᓖᑦ. where there can be time provided for Inuktut ᐄ, ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᖃᓪᓚᕆᒐᓱᒋᒐᓗᐊᖅᑕᕗᑦ language instruction for our English-speaking ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. and French-speaking teachers so that they can become more proficient in Inuktut because we do believe that’s vitally important. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. I have ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᑕᐃᒪ ᐊᔪᖅᕼᐊᕈᓐᓃᕋᒪ. ᑕᐃᒪᓗ no more names on my list. We are falling ᑲᑎᒪᓐᓂᕆᔭᕗᑦ ᑭᖑᕙᕼᐃᔾᑐᕐᔫᓕᖅᖢᓂᓗ ᐱᒐᑉᑕ. ᒥᔅᑕ behind in our meeting. Mr. Lightstone, would ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ ᐊᑕᐅᕼᐃᕐᒥᑦ ᐊᐱᕆᕼᐅᐊᖅᐲᑦ? ᒥᔅᑕ you like to ask one question? Mr. Lightstone. ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My last question is in relation to student ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ support teachers and specifically the ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔪᒪᔭᕋ. ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ ᖃᑦᓯᑦ amendments to the inclusive education ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᖏᑦ? portion of the Act. In the NTA’s opening ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᑦ ᒪᑐᐃᖅᓯᔾᔪᑎᖏᓐᓂ ᓴᓐᖏᔪᓪᓚᕆᒻᒥᑦ comments there was a very strong phrase that ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅᑕᕐᒥᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑐᖃᓚᐅᕐᒪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ, was used and the NTA stated that “…student ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑏᑦ support teachers would be stripped of most of ᐱᔭᒃᓴᖃᕈᓐᓃᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕᒎᖅ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ their responsibilities, which would fall on the ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓪᓚᕇᑦ ᐅᖁᒪᐃᓐᓂᖅᓴᓪᓚᕆᖕᓂᑦ already overworked classroom teachers.” ᑎᒍᓯᓂᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓂᑦ.

The fact that “Student support teachers

receive specialized training in developing and ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐋᖅᑭᔅᓱᐃᖃᑦᑕᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᓄᑦ implementing individual student support ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᐊᖅᑕᖏᑦᑕ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᖏᓐᓂᑦ plans” where the main teacher would not have ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᓯᒪᖏᒃᑲᓗᐊᖅᑎᒡᓗᒋᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪ these specialized capabilities and further, ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑏᑦ ᑕᐃᑯᐊᖑᔪᓐᓃᒥᑉᐸᑕ, removing this responsibility from student ᐱᔭᒃᓵᓗᖕᓂᑦ ᑳᒃᑲᓐᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᑎᒍᓯᓇᔭᖅᑐᑦ. support teachers would place a great increase in workload on those individual teachers.

I would like to ask the Minister: why is it that ᑕᐃᒻᓇ ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᔭᕋ, ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ it seems that student support teachers are ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᖏᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᔪᐊᖅᑎᒍᑦ being written out of the Education Act, and ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓐᓃᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᖏᑦ, ᑭᓱᒥᑦ what is the purpose of giving the main teacher ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᖅᖢᑎᒃ, ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓪᓗᐊᑕᖅ the responsibility or the lead role in ᓯᕗᒃᑲᑕᖅᑎᒋᔭᐅᔪᕐᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᓂᑦ developing student support plans as opposed ᐋᖅᑭᑦᓱᐃᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᓕᖅᐸᑦ to student support teachers? Thank you, Mr. ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᔪᖅᑕᖃᕆᐊᖃᖅᑎᒡᓗᒍ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᒥᑦ? Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Minister Joanasie. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ):ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Chairman. Thanks for the question. We want ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᒐᖕᓂ. to continue to have student support teachers in ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᖏᓐᓂᑦ place and they would still be required to ᐱᑕᖃᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ develop individual student support plans and ᐋᖅᑭᑦᓱᐃᖃᑦᑕᖅᓂᐊᖅᖢᑎᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ they would provide the support to the main ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᐊᖅᑕᖏᑦᑕ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᖏᓐᓂᑦ, teacher. However, we want to have the main ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒥᒡᓗ ᐃᑲᔪᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎᒃ. ᑐᒃᓯᕋᐅᑎᑎᒍᑦ teacher develop the ISSPs to ensure the ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓪᓗᐊᑕᖅ ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᐋᖅᑭᑦᓱᐃᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᓂ ISP- teacher who spends the most time with the ᓂᑦ. ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᒥᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ students in the classroom takes ownership for ᐸᕐᓇᐅᓯᐅᕐᓗᓂ ᓇᔪᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᖅᐹᕆᒐᒥᐅᒃ. ᕼᐊᐅ developing, implementing, and evaluating ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᕆᓚᐅᖅᑕᖏᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᖅ. students’ progress. This is in line with the ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓪᓗᐊᑕᖅ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᖏᓐᓇᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ Hall report recommendation that was ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᖓᓐᓄᑦ. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ commissioned. The main teacher will ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᓖᒡᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖕᒥᓗ ᐃᓅᓯᓕᕆᔩᑦ continue to receive support from the school ᐊᓯᖏᓪᓗ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑎᒃᑯᐊᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᑕᕝᕗᖓ team and that ensures that principals, student ᖃᐅᔨᒪᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕ ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑐᓂᑦ support teachers, Ilinniarvimmi Inuusilirijiit, ᐱᔭᒃᓴᖅᑖᖅᑐᖅᑎᑕᐅᓯᒪᒻᒪᖔᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ and other classroom teachers that are ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᖏᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ. appointed to the school team are all aware of the specific roles with respect to ISSPs.

A directive on…I think I’ll stop at that for ᑕᕝᕗᖓᖃᐃ ᐃᓱᓕᓪᓗᒍ. ᐃᓗᓕᑯᓘᔭᒃᑲᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ now and dive into further details when I’m ᐱᑕᖃᓛᖅᑐᖅ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. before the Committee. Thank you.

Chairman: Your mic is still on. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᑐᓵᔭᐅᔾᔪᑏᑦ ᓱᓕ ᐃᑭᓐᖓᔪᖅ.

(interpretation) Thank you. (interpretation (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ, ends) Mr. Fanjoy, maybe if you would like to ᑖᓐᓇᖃᐃ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᕈᓐᓂ, ᑖᔅᓱᒪ ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ add to or respond to Mr. Lightstone’s ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᖅᑲᐅᔭᖓ. question, I think it would be… . We’re ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓪᓗᐊᑕᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᖓᑕ wrapping up your time here, so I would like to ᐱᔭᒃᓴᖅᑖᕆᓯᒪᔭᖏᑦ. ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ. give you that final opportunity in terms of the change between main teacher and student support teacher responsibilities. Mr. Fanjoy.

Mr. Fanjoy: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman. We are really concerned with the change of language proposed in Bill 25 concerning main ᕚᓐᔪᐃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐄ teachers and their responsibilities for ᐃᓱᒫᓗᑎᒋᓪᓚᕆᑦᑕᕗᓄᑯᐊ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅᑕᐃᑦ individual student support plans. We believe ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᓂ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᕐᓗᐊᑕᕐᓂ ᐱᓯᒪᔪᑦ that would severely overburden the classroom ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᓯᐊᕆᔭᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ. ᐃᓱᒪᖃᕋᑦᑕ ᑖᓐᓇ teacher who is already responsible for the ᐊᒃᓱᕈᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᐊᓕᕋᔭᖅᑐ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓪᓗᐊᑕᖓ implementation of the plan. They do consult ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑦᑎᕙᓪᓕᐊᓯᓐᓈᕐᓗᑎᐅᒻᒪᑕ. already in the program development of that plan with student support teachers, the school team and the parents.

To put that main responsibility onto a ᐅᖃᐅᔾᔭᐅᓯᒪᓕᖅᑐᖅ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ classroom teacher, and we will call them the ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑐᖁᑎᓖᓪᓗ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ ᖄᒃᑲᓐᓂᐊᒍᑦ main teacher, which is still cloudy on how ᐱᔭᒃᓴᖅᑖᖅᑎᑕᐅᑉᐸᑦ. ᓱᓕ ᓇᓗᓇᖅᑐᖅ that would work at the secondary school level ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓐᓂᖅᓴᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓂ where every student, depending on the ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᖃᑦᑕᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᖅ 5-6−ᖑᓲᖑᒻᒪᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ semester, might have five or six teachers who ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓪᓗᐊᑕᐅᓂᕋᖅᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ would be classified as the main teacher. It ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᖢᑎ ᐊᓪᓚᕕᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ says the school administrator would appoint ᖃᓄᖅ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᓱᒪᓕᐅᕈᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᖔᖅ. who the main teacher is. Well, how is that decision made? That’s cloudy.

We believe that we have specialized teachers in our schools, student support teachers who ᐱᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᓕᕆᔨᑕᖃᐅᕐᒥᒻᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ do receive that specialized training and do ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᒪᑯᓂᖓ ᐃᓕᒃᑐᓗᐊᖅᑐᓂ have a dedicated workspace, and a vast ᐃᓕᒃᑎᕇᑦᑐᓃᓪᓗ ᑲᒪᔨᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ majority as well of student support teachers ᐃᓕᓴᐃᖏᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂ ᐱᑕᖃᖃᑦᑕᓐᖏᒃᖢᑎ. do not have homeroom students. They do ᐋᖅᑭᓱᐃᔨᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᖢᑎᓪᓗ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᓂ have the time and the workspace in terms of ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓪᓗᐊᑕᖅ ᑕᐃᓐᓇ the development of those plans in consultation ᐅᖃᓪᓚᖃᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᑳᕐᓗᓂᐅᒃ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ with our classroom teachers. We believe that ᑕᐃᒪᐃᖏᓐᓇᖁᔭᕗᑦ. system should continue.

To further sideline student support teachers and put the majority of the burden upon the ᑕᐃᔅᓱᒧᖓ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᑐᐊᕐᒧᑦ classroom teacher, we believe, would have ᑲᒪᒋᔭᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᕋᓱᒋᓐᖏᓇᑦᑎᒃᑯᑦ

negative impacts not just for the teachers but ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᖃᑦᑎᐊᔮᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᒥ for the students in terms of the quality of the ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᓂᓪᓗ ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᖃᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑦ. ᐅᓄᖅᑐᓂᒃᑯᐊ plans and how they would be delivered. Many ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓪᓗᐊᑕᕆᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᖃᐅᕐᒪᑕ of our homeroom teachers have multiple ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᐊᑐᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂ ᐊᑐᓂᓗ. ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ students on individual support plans in their ᐃᓕᑦᑎᕇᑦᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᑦᑐᖅᑐᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ classrooms, and to place that responsibility for ᐸᕐᓇᐅᓯᐅᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᖢᑎ. ᑕᐃᔅᓱᒧᖓ each student in each classroom upon mainly ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓪᓗᐊᑕᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᓐᓂᖅᑯᑕᐅᑉᐸᑦ ᓲᕐᓗᓕ the classroom teacher would be a logistical ᐱᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᒥ ᓴᖅᑭᑦᑎᓇᔭᕐᒪᑦ. nightmare.

I believe the system that we have now where the majority of that work is done by the student support teacher on behalf of the ᐋᖅᑭᓱᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑏᑦ school team in consultation with the ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᖓᓐᓄᑦ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᖃᑎᒋᔭᐅᓚᐅᖅᑳᖅᖢᓂ homeroom teacher is a system that is working ᐃᓕᓴᔨᓪᓗᐊᑕᖓ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. and it should continue. Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation) Thank you. (interpretation ends) Thank you. With that, we are wrapping up your time here with us, and I ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑖᓐᓇᐅᖃᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᓱᓕᑦᑎᕙᓪᓕᐊᓕᕋᑦᑕ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ apologize we don’t have time for closing ᒪᒥᐊᒃᖢᖓ ᒪᑐᔾᔪᑎᓄᑦ ᐱᕕᖃᓐᖏᓇᑦᑕ. ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ comments at this point, but on behalf of the ᑭᒡᒐᑐᖅᖢᒋᑦ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᖅᐳᕈᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᓚᐅᕋᔅᓯ ᐅᕙᑦᑎᓐᓄ Committee, thank you very much for your ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑎ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᕐᔪᐊᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ written submission and thank you to all your ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᒪᑯᐊᓗ members for their hard work on behalf of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒦᖏᓐᓃᔭᐅᖅᖢᓯ ᖃᐅᑕᒫᑦᑎᐊᖅ. Nunavut that they do in the trenches every ᖃᐅᔨᒪᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐊᖏᖅᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᖅᖢᑎ day in the schools. I think we all understand ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ the level of commitment and hard work that ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓂ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ. goes into being a teacher or being a school staff, so thank you very much to them.

>>Applause >>ᐸᑦᑕᑐᖅᑐᑦ

And the Committee’s work will continue. After a 10-minute break, we will hear from ᑲᔪᓯᓂᐊᖅᐳᒍᑦ 10 ᒥᓂᔅᓯᒥᒃ ᓄᖅᑲᖓᓚᐅᕐᓗᑕ the Gjoa Haven DEA. Jack Ameralik is here ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᔮᒃ representing that organization. (interpretation) ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ ᑕᕝᕙᓃᓐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑦ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) We will take a short break and come back in ᓄᖅᑲᖓᓚᐅᑲᓪᓗᑕ ᐅᕙᑦᓯᐊᕈ 10 ᒥᓂᔅᓯᒥᒃ 10 minutes. Thank you. ᐅᑎᕆᐊᕐᓂᐊᕋᑦᑕ. ᒪ’ᓇ.

>>Committee recessed at 14:48 and resumed >>ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ ᓄᖅᑲᖓᑲᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ 14:48ᒥ at 15:11 ᑲᔪᓯᓪᓗᑎᓪᓗ 15:11ᒥ

Chairman (interpretation): We are back for the Standing Committee on Legislation’s ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᑕᐃᒪ ᐅᑎᖅᕼᐃᒪᓕᕐᒥᔪᒍᑦ. ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐅᖏᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᓕᕆᓂᐅᑉ ᒥᔅᓵᓄᑦ,

hearing on Bill 25. We heard from the ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᒥᔅᓵᓄᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᖃᖃᑦᑕᑎᓪᓗᑕ, ᑕᐃᒪ Nunavut Teachers Association. Now we are ᑐᕼᐊᕐᕕᒋᐊᓂᓚᐅᕋᑦᑎᒍ ᐅᑯᐊ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ going to hear from the Gjoa Haven District ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᔩ ᑎᒥᖁᑎᒋᔭᖓᑦ, ᐃᓛᒃ Education Authority. This person is from ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔪᓂᑦ ᑐᕼᐊᕐᕕᖃᓚᐅᕋᑦᑕ, ᑕᐃᒪ ᒫᓐᓇ Gjoa Haven and was invited to come to ᐅᖅᕼᐅᖅᑑᑉ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᐊᓛᒃᑯᖏᓐᓂᒃ Iqaluit. I would first like to welcome Jack ᑐᕼᐊᕐᕕᖃᕐᓂᐊᓕᕋᑦᑕ. ᐅᓇ ᐅᖅᕼᐅᖅᑑᒥᑦ ᑕᒪᐅᖓ Ameralik. He is the (interpretation ends) vice- ᐃᖃᓗᓐᓄᑦ ᑎᑭᑎᑕᐅᕼᐃᒪᔪᖅ ᑐᓐᖓᕼᐅᖁᑉᓗᒍ, chair of the Gjoa Haven DEA. (interpretation) ᕼᐃᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥ ᔮᒃ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᐅᑉ Please feel welcome in the Legislative ᑐᒡᓕᐊ, (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᑐᓐᖓᕼᐅᒋᑦ ᑕᕝᕗᖓ Assembly. You may begin, Mr. Ameralik. ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᕐᕕᒻᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑑᓪᓗᐊᓕᖅᐳᑎᑦ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ. Mr. Ameralik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Jack Ameralik. I am from ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ: ᖁᐊᓇᖅᑯᑎᑦ ᐃᒃᕼᐃᕙᐅᑕᖅ. ᔮᒃ the Gjoa Haven District Education Authority. ᐊᒥᕋᓕᐅᕗᖓ ᐅᖅᕼᐅᖅᑑᒦᓐᖔᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᖓ ᑕᒡᒐ I thank you for inviting me to come and speak ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂᑦ ᐅᖅᕼᐅᖅᑑᒥ. ᖁᔭᓕᕗᖓ on behalf of the local DEA. I apologize that ᑕᒪᐅᖓ ᐅᖃᕆᐊᖅᑐᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᕋᒪ our chairperson was not able to come here due ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓃᓐᖔᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᖓ. to other responsibilities with the water board. ᒪᒥᐊᓇᐅᒐᓗᐊᖅ, ᒪᒥᐊᒃᑲᓗᐊᖅᑯᖓ ᐃᒃᕼᐃᕙᐅᑕᖅᐳᑦ ᖃᐃᔪᓐᓇᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᕐᒥᒐᒥᑦᑕᐅᖅ I will present our submission as the local ᐃᒪᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ. district education authority in English. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᖃᓕᒫᕐᓂᐊᕋᒃᑭᑦ ᐃᕼᐅᒪᒋᔭᒃᑯᑦ (interpretation ends) ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᒪᓂᐊᕋᒪ

(ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) Response to Bill 25, An Act to Amend the

Education Act and the Inuit Language ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑏᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒧᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ Protection Act ᐊᓯᔾᔩᔾᔪᑕᐅᒐᓱᑦᑐᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓᓂᑦ ᓴᐳᔾᔨᓂᕐᒥᑦ The Gjoa Haven District Education Authority ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᒃ thanks you for the opportunity to comment on Bill 25, An Act to Amend the Education Act ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ and the Inuit Language Protection Act. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᖅᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᕕᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᒻᒪᑕ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒥᑦ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᓯᔾᔩᔾᔪᑎᐅᒐᓱᑦᑐᖅ Our DEA just reconvened after being on leave ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ for the summer break and therefore has had ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓᓂᑦ ᓴᐳᔾᔪᒍᑎᐅᔪᒥᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᑦ. limited time to review the aforementioned document in great detail. That said, we wish ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖁᑎᕗᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᒃᑲᓐᓂᓚᐅᕐᖓᑕ ᐊᐅᔭᒥ to offer the following comments for ᓄᖅᑲᖓᑲᐃᓐᓇᓚᐅᖅᑐᑎᑦ, ᑕᐃᒫᓪᓗ consideration by the Standing Committee and ᕿᒥᕐᕈᕕᖃᕈᓐᓇᑎᐊᖅᓯᒪᓐᖏᒻᒪᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ Members of the Legislative Assembly, many ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᕐᓂᑦ ᐃᓗᓕᓕᒫᖏᓐᓂᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᓚᐅᖅᑐᖓ of which were included in our April 19, 2017 ᐅᑯᓂᖓ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᔅᓴᑎᓐᓂᑦ ᑐᓴᖅᑕᐅᖁᔨᒐᑦᑕ submission to the then Chairman, Tom ᐃᓱᒪᔅᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᒋᔭᐅᓂᐊᕐᖓᑕ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᓄᑦ Sammurtok, in regard to Bill 37 amendments ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎᐅᔪᓄᓪᓗ. ᐊᒥᓱᑲᓪᓚᐃᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ to the Nunavut Education Act. ᐃᓚᓕᐅᑎᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔭᕗᑦ ᐊᐃᐳᕉᓪ 19, 2017-ᖑᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᕆᔪᔭᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᑕᐃᔅᓱᒪᓂ ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᐅᔪᔪᒧᑦ ᑖᒻ ᓴᒻᒪᖅᑑᖅᒧᑦ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 37 ᐊᓯᔾᔩᒍᑎᐅᒐᓱᔪᔪᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᑦ, ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᑦ.

Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᑦ

ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᖃᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᑦ We remain concerned about the loss of IQ not ᐊᓯᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᒻᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᑦᑎᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓅᓯᑦᑎᓐᓂᑦ. only in our schools but in our society. ᐲᖅᓯᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖅ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᓐᓂᑦ Removing references to IQ puts our culture ᑕᐃᓯᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐅᓗᕆᐊᓇᖅᑐᒨᖅᑎᑦᑎᕗ and heritage at greater risk of being lost. We ᐊᓯᐅᓂᐅᓴᒍᓐᓇᑎᑦᑎᕗᖅ ᐊᒻᒪ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ also note that IQ is being proposed to be ᐱᑭᓪᓕᒋᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᐅᓴᒻᒪᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᑦ diminished to the speaking of Inuktut and ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖏᓐᓄᑐᐊᖅ, ᐃᓛᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ only in regard to the Nunavut society. We do ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᑦᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᓴᓐᖐᓕᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᐅᓴᒻᒪᑦ not support the repeal of any references to IQ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒥᑦ, ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕗᑦ Where additional language is being proposed ᐱᐅᓯᕚᓪᓕᑎᑦᑎᒋᐊᖁᔭᐅᒐᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ to enhance existing language, the DEA is ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᕆᔾᔪᓯᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᓂᑦ. supportive of these revisions. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᔪᓐᖏᓐᓂᖏᑦ

DEA Capacity and Governance ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᔪᓐᖏᓐᓂᖏᑦ, ᐱᓕᕆᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᒃᑎᓂᖏᓪᓗ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᑎᑐᑦ. Bill 25 proposes to recommend a drastic shift ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᖅ 25 ᐊᓯᔾᔩᒐᓱᓪᓚᕆᒻᒪᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂᑦ to the mandate of the DEAs’ authority to ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓴᓐᖏᓂᕆᖃᑦᑕᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᑦ represent and respond to the individual needs ᓱᒋᐊᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᕆᕙᑦᑕᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖏᓐᓂᑦ. of the communities. A clear example is the ᐆᑦᑑᑎᔅᓴᐅᔪᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑐᒃᓯᕌᖑᔪᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒥ proposal to set school calendars as directed by ᐅᓪᓗᖅᓯᐅᑎᖏᓐᓂᑦ, ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒧᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑕᐅᓕᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ. the Minister. The DEAs have voiced their ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑕ concerns about standardization and ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒧᑦ centralization of authorities to the Minister’s ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑏᑦ ᑐᓂᐅᖅᑲᖅᑕᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ, office. ᐃᓕᐅᖅᑲᖅᑕᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ. ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓗᓐᓂᕋᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᔨᒌᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ Every community in Nunavut has differing ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᐅᑉ ᐊᓪᓚᕕᖓᓅᖅᑲᖅᑕᐅᓪᓗᑎᑦ. needs as they relate to the timing of cultural ᓄᓇᓕᓕᒫᑦᑎᐊᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂᑦ events and activities. For this and a number of ᐱᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖃᕐᖓᑕ ᖃᖓᒃᑯᑦ other reasons, the DEAs should maintain ᐱᖅᑯᓯᓕᕆᖃᑦᑕᕈᒪᒻᒪᖔᑕ, ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑎᐊᓲᖑᒻᒪᑕ. control over the establishment of annual ᑖᓐᓇ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᐊᓯᖏᓪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ school calendars, bearing in mind that the ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᒍᓐᓇᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᒫᑦ objectives of the Act as well as needs of the ᐅᓪᓗᖅᓯᑎᒋᓂᐊᖅᑕᖓᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᐅᑉ, ᐃᓱᒪᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ students and staff are being met. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑐᕌᒐᕆᒐᓱᐊᖅᑕᖏᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᐅᑉ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᓪᓗ ᐱᒋᐊᓕᖏᑦ. The DEAs over the years have consistently sought increase in resources to implement ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ DEA authorities. The coalition has researched ᐊᖏᓪᓕᒋᐊᖁᔨᒐᓱᐊᖏᓐᓇᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᑎᔅᓴᓂᑦ, and distributed information about DEA ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑦᑎᒍᑎᔅᓴᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ authorities in Nunavut. For example, the ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᖏᓐᓂᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔩᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ coalition found that since 2008, DEAs’ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ responsibilities increased by 43 percent, but ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᑎᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ, ᐆᑦᑑᑎᒋᓗᒍ DEA operating budgets did not increase. ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔩᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᖓᓂᑦ 2008-ᒥᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐱᔭᔅᓴᖏᑦ 43 ᐳᓴᓐ ᐊᖏᓪᓕᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖏᑦ ᐊᖏᓪᓕᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᒐᑎᒃ.

Hiring and Staffing ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖅ

Our review of Bill 25 did not find reference to ᑕᑯᓐᓈᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25, any recommended changes with respect to the ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᖅᓯᒪᓐᖏᑎᐊᖅᑑᔮᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᓯᔾᔩᒐᓱᓐᓂᕐᒥᑦ, hiring and staffing of principals or vice- ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᕐᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕖᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᓐᓂᑦ, principals. The DEA wishes to reiterate the ᑐᖏᓕᖏᓐᓂᓪᓗ. ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᐅᖃᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᔪᑦ position as stated on April 19, 2017, which ᐅᖃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔭᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᐃᐳᕉᓪ 19-ᒥᑦ 2017- was in regard to hiring and staffing of ᖑᑎᓪᓗᒍ, ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᖓᔪᔪᖅ ᐱᓪᓗᒋᑦ principals and vice-principals. ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᖅᑖᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᓂᑦ ᑐᖏᓕᐅᔪᓂᓪᓗ.

The DEAs are concerned with the reduced ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᖃᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᒥᑭᓪᓕᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ ability of the DEAs to be involved, especially ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑕ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᕕᒋᕙᑦᑕᖏᓐᓂᑦ, since the DEA members will know their ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ community needs better than the staffing ᐱᒋᐊᓕᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒻᒪᑕ, ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊᓗ panels that don’t live in our communities. ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᖅᑖᑎᑦᑎᔨᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᐅᕙᒍ ᓄᓇᖓᒥᐅᑕᐅᒐᑎᒃ. Early Childhood Education ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᓐᖓᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᖅ There are… . ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᓐᖓᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᖅ.... Chairman: Mr. Ameralik, thank you for ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ, ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. going through some of your submission. The ᐃᓚᖓ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕆᕋᑖᕋᕕᐅᒃ. ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓯᒪᒻᒪᑕ Committee has reviewed your submission in ᐃᕝᕕ ᑐᓂᓯᒪᔭᖏᓐᓂᑦ, ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᓂᓕᒫᖏᓐᓂᑦ detail. Is there anything within the submission ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᓴᖅᑭᔮᖅᑎᑦᑎᓗᐊᓐᖑᐊᕈᒪᕖᑦ ᐃᕝᕕ that you would like to highlight or add a ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔭᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐃᓚᒋᐊᖅᓯᒍᒪᕕᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ? ᑕᐃᒫᒃ comment to? I’ll give you that opportunity ᐱᕕᖃᖅᑎᓐᖑᓱᒃᑲᒃᑭᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ. right now. Mr. Ameralik.

Mr. Ameralik: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑕᕝᕙ you can see, you all have the paper. I don’t ᐱᓯᒪᒐᔅᓯᐅᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔭᕗᑦ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᑦ really have anything to add onto the ᐃᓚᒋᐊᕈᑎᔅᓴᖃᓗᐊᓐᖏᑦᑐᖓ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑐᓂᓯᒪᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂᑦ submission we put in, but I can try to answer ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᑦ. ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᔅᓯᓐᓂᑦ questions that you might have. ᑭᐅᒐᓱᐊᕈᓐᓇᕋᓗᐊᖅᑐᖓ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᔅᓴᖃᕐᓂᕈᔅᓯ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Okay, yes, there are ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) Members with questions and we will go to ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᔅᓴᖃᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᐃᓄᑯᐊ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑏᑦ, ᒫᓐᓇ them now. (interpretation) Going first is, I ᑕᕝᕗᓐᖓᑲᐃᓐᓇᓕᖅᑕ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) believe, your fellow resident of Gjoa Haven, ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐸᐅᓂᐊᖅᖢᓂ Mr. Akoak. ᐅᖅᕼᐅᖅᑑᕐᒥᐅᑕᐅᖃᑎᒋᖅᑰᒃᑲᑦ, ᒥᔅᑕ ᐋᖁᐊᖅ.

Mr. Akoak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wanted to make a comment here. The person who is sitting in front of us is ᐋᖁᐊᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. from Gjoa Haven and I wanted to state my ᐅᖃᐅᓯᔅᓴᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᖑᓇ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑕᒫᓂ ᐃᒃᕼᐃᕙᔪᖅ pride in that fact. He will be sitting there by ᐅᖅᕼᐅᖅᑑᕐᒥᐅᑕᖅ ᐅᐱᒋᔪᒪᓪᓗᒍ, ᑕᒫᓂ

himself and answer questions. I wanted to ᐊᐃᖃᓐᖏᓪᓗᓂ ᑖᕙᓂ ᐊᐱᖅᕼᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂᓗ, voice my pride and gratitude for his ᐅᐱᒋᔪᒪᕼᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᒍ ᖁᔭᒋᓪᓗᒍᓗ ᑕᒪᐅᓐᖓᕈᓐᓇᕐᒪᑦ. commitment as he had to travel here. Thank ᖁᐊᓇᖅᑯᑎᑦ ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. you, Mr. Chairman.

>>Applause >>ᐸᑦᑕᑐᖅᑐᑦ

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ. Towtongie.

Ms. Towtongie (interpretation): Thank you, ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᒪᕐᕈᓗᐊᓐᓂ Mr. Chairman. I have two questions. In your ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕈᒪᓪᓗᖓ ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᓪᓗᖓ ᑖᓐᓇ submission of September 5, 2019 it clearly ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔭᓯ ᓯᑎᐱᕆ 5, 2019 explains your problems and concerns in ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᕐᒪᑦ ᐃᓱᐊᕆᓐᖏᑕᔅᓯᓐᓂᑦ, regard to the proposed Bill 25 and also the ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓗᒋᔭᔅᓯᓐᓂᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ proposed amendments to the current ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᐊᒻᒪ Education Act, especially with regard to the ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᕆᓂᐊᖅᑕᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ. Inuit language. ᑖᓐᓇᖃᐃ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓗᐊᖅᓱᒍ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖓ. I would like to ask how our children and youth who are in school right now will be ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᓪᓗᖓ ᖃᓄᖅ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓄᑕᕋᕆᔭᖅᐳᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ, ᒪᒃᑯᒃᑐᐃᓪᓗ ᑖᔅᓱᒧᖓ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᑦᑎᓄᓪᓗ impacted by the legislation when it comes to ᐃᓕᖅᑯᓯᑦᑎᓄᓪᓗ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒧᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᕐᓂᑦ our language and culture. In your view, how ᐊᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᓂᖃᕐᓂᐊᖅᐸᑦ ᐊᔪᕈᓐᓃᖅᐹᓪᓕᕐᓂᐊᖅᐹᑦ? will they be impacted? Will they become ᐅᕝᕙᓘᕝᕙ ᐊᔪᓕᒃᑲᓂᕐᓂᐊᖅᐸᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, more capable or not? Thank you, Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ. Ameralik.

Mr. Ameralik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) As the ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ: ᖁᐊᓇᖅᑯᑎᑦ ᐃᒃᕼᐃᕙᐅᑖᖅ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) DEA in Gjoa Haven, with the proposed ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖁᑎᕗᑦ ᐊᓯᐅᔨᓂᐊᖅᑐᐃᑦ, changes and amendments in Bill 25, we feel ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑲᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ that our students will lose a lot if they are 25, ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒧᑦ. ᐃᓱᒪᔪᒍᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ going to change the Education Act through ᒥᓂᑕᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᓴᓂᕌᓄᑦ Bill 25. We feel that the students will be left ᕿᒪᑦᑕᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᓂᐊᖅᑐᑦ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑏᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ out on curricula that are supposed to be taught ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓴᔭᐅᔭᕆᐊᓕᐅᒐᓗᐊᑦ ᐃᓚᖏᑦ in schools, but some will be left out and a lot ᐊᓪᓗᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᓂᐊᕐᖓᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᓪᓗ of students will be left out on those, we feel, if ᐊᓪᓗᐃᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᓂᐊᕐᖓᑕ. ᐃᓱᒪᔪᒍᑦ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᑕᐅᑉᐸᑦ they change the bill or make amendments to ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ. the Act.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. Towtongie. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ.

Ms. Towtongie (interpretation): Thank you, ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ ᐊᒻᒪ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ Mr. Chairman. I also thank you for ᑭᐅᒐᕕᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᖅᓴᐅᑎᔅᓴᕐᒥᑦ. ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ responding with something we can consider. ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔭᖏᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓯᒪᒻᒪᑕ The letter from Gjoa Haven mentions ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ amendments regarding Inuit ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖓ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂᓕ ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ 25 Qaujimajatuqangit, but Bill 25 has proposed ᓇᐃᓴᐅᑎᖃᖅᑐᖅ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ 25 ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ amendments to remove a number of ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖓᒎᖅ ᐃᓗᐃᒃᑐᕈᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᒍ references to Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit. They ᑖᔅᓱᒧᖓ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᓕᔭᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᖅ. would be put into the preamble of the Act.

Clause 18 of Bill 25 proposes to include a ᓇᓗᓇᐃᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅᓱᓂ ᓇᐃᓴᐅᑎᖃᖅᑐᒥᑦ 18 ᑖᓐᓇ definition of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᐊᕐᒪᒎᖅ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ responsibilities under section 122.1, which ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᔭᔅᓴᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐃᕐᕋᕕᖓᑕ states that Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit 122.1(7) ᐊᑕᐅᓯᖅ ᐅᖂᑕᓐᖑᐊᖅ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᖅ. responsibilities “refers to the responsibility to ᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᓕᓯᒪᔪᖅ, ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᑦ ensure that Inuit societal values and the ᐱᓕᕆᐊᔅᓴᐅᔪᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᒻᒪᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ principles and concepts of Inuit ᑎᒍᒥᐊᖅᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᖅᑯᓯᒥᓐᓄᑦ Qaujimajatuqangit are incorporated ᐃᑉᐱᒋᓯᒪᔭᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᓴᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᖃᓄᕐᓗ throughout, and fostered by, the public ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖓ ᐃᓗᒃᑑᓗᒍ ᑕᐱᕇᒃᑎᑦᑎᔪᖅ education system.” Bill 25 as a whole has ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᒥᑦ ᐃᓗᓕᒫᖓ Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit as its foundation. ᓇᐃᓴᐅᑎᖃᖅᑐᖅ 25 ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖓᓂᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᖃᖅᑐᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇᖃᐃ ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥᐅᑕᐃᑦ Would the Gjoa Haven DEA be supportive of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᑖᔅᓱᒥᖓ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᐃᓇᔭᖅᐸᑦ this proposed amendment? That is my final ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᒥᒃ? ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒐ. question. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ. Ameralik.

Mr. Ameralik: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Thank you for your question. The Gjoa Haven ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐊᐱᕆᒐᕕᑦ. ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ District Education Authority would be ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᒐᔭᖅᑐᑦ supportive if they can keep Inuit ᐃᒪᐃᓕᖓᓐᓂᖅᑲᑦ, ᐱᓯᒪᐃᓐᓇᕈᓐᓇᖅᑲᑕ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ Qaujimajatuqangit in the Education Act in ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᐅᑉ another area. As long as Inuit ᒪᓕᒐᖓᓃᓪᓗᓂ, ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ. ᑖᓐᓇ Qaujimajatuqangit are put into schools, we ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒨᖅᑲᖅᑕᐅᑉᐸᑕ are very supportive of that. ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᓪᓚᕆᒃᑲᔭᖅᑕᕗᑦ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᐅᓇ ᐅᖃᐅᕼᐃᖅ Minister Joanasie, would you like to address ᐊᐱᖅᑯᕼᐃᖅᕼᐊᕆᔭᐅᕌᓂᕼᐋᖅᑐᖅ the question that was just posed or respond to ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᔫᓪᓗᐊᖅᐱᐅᒃ, ᑭᐅᖃᑕᐅᔫᓪᓗᐊᖅᐱᐅᒃ ᖃᓄᖅ it? What would change if Bill 25 was ᐅᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᒪᓕᒃᖢᒍ ᕼᐅᓇᓪᓗᐊᕕᓐᓂ enacted? Minister Joanasie. ᐊᓯᔾᔩᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᐱᓐᖑᖅᑎᑕᐅᓐᓂᕈᓂ ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᕼᐊᖅ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. Hon. David Joanasie (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We want Inuit ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Qaujimajatuqangit to be the foundation of the ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖓ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᓪᓗᐊᑕᕆᔭᐅᖁᔭᕗᑦ

Act. We want the entire Act to be based on ᒪᓕᒐᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒧᑦ IQ. The way it is written right now, it looks ᑐᓐᖓᖁᓪᓗᒍ ᓲᕐᓗ, ᒫᓐᓇᐅᔪᖅ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᓂᖓ ᓲᕐᓗ like Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit is just in part of ᐃᓚᐃᓐᓇᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᑦ it, but we want it to apply to the whole Act ᐊᑐᖅᑑᔮᖅᑐᑎᑐᑦ ᐱᒻᒪᑦ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᓕᒫᖅ and be implemented. ᒪᓕᒐᕐᔪᐊᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᖓᖁᔭᕗᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒍ. In addition, we are requesting that curriculum ᑖᔅᓱᒪ ᖄᒃᑲᓐᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᕋᓗᐊᕐᒥᔪᒍᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ materials that are developed for whichever ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᔅᓴᓕᐊᕆᔭᐅᕙᑦᑐᑦ ᓇᓕᐊᓐᓂᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅ grade include Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓐᓂᓕᒻᒥᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ concepts and Inuit societal values. We want ᐃᓚᓕᐅᔾᔨᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᖁᓪᓗᑎᒍ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ them to be prominent in the curriculum ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᓪᓗ ᐱᒻᒪᕆᒋᔭᖏᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ materials. Every year we would request ᓴᖅᑭᔮᑦᑎᐊᖁᓪᓗᑎᒍ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᔅᓴᐃᑦ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ. information on how Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit ᑖᓐᓇᓗ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᕋᔭᖅᑐᒍᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᖃᓄᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ principles have been applied in schools and ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖓ the DEA coalition would include it in their ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓯᒪᒻᒪᖔᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ annual report. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔩᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᕆᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᓂᒋᑦ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Do ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Members have questions? Ms. Kamingoak. ᕼ ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᐊᐱᖅ ᐅᕈᐊᖅᑐᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ, ᒥᔅ ᖃᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ. Ms. Kamingoak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Welcome. On page 1 of your submission you ᖃᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ ᐊᒻᒪ addressed the issue of DEA capacity in ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᑦ. ᒪᑉᐱᒐᖓᓂᑦ 1 ᐃᓕᔅᓯ ᑐᓂᓯᓯᒪᔭᖏᓐᓂᑦ government and refer to the establishment of ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕐᖓᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑕ school calendars. Bill 25 proposes to establish ᐱᓕᕆᔨᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᐅᑉ three different school calendars for each of the ᐅᓪᓗᖅᓯᐅᑎᖓᓂᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ. ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᖅ three regions across Nunavut and further 25 ᐱᖓᓱᓂᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂᑦ ᐃᓛᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ proposes that DEAs select one of the three ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᐅᓴᒻᒪᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪ calendars for their region by March 31 of the ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐱᖓᓱᓂᑦ preceding year. In your view, would this ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ ᑕᕝᕙᓐᖓᑦ ᐱᖓᓱᓂᑦ ᓂᕈᐊᕈᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎᑦ approach offer adequate flexibility to the ᐊᕐᕌᒎᓂᐊᖅᑐᒥᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒎᓂᐊᖅᑐᒧᑦ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᓈᒻᒪᒃᑐᓂᑦ DEA to determine school calendars for the ᓇᓖᕌᕋᔅᓴᖃᖅᑎᑦᑎᒐᔭᖅᑳ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ schools in its district? Thank you, Mr. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᑦ Chairman. ᐅᓪᓗᖅᓯᐅᑎᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᓂᕈᐊᕋᔅᓴᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᓄᓇᖓᓄᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ.

Ameralik. ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐄᖑᒐᔭᖅᑐᒍᑦ, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐅᓪᓗᑕ Mr. Ameralik: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As ᐅᓪᓗᖅᓯᐅᑎᓕᕆᖃᑦᑕᓲᖑᒐᑦᑕ ᓄᓇᑦᑎᓐᓂ, ᓄᓇᕗ DEAs regarding the school calendar, we know ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒐᑦᑎᒍ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓱᒍᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑦᑕ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒐᑦᑕ our community and what we can do in schools ᐃᓕᓴᕕᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᓄᓇᓕᑦᑎᓄᓪᓗ within our community and use our community ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓲᖑᒻᒪᖔᖅ in our schools. As DEAs we are very ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒐᑦᑎᒍ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᕗᑦ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ supportive to finalize and approve the school ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐅᓪᓗᑕ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᓪᓚᕆᑦᑐᒍᑦ ᐱᔭᕇᖅᓯᓂᕐᒥᑦ year calendar within our community because ᐊᖏᖃᑦᑕᓂᕐᒥᓪᓗ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᐅᑉ we are the DEAs in our communities and we ᐅᓪᓗᖅᓯᐅᑎᒋᓂᐊᖅᑕᖓᓂᑦ ᓄᓇᑦᑕ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ

know what’s good for our communities. ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒐᑦᑕ ᑭᓱ ᐱᐅᒻᒪᖔᑦᑕ ᓄᓇᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᑐᕌᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᖃᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ. Kamingoak.

Ms. Kamingoak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᖃᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Does your DEA agree with the Department of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖁᑎᓯ ᐊᖏᖃᑎᖃᖅᑳ Education giving DEAs a select of three ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐱᖓᓱᓂᑦ calendars to choose from for their school or ᓂᕈᐊᕋᔅᓴᖃᖅᑎᑎᓪᓗᑎᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᖅᓯᐅᑎᔅᓴᓂᑦ do you feel that your DEAs should have ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒋᓂᐊᖅᑕᖓᓄᑦ? ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᕕ discretion on what type of calendar you guys ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓯ ᐃᓱᒪᖅᓱᕈᓐᓇᖁᕕᓯᐅᒃ would like to see? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑐᒥᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᖅᓯᐅᑎᖃᕈᒪᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Ameralik. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ.

Mr. Ameralik: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Yes, we DEAs would like to select our school ᐅᕙᒍᓪᓕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐅᓪᓗᑕ year calendar within our community instead ᓂᕈᐊᖃᑦᑕᕈᒪᔪᒍᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᖅᓯᐅᑎᒋᓂᐊᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᑦ of the Minister giving us because the Minister ᐃᓕᓴᕕᑦᑕ ᓄᓇᓕᑦᑎᓐᓂᑦ, ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒧᑦ ᑐᓂᓯᔭᐅᓐᖏᖔᕐᓗᑕ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒐᔭᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᑭᓱᓂᑦ may not know what is needed in our ᐱᒋᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᑦᑕ ᓄᓇᑦᑎᓐᓂ, ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ community. We as DEAs know what’s ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐅᓪᓗᑕ needed in our communities. I hope that ᑭᓱᑖᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᑦᑕ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓲᖑᒐᑦᑕ. answers your question. Thank you, Mr. ᑭᐅᒐᓗᐊᖅᑭᒋᖅᑲᐃ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᖃᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ. Kamingoak. ᖃᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ Ms. Kamingoak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᑭᐅᒐᕕᑦ. ᒪᑉᐱᒐᖓᓂᑦ 2- Thank you for your response. On page 2 of ᖓᓂᑦ ᑐᓂᓯᒪᔭᔅᓯᓐᓂ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᒥ, ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕐᖓᑦ your submission it expresses very strong ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓰᓪᓚᕆᒃᑲᔅᓯᒎᖅ support for early childhood education ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᕆᐊᓐᖓᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒥᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗᑦᑕᐅᖅ programs and provides a number of examples ᐆᑦᑑᑎᔅᓴᓂᑦ ᓴᖅᑮᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᑑᑎᖃᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ of the benefits of such programs. Can you ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓃᑦ. ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖃᕈᓐᓇᖅᑮᑦ describe what early childhood education ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᕆᐊᓐᖓᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ programs are currently provided in Gjoa ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᕆᐊᓐᖓᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ ᒫᓐᓇ? Haven? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ. Ameralik. ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Mr. Ameralik: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ ᐊᓈᓇᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᓱᕈᓯᓛᖁᑎᖃᖅᑐᒍᑦ Gjoa Haven we have Moms & Tots and also ᐊᓈᓇᐃᑦ ᕿᑐᓐᖓᖏᓪᓗ, ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ Aboriginal Head Start. Over the last five years ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᑐᒥᓂᕐᓄᑦ ᐸᐃᕆᕕᓕᕆᔾᔪᑏᑦ. ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓂᑦ ᑕᓪᓕᒪᓂᑦ ᐊᓂᒍᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᑦ

100

the hamlet has given the Aboriginal Head ᕼᐋᒻᒪᓚᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᓂᓯᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ Start to the DEA because they could no longer ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᑐᒥᓂᖅᑐᑎᒍᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖅᑖᕆᓯᒪᔭᒥᓐᓂᑦ give them space for classrooms. Our DEA has ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ. given them a classroom in the high school for ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᔅᓴᒥᑦ ᐱᕕᖃᕈᓐᓃᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑕ, the Aboriginal Head Start so we won’t lose ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐅᓪᓗᑕ our Aboriginal Head Start. We are very ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᒐᑦᑕ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᑐᒥᓂᕐᓄᑦ supportive of those early childhood programs ᑐᕌᖓᔪᓂᑦ ᐅᓪᓛᕈᕐᒥᑕᖅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᓂᕐᒧᑦ. in our community because they help with the ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᓪᓚᕆᑦᑕᕗᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ students to prepare them for elementary and ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᕆᐊᓐᖓᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᓄᓇᑦᑎᓐᓂ secondary school. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᑲᔪᖃᑦᑕᕐᖓᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓂᑦ, ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕈᖅᓴᐃᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᒥᑭᔫᑕᐅᓂᖅᐹᒥ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᓛᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᖁᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᒥᑦ Kamingoak. ᐃᓕᓴᓂᖓᓄᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᖃᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ. Ms. Kamingoak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the response. It has been ᖃᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ suggested that the Department of Education ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᑭᐅᒐᕕᑦ. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ deliver a universal early childhood education ᑕᐃᒪ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᒥᑦ program across all of Nunavut’s communities ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᕆᐊᓐᖓᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒥᑦ ᓴᖅᑮᑉᐸᑕ with early childhood educators as ᓄᓇᓕᓕᒫᕌᓗᓐᓂ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ. Government of Nunavut employees. If a ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᕆᐊᓐᖓᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖏᑦ Nunavut-wide program of this type was ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᐅᓗᑎ. ᓄᓇᕘᓕᒫᒧᑦ established, would you envision local district ᑐᕌᖓᔪᒥᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᒥ ᓴᖅᑮᔪᖃᖅᑲᑦ ᐃᕝᕕ education authorities playing a role in the ᑕᑯᓐᓇᓐᖑᐊᕋᔭᖅᑮᑦ ᓄᓇᔅᓯᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ administration or delivery of these programs? ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐱᖃᑕᐅᓗᑎᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᕆᐊᓐᖓᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᖅ, ᐃᓕᓴᑎᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᔭᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍᓘᓐᓃᑦ? Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Ameralik. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ.

Mr. Ameralik: Thank you. Can you clarify ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. that, please? Thank you. ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕆᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᑭᐅ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᕋᑖᖅᑕᐃᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. Kamingoak. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᖃᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ.

Ms. Kamingoak: Thank you. It was ᖃᒥᓐᖑᐊᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ ᑕᐃᒪ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓄᓇᕘᓕᒫᒧᑦ suggested that the Department of Education ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᕆᐊᓐᖓᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᓂᕐᒥᑦ deliver a universal early childhood education ᓴᖅᑮᖁᔭᐅᓪᓗᓂ ᓄᓇᕘᒥ ᓄᓇᓕᓕᒫᓂᑦ. program across all of Nunavut’s communities ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᕆᐊᓐᖓᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖏᑦ with early childhood educators as ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᐅᓗᑎ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ. ᓄᓇᕘᓕᒫᒥᓪᓕ Government of Nunavut employees. If a ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᒥ ᓴᖅᑭᖅᑕᐅᔪᖃᕐᓂᖅᑲᑦ, Nunavut-wide program of this type was ᑕᑯᓐᓇᓐᖑᐊᕋᔭᖅᑮᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᔅᓯᓐᓂ established, would you envision your local ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ district education authority playing a role in ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ the administration or delivery of this ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒋᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ

101

program? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᒥ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ. Ameralik.

Mr. Ameralik: Yes, we would be very ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᓪᓚᕆᒃᑲᔭᖅᑐᒍᑦ supportive of that if all of Nunavut would ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᒥ, ᓄᓇᕘᓕᒫᒦᒍᓐᓇᓂᖅᑲᑕ have these early childhood programs and we ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᕆᐊᓐᖓᖅᑐᓕᕆᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ would help other communities with whatever ᐃᑲᔪᕐᓂᖃᕋᔭᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᓯᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᓄᓇᑦᑎᓐᓂ. is needed to clarify how to get early childhood ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕆᐊᕐᓗᒍ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑕᐅᓗᓂ ᖃᓄᖅ programs in all of Nunavut. Thank you, Mr. ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᕋᔭᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᓄᓇᓕᓕᒫᓂᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Chairman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Maybe just to add to Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐊᒻᒪ Kamingoak’s questioning, for the early ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᕋᑖᖅᑕᖓᓄᑦ ᐃᓚᓯᒃᑲᓂᕐᓗᖓ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ childhood programs that are offered in Gjoa ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᓐᖏᓗᐊᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ Haven right now, in the DEA’s opinion or in ᐱᓕᕆᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᓈᒻᒪᒃᑐᒥᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ your experience, is there enough ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐅᑭᐅᓖᑦ 6 ᐊᑖᓂ programming being offered for early ᐱᔭᔅᓴᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᐸ? ᐃᓂᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᐹᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ childhood education or do they need more ᐊᒥᓲᓗᐊᒧᑦ ᐸᐃᕆᔨᔅᓴᖃᓐᖏᓗᐊᒧᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑑᓲᖑᕙ? ᓲᕐᓗ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᖅᐸᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ spaces? Are the programs full? Are there ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᖏᑉᐸᓘᓐᓃᑦ? ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ. parents who need child care that can’t find it?

Just in terms of the size of the program and the size of the community, (interpretation) I would like to know if they are adequate. Mr. Ameralik.

Mr. Ameralik (interpretation): Thank you, ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᓇᑯᕐᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Yes, the ᒫᓐᓇ ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ ᐃᒪᐃᑦᑑᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᒍᑦ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ programs in Gjoa Haven are the Aboriginal ᑐᒃᓯᕌᕆᔭᐅᓂᑯᑦ Head Start−ᓚᔭᐅᓲᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ Head Start and Moms & Tots. They give out ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐱᖃᑖ ᐊᓈᓇᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᕿᑐᓐᖓᖏᓪᓗ full programs and I’m not too sure if they ᑲᑎᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᑦ. ᒫᓐᓇ have the least programs in the Moms & Tots, ᑐᓂᐅᖅᑲᐃᓲᖑᒻᒥᒻᒪᑕᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᓲᕐᓗ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᑎᒎᓇ Head but they give out most of the programs in the Start−ᑯᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐊᓈᓇᐅᔪᑦ ᕿᑐᓐᖓᖏᓐᓄᓪᓗ, Aboriginal Head Start. We support all those, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐸᐃᕆᕕᖃᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ. ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐃᓚᖏᑦ but without the daycare centre in Gjoa Haven, ᐊᓐᓇᐃᕙᒻᒥᔪᒍᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᖅᐸᖏᒻᒪᑕ ᕿᑐᕐᖓᑕ we are losing some students who have ᐅᕕᒃᑲᐃᑦ, ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐊᒥᒐᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ children and can’t go to school. Those early ᑕᐃᒃᑯᑎᒎᓇᖔᖅ ᐅᐸᒍᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᖏᒻᒪᑕ ᐊᒻᒪᓗᑦᑕᐅᖅ childhood programs really do help in our ᒫᓐᓇ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᔅᓴᖃᓐᖏᓇᑦᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒃᑎᒍᑦ community. ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᓄᑦ.

I’m sorry I lost the question. ᐊᐱᕆᔭᐃᑦ ᓇᓗᒋᑲᐃᓐᓇᕋᒃᑯ. ᐊᐱᕆᔭᐅᑦᑎᐊᓚᐅᕐᒥ.

Chairman (interpretation): That’s fine. (interpretation ends) Thank you. You ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᓈᖕᒪᑦᑐᖅ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ

102

mentioned that there is no daycare right now. ᐸᐃᕆᕕᖃᓐᖏᑦᑑᖅ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ Head Start−ᑯᑐᐊᖅ Aside from the Head Start, there are no ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐱᔨᑦᓯᖅᑕᐅᕙᓐᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ daycare services being offered in Gjoa Haven, ᐸᐃᕆᔨᖃᕈᔪᓐᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ? if you could clarify that a bit or explain a little ᓇᓗᓇᐃᑦᑎᐊᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᕈᕕᐅᒃ, bit about that situation. Mr. Ameralik. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᑦᑎᐊᑲᓐᓂᕐᓗᒍ ᖃᓄᕐᓕ ᐸᐃᕆᔭᐅᓲᖑᕙᑦ ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐸᐃᕆᕕᖃᖅᐸᑦ? ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ. Mr. Ameralik: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, we don’t have a daycare centre in Gjoa Haven. It went bankrupt a few years back. ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᒫᓐᓇ They are trying to put it back into place, but I ᐸᐃᕆᕕᖃᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ, don’t know what’s going on with that in our ᑮᓇᐅᔭᐃᕈᑎᓯᒪᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ ᑲᑕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ, community. I believe that they are trying to ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖅᐸᒃᑭᐊᖅ ᒫᓐᓇ ᓄᓇᓕᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᖃᓄᖅ get a committee going there on a daycare ᐊᐅᓚᔾᔭᐃᔪᖃᒃᑲᓐᓂᓚᐅᕐᒪᖔᓘᓐᓃᑦ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ centre. We had one proposed in our school, ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᐃᓛᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᑎᒍᑦ but we couldn’t come up with the committee ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᑎᔪᒪᔪᔫᒐᓗᐊᑦ. ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᓂᓪᓗ ᐊᒻᒪ and the funding from the Department of ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓂᓪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᔪᓚᐅᕋᑦᑕ Education to start the daycare centre in our ᐸᐃᕆᕕᒃᑖᕈᓐᓇᓚᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᒍ ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓐᓂᖅᓴᒥᑦ high school. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐊᓗᒻᒥ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Minister Joanasie, when ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ, ᐆᑦᑑᑎᖃᕌᖓᑦᑕ ᓲᕐᓗ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕋᑖᑦᑎᐊᖅᑕᖓᓂᑦ it comes to examples like the one that was just ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥᑦ, ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊᓗ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᓲᖑᒻᒪᑕ mentioned in terms of Gjoa Haven and issues, ᑮᓇᐅᔭᑎᒍᑦ ᖃᓄᕐᓗ ᐊᐅᓚᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ it sounds like issues with the funding or the ᐸᐃᕆᕕᐅᔪᐃᑦ. ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐱᕕᖃᖅᑎᑦᑎᓚᖓᕚ management of the daycare, does Bill 25 offer ᐊᑲᐅᓂᖅᓴᒥᑦ ᐃᖏᕐᕋᓂᖃᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ any… ? Would it make things better, for ᓄᓇᓕᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ example, for Gjoa Haven in terms of the ᐊᐅᓚᔾᔭᐃᔪᒪᔪᖃᕐᓂᕌᖓ ᐸᐃᕆᕕᒻᒥ support or whatever might be needed to see a ᓄᓇᓕᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂᑦ? ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. daycare running in that community? Minister Joanasie.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe that would be more suited through the Child Day Care Act, but just in ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, terms of the Gjoa Haven child care centre ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᑐᕋᖓᓂᖅᓴᐅᒐᔭᖅᑐᖅ case, Nutarqanut Pairivik, it had closed down ᐸᐃᕆᕕᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᑎᒍᑦ ᐊᑖᒍᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ in the summer of 2014 and has not reopened ᑭᐅᔭᐅᓂᖃᕈᓐᓇᖅᐸᑦ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐸᐃᕆᕕᒻᒥ ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ as of yet. The hamlet had tried to open a new ᑖᓐᓇ ᐆᑦᑑᑎᒋᓗᒍ ᒪᑐᔪᒻᒪᑦ ᓄᑕᕋᕐᓄᑦ daycare in the building that Nutarqanut ᐸᐃᕆᕕᒃᓚᔭᐅᔪᖅ, ᐊᒻᒪ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᕼᐋᒻᓚᒃᑯᖏᑦ Pairivik was in. Our department had been ᒪᑐᐃᖅᓯᒐᓱᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᔪᒻᒥᔫᒐᓗᐊᑦ ᓄᑕᕋᕐᓄᑦ ᐸᐃᕆᕕᒃ working with the hamlet in trying to get the ᒪᑐᒻᒪᑦ. ᐅᕙᒍᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑎᒍᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ paperwork completed. We sent a contribution ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᒍᒻᒥᑦ ᐱᒋᐊᓐᖓᕈᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᖅᑐᒥᑦ agreement for start-up for their signature and ᐊᐅᓚᖅᑎᑦᑎᔪᔪᒍᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪ ᐊᑲᐅᔪᒥᒃ once all of the necessary equipment and tools ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᕈᔾᔭᐅᑦᑎᐊᕈᑎᑦ ᐃᒻᒥᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᑎᒎᓇ ᑖᓐᓇ are in place, the early childhood officer would ᓄᓇᓕᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᓚᐃᓴᓐᓯᑯᑎᒍᓪᓗ visit the community to conduct the licensing

103

inspection. It was hoped that the daycare ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ. ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᐅᑭᐊᔅᓵᒥ would be licensed this fall. Thank you, Mr. ᓚᐃᓴᓐᓯᑖᖅᑎᑕᐅᒐᔭᖅᑐᐃᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᒥᔅᑕ (interpretation ends) Thank you. Mr. ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ. Lightstone.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good afternoon and welcome to the ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Assembly. I would like to thank you for ᐅᓐᓄᓴᒃᑯᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᑦ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᑲᑎᒪᕕᐊᓗᒻᒥᑦ, ᓇᑯᕐᒦᒃ making a submission. It highlighted a lot of ᑐᓂᓯᓚᐅᕋᔅᓯ ᑎᑎᖅᑲᖁᑎᒋᔭᔅᓯᓐᓂᒃ. ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊᑦᑕᐅᖅ issues that seemed to be recurring with regard ᐅᕙᖓ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖃᐅᒻᒥᒐᒃᑭᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂᑦ to the Education Act. ᐅᑎᓕᖅᑭᑦᑖᓕᕋᑦᑕ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᑐᓴᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑏᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᑐᕌᖓᓚᖓᔪᐃᑦ. My questions will be around…on the last page you addressed the teacher allocation ᒪᑉᐱᖅᑐᒐᕆᔭᖓᓂᑦ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖓᓂᑦ funding model. You state that the student- ᓇᓗᓇᐃᓚᐅᕋᕕᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ teacher ratio does not give a whole picture ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖅᑖᕆᔭᐅᒋᐊᖃᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᒪᑯᐊ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᓕᒫᖅ and the very programs that you want in your ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᓐᖏᓗᐊᕋᑦᑕᒎᖅ ᒪᑯᐊ ᐅᓄᕐᓂᖏᑦ schools are jeopardized by students who do ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖏᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐅᐸᒍᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᕈᓐᓃᕌᖓᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓄᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ not attend. You go on to say that your school ᓲᕐᓗ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖅᑎᒍᑦ ᒥᑭᓪᓕᒋᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᖓᑕ is penalized financially for this, and this also ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᐅᐸᓐᖏᓗᐊᓕᕌᖓᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓄᑦ decreases the school’s ability to deliver ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᐅᐸᖃᑦᑕᖏᓐᓂᖓ, programming to meet the needs of all ᓇᑲᑎᖅᑕᐅᕚᓪᓕᖃᑦᑕᕐᖓᑕ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗᑦᑕᐅᖅ students. Finally, students who do show up ᐱᖃᑖ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᐅᐸᓲᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᐅᐸᒃᑕᐅᓐᖏᒑᖓᑕ and are considered non-attenders who don’t ᓇᑉᐸᑲᓴᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐅᐸᓐᖏᓗᐊᕌᖓᑕ ᑕᒪᓐᓇᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᓱᓕ show up for than 40 percent of the time, you ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᒋᐊᖃᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᓯᓐᓂᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ do indicate that your school is still responsible ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᑎᕕᒋᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᔅᓴᓂᑦ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ for teaching and providing resources to them ᓂᐅᕕᕋᔅᓴᐅᒐᑎᓪᓗ and that these resources cannot be bought ᐃᑲᔪᕈᑎᒋᒐᔭᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᓄᖓ because there is no money for these non- ᐅᐸᓐᖏᓗᐊᑲᐃᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᓄᑦ, ᐊᒥᒐᖅᓯᓂᔅᓯᓐᓂ. attending students.

My first question is if you would be able to elaborate further on the concerns that the Gjoa ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒐ, ᓲᕐᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒋᔭᕐᓃᕕᑦ Haven DEA has with the current funding ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᐃᑦ formula and what suggestions you might have ᖃᓄᖅ ᐋᖅᑭᒍᑕᐅᓯᒪᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ, ᖃᓄᖅ and that you might bring forward to improve ᐃᓱᒻᒥᖅᑎᑦᑎᒍᓐᓇᖅᐱᑎᒎᑦ ᓯᕗᒧᐊᒍᓐᓇᕋᔭᕐᒪᖔᖅ it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᖃᓄᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Ameralik. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ.

Mr. Ameralik (interpretation): Thank you, ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᖅᑯᑎᑦ ᐃᒃᕼᐃᕙᐅᑖᖅ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Thank ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ

104

you for the question. The DEA in Gjoa ᐊᐱᕆᒐᕕᑦ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᑦ ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ Haven, with the current student-teacher ratio, ᒪᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖁᑎᖏᑦ ᐃᓛᒃ when a child does not attend school or if there ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖁᑎᖏᑦ ᖃᑦᑎᐅᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ are students that don’t go to school, they cut ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᓲᖑᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᖅ teachers off. If they start coming back later on ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ ᐃᒪᓐᓇᑎᒋ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖁᑎᖃᕈᓂ ᐊᒻᒪ in the year, we have to split students in order ᐃᓚᖏᑦ ᐅᐸᓐᖏᓗᐊᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ to accommodate them for their learning. ᑭᖑᕙᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ When the department cuts our teachers off in ᐅᐸᖃᑦᑕᖏᒃᑯᑎᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐅᐸᓂᖏᒃᑯᓂᓪᓗ our schools, it puts a burden on other ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᕕᒃᑎᒋᐊᖃᓕᓲᖑᒐᑦᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ ᐊᑲᐅᔪᒥᑦ teachers’ workload. As the DEA we would ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᓇᓪᓕᐊᓐᓄᖔᖅ like to see, from the beginning of the school ᓴᖑᑎᓕᕐᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᓯᐊᓄᖔᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᔪᑦ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ year, the student-teacher ratio and keep that ᓇᑲᑎᕆᒑᖓᑦᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ from the beginning of the school year until the ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᔪᓂᑦ, ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐊᓯᖔᖏᑦ end of the school year. That would help out a ᐃᓐᓄᒃᓯᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᒑᖓᑕ ᐅᖁᒪᐃᓪᓕᕈᑎᒋᓕᓲᕆᒻᒪᒍ. lot in the long run in the allocation of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᑎᒍᑦ ᑕᑯᔪᒪᔪᒍᑦ ᐱᒋᐊᕐᓂᖓᓂᑦ teachers. (interpretation) I hope that was clear. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓇᐅᓂᐊᓕᕌᖓ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᖃᑦᑎᓂᒃ ᐃᓐᓄᒃᓯᒪᓂᐊᖅᐸᑕ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ ᐱᒋᐊᕐᓂᖓᓂᑦ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓇᖅ ᐊᒻᒪ ᑎᑭᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᓱᐊᓄᑦ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ Lightstone. ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓲᔾᔭᐅᖔᖃᑦᑕᕈᓂ ᖃᑦᑎᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᔪᖅ ᑎᒍᒥᐊᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖁᑎᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂᑦ. Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑐᑭᑖᑦᑎᐊᖃᑦᑕᖔᖅᐸᑦ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᑐᑭᕼᐃᓐᓇᓐᖑᖅᐸᒃᑭᐊᖅ. Just a follow-up question to seek some clarification, I gather from your response that ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ. the Gjoa Haven DEA believes that student ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. enrollment numbers should be used in this ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᒃᑲᓐᓂᑐᐃᓐᓇᓯᔪᖓ teacher allocation formula as opposed to ᓱᖅᑯᐃᓇᖅᓯᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᕈᕕᐅᒃ ᑐᑭᓯᑦᑎᐊᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᒧᑦ, student attendance. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᑦᑎᐅᓂᖏᑦ ᐅᐸᓲᑦ? ᑐᕋᖓᒋᐊᓕᒃ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑦ ᖃᑦᑎᓂᑦ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖁᑎᖃᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᖅ, ᓲᕐᓗ Ameralik. ᐅᐸᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ, ᑖᓐᓇᐅᕙᓪᓚᐃᒻᒪᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Mr. Ameralik: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ. Yes. ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐄ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᖃᓄᐃᓐᖏᑉᐸᑦ, (interpretation ends) If it is alright, I’m just ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᓂᐊᕋᒃᑯ ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒧᑦ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ, going to turn that over to the Minister. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᒐᑦᑎᒍ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ ᐊᑕᐅᓰᑦ Minister Joanasie, we have discussed this ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᑎᓯᒪᓕᕐᒥᒻᒪᑕᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ student-educator ratio, the Gjoa Haven DEA ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕆᖅᑲᐅᒥᒻᒪᑕ has raised it, the teachers association has ᒫᓐᓇᒫᕈᓗᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᑭᒡᓕᓯᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ raised it, it was raised in our recent hearing ᓈᓴᐅᓯᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑎᖓᑦ with the Auditor General’s office, and we ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒻᒥᒻᒪᑦ. ᑎᑎᖅᑲᐅᓯᐊᖅᑖᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᑕᓗ have correspondence from you detailing your ᖃᓄᖅ ᐃᓗᓕᑯᓘᔭᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᒋᓂᐊᖅᑕᓯᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ department’s plan with that formula. If you ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᖅ. ᓇᐃᓈᖅᑐᒥᒃ could just summarize what the game plan is in ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᑎᑦᑎᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᖅᐱᑦ, ᖃᓄᖅ terms of looking at it and making changes. ᐊᓯᔾᔩᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᖅᐱᑦ?

105

Minister Joanasie. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, we are still in the ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, development of a revised formula which ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐱᒋᐊᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒦᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ would capture all school staff positions. We ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᒋᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᒋᔭᕗᑦ want to provide more consistent and equitable ᒫᓐᓇ ᖃᓄᐃᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᓪᓗ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᓯᒪᒐᑦᑕ distribution of staff across our schools. The ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖓᓃᑦᑐᒍᑦ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᔾᔫᒥᔪᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ plan is to present a business case and submit it ᓇᓕᒧᒌᑦᑐᒥᒃ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓲᑎᒍᒪᒐᑦᑎᒍ, ᐊᒻᒪ as part of our 2021-22 business plan cycle. ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᒍᓐᓇᕐᓂᖓ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᒥ 2021-2022−ᒧᑦ We will be looking at some of the ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᓪᓚᕆᒻᒥᒃ ᐊᓚᒃᑲᐃᒍᒪᓂᐊᕋᑦᑕ, recommended options that would reduce the ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᖃᓄᖅ fluctuation of staffing levels so that there is ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᓗᐊᖅᑐᖃᓕᕌᖓ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᓪᓗ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ more stability and ensure a fair allocation by ᓇᓪᓕᐊᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒥᓲᓂᖅᓴᓂᑦ ᑎᒍᓯᒋᐊᖃᓕᓲᖑᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ providing a core complement of staff to every ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᐹᓪᓕᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗᑦᑕᐅᖅ school, as well as allocating staff based on ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ ᐃᓱᐊᖅᓯᕚᓪᓕᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ headcount, which would not be affected by ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓕᒫᓂᑦ. ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐊᒃᑐᐊᓂᖃᔾᔮᓐᖏᑦᑐᕐᓕ enrollment. It would be a combination of ᐃᓯᖅᐸᑦᑐᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᐊᑎᓕᐅᕐᓂᖏᑎᒍᑦ, looking at the whole school staff as well as ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓈᓴᐃᓗᑕ ᑖᓐᓇ ᒫᓐᓇ headcount. These are still up for cabinet ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᖃᕐᒥᒻᒪᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑲᐅᑎᓄᑦ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᒫᓐᓇ approval and like I said, it’s still under ᐱᒋᐊᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒦᒐᑦᑕ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. development. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒥᓂᔅᑕ (interpretation ends) Minister, maybe if you ᓇᓗᓇᐃᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᕈᕕᑦ ᓈᓴᐃᓂᖅ ᐅᐸᒃᑐᐃᑦ could just clarify; you mentioned headcount. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒧᑦ? ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᕖ? ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. Is that just another way of saying attendance? Minister Joanasie.

Hon. David Joanasie: That’s equated as full- ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖃᐅᑕᒫᑦ time equivalent. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐅᓪᓗᑕᒫᑦ ᐅᐸᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) And then I could ask you ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐊᐱᕆᔪᓐᓇᕈᒃᑭᑦ what full-time equivalent means, but we ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓗᓕᑯᓘᔭᖏᓐᓂᑦ won’t go down that road just yet. Mr. ᓇᓗᓇᐃᒃᑲᓐᓂᖁᔨᒐᓗᐊᖅᓱᑕ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ Lightstone. ᐅᑕᖅᑭᑲᓚᐅᕐᓂᐊᕋᑦᑕ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ You’re absolutely correct; it seems to be that ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᖃᑦᑎᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ this student-educator ratio is a recurring topic ᐊᑕᐅᓯᖅ ᖃᑦᑎᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖁᑎᖃᕐᒪᖔᖅ not just over the last two days but over the last ᐊᕐᕌᒍᐃ ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓕᖅᑭᑦᑖᓕᕋᑦᑎᒍ. two years and much longer.

The Nunavut Teachers Association made a ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᓪᓗ, clear comment that the student-educator ratio ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᖅᑲᐅᒥᒻᒪᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᖃᑦᑎᐅᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ

106

is not indicative of the number of students in a ᓲᕐᓗ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖁᔨᒐᓗᐊᕐᖓᑕᑦᑕᐅᖅ. class, and also made a recommendation that it ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᖏᑎᒍᑦ would be an ideal time to make a correction ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᕚᓪᓕᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒍ. by implementing the SER into the Education ᐊᐱᕆᔪᒪᕙᕋ ᒥᓂᔅᑕ, ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᑦ ᓱᒻᒪᒃᑭᐊᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ Act. I would like to ask the Minister: why is it ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᓯᒪᑐᐃᓐᓇᖏᒻᒪᖔᖅ ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᒧᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, that the student-educator ratio is not being ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. incorporated into the Education Act? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) The student-educator ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ ᐊᒻᒪ ratio is in the current Education Act is my ᖃᑦᑎᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖁᑎᖃᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᒫᓐᓇ understanding, but Minister, in terms of Mr. ᒪᓕᒐᕐᔪᐊᕐᒦᑦᑑᒐᓗᐊᖅ, ᐊᒻᒪ ᑖᓐᓇ ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᓯᑑᓐ Lightstone’s request. Minister Joanasie. ᑐᒃᓯᕋᕆᔭᖓᓐᓂᑦ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, it’s in our current Act and we ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, are reviewing this formula. I’m advised that it ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᒫᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᑦᑕ ᐃᓗᐊᓃᑦᑑᒐᓗᐊᖅ, is something that we could possibly also look ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᒫᓐᓇ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓂᕐᒦᑦᑐᒍ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ at through our regulations as a specific ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅᑎᑎᒍᑦ, regulation that would deal with the student- ᒪᓕᒐᐅᔪᑎᒍᑦ ᐅᕙᒍᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖏᑎᒍᑦ. ᖃᑦᑎᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖁᑎᖃᕆᐊᖃᖅᐸ ᐊᑕᐅᓯ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ, educator ratio. There are different ways that ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᕈᓐᓇᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᒍᓐᓇᖅᐳᖓ. we are trying to address this. Thank you, Mr. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ. Lightstone.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᓇᑯᕐᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Sorry, I didn’t phrase my question correctly. It ᐊᐱᕆᑦᑎᐊᖃᐅᓐᖏᓐᓇᒪ, ᑕᐃᓂᕆᔭᖏᑦ was a poor use of words there. ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᓚᐅᕐᓚᒃᑲᐃ.

The Nunavut Teachers Association ᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕆᔪᒪᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᒥᑦ recommended making amendments to the ᓱᖅᑯᐃᓇᖅᓯᒍᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒍ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓗᒍᓘᓐᓃᑦ Education Act to make it clearer or to make ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᖃᑦᑎᐅᒋᐊᖃᓲᖑᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ corrections in the SER that everyone seems to ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᕐᒥᑦ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᖅ ᖃᑦᑎᓂᒃ have so many issues with. The Minister stated ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᖁᑎᖃᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᖅ, ᑖᓐᓇ that the intention is to go through the business ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓂᑦ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᐅᖃᖅᑲᐅᒥᒻᒪᑦ planning process and hopefully to get this ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᓪᓚᕆᒻᒥᓂᒃ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐱᒋᐊᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒦᒻᒪᑕ issue corrected in the 2021-22 fiscal year, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᒍᓐᓇᖅᐸ 2021-2022−ᒧᑦ which is a year and a half away from now, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᕙᒍᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᓪᓚᕆᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓕᒫᖅ which was the earliest possible time. Given ᓇᑉᐸᖓᓂᓗ ᐃᓚᓗᒍ, ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᑎᒋ that is quite a ways down the road, I would ᓯᕗᕙᓯᒃᑐᒎᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐱᕕᖃᖅᐳᒍᑦ. just like to ask why it wasn’t addressed in Bill ᐊᐱᕆᕗᖓ ᓱᒻᒪ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25-ᒥᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ 25. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐅᖃᐅᑕᐅᖅᑲᓐᓂᖏᒻᒪᖔᖅ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

107

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. Minister Joanasie.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is something that has been an ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ongoing process that our department has been ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐅᕙᒍᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᑎᒍᑦ looking at and we didn’t see the need to ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᖏᓐᓇᕋᑦᑎᒍ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᐹᓪᓕᕈᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᖅ, incorporate it through the introduction of Bill ᐱᒋᐊᓚᐅᓐᖏᓐᓂᖓᓂᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ 25 at this time. As I said, we are reviewing ᐅᖃᖅᑲᐅᒐᒪ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᕋᑦᑎᒍ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ this formula and if it requires that we amend ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕆᐊᖃᕈᑦᑎᒍ ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᖅ 25 the Act, we will have to look at that if the new ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᕆᐊᖃᕋᔭᕋᑦᑎᒍᑦᑕᐅᖅ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᓄᑖᖅ formula gets approved and we go forward ᓈᓴᐃᓂᖏᑎᒍᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᖓᒋᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᖅ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, with that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Lightstone. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ.

Mr. Lightstone: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just to follow up on that with another ᓚᐃᑦᓯᑑᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. question, during the community consultations, ᐊᐱᕆᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᓯᕗᖓ, ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᕝᕗᕋᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ how many times did this SER formula come ᖃᑦᑎᐊᖅᑎ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᔪᕚ? ᖃᑦᑎᐊᖅᑎ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. up and how many times was it raised? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒫᓐᓇ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᒥ (interpretation ends) I’ll allow this final ᐊᐱᕆᒃᑲᓂᕐᓂᐊᖅᐳᖅ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐅᑎᕐᓂᐊᖅᐳᒍᑦ question, but we should get back to Gjoa ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒧᑦ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. Haven and their submission. Minister Joanasie. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᓇᑯᕐᒦᒃ, Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᓐᓈᓗᒃ ᖃᖓᒃᑯᑦ, Chairman. I believe it didn’t come up ᖃᑯᑎᒃᑯᓚᐅᓪᓚᖅ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐅᖃᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᖓ, regularly. I believe it did come up ᓂᓪᓕᐅᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᖃᐅᑕᒫᓐᖑᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ periodically, but there wasn’t a huge ᐅᐸᒃᑕᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᓗᐊᓚᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ discussion point around the development of ᑕᐃᔅᓱᒪᓂ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓄᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᑕ. the consultation period before we presented ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Bill 25. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Qamaniq. ᖃᒪᓂᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑕᐃᒪ ᑎᑎᕋᓚᐅᖅᑕᔅᓯᓐᓂ ᒪᑉᐱᖅᑐᒐ 3-ᒥ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕐᒪᑦ Mr. Qamaniq (interpretation): Thank you, ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ Mr. Chairman. In your submission on page 3, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ it talks about the need for orientation and ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᓪᓗ training of district education authorities. Can ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᐃᔪᓐᓇᖅᐲᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ ᓄᓇᔅᓯᓐᓂ you describe what kind of orientation and ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑐᓂᒃ

108

training your local DEA receives? Thank you, ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᖔᑕ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ. Ameralik.

Mr. Ameralik: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On orientation and training in Gjoa Haven, ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ that’s what we indicate in the letter, in our ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᐃᓂᕐᓗ ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ submission. The RSO’s schedules do not ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᑎᑎᕋᓚᐅᖅᑕᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ accommodate the DEA’s in our community. ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ They go to our community to deliver training ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑎᑦᑎᔪᑦ when they have their own time and that may ᐱᕕᖃᓕᕌᖓᒥᒃ ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᔭᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ, not always be with the DEA’s discretion or ᐃᓱᒪᖅᓲᑕᐅᖏᓐᓇᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ would be the same time as the DEA would ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᖅᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ take the training because some government ᐊᑕᐅᑦᑎᒃᑰᕋᔭᖅᑐᖅ, ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖏᑦ workers cannot make it to the training or they ᐃᓚᖏᑦ ᑕᐃᒪ ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᐃᔭᖅᑐᕈᓐᓇᓐᖏᑦᑕᕌᖓᑕ, will be out of town. The kind of orientation ᐊᐅᓪᓚᖅᓯᒪᔭᕌᖓᑕᓘᓐᓃᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᓄᑦ we take is as being a committee and the roles ᐱᔭᔅᓴᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂᑦ of DEAs, the roles of the chair, and the roles ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖓᓐᓄᑦ ᑐᖏᓕᖓᓐᓄᓪᓗ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓕ of the vice-chair. Those are the kinds of ᑕᕝᕙ ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᖅᑕᐅᓂᕆᖃᑦᑕᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᐅᓱᖅᑑᒥ. orientation and training we take in Gjoa

Haven.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ Qamaniq.

Mr. Qamaniq (interpretation): Thank you, ᖃᒪᓂᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ. ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᒪ Mr. Chairman. As part of my last question, ᐃᓚᒋᓯᓐᓇᖅᑕᖓ, ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᓄᓇᔅᓯᓐᓂ the district education authority in your ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ, ᒪᒥᐊᓇᖅ. ᑕᐃᒪ community… . I apologize. With respect to ᓄᓇᔅᓯᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ district education authority orientation and ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᑦ training, do you feel that the Coalition of ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᓪᓗ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ. Nunavut District Education Authorities would ᓄᓇᕘᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑕ be the appropriate entity to provide the ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᔨᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᕋᓱᒋᕕᒌᑦ training if it had additional staffing and ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᖅᑐᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅᐸᑕ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ resources as proposed under Bill 25? Thank ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᔅᓴᖅ 25? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Ameralik. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ.

Mr. Ameralik: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. didn’t understand the question, Mr. Chairman. ᑐᑭᓯᓐᖏᓐᓇᒃᑯ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᖓ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ.

109

(interpretation ends) Mr. Qamaniq, please (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ ᑐᑭᓯᓇᖅᓯᑎᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈ clarify the question. Mr. Qamaniq. ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᐃᑦ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ.

Mr. Qamaniq: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᖃᒪᓂᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. With respect to orientation and training ᑕᐃᔅᓱᒪᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᖏᓪᓗ requirements for your district education ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᖅᑕᐅᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᓪᓗ authority, do you feel that the Coalition of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ. ᐃᑉᐱᒍᓱᑉᐱᓪᓖ Nunavut District Education Authorities would ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ be the appropriate entity to provide the ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑦ ᓈᒻᒪᒃᑲᔭᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᑎᒥᐅᓗᑎ training if it had additional staffing and ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᐃᔨᐅᓗᑎᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᖅᑖᑲᓐᓂᕈᑎ resources as proposed under Bill 25? Thank ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᑎᔅᓴᑲᓐᓂᕈᔪ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᑐᒃᓯᕋᖅᑕᐅᓂᖓᑕ you, Mr. Chairman. ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Ameralik. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ.

Mr. Ameralik: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, we would. If the coalition can come up ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐄ, with more staff to do orientation and training ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒃᑲᔭᖅᑐᒍᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ in all the communities of Nunavut, it would ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᒃᑲᓂᕐᓂᖅᐸᑕ take a load off of the RSOs and that would ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᐃᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓕᒫᓂ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ probably be helpful to the DEAs in all of our ᐱᔭᔅᓴᖃᓐᖏᓐᓂᖅᓴᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ communities. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓕᒫᓂ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᖃᒪᓂᖅ. Qamaniq. ᖃᒪᓂᖅ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ. ᑎᑎᕋᓚᐅᖅᑕᓯᓐᓂ Mr. Qamaniq (interpretation): Thank you, ᒪᑉᐱᖅᑐᒐ 3-ᒥ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᖅ Mr. Chairman. Page 3 of your submission ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ indicates that the Gjoa Haven District ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᖏᓐᓂᕋᖅᑐᑎᑦ ᓇᒡᓕᐊᓐᓂ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᓂᑦ Education Authority does not support the ᐊᑐᕐᓗᓂ ᐱᔭᕇᖅᑕᕐᕕᓕᐊᕆᓯᒪᔭᖏᑦ. ᑎᑎᕋᓚᐅᖅᑕᓯ deadlines set for language of instruction. Your ᐃᒪᐃᓕᖓᔪᖅ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ submission states that “It is critical that the ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᓪᓚᕆᒋᐊᓖᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ DEA’s maintain control as it relates to the ᓇᒡᓕᐊᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᓂᑦ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᑎᑦ Language of Instruction in their respective ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᓂᐊᕐᒪᖔᖏᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᒥᐅᓂᑦ. community…” Can you elaborate further on ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᖏᑕ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ the concerns that the Gjoa Haven District ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑐᓪᓚᕆᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓱᒪᓪᓗᑎᒃ, ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᖃᕐᒪᖔᖏᑦ Education Authority has raised with respect to ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᐲᑦ? ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ language of instruction and the needs of the ᓇᒡᓕᐊᓐᓂᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᓂᑦ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᑎᒃ community? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᓯ ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᑭᓐᖒᒪᒋᔭᖃᕐᒪᖔᑕ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᓖᒃ. Ameralik. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ. Mr. Ameralik: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Our DEA does not support the proposed ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᖏᒻᒪᑕ

110

changes in subsection 24(1) and 24(2), as we ᓈᓴᐅᑎᖓ 24(1,2) ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᒐᑦᑕ, stated here. It would be nice for the ᐱᐅᒐᔭᖅᑑᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓇᓕᐊᓐᓂᒃ department to come up with language of ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᓂᑦ ᐊᑐᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᑕ instruction to use for all of Nunavut instead of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓗᓂ ᐱᖓᓱᓂᑦ ᐊᑐᓐᖏᓪᓗᑎ having three models to use because they use ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂᑦ. ᐱᐅᒐᔭᖅᑑᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᑦ three models. It would be nice to have one ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᒥᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᔪᓯᖅᑕᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᐸᑦ language of instruction for all of Nunavut. It ᓄᓇᕗᓕᒫᒥ, ᐊᖑᒻᒪᑎᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ would be a lot more helpful to keep up with ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Canadian standards in education. Thank you, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Minister Joanasie, the ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ Special Committee to Review the Education ᑖᓐᓇ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᖑᑲᐃᓐᓇᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ 2015-ᒥᒃ Act, this is back in 2015, one of the ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᑦ, recommendations was precisely that, I ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔨᕗᖔᕈᑎᑕᖃᓚᐅᕐᒪᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᑦᑐᒥᒃ ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓄᒃ believe, that there would be one standardized ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᒻᒧᑦ ᑕᕝᕗᖓ ᓄᓇᕗᓕᒫᒧᑦ. ᑭᓯᐊ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ model for bilingual education across the ᐱᖓᓱᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑐᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ territory. That is a recommendation that hasn’t ᐊᑐᓕᖅᓯᒪᑎᑕᐅᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ. ᖃᓄᐃᒻᒪᑦ been acted on. Why is the Department of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᕝᕕᖓ ᑖᒃᑯᓂᖓ Education keeping the three-model system, as ᐱᖓᓱᓂᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᔅᓱᖅᓯᒪᓂᖅ? ᑖᓐᓇ ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᐅᑉ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᕋᑖᖅᑕᖓ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. Mr. Ameralik was mentioning? Minister

Joanasie.

Hon. David Joanasie (interpretation): Thank ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ: ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Just ᐃᑦᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᐃᓕᓴᕆᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᒍ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ recognizing that there are different ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᖅᑯᓯᖃᐅᕐᒪᑕ, ᑕᐃᒫᒃ communities which have different language ᐃᒪᐃᓕᖓᔪᒥᒃ ᓂᕈᐊᕋᔅᓴᖃᖃᑦᑕᕈᒪᒐᑦᑎᒍ situations and we want to ensure that they ᐊᖑᒻᒪᑎᔪᓐᓇᕐᓗᓂ ᑕᐃᔅᓱᒧᖓ ᓄᓇᓕᒻᒧᑦ, ᓲᕐᓗ have that option if that capacity is able to be ᐊᔪᕐᓇᖏᑦᑕᕌᖓ ᑐᑭᓕᐅᑎᓗᒍ ᕿᑎᕐᒥᐅᓂᑦ ᑕᐃᒪ met in that community. For instance, we do ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᒥᓂᑦ ᐊᓯᐅᔨᓯᒪᕆᐅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ want to wherever possible, as much as we ᑭᖑᑉᐱᐊᖔᖁᒐᑦᑎᒍ ᐊᔪᕐᓇᖏᔾᔪᑎᖃᕐᓗᓂ can… . As an example, in the Kitikmeot ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ. ᑕᐃᑲᓂ where there has been significant language ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᓕᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒥᑦ loss, we want to reverse that trend and allow ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓯᒪᔭᖓ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑕᕝᕙ ᐃᓚᖏᑦ for the DEAs in that region specifically to ᐃᓱᒪᔅᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᒋᓯᒪᔪᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ incorporate immersion models. Those are ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᖓᐃᓐᓇᖁᔭᕗᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. some of the things that we considered and we want to keep in place as best we can. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ, ᒥᓂᔅᑕ. ᐊᑎᖁᑎᖃᕈᓐᓃᕋᒪ. ᒥᔅᑕ Minister. I have no more names on my list. ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ ᐅᒃᑯᐊᕈᑎᒃᕼᐊᓂᑦ ᐱᐊᓂᒍᑎᒃᕼᐊᓂᒃ Mr. Ameralik, if you have any closing ᐅᖃᐅᕼᐃᒃᕼᐊᖃᕐᓂᕈᕕᑦ ᐱᕕᖃᖅᑎᓕᖅᐸᒋᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ. remarks, I now give you the floor. Mr. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ. Ameralik.

111

Mr. Ameralik: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐊᒥᕋᓕᒃ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. I’m very grateful that we can be a part of this. ᖁᔭᓕᑦᑎᐊᖅᐳᖓ ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᕋᑦᑕ As the DEA in Gjoa Haven, we’re very happy ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᐅᓪᓗᑕ ᐅᖅᓱᖅᑑᒥ to be here and give our statements. Thank you ᖁᕕᐊᓱᓪᓗᖓ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᐅᖃᕆᐊᖅᑐᕈᓐᓇᕋᑖᕋᒪ, for inviting us here. I hope all goes well with ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᓪᓗ ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒃᑎᑕᐅᓚᐅᕋᑦᑕ. the amendments. Thank you very much. ᐃᓱᒪᓇᕋᓗᐊᖅᐳᖅ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕆᐊᕈᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᑲᔪᓯᑦᑎᐊᕋᔭᓐᖑᐊᕋᓗᐊᖅᐳᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒻᒪᕆᒃ. >>Applause >>ᐸᑦᑕᑐᖅᑐᑦ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) I would now ask ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᑕᐃᒪ ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ Members to remain in their seats and we’re ᐃᒃᓯᕚᖏᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᑦ going to very quickly switch witnesses. ᐊᐱᖅᓱᒐᔅᓴᖅᑖᕐᓂᐊᕋᑦᑕ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᒪ’ᓇ. (interpretation) Thank you.

Thank you. One of the invited guests is the Iqaluit District Education Authority. Doug (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᖃᐃᖁᔭᐅᕼᐃᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓚᒋᒻᒥᔭᖓ Workman is here, so feel welcome, and ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᖃᓗᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᐊᓛᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ, ᕼ ᕼ Okalik Eegeesiak, welcome to the Legislative ᑕᒡ ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ ᑕᕝᕗᖓᖅ ᐃᒪᒻᒪᑦ ᑐᓐᖓ ᐅᒋᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᑲᓕᖅ ᐃᔨᑦᓯᐊᖅ ᑐᓐᖓᕼᐅᒋᑦ ᑕᕝᕗᖓ Assembly. Who is now going to make the opening comments? I believe it’s you, Mr. ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᕐᕕᒻᒧᑦ. ᒫᓐᓇ ᓇᓪᓕᐊᑭᐊᖅ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᓐᓂᐊᖅᐸ ᐱᒋᐊᕆᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᓗᓂ ᐃᕝᕕᐅᑰᖅᑐᖅ, ᒥᔅᑕ ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ. Workman. Mr. Workman.

Mr. Workman: Thank you. I’m not used to ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᒥᔅᑕ being called Mr. Workman. ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐᓚᔭᐅᔪᒪᓐᖏᑦᑑᖅ.

On behalf of the Iqaluit District Education ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᖅᑐᒋᑦ ᐃᖃᓗᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᖏᑕ Authority, thank you for the opportunity to ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᖅᐳᖓ ᓵᒃᓯᓐᓃᑦᑐᓐᓇᕋᒪ ᐅᓪᓗᒥ. appear before the Standing Committee today. ᒫᓃᖃᑎᒋᔭᕋ ᐅᑲᓕᖅ ᐃᔨᑦᓯᐊᖅ, ᒫᓐᓇᕈᓘᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ I have with me Okalik Eegeesiak, who was ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ. ᐅᑯᐊ recently elected to our DEA. Our presentation ᐅᓂᒃᑲᐅᓯᕆᓂᐊᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒋᔭᕗᑦ will be to outline our concerns and reasons for ᐱᔾᔪᑎᔅᓴᖏᓪᓗ ᐊᑲᕆᓐᖏᓇᑦᑎᒃᑯ ᐃᓘᓐᓇᖓ rejecting Bill 25 in its entirety. ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25.

I will provide a history of education in ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑑᓂᖓ Nunavut in three phrases and portray the ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᑲᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕋᒃᑯ ᐱᖓᓱᐃᓕᖓᓗᒍ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ diminished collaboration that can be seen as ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᑐᕈᓐᓃᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᒪᑦ each time passed. I will repeat issues that we ᑕᐃᒪᓐᖓᓂᑦ ᐱᒋᐊᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ. ᑭᖑᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ have voiced in the past, as we must. To date ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔭᕗᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑑᓪᓗᑕ the Department of Education’s failure to ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᒐᑦᑕ, ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᑎᑭᖦᖢᒍ address them has led us to Bill 25. I will ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᐃᑯᓂᖓ conclude by recommending that the Coalition ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑦᑎᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ, ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᓕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ of Nunavut DEAs’ proposal be used as the ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ guide to make the necessary improvements in ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᖏᑦ, ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᐊᑐᖔᕈᒪᓪᓗᑎᒃᑯ ᑕᐃᑯᓄᖓ our education system. ᐋᖅᑭᒃᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ.

112

Brief History of Education in Nunavut ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᐅᑉ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓯᒪᓂᖓ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ

The current education system can be ᒫᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᖅ categorized in three time periods: pre- ᐱᖓᓱᐃᓕᖓᔪᑎᒎᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐋᖅᑭᒍᓐᓇᖅᑕᕗᑦ, divisional boards (up to 1985), regional ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒻᒪᕆᒃᑯᑦ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓚᐅᓐᖏᓐᓂᖓᓂᑦ divisional boards (up to 2000), and post- 1985-ᒧᑦ ᑎᑭᖦᖢᒍ ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ divisional boards/councils (2000 to current). ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒻᒪᕇᑦ 2000-ᒧᑦ ᑎᑭᖦᖢᒍ ᐊᒻᒪ ᑭᖑᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᓐᖑᖅᑎᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ 2000-ᒥᑦ ᒫᓐᓇᒧᑦ We acknowledge that we have not included ᑎᑭᖦᖢᒍ. the residential school era, as this time period does not reflect the residents as decision- ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ making members of societies, though we must ᐃᓚᐅᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ, ᓴᖅᑭᑦᑎᓪᓚᕆᒃᓯᒪᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ ᖃᓄᖅ acknowledge and respect the victims and ᐃᓱᒪᓕᐅᕈᑎᖃᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ survivors of residential schools and the ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ intergenerational impacts the schools continue ᐅᐱᒋᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑕᕗᑦ, ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕐᓗᑎᒃᑯᓪᓗ to experience. ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᖃᓪᓚᕆᒻᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒥᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᑎᑭᖦᖢᒍ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒻᒪᑦ. Pre-division Board (Up to 1985) 1985-ᒧᑦ ᑎᑭᓪᓗᒍ During pre-divisional boards, every ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒻᒪᕆᒃᑕᖃᓚᐅᖅᑎᓐᓇᒍ community in the eastern Arctic had an ᐅᖁᕐᒥᐅᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑯᓗᖃᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ advisory committee of community ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᓂᑦ ᐃᒃᓯᕚᕐᕕᐅᓪᓗᑎᑦ. 1980-ᖑᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ representatives. By 1980 these advisory ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔨᑕᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᖏᑦ ᓇᖕᒥᓂᖅ committees became registered societies with society−ᖑᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕋᓛᖃᐅᖅᖢᑎᒃ, their own bylaws and procedures. Among the ᒪᓕᒐᖃᐅᖅᑐᑎᓪᓗ, ᐃᓱᒪᓕᐅᖅᑎᐅᖃᑕᐅᓪᓗᑎᓪᓗ many facets of decision-making, these ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᓪᓗᑎᓪᓗ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᖃᑦᑕᖅᓱᑎᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ representatives participated in hiring school ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᑦ, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓂ ᐊᓪᓚᕝᕕᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᓂᑦ staff like teachers, school administration, and ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᔩᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒧᑦ. ᐃᓚᖏᑦ school support staff. In fact some community ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔩᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᓱᖃᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ education representatives conducted ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓐᖑᕈᒪᔪᓂᑦ ᖃᓪᓗᓈ ᓄᓇᖓᓅᖅᑐᑎᑦ interviews with prospective teachers during ᕿᓂᕆᐊᖅᑐᑎᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓐᖑᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᓂᑦ. southern Canadian recruitment trips.

In fact, in my case, I was recruited in Toronto ᐅᕙᖓᓕ ᐆᑦᑑᑎᒋᓗᖓ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᖅ in March of 1978, and a community ᐊᐱᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᖓ 1978-ᒥᑦ ᑐᕌᓐᑐᒥᑦ, representative from Pond Inlet, Mr. Joe ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᒻᒥᐅᑕᒥᓪᓗ ᔫ ᐃᓄᒃ Enook, interviewed me for a position. ᐊᐱᖅᓱᖃᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᓂ, ᒪᒥᐊᓇᖅᑐᖅ. Fortunately for me, I was able to be hired in ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᕆᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᓯᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᖓ Pond Inlet later on that school year. ᒥᑦᑎᒪᑕᓕᒻᒥ ᑕᒪᑐᒪᓂ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᒥ ᐊᑐᓚᐅᖅᑕᑦᑎᓐᓂ.

In communities that had adult educators, they would support these school advisory ᐃᓐᓇᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᖏᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᔨᐅᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ committees with their day-to-day operations ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔨᑕᕆᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᖃᐅᑕᒫᖅᓯᐅᑏᑦ along with school administration. As well, ᐱᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ ᐊᓪᓚᕝᕕᖏᓐᓂᑦ. there would be at least three times per school ᐅᓄᓐᖏᓛᖅ ᐱᖓᓱᐊᖅᑕᖅᑐᑎᖃᐃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓇᐅᑉ year visits with the local education authority ᐊᕐᕌᒍᐊᓂ ᐳᓛᕆᐊᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ

113

development officer from the regional office. ᑲᒪᔨᐅᔪᒥᑦ ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᕐᕕᖏᓐᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᒥᒃ. The relationships at the community level and ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᑦ ᑐᑦᑕᕐᕕᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᑦ from regional headquarters were supportive ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᐅᐱᒍᓱᑦᑎᐊᓚᐅᖅᑐᓪᓗ and respectful; decisions were made in ᐃᓱᒪᓕᐊᕆᔭᐅᔪᓂᑦ ᐃᓘᓐᓇᖏᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᒃᑐᖅᑕᐅᔪᑦ collaboration with all of the parties. As for ᐃᓱᒪᓕᐅᖃᑕᐅᔪᐃᓐᓇᐅᓪᓗᑎ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ school staff, there was a sense of serving the ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖏᑦ ᐱᔨᑦᑎᓂᕐᒥᓂᑦ community for the betterment of the students ᖃᐅᔨᒪᑦᑎᐊᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᑦᑎᐊᕋᓱᓐᓂᖅᐹᖑᓪᓗᑎ and for all. ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᓂᑦ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᓪᓗ.

The early 1980s saw a move toward regionalization. Most regional education ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᓴᓴᐃᔭᑎ societies had been created with the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᒃᓯᕚᖅᑎᖃᐅᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ membership selected from their respective ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᓴᓴᐃᔭᑎᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᓂᑦ, community education society. Regional ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ society education societies would meet periodically ᑲᑎᒪᖃᑎᒋᓚᐅᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᑦ during the year to deal with regional and local ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂᓪᓗ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐱᓪᓗᒋᑦ, concerns and with the regional school ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᑦ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᐱᖃᑎᒋᓪᓗᓂᔾᔪᒃ. superintendent in the regional centre.

Regional Divisional Boards (1985 to 2000) 1985-ᒥᑦ 2000-ᒧᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒻᒪᕆᒃᑕᖃᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ

In the spring of 1985, regional divisional 1985-ᒥ ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒻᒪᕇᑦ boards of education were created throughout ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᑦᑎᐊᕐᒥ, the Northwest Territories. All new school ᓄᓇᑦᑎᐊᖑᓱᖓᖅᑎᓪᓗᑕ. ᓄᑖᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ staff were hired by a team of people that ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓂᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ included the community government liaison ᓂᕈᐊᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓚᓕᐅᓪᓗᒍ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᑦ officer and two elected community education ᐊᑯᓐᓂᖅᓱᖅᑎᖓ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒪᕐᕉᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ committee members, now called local ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ. ᐊᕕᒃᑐᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᓇᓖᕋᕐᕕᖃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ education authorities. Regions had flexibility; ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓴᖅᑭᑦᑎᕙᓪᓕᐊᓪᓗᑎᑦ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑑᖅᑐᓂᑦ they created resources in Inuktitut and ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᔅᓴᓂᑦ ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑐᓂ ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓐᓂᓕᒃ 6-ᒧᑦ Inuktitut curriculum for kindergarten to grade ᑎᑭᖦᖢᒍ. 6.

Staffing positions were created to enhance ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑕᖃᐅᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᐱᐅᓯᒃᑲᓐᓂᖁᓪᓗᒍ student achievement in schools. This is worth ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ ᐊᓂᒍᐃᕙᓪᓕᐊᔭᖏᑦ. ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ repeating: staffing positions were created to ᐃᓂᖏᑦ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ enhance student achievement. ᑲᔪᓯᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᖅᓴᐅᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ.

The first position was known as the program support teacher. This position was ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᔨᖏᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᖅ independent of all other teaching positions in ᑕᐃᔭᐅᖄᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᒃᑐᐃᓂᖃᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂ ᐊᓯᓕᒫᒥᓂᒃ the school. Their responsibility under the ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᖃᑎᒥᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒥ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐱᔭᔅᓴᖏᑦ direction of the school principal and the ᐊᐅᓚᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᕕᒻᒥ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᕆᔭᐅᔪᓂᑦ school team was to develop learning plans for ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᔅᓴᓂᓪᓗ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᓯᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑎᑦ students who needed support with their school ᑕᐃᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐊᑐᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓄᑦ work and train the special needs assistant. ᐃᓕᒃᑎᕇᒃᑐᓄᑦ, ᐃᓕᓴᕋᐃᑦᑐᓄᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ.

114

The special needs assistants were created to ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑏᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓂᖏᑦ work with students who needed one-on-one ᐃᑲᔪᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᒃᑎᕇᑦᑐᓂᑦ support in the school and who had learning ᐃᓕᒃᑐᖅᑐᓂᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᓯᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᒪᓕᓪᓗᒋᑦ. plans.

Finally, the school community counsellor was created. Each school in every community, ᑭᖑᓪᓕᕐᒥ ᐃᓅᓯᓕᕆᔨᑖᖅᑎᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓕᒫᑦ with the support of the local education ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᓪᓗᑎᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ authority, could have such a position. When ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᖅ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᒻᒪᑦ this position was initially implemented, the ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᔪᖅ successful candidate was given extensive ᐱᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᖅᑕᐅᒋᐊᖅᑐᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᕗᐊᑦ ᓯᒥᑦᒧᑦ, training in Fort Smith. School community ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖃᑎᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᖢᑎᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᒻᒥ counsellors were responsible for working with ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ the school team, the local community ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᓂᑦ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ intradepartmental community committee, as ᐅᓗᕆᐊᓇᖅᓱᖅᓯᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ well as work in the school supporting at-risk ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖃᑎᒋᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᓂᒋᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ. students.

The working relationship of the local education authority was supported by school ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ administration and the community adult ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ ᐊᓪᓚᕝᕕᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐃᓐᓇᕐᓄᓪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᒧᑦ. 1986-ᖑᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ educator. By 1986 they were no longer ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ employees, and I’m referring to the ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᐅᔪᓃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓐᓇᐃᑦ community adult educators, of the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖏᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᑖᕆᔭᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑕ Department of Education. They were ᓯᓚᒃᑐᖅᓴᕐᕕᒻᒧᑦ ᐅᕙᓂ. ᐃᓘᓐᓇᖏᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ employed by Arctic College. All staff worked ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ. collaboratively.

It was noted that as there were more Inuit ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ ᐅᓄᒃᑲᓐᓂᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ teachers graduating with their certificates and ᓇᓗᓇᐃᒃᑯᑕᖃᖅᓱᑎᑦ ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓐᓂᖅᓴᓂᓪᓗ Bachelors of Education, the Department of ᐱᖃᐅᖅᖢᑎ. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᖓᓂ Education started to eliminate the classroom ᓄᖑᑎᕆᔭᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᒻᒥ assistant positions. By the late 1990s, before ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑏᑦ. 1990 ᐃᓱᓕᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ the creation of Nunavut, Inuit educators ᓄᓇᕗᑕᖃᓚᐅᖅᑎᓐᓇᒍᓱᓕ ᐃᓐᓇᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖏᑦ across Nunavut developed a curriculum for ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᔅᓴᓕᐅᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᓴᓇᔭᕕᓂᕐᓂ programs to be used throughout the Northwest ᓄᓇᑦᓯᐊᕐᒥ. Territories.

Dissolution of Boards (2000) ᐱᑕᖃᕈᓐᓃᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᖏ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒻᒪᕇᑦ (2000) When the boards were dissolved in 2000, collegial and cooperative relationships that ᓄᖑᑎᑕᐅᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒻᒪᕇᑦ once existed between the Department of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒻᒪᕇᑦ ᓄᖑᑦᑎᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ Education or senior management for schools 2000-ᒥ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ with DEAs changed. The built-in supports ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑲᐅᑏᓪᓗ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖃᑎᒌᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔭᖏᑦ were reduced to a regional DEA development ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ. ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᔩᑦ ᓄᖑᑎᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᒐᒥᒃ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᑐᐊᖑᓕᖅᖢᓂ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ

115

officer whose contact with the community ᑖᓐᓇᑐᐊᖅ ᖃᕋᓴᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖃᑦᑕᖅᖢᓂ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ DEAs was mostly by emails. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ.

NTI/Department of Education consultations ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓪᓗ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ for Bill 1 resulted in DEAs realizing that they ᐃᓄᓕᒫᖅᑎᑦᑎᑲᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 1-ᒥ had become isolated communities. DEAs ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓄᐊᑕᖅᖢᑎ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ realized they lost networking opportunities ᐅᔾᔨᕆᐊᓪᓚᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖃᑎᒌᒍᓐᓃᕐᒪᑕ when the regional boards were removed. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒻᒪᕇᑦ ᓄᖑᑎᑕᐅᑐᐊᕐᒪᑕ.

By 2006 the Coalition of Nunavut DEAs was 2006-ᖑᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ created to fill that gap. It was the DEAs that ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᖓ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪ ᐃᓇᖏᖅᓯᓪᓗᑎ founded the Coalition of Nunavut DEAs and ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒻᒪᕆᒻᒥ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ indeed it was our Iqaluit DEA who provided ᑭᒡᒐᑐᐃᔨᖃᓕᕋᒥ ᑕᐃᒪ ᐃᖃᓗᐃᑦ in-kind support by way of allowing the office ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᖏᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ administrator at that time, Alice Ladner, to ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᖃᑦᑕᓕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᓪᓚᕕᒻᒦᑦᑐᖅ ᑕᐃᓐᓇ assist in creating the Coalition of Nunavut ᑕᐃᔅᓱᒪᓂ ᐋᓕᔅ ᓛᑦᓄ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᒋᔭᐅᓪᓗᓂ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ District Education Authorities. To date the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᑐᐃᔩᑦ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ. DEA’s main support is advice from the ᐅᓪᓗᒥᒧᑦ ᑎᑭᒃᖢᒍ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᑐᐊᕆᓕᖅᑕᖓ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ Coalition of Nunavut District Education ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦᑕ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᖏᑦ. Authorities.

ᒪᑯᐊ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᖅᑖᕆᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐱᔭᒃᓴᖅᑖᕆᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᓪᓗ Roles and responsibilities became confusing ᓇᓗᓈᕿᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᑎᑭᐅᑎᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓂ when school principals are given one set of ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᑦ ᑎᓕᔭᐅᓯᒐᒥ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ instructions and DEAs another set of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒋᓐᖏᑕᖏᓐᓂ ᑐᓂᔭᐅᓪᓗᑎ. instructions on the same issues. The ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ Department of Education’s inconsistent ᐅᐃᒻᒪᑎᑦᑎᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐃᓗᐃᓐᓇᑦᑎᐊᖏᓐᓂ communications continues to cause confusion ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂ ᐊᓪᓚᕕᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᓂᒃ for all parties: DEAs, administration, parents, ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑐᖁᑎᓕᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᓂᓪᓗ. and students.

Issues ᐱᕐᔪᐊᖑᔪᐃᑦ

With the passing of years, the amount of ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᔭᕗᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍ ᐊᓂᒍᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ resources dedicated to student support has ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᓴᓇᖅᑯᑏᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᓄᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓲᑎᓄᑦ eroded. Among many other issues, we ᑐᕌᖓᔪᑦ ᓄᖑᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᓕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ. ᐊᒥᓱᑦ continue to maintain the following issues we ᐅᑯᐊᖑᕗᑦ ᐃᓚᖏᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓂᐊᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑮᓐᓄ have presented to both the Department of ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᕝᕕᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ Education and past Members of the Nunavut ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎᐅᖃᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᕕᓂᕐᓄᑦ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓱᓕ Legislative Assembly. They are: ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓂᐊᖅᐸᒃᑲ:

 The calculation of the student-educator  ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ratio (also known as SER); ᖃᔅᓯᐅᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦᑕ ᐋᖅᑭᑦᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐ  The lack of transparency around how the SER−ᖑᓂᕋᖅᑕᐅᒻᒥᔪᖅ student support assistant positions have  ᒫᓐᓇ ᓴᖅᑭᔮᖅᑎᑎᓐᖏᓗᐊᕐᒪᑕ ᖃᓄᖅ been allocated; ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᖏᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᓇᒧᑦ  The lack of a Nunavut Inuktut curriculum ᐃᓕᐅᖅᑲᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᑦ  ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓄᒃᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ

116

with resources; ᐱᑕᖃᓐᖏᓗᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦ  The declining number of qualified Inuit  ᐱᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᓖᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ teachers and the lack of strategy to ᐅᓄᕈᓐᓃᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓗᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᑐᑭᒧᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᓗ support, recruit, and retain Inuit teachers; ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᑏᑦ ᕿᓂᕐᓂᖅ ᐸᐸᑦᑎᓂᕐᓗ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ  Social passing in the younger grades; ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖏᓐᓂ ᐊᑐᕈᓐᓃᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓗᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂ  Little support for ongoing training for  ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓐᓂᖅᓴᐃᑦ ᐊᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᐃᑦ school community counsellors and student ᐊᓂᒍᖅᑎᑕᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᕐᓂᖏᑦ support assistants;  ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᓐᖏᓐᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓅᓯᓕᕆᔩᑦ  The lack of resources for dealing with ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᓪᓗ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑏᑦ.  students who need supports in the schools ᓴᓇᕐᕈᑎᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ for behavioural challenges; ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓂ ᐱᑦᑎᐊᖃᑦᑕᓐᖏᓐᓂᕐᒥ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᓖᑦ  The lack of real concrete support for  ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᓪᓚᕆᓐᖏᓗᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦ training for DEAs other than financial ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᓕᕆᓐᓇᐅᑉ training; ᐊᓯᐊᒍᑦ  The lack of choices for students who may  ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᒡᒐᒥᓂ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᑎ need vocational training at high school ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᒪᔫᒐᓗᐊᑦ rather than an academic program;  ᓇᓖᕌᕐᕕᔅᓴᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᓐᖏᓗᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦ  A real cooperative, collaborative and ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᓪᓚᕆᒻᒥᒃ respectful working relationship with ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖃᑎᖃᕐᓂᕐᒥᓪᓗ ᐱᑕᖃᓐᖏᓗᐊᕐᓂᖓ DEAs. ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒋ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔩᑦ

Recommendations ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᓕᐊᑦ

As an alternate to Bill 25, we use two sources to form our recommendations. First is to ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᐊᓯᐊᒎᕐᓗᒍ ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓕᖓᔫᓐᓂ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᑕ propose the recommendations outlined by the ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᓕᐅᕐᓂᐊᖅᑐᒍᑦ. ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᐃᑦ Coalition of Nunavut District Education ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ Authorities’ submission be enacted. We have ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᖏᓐᓂᖔᖅᑐᑦ read their submission and agree with their ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᑎᑦ. ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᑐᓐᓂᖅᑯᑎᒋᓚᐅᖅᑕᖏᑦ analysis that the education system in Nunavut ᐅᖃᓕᒫᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᓇᒃᖢᑕᓪᓗ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ is tiered in two levels, one where the French ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᖅ ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓕᖓᒻᒪᑦ. ᐊᑕᐅᓯᖅ ᐅᐃᕖᑦ minority speaking residents have more rights ᐅᓄᓐᖏᓂᖅᓴᐃᑦ ᒫᓂᕐᒥᐅᑕᐃᑦ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᖃᓂᖅᓴᐅᔪᑦ than do our general and Inuit populations, ᐃᓄᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑭᒃᑯᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂ ᑕᑯᓐᓇᕈᑦᑕ despite the commitments made in the Nunavut ᐊᖏᖅᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᕋᓗᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᓄᓇᑖᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ Land Claims Agreement. We agree with their ᐊᖏᕈᑏᑦ ᐃᓗᓕᖏᑦ. ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕗᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᓚᐅᖅᑕᖏᑦ analysis that a unified education system will ᐅᓄᖅᓯᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ ᐃᓱᓕᑦᑎᕙᓪᓕᐊᔪᑦ see greater chances of success for our ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᖅᓴᐅᓕᕐᓗᑎᓪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᓕᕆᓂᐅᑉ students. We will see greater collaboration ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᐱᓕᕆᔪᑦ. and accountability within our education system.

Our second source is based on a research ᐊᐃᑉᐸᖓ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᖃᖅᐳ ᖃᐅᔨᓵᖑᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓂᖔᖅᑐᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᖅᑎᓂ ᐱᓚᐅᖅᑕᕗᑦ report we received from the Qaujigiartiit ᐋᓐᓂᐊᖃᕐᓇᓐᖏᑦᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑏᑦ Health Research Centre (QHRC). The QHRC QHRC−ᖑᓂᕋᖅᑕᐅᓪᓗᓂᓪᓗ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ 2017-ᒥ had conducted research in 2017 of students in ᖃᐅᔨᓴᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑎᓂ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ Nunavut and shares these community and

117

study literature recommendations from their ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᓕᐊᕕᓃᑦ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᐃᓂᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᕕᒻᒥ “Identifying Determinants of School ᐱᔭᕇᖅᓯᓂᕐᒥ ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓐᓂᖅᓴᒥᓂᓪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ Completion, Post-Secondary Education, and ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᔪᓯᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ. Education Success in Nunavut.” ᐱᔭᕆᐊᑐᔪᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑏᑦ, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ Challenging Courses, Student-Educator ᐊᒥᓲᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒧᑦ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ Ratio & One-on-One Learning ᐊᑐᓃᖅᑕᕐᓗᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ

1) Increase access to distance learning 1) ᖃᕋᓴᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᐃᑦ options. ᓇᓖᕌᕈᑕᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ 2) Advocate for improved increase access to ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᓂᖅᓴᐅᓕᕐᓗᑎ. distance learning options. 2) ᖃᕋᓴᐅᔭᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᐊᔭᐅᖅᑐᕐᓗᒋᓪᓗ 3) Advocate for improved connectivity ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑲᑎᓐᖓᓂᖅᓴᐅᓕᕐᓗᑎ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ. within the schools. ᐊᑐᓃᕐᓗᑎ ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᓐᓄᑦ. 4) Separate school Internet policies from the 3) ᖃᕋᓴᐅᔭᑦ ᐊᑐᐊᒐᖏᑦ ᓄᖅᑲᖓᐅᑕᐅᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ more restrictive policies of the ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᖏᓐᓄᑦ. Government of Nunavut. 4) ᐊᔾᔨᐅᓐᖏᓐᓂᕗᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ 5) Adjust the student-educator ratio to ᐃᓂᒃᓴᖃᑦᑎᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᕐᓗᑎ. accommodate for these unique 5) ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᖅ ᖃᔅᓯᓂᒃ circumstances. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᖓ ᐃᓚᖃᕐᓗᑎ ᐅᐸᖃᑦᑕᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᓈᓴᐃᓕᕌᖓᒥ ᐅᐸᐃᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ ᐅᓄᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ. Addressing the Student-Educator Ratio

ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᐊᒥᓲᓂᖏᓐᓂᑦ 1. Adjust the student-educator ratio to ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒧᑦ include non-attenders in the calculation

along with the full-time equivalent 1. ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕐᓗᒋᖅ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᐊᒥᓲᓂᖏᑦ students. ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒧᑦ ᐱᖃᓯᐅᔾᔭᐅᓕᕐᓗᑎᑦ ᐅᐸᖃᑦᑕᖏᑦᑐᑦ. a) This would ensure that class sizes are smaller and more staff is available to a) ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᖓᑉᐸᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑕᑦ ᐅᓄᓐᖏᓂᖅᓴᐃᑦ focus on the diverse needs of every ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᐅᓕᕋᔭᖅᑐᑦ ᐅᓄᒃᑲᓂᖅᑐᓪᓗ student. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐊᑐᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖅᓴᓄᑦ b) This would allow [staff] to continue ᓵᒡᓗᑎᑦ. differentiated instruction but teach b) ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑉᐸᓪᓗ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ groups of students who are one or two ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓇᔭᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥ ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᓪᓗ different levels of learning as opposed ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓂᓖᓐᓇᕐᓄᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐱᖓᓱᑦ to a class with groups of students ᑎᓴᒪᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓐᓂᓕᖏᑎᒍ learning at three or four different c) ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒦᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊᓗ ᐃᓚᖃᕐᓗᑎ levels. ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ ᐅᐸᐃᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᓐᖏᑦᑐ c) Adjusting the student-educator ratio to ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓗᑎ ᐃᑲᔫᑕᐅᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᕐᒪ include students who are not full-time ᐃᓕᓴᖅᕕᒻᒥ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ equivalent would help school staff ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ. more effectively address the learning needs of all students.

118

Addressing Literacy (Recommendations ᐅᖃᓕᒫᕆᐅᖅᓴᓕᕆᓂᖅ (ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᓕᐊᑦ ᐊᖏᕐᕋᒥ from Study Literature) ᐅᖃᓕᒫᕆᐅᖅᑕᓂᕐᒥᒃ)

1. Address literacy levels in the home and 1. ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᓕᐊᕕᓂ ᐅᖃᓕᒫᕆᐅᖅᓴᓂᕐᒥ ᐊᖏᕐᕋᒥ the community, including: ᓄᓇᓖᓪᓗ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ.

a) Literacy initiatives that encourage a) ᐃᓚᒋᐅᓪᓗᒍ ᑎᑎᕋᕆᐅᖅᓴᕐᓂᖅ parental engagement and provide them ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᓪᓗ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᑦ with the resources to do so. ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑐᖁᑎᓖᑦ b) Increase efforts to ensure early ᓴᓇᖅᑯᑎᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᓪᓗ. childhood education opportunities are b) ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᓕᒻᒪᒃᓴᐅᑏᑦ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕈᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᑎᑦ available in every community and are ᓄᓇᕗᓕᒫᒥ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓕᓐᓂ 0-ᒥ 5-ᒧᑦ ᑎᑭᓪᓗᒍ being accessed by all children to the ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕈᖅᓯᒪᓗᑎᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓄᖓ. age of five.

Continuous Progress Model ᑲᔪᓰᓐᓇᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐆᑦᑐᕋᐅᑦ

1. Consider a new model of student progression for implementation, 1. ᓄᑖᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔾᔪᓯᖏᓐᓂ implementing adequate human and ᐃᓱᒪᖅᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᖃᕐᓗᑎᑦ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᐊᖅᑐᓂ financial supports. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖃᑦᑎᐊᕐᓗᑎᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᖅᑎᒍᓪᓗ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᕐᓗᑎ.

2. The model should take into account the unique education needs in Nunavut, 2. ᐊᔾᔨᐅᓐᖏᑦᑐᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖃᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᕗᑦ including but not limited to: ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓚᓕᐅᓪᓗᒍ ᐅᑯᓄᖓ, ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᑦᑐᓐᖏᑦᑐᑦ 1) English Second Language students; 1) ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅᑖᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᔪᐃᑦ; 2) Low levels of literacy in English and

Inuktut; 2) ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᑦ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᓪᓗ ᑎᑎᕋᕆᐅᖅᓴᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ; 3) Low attendance rates; 3) ᐅᐸᖃᑦᑕᓐᖏᓗᐊᕐᓃᖅ 4) High staff turnover rates; 4) ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᑲᑕᓗᐊᕐᓂᖏ; 5) Cultural and language needs among 5) ᐃᓕᖅᑯᓯᕐᓄᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᓪᓗ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᑦ school staff and students; and ᐊᒻᒪ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ; ᐊᒻᒪᓗ 6) Supporting excellence in education in 6) ᐱᐅᓂᖅᐹᒧᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖃᕐᓂᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ Nunavut schools for students who are ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᓐᓂ ᒪᑯᓄ ᐱᒃᑲᐅᓂᖅᓴᓄᑦ. excelling.

Bilingual Model ᒪᕐᕈᐃᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᓂ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᓂ

1. Increase appropriate Inuktut instruction at 1. ᐅᓄᖅᓯᒋᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ all grade levels, with curriculum resources ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᖁᕝᕙᓯᓐᓂᓕᒫᓂ, for educators. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᔅᓴᖃᐅᑦᑎᐊᕐᓗᑎᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᖅᑏᑦ.

2. Ensure adequate levels of literacy in both 2. ᑕᒪᒃᑮ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᖃᓪᓗᓈᑎᑐᓪᓗ English and Inuktut at all grade levels. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᑎᑦ ᐅᖃᓕᒫᕆᐅᖅᓴᕐᓗᑎᓪᓗ.

119

Teacher Retention, Nunavut Teacher ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖃᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᖅ, ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒃᓴᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ Education Program, Local Community & ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ, ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᐃᓄᓐᓂᓪᓗ Inuit Staff, and Staff-Students-Community ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ ᐊᓪᒪᓗ Relationships ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ−− ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᓂᖏᑦ

Community Recommendations ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᓐᓃᑦ

1. Improve teacher retention and teaching 1. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᑦ ᐱᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᓂᖅᓴᐅᓂᖅ success by: ᐃᓕᓴᐃᑦᑎᐊᓂᕐᓗ ᐃᒫᒃ:

a) Creating mentorship programs for new a) ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑐᓂ ᒪᓕᔅᓱᐊᖃᑦᑕᓂᕐᒥ teaching staff; ᐱᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎ ᓄᑖᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ; b) Creating robust orientations to Inuit b) ᐃᓕᑉᐹᓪᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎᑦ ᐃᓄᓐᓂᑦ and northern cultures and ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᓄᓇᖃᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ. communities. 2. ᐊᒥᓱᕈᕆᐊᖅᑕᐅᓪᓗᑎᑦ ᐃᓄᓐᓂᑦ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ 2. Increase the number of Inuit school staff ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒥ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑏᑦ. and teachers. 3. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᓪᓗ ᐱᐅᓯᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓗᑎᑦ 3. Improve and increase delivery of the ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᕈᕆᐅᖅᓴᖅᑎᑦᑎᓂᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ Nunavut Teacher Education Program by ᓄᓇᓕᓕᒫᓂ ᐃᓕᓴᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᓕᕐᓗᑎᑦ.

offering programs in every community. 4. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᖃᑦᑕᕐᒥᓗᑎᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᑦ

ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕈᖅᓴᐃᒐᔭᖅᑐᓂᑦ ᖁᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᒥ 4. Include courses that prepare teachers to ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᔪᓂ. instruct at the secondary school level

ᐅᖃᓕᒫᕆᐅᖅᓴᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᑦ Literature Recommendations 1. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑕᖃᓗᐊᕐᓂᑯᒧᑦ ᓄᖅᑲᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ 1. Address teacher burnout by creating a ᖁᐊᖅᓵᖅᑐᒥᓂᕐᓂᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᕆᐊᕈᑎᖃᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎᑦ trauma informed school culture. ᐊᒃᓱᕈᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥᓂᕐᓂᑦ.

a) Provide educators with the tools to a) ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᔾᔪᓯᔅᓴᑖᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᑎᑦ address the needs of students who ᓱᒋᐊᕈᓐᓇᕐᓗᑎᒃ ᐃᑲᔪᕆᐊᕐᓗᑎᑦ have experienced trauma. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓂᑦ ᖁᐊᖅᓵᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᑦ b) Prevent vicarious stress among b) ᑕᖃᓗᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᑕᐅᑦᑕᐃᓕᒪᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎᑦ teaching staff. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ

Culturally Relevant Curriculum ᐃᓕᖅᑯᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᖃᕐᓗᑎᑦ

1. Develop and implement a standardized 1. ᓴᓇᖃᑦᑕᕐᓗᑎᑦ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑦᑎᓗᑎᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒧᑦ Nunavut-specific and culturally relevant ᑐᕌᖓᑎᑕᐅᔪᓂᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᑦ curriculum for kindergarten to grade 12. ᐱᖅᑯᓯᕐᒧᑦ ᑐᕌᖓᔪᓂᑦ ᒥᑭᔫᑕᐅᓂᖅᐹᖏᓐᓂᑦ 2. Create and staff several curriculum ᖁᑦᑎᓐᓂᓕᖅ 12−ᒧᑦ. specialist positions to help educators 2. ᓴᓇᓗᑎᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᖃᕐᓗᑎᓪᓗ navigate and understand the resources that ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᔅᓴᓕᐅᖅᑎᓂᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖃᑦᑕᕋᔭᖅᑐᓂᑦ are available to them. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᒐᓱᑦᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑭᓱᓂᑦ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᖃᕐᒪᖔᑕ.

120

3. Develop and implement a Nunavut- 3. ᓴᓇᓗᑎᑦ ᐊᑐᕐᓗᑎᓪᓗ ᓄᓇᕗᒧᑦ ᑐᕋᖓᔪᓂᑦ specific departmental exam. ᐃᓕᓯᒪᔭᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒥᒃ.

We encourage you to review and consider the ᑲᔪᖏᖅᓴᐃᒻᒥᔪᒍᑦ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᖃᑦᑕᖁᔨᓪᓗᑕ research and recommendations of the QHRC. ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᖃᖃᑦᑕᖁᔭᐅᓗᑕ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕋᔅᓴᐅᔪᓂᑦ Their findings mirror many of the Iqaluit ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂᑦ ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᓕᐊᖑᓯᒪᔪᓂᓪᓗ DEA and the coalition’s issues that have been ᐋᓐᓂᐊᕕᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗ. ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ shared and are important to consider for ᖃᐅᔨᓴᒥᓂᖏᑦ ᐊᒥᓱᐊᓗᐃᑦ ᐊᔾᔨᒋᒻᒪᒋᑦ. ᐃᖃᓗᓐᓂ student success. Their research is developed ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᓗ in Nunavut and is for the betterment of ᐃᓱᒫᓗᒋᔭᖏᓐᓂᒃ. Nunavut. ᐱᔭᕇᕋᓱᓪᓗᖓᓕ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᐱᕈᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᖃᖅᑐᓂ To conclude, Nunavut has had growing pains, ᐱᔭᕆᐊᑐᔪᖅᓯᐅᖅᑐᖅ, ᐄ, ᑐᑭᓯᓯᒪᔭᕗᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᓯᒪᔭᕗᑦ yes. Now let us use our collective experience ᐊᑐᓚᐅᕐᓚᕗᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦᑎᐊᓂᖅᓴᐅᒐᓱᓪᓗᑕ and better collaborate, respect community ᐃᑉᐱᒋᑦᑎᐊᕐᓗᒋᑦ ᓄᓇᓖᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᖏᑦ ᐱᒍᒪᔭᖏᓪᓗ knowledge and aspirations, and develop a ᐊᒻᒪ ᓴᓇᓗᑎᑦ ᓴᓐᖏᔪᐊᓗᒻᒥᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ strong Education Act which builds upon the ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᒃ. ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᖃᕐᓗᑕ 1970−ᖏᓐᓂ 1980−ᖏᓐᓂ strength and vision from the 1970s, 1980s, 1990−ᖏᓐᓂ ᓴᓐᖏᓂᐅᖃᑦᑕᔪᔪᓂᑦ ᑕᒪᐅᓐᖓ and 1990s. Let’s go into the 21st century ᐊᕐᕌᒍᒧᑦ 2100−ᒧᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᕆᐊᓚᐅᖅᑕ working together to build a system that works ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᓪᓗᑕ ᓴᓇᓗᑕ ᐱᐅᔪᒥᒃ ᓱᕈᓯᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ for our children and for a more strengthened ᓴᓐᖏᓂᖅᓴᐅᓛᕐᒪᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᓇᑯᕐᒦ. Nunavut. Nakurmiik.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ, ᒥᔅᑐ ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒫᓐᓇ Workman. (interpretation ends) We will move ᑕᐃᒪ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᓄᑦ ᓅᒋᐊᖑᓱᓕᕐᒥᒐᑦᑕ ᐊᐱᖅᓱᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ. on now to the question-and-answer portion of ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ ᐊᑎᖁᑎᓐᓂ, ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ. our hearing. The first name on my list, Ms. Angnakak.

Ms. Angnakak: Thank you and welcome, a ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. special welcome to the Iqaluit District ᑐᓐᖓᓱᒋᔅᓯ ᐃᖃᓗᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ Education Authority. ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ.

I would like to start off with asking, on page 1 ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᖃᖅᑳᕈᒪᔪᖓ ᒪᑉᐱᒐᖓᓂ ᑐᓂᓯᒪᔭᔅᓯᓐᓂ of your submission you stated that “IDEA ᑎᑎᖅᑲᒥᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᖃᓗᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ members believe that behavioral challenges ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᑐᓵᓐᖏᓵᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᐃᑦ should be addressed in the classrooms and ᑲᒪᒋᔭᐅᒋᐊᖃᕐᒪᑕ ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ, ᐊᒻᒪᑦᑕᐅᖅ should be specifically included in the ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᒋᐊᖃᖅᑐᑎᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ Education Act.” Can you elaborate a little bit ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥᒃ ᑕᐃᔭᐅᔪᓯᒪᓪᓗᑦ. more on what you consider to be behavioural ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕆᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᑭᐅᒃ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ challenges” and, perhaps, describe how such ᑐᓵᓐᖏᓵᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ ᖃᓄᐃᑉᐸᒻᒪᖔᑕ, ᖃᓄᕐᓗ behavioural challenges should be identified in ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᑕ ᐃᓛᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ individual students? Thank you, Mr. ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᖅ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman.

121

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ. Workman.

Mr. Workman: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ, ᐊᒻᒪ thank the Member for the question. As the ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎ ᐊᐱᕆᒻᒪᑦ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ. ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ NTA representative that presented earlier this ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖓ ᐅᖃᖅᑲᐅᒻᒪᑦ ᐅᓪᓛᖅ morning, he was talking about violence in the ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᐅᑉ ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ classroom. In Iqaluit we have a lot of violence ᐱᑦᑎᐊᖃᑦᑕᖏᑦᑐᓂᑦ ᑲᑉᐱᐊᓈᕿᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᓂᑦ in the classroom. There was a question asked ᐃᖃᓗᓐᓂ. ᐊᒥᓱᐊᓗᓐᓂᑦ ᑲᑉᐱᐊᓈᕿᔪᖃᖅᐸᑦᑐᖅ by one of the Members about “Are the ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᕐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᔪᓂ. ᐊᐱᕆᔪᖃᖅᑲᐅᒻᒥᒻᒪᑦ numbers tracked?” Well, the only way we ᑕᐃᒪ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎᒥᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᖃᔅᓯᐅᒻᒪᖔᑕ track it is by suspension and we have a list of ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᐅᒐᓱᑉᐸᒻᒪᖔᑕ. ᑕᐃᒫᑐᐊᕐᓕ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓲᕗᑦ suspensions every year for students who are ᓄᖅᑲᖅᑎᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᓈᓴᖅᑐᑎᒍ. violent in the classroom with other children in ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ ᓄᖅᑲᖓᑎᑦᑎᒋᐊᖃᖅᐸᑦᑐᒍᑦ their classroom as well as with staff members. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓂᑦ ᑲᑉᐱᐊᓵᕆᔪᒥᓂᕐᓂᑦ ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᕐᒥ The only recourse we have in the current Act ᐊᓯᒥᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖃᑎᒥᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᓂᑦ. is suspension. ᑕᕝᕙ ᓵᕝᕕᔅᓴᑐᐊᕗᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᓂ ᒫᓐᓇ ᓄᖅᑲᖓᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ. We have issues in the elementary school. Of the four schools that we have, the two ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᖃᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᒥᑭᔫᑕᐅᓂᖅᐹᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᔪᓂ. elementary schools are the ones that we notice ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᒥᑭᔫᑕᐅᓂᖅᐹᓂ ᑎᓴᒪᓂᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᖃᕋᑦᑕ ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ ᒥᑭᔫᑕᐅᓂᖅᐹᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᖃᖅᑐᑕ. the most disruption of behavioural issues. ᖃᐅᔨᓯᒪᔪᒍᑦ ᑕᐃᑲᓂ Now, where would we find it in the Act? ᑕᐸᓱᕈᓘᔭᖃᑦᑕᐅᑎᓂᖅᓴᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑑᔮᖅᑐᐃᑦ Well, inclusive education is rather silent in the ᑐᓵᓐᖏᓴᖅᑐᐃᓪᓗ. ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᓇᒦᒃᑲᔭᖅᐸ ᑖᓐᓇ current Act about what that all entails. I ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥ? ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᑎᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᑎᑦᑎᓂᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ understand from questioning, I think Mr. ᑕᕝᕙᐅᓇᓱᑦᑑᒐᓗᐊᖅ. ᖃᓄᖅ ᑐᑭᖃᕐᒪᖔᕐᓗ Rumbolt asked some questions earlier with ᐊᐱᖅᓱᕈᑕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑲᐅᔪᓂ ᒥᔅᑕ ᕋᒻᐴᑦ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᓇᓐᖓᑦ the NTA’s representative here earlier this ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓂ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕋᓱᓐᓂᖅ morning about defining what inclusive ᑐᑭᖓ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᓯᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᓂᖅ education is and he got quite a response, but I ᑭᐅᔭᐅᓪᓗᐊᖅᑲᐅᒻᒪᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᒥᔅᑐ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ thought Mr. Fanjoy did a decent job of ᑭᐅᑦᓯᐊᕋᓱᒋᖅᑲᐅᔭᕋ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕆᓇᓱᑦᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑭᑐᓂᒃ describing it. It is about needs and it is needs ᐱᔪᑦᓴᐅᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ. ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓐᖏᑦᑐᕈᓘᔮᓗᓐᓂᒃ of all kinds. ᐱᒋᐊᖃᖅᐸᖕᒪᑕ.

The department tends to focus on learning challenges and it’s not just learning ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓕᑦᓯᕇᑦᑐᓄᑦ challenges or special needs that we need to ᓵᖓᑦᑎᓂᖅᓴᐅᕙᖕᒪᑕ. ᑖᒃᑯᑐᐊᖑᖏᒻᒪᑕ look at because our schools have changed. ᑕᐃᒫᑑᖏᒻᒪᑕ ᐃᓕᑦᓯᕇᑦᑐᑦ ᑕᕝᕙᑑᖏᒻᒪᑕ They have changed a lot since I was in the ᑕᑯᓐᓇᕆᐊᓕᕗᑦ. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᕕᕗᑦ ᐊᓯᕈᖅᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ. school system. They have changed a lot in the ᐊᓯᕈᖅᓯᒪᔪᒻᒪᕆᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᖓᓂᑦ last ten years. We’re noticing more children ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᖕᒦᖃᑦᑕᔪᓂᕐᓂᑦ. ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑦ ᖁᓕᓂᓪᓗ coming with issues to our school and they act ᐊᓯᕈᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᕆᑦᑐᐃᑦ, ᐊᒥᓲᓂᖅᓴᐃᑦ ᓱᕈᓯᑦ them out. You have to be careful as a teacher ᐃᓯᖅᐸᓕᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐃᓱᒫᓗᑦᓴᐅᑎᒋᓪᓗᑎᒃ or a school administrator of how you handle ᐱᑯᑦᑐᖅᑕᐅᑎᒋᓕᖅᑐᑎᓪᓗ. ᐊᐅᓚᑦᓯᔨᐅᓪᓗᓂ those kinds of circumstances. Restraining ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᖕᒥ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᐊᐅᓚᑦᓯᓇᓱᒋᐊᒥᒃ them and putting your hands on them is not ᑎᒍᒥᐊᒋᐊᖃᖏᒻᒥᒐᑦᑎᒍᑦ.

122

something that is advised. It is a challenge. ᐱᒡᒐᓇᖅᐸᒃᑐᖅ.

We have students, when we talk to their parents about those kinds of issues, what kind ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᑦ ᐅᖃᖃᑎᒋᒐᐃᒐᑦᑎᒍ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ of supports can we give them, and of course ᑐᓵᓐᖏᓵᖅᐸᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᖃᓄᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓗ what we really would like to see is some form ᐃᑲᔪᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᒐᐃᒐᑦᑎᒍ ᐊᐱᕆᓪᓗᒋᑦ. of assessment on those children. It’s one thing ᑕᑯᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᒐᓗᐊᖅᑐᒍᖏᓛᖅ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᓂᒃ if a child is just having a tantrum, but what ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓇᓐᖓᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᓱᕈᓯᕐᓂᒃ ᓱᕈᓯᓛᓂᒃ. we’re noticing is more than that. We have ᓂᓐᖓᐅᒪᓂᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᕙᖏᒻᒪᑦ, heard stories from relatives, we have heard ᕿᓄᖓᓂᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᕙᖏᒻᒪᑦ. ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕐᕕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᒍᑦ stories from different people in the ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᖅᑲᑎᖏᓐᓂᑦ, community that there’s more than that that’s ᐱᔾᔪᑎᑦᓴᖃᕐᒪᑕ. ᖃᓄᕐᓗ ᐃᑲᔪᕈᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑦᑎᒍ going on, and we would like to know how we ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᓇᓱᓲᖑᔪᒍᑦ. can help these children.

In fact we were lucky enough to have been at a conference with...I know I’m talking for, but ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒍᓐᓇᕈᓘᔭᔪᒻᒥᒐᑦᑕ I want to explain this. At a coalition annual ᑲᑎᒪᔾᔪᐊᓂᕐᒨᒍᓐᓇᕈᓘᔭᔪᒐᒪ. ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᑦ general meeting two years ago, we had a ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᔨᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒎᒃ ᒪᕐᕉᒃ ᐊᓂᒍᖅᓯᒪᓕᖅᑐᑦ presentation from NTI about Jordan’s ᑲᑎᒪᓂᕐᔪᐊᕐᓂᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᑕ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᕐᕕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᑦᑕ Principle. Jordan’s Principle is funding ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓐᓂᑦ ᔪᐊᑕᓐ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᑦᑕᕆᔮ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ. ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᔪᐊᑕᓐ ᑐᕌᒐᖓᓄᑦ ᑮᓇᐅᔭᑦ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᔪᑦ available through Health Canada, just putting ᐋᓐᓂᐊᖃᕐᓇᖏᑦᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᓇᑕᒥ. ᐅᖃᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓗᒍ it in general terms, to support First Nations ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ.ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᕈᑎᐅᔪᑦ ᐊᓪᓚᓂᒃ ᐃᓄᓐᓂᓪᓗ and Inuit children who are having challenges ᓱᕈᓯᕐᓂᒃ ᐱᔭᕆᐊᑐᔪᒃᑰᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᖕᓂ. ᑕᑯᔭᕗᑦ in the school system. We see that as a real ᑖᓐᓇ ᑕᕝᕙ ᓇᓖᕌᒐᒃᓴᑦᑎᐊᕙᐅᓇᓱᒋᓪᓗᒍ option for us and we are working on that as ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᓇᓱᑉᐸᕗᑦ ᑕᒪᑐᒧᖓ. we go through the process right now. ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᓯᓂᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᓂᖅ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᓄᖓ For us, inclusive education is silent on ᑲᒪᔾᔪᑕᐅᓇᓱᒻᒪᑦ ᐱᑦᑎᐊᖅᐸᖏᑦᑐᓄᑦ. behavioural challenges in the current Act and ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᕆᐊᖃᖅᐸᓪᓚᐃᔪᖅ we think it needs to be premier because times ᑕᐃᑦᓱᒪᓂᐅᕙᔪᒻᒪᓂᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᒥ ᐊᔾᔨᒋᖏᑦᑎᐊᓕᕐᒪᒍ. have changed. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ. Angnakak.

Ms. Angnakak: Thank you. Thank you for ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᓪᓗ your response. It leads me to my next ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ ᑭᐅᒐᕕᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᐊᐱᕆᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᒪᓯᕗᖓ question. When we talk about violence, the ᐱᑦᓯᐊᖃᑦᑕᐅᑎᕙᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᕋᑦᑕ NTA talked about violence, as you indicated, ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᖅᑲᐅᒻᒪᑕᓗ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑦ and I did ask them myself about tracking. It ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑦ. ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᐅᓇᓱᑉᐸᒃᑲᓗᐊᕐᒪᖔᑕ seems nobody is really tracking this ᐊᐱᕆᖅᑲᐅᒐᒪ. ᐱᒻᒪᕆᐊᓘᓇᓱᒋᒐᒃᑯ information and I think it’s important. You ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᐅᓇᓱᑉᐸᒍᑎᒃ ᖃᑦᑎᐅᕙᓐᓂᖏᑕ can start to see where things are happening. ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᖅᑐᖃᖅᐸᒻᒪᖔᓪᓗ.

Do you feel that there has been a big jump in ᐃᓱᒪᕕᑦ ᐊᒥᓱᕈᑲᓪᓚᓗᐊᕋᓱᒋᓪᓗᒋᑦ

123

increased violence in the classroom that you ᐱᑦᑎᐊᖅᐸᖏᑦᑐᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕ ᐃᒡᓗᕈᓯᖏᓐᓂ? see here in Iqaluit? Do you see a big jump ᐃᖃᓗᖕᓂ ᑕᑯᕙᒃᑲᑦᓰᓛᒃ ᐊᒥᓱᕈᑲᓪᓚᒃᓯᒪᕙ? and, if so, why do you think that is? I guess I ᓱᒻᒪᖏᒃᑯᐊ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᐃᑉᐸᑦ? ᐊᐱᕆᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓗᑎᓪᓗ, would further ask…you were saying that you ᐅᖃᖅᑲᐅᒻᒥᒐᕕᑦ ᑭᐊ ᑲᒪᒋᒻᒪᖔᒋᑦ have to be careful with who is dealing with an ᖃᐅᔨᒪᑦᑎᐊᕆᐊᖃᖅᐸᒻᒥᒐᑦᑎᒍ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᑦ issue like that. How do you feel that these ᐃᓱᒫᓗᓐᓇᖅᑐᑦ. ᖃᓄᕐᓕ ᐃᓱᒪᕕᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ violent outbursts should be treated? Is it the ᐱᑦᑎᐊᖅᐸᖏᑦᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᖕᓂ ᖃᓄᖅ teacher’s responsibility or whose ᑲᒪᒋᔭᐅᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᖁᕕᒋᑦ? ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒧᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐅᕝᕙᓗ responsibility would it be if it’s not? Thank ᑭᓇᐅᑉ ᑲᒪᒋᒋᐊᖃᕋᔭᖅᐸᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᑉ you, Mr. Chairman. ᑲᒪᒋᒋᐊᖃᓐᓂᖏᒃᑯᓂᒋᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Workman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ.

Mr. Workman: No easy questions, right? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᓃᑦᑐᒍᖏᓛᒃ? question, Ms. Angnakak. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᓐᓄᑦ, ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ, ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᓪᓗ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᓐᓄᑦ, ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ. I’m just going to have a minute to think about that. Can you restate the question, please, so I can think of an answer? ᐃᓱᒪᒋᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕆᐊᖃᕋᒃᑯ. ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᒃᑲᓐᓂᕉᒃ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑎᒃᓴᒥᒃ ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕐᓂᐊᕋᒪ?

>>Laughter >>ᐃᓪᓚᖅᑐᑦ

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you.

(interpretation ends) Ms. Angnakak, there ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ, ᐃᒻᒪᖄ were several questions within that question. ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒐᕕᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᑎᑦ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᐅᕋᑖᖏᒻᒪᑕ Just choose one and maybe restate it. Ms. ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᓐᓂᒃ, ᓇᓕᑐᐃᓐᓇᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᖃᕈᕕ Angnakak. ᐊᒻᒪᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐅᖃᕆᐊᑦᓯᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᕐᓗᒍ. ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ.

Ms. Angnakak: Okay, let me choose one. Assuming that violence in the classroom is ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᐊᑏ, ᓇᓕᐊᓐᓂᒃ escalating, it puts a lot more pressure on the ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᖃᓕᕐᓚᖓ. ᐃᓱᒪᓇᕈᓂ teachers to deal with situations that are going ᐱᒃᑯᓗᒃᑐᖃᖅᐸᓐᓂᖓ ᐃᓕᓴᕐᕕᑦ ᐃᒡᓗᕈᓯᖏᓐᓂ on in the classroom that don’t have anything ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ, really to do with the actual teaching. Whose ᐊᒃᓱᕈᖅᑎᑦᓯᓂᖅᓴᐅᓚᖓᒻᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᒃ responsibility do you think it really should be ᖃᓄᖅᑑᕋᓱᒋᐊᒥᒃ ᖃᓄᐃᓐᓂᐅᕙᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᐃᒡᓗᕈᓯᕐᓂ to deal with these kinds of violent outbursts? ᐃᓕᓴᐃᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᑦᑐᐊᓗᐊᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ. ᑭᐊ If it’s not the teacher, who would it be? Thank ᑲᒪᒋᒋᐊᖃᖅᑐᒋᕕᒋᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ you, Mr. Chairman. ᑲᑉᐱᐊᓈᕆᔨᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑦ, ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᓐᖏᑉᐸᑦ ᑭᐊ ᑲᒪᒋᒋᐊᖃᖅᐸᐃᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Workman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ.

Mr. Workman: Yes, that’s a difficult ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᑖᓐᓇ ᑭᐅᔭᕐᓂᖏᑦᑐᐊᓗᒃ question to answer because, really, the teacher ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒃ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ

124

is there when the outburst occurs. Every time ᑕᕝᕙᓃᖏᓐᓇᕐᒪᑦ ᑕᕝᕙᓃᑦᑐᒥᓂᐅᒐᔭᕐᒪᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ I have talked to a teacher about that, they’re ᐱᑦᑎᐊᖏᑦᑐᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᓪᓗ there and it’s usually a child maybe being ᐅᖃᖃᑎᒋᒐᐃᒐᒃᑭᑦ ᑕᐃᑲᓃᑦᑐᒥᓂᐅᓇᕋᖅᑐᓂ ᑖᓐᓇ attacked or just a complete meltdown ᓱᕈᓯᖅ ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑕᒥᓂᐅᓗᓂᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐊᓯᐊᓄᑦ situation and the teacher is there to try to ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐊᔪᕐᓇᖅᓯᑲᐃᓐᓇᓘᓐᓃᑦ. block.

Sometimes we’re lucky enough to have a student support assistant in the classroom, ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨ ᐃᓛᓐᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᖃᓲᖑᒐᓗᐊᑦ which helps, but like I said in our opening ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᕐᒥ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐃᑲᔪᕐᓂᖃᓲᖅ. ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ comments, there’s no real transparent formula ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᖅᑲᐅᔭᓐᓂ ᓴᖅᑭᔮᖅᑐᒥ ᑲᒪᔾᔪᑎᔅᓴᖃᓐᖏᑦᑐᖅ for allocating student support assistants. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓂᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᔅᓴᓂᑦ. Chances are there may not be a student ᐱᑕᖃᕋᔭᖅᑐᓴᐅᓐᖏᒻᒥᒻᒪᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᒥᒃ support assistant, but at least there’s a ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ. ᐃᓕᓴᕕᐅᑉ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖓ communication that can be sent to the school ᑐᖏᓕᖓᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒃᑲᖅᑕᐅᓗᓂ ᐊᒻᒪ ᖃᐃᑦᑕᖅᐳᑦ principal or vice-principal and they come in ᓱᕈᓯᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᓂᑎᑦᑎᓪᓗᓂ ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᓯᖏᑦ. and they will escort the child out or try to get the child out of the classroom.

Obviously the other children are in shock when that sort of thing happens. We’re a bit ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖃᑎᖏᑦ ᖁᐊᖅᓵᖅᓯᒪᑎᓪᓗᒋᖅᑲᐃ. ᐱᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᖅ ᒫᓂ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᑦᑎᓐᓂ fortunate in our schools here that we do have ᐃᓱᒪᓕᕆᔨᖃᐅᕋᑦᑕ. ᐃᓐᓇᑐᖃᕐᓂᓪᓗ school community counsellors and we do ᐃᓕᓴᕕᓐᓃᑦᑐᖃᖅᐸᑦᑐᓂ ᐃᑲᔪᓲᓂᑦ ᐃᓚᖓᒍᑦ. have elders in the school, so that does help to ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎ ᐊᓪᓚᕝᕕᓕᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᓲᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ some degree. Eventually that student will be ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᑉ ᐊᓪᓚᕝᕕᖓᓄᑦ ᑐᖏᓕᖓᓘᓐᓃᑦ escorted to the office and then put in either the ᐊᓪᓚᕝᕕᖓᓅᖅᑕᐅᓲᖅ. ᐃᓕᓴᕕᐅᑉ principal’s office or the vice-principal’s ᐊᓪᓚᕝᕕᓕᕆᔨᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᖃᓯᓴᖅᑕᐅᒐᓱᓲᑦ. ᐃᓛᓐᓂᒃᑯᑦ office. I know that the school administrator is ᐊᔪᕐᓇᓲᖑᒻᒥᔫᒐᓗᐊᑦ. trying to calm them down. Sometimes that doesn’t work.

I remember going to one of the schools here. Well, I went to Joamie School and it was after the student had been there. By that point the ᐃᖅᑲᐅᒪᒻᒥᒐᒪ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᓐᓅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᒪ ᐅᕙᓂ ᔫᒥ parent had been contacted and came up and ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᖓᓄᑦ. ᑭᖑᓂᑦᑎᐊᖓᒍᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎ got the child. Before that it was a good hour ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᓚᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐊᓈᓇᒃᑯᖏᑦ that took place. I went to the vice-principal’s ᖃᐅᔨᒃᑲᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐃᑲᕐᕋᓪᓗᐊᒥᖅᑲᐃ office and it was completely trashed, and this ᐱᓕᕆᐊᖑᓐᓂᔪᔪᖅ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᑉ was an elementary school student. In those ᑐᖏᓕᖓᓅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᒪ ᐊᓪᓚᕝᕕᖓᓄᑦ. kinds of circumstances it’s pretty hard to ask. ᓱᕋᐃᔭᔅᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᑯᓗᑦ ᐊᓪᓚᕝᕕᖓ ᑕᑯᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔭᕋ Of course I met with the parent and asked ᑖᓐᓇ ᒥᑭᔫᑕᐅᓂᖅᐹᓂ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒥ. them, “We want to know how that happened,” ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐱᔭᕆᐊᑐᓲᖅ. ᐊᓈᓇᒃᑯᖏᑦ and unfortunately there has been a history ᑲᑎᒪᖃᑎᒋᔪᔭᕋᓗᐊᒃᑲ ᐊᐱᕆᓪᓗᒋᓪᓗ ᖃᐅᔨᔪᒪᔪᔪᒍᑦ with that child. We suggested that there will ᖃᓄᐊᓗᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓕᑦᑕᓂᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗᑦᑕᐅᖅ be a suspension for a couple of days. We ᐅᖃᖅᑐᑕ ᓄᖅᑲᖓᑎᑕᐅᑲᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᐊᐸᓪᓚᐃᒻᒪᑦ don’t like doing that, but there needs to be a ᐅᓪᓘᓐᓂᒃ ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ

125

time period where we can get the rest of the ᐱᕕᖃᕆᐊᖃᓲᖑᔪᒍᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᐅᖃᑎᖏᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ students in class calmed down and deal with ᖃᓱᓴᕋᓱᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᖃᓚᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ. the circumstances at hand.

We have made recommendations that those children are seen by a medical practitioner. We don’t have to know. The school team ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᓕᐅᖃᑦᑕᖅᓯᒪᔪᒍᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᓱᕈᓰᑦ needs to know how we can move ahead with ᑕᑯᔭᐅᖁᓪᓗᑎᒍ ᐋᓐᓂᐊᓯᐅᖅᑎᓄᑦ ᓘᑦᑖᓄᓪᓘᓐᓃᑦ. some kind of plan in place so we can better ᖃᐅᔨᒪᒋᐊᖃᓲᒍᓐᖏᑦᑐᒍᑦ ᑭᖑᓂᐊᒍᑦ. ᖃᓄᕐᓕ support that student. Maybe there’s something ᓯᕗᒧᐊᕆᐊᔅᓴᕈᑎᔅᓴᓂᑦ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂ ᒪᓕᒋᐊᓕᑦᑎᓐᓂᑦ that triggered that ill behaviour. We’re not ᑕᑯᔪᒪᓲᖑᒐᓗᐊᖅᑐᒍᑦ. ᐃᓐᓇᖃᐃ ᑭᓱᒥᒃᑭᐊᖅ sure. It’s not my role to find out, but certainly ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᖅᑐᓂ ᑲᑉᐱᐊᓈᕿᔭᓕᖅᑐᒥᓂᐅᒻᒪᑦ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ support the student and parents and certainly ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᕆᔪᓐᖏᑕᕋ ᖃᐅᔨᒐᓱᒋᐊᔅᓴᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᕕᒻᒥ the school team has a role to be able to plan ᑲᑐᔾᔨᔪᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒐᓱᒋᐊᖃᖃᑦᑕᓲᖑᒻᒪᑕ supports that maybe we can put in place ᐸᕐᓇᐅᓯᐅᕈᔾᔨᓗᑎᓪᓗ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᖅᑕᐅᒍᑎᔅᓴᖏᓐᓂᑦ immediately so that kind of condition doesn’t ᑕᕝᕙᑦᑕᐅᑎᒋ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᖃᒃᑲᓂᖁᓇᒍ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, happen again. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. ᐅᖃᖅᑏ.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ. Angnakak.

Ms. Angnakak: Thank you. I would like to ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᐊᒻᒪ ᐊᓯᐊᓄᑦ move on to something else to do with ᓄᑦᑎᓚᐅᕐᒥᓚᖓ. ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᓕᒫᖅ inclusive education. You were talking about ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ the school team, but your submission raised a ᑲᑐᔾᔨᔪᖃᕌᖓᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᒻᒥ ᒪᑯᓂᖓ ᓲᕐᓗ number of concerns regarding changes that ᐃᓱᒪᒋᒐᒃᑭᓪᓕ ᐃᒫᖅ ᐊᓯᔾᔩᓚᖓᓐᓂᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᓲᕐᓗ are proposed in Bill 25 with respect to the ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᖃᓄᖅ ᓯᐊᒻᒪᖅᑎᑕᐅᒋᐊᖃᕋᔭᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ delivery of inclusive education. I’m ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᓕᒫᖅ wondering if you can elaborate further on ᐃᓚᐅᒍᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ. ᖃᓄᖅ some of the reasons why you disagree with ᐊᖏᖃᑎᒌᓐᖏᒻᒪᖔᖅᐱᐅᒃ ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ the proposal to designate a main teacher as ᐃᓕᓴᔪᒥᒃ ᐸᕐᓇᑦᑐᐃᖃᑦᑕᕆᐊᖃᓚᖓᒻᒪᑦ being responsible for developing individual ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ. ᖃᓄᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ student support plans. Thank you, Mr. ᐃᓱᒪᒋᒻᒪᖔᖅᐱᐅᒃ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you as ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ. well. Mr. Workman.

Mr. Workman: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Member Angnakak, for the ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᓇᑯᕐᒦᒃ, question. I’m going to agree with Mr. ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ, ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᐃᑦ, ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ Fanjoy’s answer. I think he had an ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᒐᕕᐅᒃ. outstanding answer. It’s a lot for our own ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᑭᐅᖅᑲᐅᔭᖓ ᒥᔅᑕ ᕚᓐᔪᐃ ᑭᐅᑦᑎᐊᖅᑲᐅᒻᒪᑦ classroom teachers now. They have a lot of ᓲᕐᓗ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᐅᓲᑦ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐊᒃᓱᕈᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᒻᒥ work to do. There are a lot of reports. There ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᖏᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᕈᓘᔮᓗ are a lot of things that they have to do in the ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᐃᓲᖑᒻᒪᑕ

126

classroom, a lot of different learning levels in ᐃᓪᓗᕈᓯᖏᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕖᑦ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ the classroom that they have to manage. ᐊᐅᓚᑦᑎᒋᐊᖃᓲᖑᒻᒥᒻᒪᑕ ᐊᒥᓱᕈᓗᓐᓂᑦ.

I think that’s why I talked a few minutes ago in my opening remarks that we had back in ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᒪᑐᐃᖅᓯᒐᒪ ᐅᕙᖓ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᒃᑲᓂᒃ the mid ‘80s, during the board days, the ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᑲᐅᒐᒪ ᑕᐃᔅᓱᒪᓂᓴᐃᑦ 1980−ᒥᓂᓴᐃᑦ position of program support teacher was ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᖃᖅᐸᔪᒐᓗᐊᕐᒪᑕ ᓲᕐᓗ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔨᒋᔭᐅᓗᓂ. created. It was like an in-house consultant and ᐊᒻᒪ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᑦᑎᖃᑕᐅᔨᐅᔪᒻᒪᑦ ᒪᑯᓂᖓ they helped with developing individual ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᖏᓐᓂ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᐃᒻᒥᒍᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ student support plans. We didn’t call them ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᒋᓂᐊᖅᑕᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᕈᑎᒃᑲᓐᓂᑦ that in those days, but that’s what they have ᖄᖓᒍᑦ ᓱᓇᓂᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᐃᒍᑎᐅᒋᐊᖃᕐᒪᖔᑕ become. That position has morphed into the ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᒫᓐᓇᓕ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᑉ student support teacher positions that we have ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᖏᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᓚᒃᑲᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᓕᕐᒪᑕ right now. Most individuals like Mr. Fanjoy ᐊᒻᒪᓗᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᑕᐃᔅᓱᒪᓂᓕ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᔾᔨᐅᖏᑦᑐᓂᑦ mentioned have specialized training in those ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᖁᕝᕙᓯᑎᒍᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ fields and that’s what their job is for. Their ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔨᒋᔭᐅᒻᒪᕆᔪᒻᒪᑕ ᐊᒻᒪ job is to support teachers in the school. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᐊᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᑎᑦ ᐱᓕᒻᒪᖅᓴᖅᑎᐊᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᑎᑦ.

Saddling the main teacher in place, that’s just one more administrative function that they have to do on top of lesson planning and ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐊᓪᓚᕕᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᔭᖏᑦ ᐅᓄᖅᓯᓯᒪᓕᕐᒪᑕ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᖃᕈᓐᓃᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ assessing students’ work every day. I was a ᐅᔾᔨᕆᔭᐅᓯᒪᕙᓪᓚᐃᖏᒻᒥᒻᒪᑦ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ teacher in the classroom for over 15 years ᐊᒥᒐᖅᓯᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᐃᑦ 15 ᐃᓐᓇᕐᓄᑦ before I got into adult education, but your day ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᐅᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᓯᐊᓅᓚᐅᓐᖏᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ. starts before eight o’clock in the morning and ᐅᕙᖓᐃᓛᒃ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ 8−ᒥᒃ ᐱᒋᐊᖅᑐᒍ ᐅᓪᓛᒃᑯᑦ even worse when I was…I shouldn’t say ᐊᒃᓱᕈᕐᓇᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ ᐱᔭᒃᓴᐃᑦ ᐅᓄᖅᑑᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ worse. It was even more challenging when I ᐊᒥᓲᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᑕᒪᒃᐊ ᐅᓪᓗᖅ ᐊᓂᒍᕋᓱᐊᕐᓂᓕᒫᖓᓂ was a school administrator, it was before then, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᖏᕐᕋᕐᒥ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑕᐅᑦᑎᐊᕐᓗᓂ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ and then it would last much longer. I was ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᔪᓐᓇᖃᑦᑕᕐᒪᑕ ᐊᓪᓚᕕᒻᒥᐅᑕᐃᑦ thankful I had a very loving wife that ᐅᕝᕙᓘᓐᓃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᒻᒥ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᐅᔪᐃᑦ supported all of that, but it’s a challenge to be ᑭᒡᒐᖅᑐᐃᒍᑎᖃᕐᒪᑕ ᐅᓄᖅᑐᓂᑦ. added one more responsibility.

Right now the teacher that has to deal with a child is still a part of the school team. They’re ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓲᕐᓗ ᑭᓇᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑎᐅᔪᖅ still part of the development of the individual ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔨᒋᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᐃᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ ᓱᓕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕕᒻᒧᑦ student support plan. It’s not like they’re out ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖅᑎᒋᔭᐅᒻᒪᑦ. ᑕᖅᑳᓂ ᐊᕙᓂᐊᓗᒃ ᓱᓪᓗᑯᑖᒥ in the corridor waiting. They’re actually there ᑕᐃᑲᓂᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅ ᓇᔪᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓲᖑᒻᒪᑕ participating along with the other members of ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑖᒃᑯᓄᖓ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ the school team. It’s the student support ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᐅᑉ. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᒃ teacher that actually writes it up and goes ᐅᖃᖃᑎᖃᖃᑦᑕᖅᑐᑎᓪᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊᑦᑕᐅᖅ through it and talks to other people and makes ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᑦᑎᐊᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔩᑦ ᐃᒻᒥᓂᒃ other people on the school team ensure that ᑲᒪᒋᔭᒋᐊᖃᖅᑕᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᖃᐅᑕᒫᖅᓯᐅᑎᖏᓐᓂᒃ. the plan is a good plan that can be ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. implemented as soon as possible. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

127

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ. Angnakak.

Ms. Angnakak: Thank you. I guess my last question is…I’m throwing my pencil. You ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ. ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒋᔭᕋ have said that you want to reject the proposed ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ. ᖁᔭᓈᖁᒐᕕᐅᒃ ᐲᖅᑕᐅᖁᓪᓗᒍ bill. Is there anything in that bill that the ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᐅᔅᓴᓐᖏᓛᑦ Iqaluit DEA likes? Anything at all? Thank ᓇᓕᐊᓐᓂᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᒐᓗᐊᖅ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ. Workman.

Mr. Workman: No. I mean they may as well drop the Act alone. I talked to the former ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᐋᒡᒐ, ᐱᐅᑦᑕᖏᑦᑐᒍᑦ Assistant Deputy Minister when we first got ᐃᓘᓐᓇᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᐅᓂᖅᑕᖃᖅᑐᒋᓐᖏᑕᕗᑦ. ᑖᓐᓇ elected and when they were looking at Bill 37 ᒪᓕᒐᕆᔭᐅᔪᖅ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᔪᖅ and most of the changes they were looking at, ᓱᕐᕋᑕᐅᓐᖏᓪᓗᓂᐅᒋᐊᓕᒥᓂᐅᔮᕐᒪᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ I mean the real changes other than stripping ᐲᖅᑕᐅᖁᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑕᕗᑦ. ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔭᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ our DEAs of the authorities, I suggested we ᐊᓯᕈᖅᑕᐅᓇᓱᐊᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᓲᕐᓗ have a better working relationship, “Park your ᐊᓯᕈᖅᑕᐅᓪᓚᕆᒐᓱᐊᖅᑐᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓴᓐᖏᓂᕆᔭᖏᓐᓂ ᐲᖅᓯᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑰᔨᒻᒪᑕ. ᐊᑲᐅᔪᒥᓪᓗ acrimony, park your disrespect or you don’t ᒫᓐᓇ ᕿᒃᓱᕈᕐᔭᐅᓯᒪᒐᓗᐊᕋᑦᑕ want to talk to us like regular people. We’re ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᑦᑎᐊᓲᖑᒐᑦᑕ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᐱᒃᑯᒋᓐᖏᓐᓂᕐᒧᑦ part of a team. Park whatever your attitude is ᓲᕐᓗ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᒍᒪᓐᖏᓐᓂᕐᒦᑦᑐᐃᔮᕐᓇᕐᒪᑦ ᑕᐃᒪ because I don’t get it. That’s not what we do ᐃᓚᐅᒐᓗᐊᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᑲᑎᔾᔨᒋᐊᖃᕋᓗᐊᕋᑦᑕ in Nunavut. It’s not part of the IQ principles. ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ. ᑕᐃᒫᒃ ᐱᒃᑯᒋᔭᖃᕋᑦᑕ We are to work together. Frankly, some of the ᐃᓅᖃᑎᒌᑦᑎᐊᕐᓗᑕᓗ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᓄᖅᑲᕆᐊᓕᒃ changes you want to make are really policy ᐊᖏᔪᖅᑲᐅᓴᕐᓂᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇᓕ changes like language of instruction, calendar ᐊᖏᔪᖅᑲᐅᓴᕐᓂᕐᒦᒍᒪᓐᖏᓇᑦᑕ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐅᕙᒍᑦ year.” All those kinds of things can be talked ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᑎᒍᑦ ᐃᓚᐅᒐᑦᑕ about in an open discussion. They don’t want ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᓪᓗᑕ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐱᔭᒃᓴᕆᔭᐅᔪᐃᑦ to do that. They want to change the Act. ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓱᐃᔾᔭᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖅ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ That’s fine. That was rejected and now with ᐃᓗᐊᓂ. ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᒦᒍᒪᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᐊᓯᕈᐃᔪᒪᒻᒪᑕ ᑖᓐᓇ Bill 25 there have been some superficial ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᒃ ᐲᖁᔭᕗᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ changes from Bill 37, but I don’t see anything ᐊᓯᕈᖅᑐᐃᓇᓱᐊᕐᒪᑕ ᐃᓚᖓᓂᒃ ᐊᒥᒐᖅᑰᔨᔪᓂᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ there that has any value. ᑕᑯᓗᐊᓐᖏᑦᑐᒍᑦ ᐱᐅᔪᖅᑕᖃᖅᑐᓂᑦ.

Some of the other previous presenters talked and they spoke about the expansion or ᐃᓚᖏᑦ ᐅᖃᓪᓚᖅᑲᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᓯᕗᓂᐊᒍᑦ extension of the times for the implementation ᐅᖃᓪᓚᖅᑲᐅᔪᑦ ᓯᕗᓂᐊᒍᑦ ᐅᖃᖅᐸᖅᑲᐅᔫᒐᓗᐊᑦ of the Inuktut language implementation for 20 ᐃᓚᓯᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ, ᓲᕐᓗ ᖃᓄᖅ years. Nothing has happened in these first 20 ᓯᐊᒻᒪᒃᑎᑕᐅᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖅ ᐱᓪᓗᒍ, ᖃᓄᕐᓗ years. You have to give us a little more than ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓄᑦ ᐊᕙᑎᓄᑦ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ, ᐊᕙᑎᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑦ “Oh, well, give us another 20 years.” There is ᓯᕗᓪᓕᖅᐹᖏᓐᓂ ᓱᔪᖃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᖏᒻᒪᑦ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ, no strategy. There is no plan. We haven’t seen ᐊᕐᕌᒍᐃᑦ ᐊᕙᑎᒃᑲᓂᕐᓂᒃ ᐅᑕᖅᑭᑲᓐᓂᓂᐅᔭᕋᑦᑕ any strategy or plan. If there is, why don’t we ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᖃᕋᓂᓗ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇᓗ ᖃᓄᖅ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎ ᓱᓇᐅᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᑕᑯᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᓇᑕᓗ ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᖃᕐᓂᕈᓂ.

128

see it? How can we make those milestones ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᑦᑐᒦᒻᒪᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᕗᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪᐃᒻᒪᓪᓗ actually really occur? That is the part that we ᐃᓚᐅᔪᒪᕗᒍᑦ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓂᐊᖅᑎᓪᓗᒍ would like to be a part of helping to develop ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᑎᒍᑦ ᑕᒡᕙ ᐃᓚᐅᔪᒪᓪᓚᕆᑉᐳᒍᑦ. it, whether it is the coalition or the DEAs. ᐅᕙᒍᑦ ᑕᑯᖏᑦᑐᑦ.

I would rather just keep the current Act and then work on a better working relationship ᒫᓐᓇ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᕐᔪᐊᒃᑯᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖓ with the Department of Education, provided ᐊᑕᑐᐃᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒍ ᑕᐱᖃᑎᒌᑦᓯᐊᕐᓂᖅᓴᐅᒐᑦᑕ they want a working relationship with the ᑖᒃᑯᑎᒎᓇ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ, ᐅᕙᒍᑦ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖃᑎᒌᑦᓯᐊᓂᕐᒧᑦ DEAs. Support us. Since 2000 there has been ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᑦᓯᐊᕆᐊᖃᖅᓯᒪᒻᒥᒐᑦᑕ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᖓᓂᑦ very little contact. That is what I said in my 2000-ᒥᓂᑦ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ, ᖃᐅᔨᒋᐊᕐᕕᐅᓗᐊᖃᑦᑕᓐᖏᓇᑦᑕ opening remarks. There has been very little ᑕᐃᒪᓐᖓᓂᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᒥᓂᑦ 2000−ᒥᓂᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ ᓲᕐᓗ contact. The little contact that we’ve had has ᐃᓚᖓᓂᑦ ᐊᒥᒐᖅᑐᒥᒃ. ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᖃᓄᕐᓕ been acrimonious. It has been directive. It is ᐃᓱᒪᕖᖅᑕᐅᒐᑕ, ᓲᕐᓗ ᐅᑯᐊ ᑕᒡᕙ ᐃᒪᐃᑑᓂᐊᖅᐳᐃᑦ not advisory. The tone has been top-down and ᐃᒪᓐᓇᖔᖅ ᐊᖏᔪᖅᑲᐅᓯᕐᕕᐅᖔᖅᖢᑕ we’re on the down. I don’t like being talked ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᑦᓯᐊᖏᓐᓂᕆᔭᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᐃᖏᓐᓇᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ down to. Our members on our DEA don’t like ᑕᐃᑲᓐᖓᓂᑦ. ᖁᕕᐊᓱᖏᑉᐳᒍᓪᓗ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ being talked down to. The other board ᐱᒃᑯᒋᔭᐅᓂᕐᒦᓐᖏᓇᑦᑕ ᓲᕐᓗ members at the Coalition of Nunavut DEAs ᒥᑭᓂᖅᓴᒦᑎᑕᐅᓂᑦᑎᓐᓄᑦ ᓇᓕᒧᒌᓐᖏᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ. don’t like being talked down to. We are all ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᖃᑎᒌᑦᓯᐊᕆᐊᖃᕋᑦᑕ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᑦᓯᐊᕐᓗᑕ equal. We all have a role to play. We all have ᐅᕙᒍᑦ ᕿᑐᕐᖓᕆᔭᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᑕᖏᕐᓗᑕ ᐃᓘᓐᓇᑕ ᑕᒪᐃᓃᓐᖔᖅᓯᒪᔪᑎᒍᑦ, ᐃᓛᒃ, a value in the way our children should be ᐅᕙᒍᓗᑦᑖᖅ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇ educated and it has to be respected with the ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᑦᑎᐊᕆᐊᖃᕋᓗᐊᕋᑦᑕ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐱᓪᓗᒋᑦ. department, and the department doesn’t listen.

I took a look at a letter that the former Minister of Education, Minister Tapardjuk, sent me when I was a stakeholder in another role 10 years ago. He asked how his department used IQ principles in ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᑦ ᐃᓚᖓᑦ ᑕᐃᓐᓇ implementing the former Act, the Act that ᒥᓂᔅᑑᑎᓪᓗᒍᑦᑕᐅᖅ, ᑕᐹᕐᔪᒃ, ᐊᕐᕌᒍᐃᑦ ᖁᓕᑦ made Royal Assent in 2008, and I listed them, ᓈᓯᒪᓕᖅᑐᑦ. ᐊᐱᕆᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒻᒥᒻᒪᑦ ᖃᓄᕐᓕ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ listing my position of each of the IQ ᐊᕕᑦᑐᕐᕕᒋᓯᒪᔭᖓᓐᓂ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓂᕆᔭᖏᑦ principles and frankly most of them maintain ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒋᓗᒋᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᑲᔪᓯᑎᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᖅ today no collaboration. When we talked in 2000−ᒥᑦ ᑕᐃᒫᖅᓱᑎᒍᓪᓗ? ᐊᒻᒪᓗ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓄᐃᑦ meetings, we were talked down to. They had ᖃᐅᔨᒪᓂᑐᖃᖏᑦ ᑭᓲᒻᒪᖔᑕ ᐃᓚᖏᑦ ᓱᓕ already made a decision of the way it was ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᒻᒪᑕ. ᑕᐱᖃᑎᒌᖏᓐᓂᖅ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᓄᐃᑕᒻᒪᑦ. going to be implemented and even though ᐅᖃᓪᓚᕝᕕᐅᑐᐃᓐᓇᕈᒪᖏᑦᑐᒍᑦ ᒥᑭᓂᖅᓴᐅᖁᔨᓗᑕ there were many people in the room, people ᐃᒪᓐᓇ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᒥᓱᑦ from Culture and Heritage… . In my case I ᑕᕝᕙᓃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔫᒐᓗᐊᑦ ᐱᖅᑯᓯᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓃᓐᖔᖅᑐᑦ was from the Nunavut Employees Union, the ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ Nunavut Teachers Association was there, NTI ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᓐᓂᑦ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐅᓄᓐᓂᖅᓴᓂᒃ was there, NTI had more than one ᑭᒡᒐᑐᖅᑎᖃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᓄᓇᕗᒃᑯᑦ. ᖃᓄᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅ representative, and we were not respected. It ᓂᓪᓕᕋᓗᐊᕈᑦᑕ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᕙᒌᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑕ. didn’t matter what we said. They had already ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᒫᓐᓇ ᐊᑐᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑰᔨᒐᑦᑕ predetermined what the outcome was, much ᐱᔭᕇᖅᓯᒪᔫᔮᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᑲᔪᓯᑎᑦᓯᓇᓱᑦᑑᔮᕐᒪᑕ

129

like this process. ᒫᓐᓇᐅᔪᒥ.

If you look at the legislative proposal that was given in cabinet back in June or July of 2018, ᑕᐃᑦᓱᒪᓂ ᔪᓚᐃ, 2018-ᒥ, ᓲᕐᓗ ᖃᓄᖅ it basically lays out what is going to happen in ᓯᐊᒻᒪᑎᑦᓯᓂᐊᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᓯᕗᓂᒃᓴᒧᑦ ᑖᑦᓱᒪ ᐊᔾᔨᖓᓂᒃ Bill 25. Thankfully I was able to get a copy of ᐱᓚᐅᕋᑦᑕ ᖃᓄᖅ ᓯᐊᒻᒪᒐᔭᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ. ᑕᐃᒫᑦᓴᐃᓐᓇᖅ that. I have seen it panned out the same way. ᐊᔾᔨᑐᐃᓐᓇᕆᔭᖓᓂᒃ ᑕᐃᑦᓱᒪᓂᑎᑐᑦ It didn’t matter what happened during the ᐸᕐᓇᐅᑎᐅᒌᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖅ 37 community consultations. It was preplanned ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒻᒥᒻᒪᑦ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ, all the way, just like Bill 37. It was structured, ᐋᖅᑭᑦᑕᐅᕙᒌᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᓂ ᖃᓄᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᖅ formatted, and frame-worked. It didn’t matter ᑭᐅᕕᐅᒐᓗᐊᕈᓂ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑲᔪᓰᓐᓇᕈᑎᐅᕙᒌᓐᓂᐊᓂᕐᒪᑦ what happened in the community ᐃᓗᓕᕈᓘᔭᖏᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 consultations. Very few of those comments ᑕᐅᑐᒻᒥᔭᕋ ᐋᖅᑭᑦᑕᐅᕙᒌᖅᓯᒪᔪᑐᑦ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, actually made it into Bill 25. That’s my ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ. answer.

Chairman: I’m going to give the Minister a chance to respond. Mr. Workman touched on ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᑭᐅᕕᖃᖅᑎᑦᓯᖔᕐᓂᐊᕋᒪ a large number of issues in his response. ᒥᓂᔅᑕᒥᒃ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᐆᒃᒥᓐ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᑲᐃᓐᓇᕐᒪᑦ ᐅᓄᖅᑐᓂᒃ Minister, in terms of the current Act, as the ᐱᔾᔪᑕᐅᕙᑦᑐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᑭᐅᒍᑎᒥᓂᒃ. ᐊᒻᒪᓗᖃᐃ, witness just mentioned, the current Act, the ᒥᔅᑐ, ᐃᓱᒪᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᒫᓐᓇᐅᔪᒥ ᐱᕈᔭᐅᔪᒥᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᓱᖅᑕᐅᔪᖅ ᐅᖃᓵᕐᒪᑦ, ᒪᓕᒐᐅᔪᖅ ᒫᓐᓇ 2008−ᒥ existing 2008 Education Act, would be fine ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖓ ᑖᓐᓇ left alone without Bill 25. I think it’s obvious ᓱᕐᕋᑕᐅᖁᓇᓂᐅᒃ ᐊᒻᒪ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ 25 ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐃᓕᑦᓯ that your department doesn’t agree with that ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᑕᒪᑐᒥᖓ ᐊᓯᐊᓂᒃ opinion. In terms of the improvements that ᐃᓱᒪᖃᕋᑦᑎ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ your department sees that would come should 25 ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᓐᓂᕈᓂ. ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ. Bill 25 be approved, Minister Joanasie.

Hon. David Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᖅ ᑕᐃᕕᑎ ᔪᐊᓇᓯ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, Chairman. I thank the IDEA membership for ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᓇᑯᕐᒦᖅᑐᒋᓪᓗ. their extensive background information on ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓗᓕᑯᓘᔭᖃᑲᐃᓐᓇᕐᒪᑕ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᔅᓴᒥᓂᖏᑦ education in Nunavut too. ᑎᑎᖅᑲᑎᒍᑦ.

This has been a long process that we have come to, to date. I explained yesterday that it has been a culmination of six years in the making. With the recommendations from the ᑕᒪᓐᓇᐃᓛᒃ ᐊᑯᓂᕈᓘᓕᕐᒪᑦ ᐅᖃᓚᐅᕐᒥᒐᒪ ᐃᑉᐸᑦᓴᖅ Auditor General from 2013, from the Hall ᐊᕐᕌᒍᐃᑦ ᐱᖓᓲᔪᖅᑐᑦ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᔭᐅᓯᒪᓕᕐᒪᑦ. report in 2015, and the Special Committee to ᑭᖑᓂᐊᓂ 2013 ᓈᓴᐅᓯᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑭᓪᓕᓯᓂᐊᖅᑎᒃᑯᑦ Review the Education Act, we had to consider ᐅᓂᒃᑳᖓᓂᒃ ᑭᖑᓂᐊᓂ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ, ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᒥ all those in addition to all the community ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᒃᑯᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖓᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ consultations that have taken place to date. ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᖁᔭᐅᓯᒪᑎᓪᓗᒍ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᑎᒎᓇ. We understand that we cannot please ᑐᑭᓯᐊᔪᖓᐅᒐᓗᐊᖅ ᐃᓘᓐᓈᓗᑎᑦ ᐃᒪᓐᓇ everyone, but we’re looking at the whole, ᖁᕕᐊᒋᔭᓕᒫᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᑐᓂᔪᓐᓇᓐᖏᑕᐃᓐᓇᕋᓗᐊᕗᑦ. broad spectrum of education in Nunavut and we feel that the proposals that we are

130

presenting is with the intent of providing a ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᐱᑦᑎᐊᓂᖅᐹᒥᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ quality education and to improve student ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᐱᔭᕇᕈᓐᓇᕐᕕᐊᖃᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᐃᒪᓐᓇᒃ outcomes. Those are the foundation that has ᑕᐅᑐᒃᑲᑦᑕ. ᐅᓪᓗᒥ ᑕᕝᕙ ᑕᕝᕙᓃᔾᔪᑎᒋᔭᕗᑦ. brought us here today.

In terms of some of the things on inclusive education that were discussed, we are trying to look at how inclusive education can be ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ better implemented in our schools. We ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᕆᐊᖃᖅᒪᒐᑦᑕ ᖃᓄᖅ understand the provisions now as it stands in ᐋᖅᑭᑉᐹᓪᓕᕈᓐᓇᕐᒪᖔᑎᒍᑦ ᓯᐊᒻᒪᖅᑎᑕᐅᓗᓂ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ our current Act, there could possibly be some ᖃᓄᖅ ᐊᐅᓚᑕᐅᓂᕆᓲᕆᔭᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᑎᒍᑦ. clarifications made on what inclusive ᓱᖅᑯᐃᓇᖅᑎᑦᑎᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᑐᒍᑦ ᑭᓲᒻᒪᖔᑦ ᖃᓄᖅ education means, but we do have a directive ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦᑎᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖃᓄᖅ on education support services, which provides ᐃᑲᔪᕈᑎᐅᓲᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕐᕕᓐᓂ ᑭᓲᒻᒪᖔᑕ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ clear directions for teachers in determining ᓱᓇᐅᒻᒪᖔᑕ ᐋᖅᑭᒃᓲᔾᔭᐅᔭᕆᐊᓖᑦ ᖄᖓᒍᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅ. which education supports are required. We ᐅᖃᐅᓯᔅᓴᖃᕐᕕᒋᓂᐊᕋᑦᑎᒍᑦ ᓯᕗᒧᐊᕋᓱᓐᓂᑦᑎᓐᓂ. want to build on that. This is something that we want to continue discussing moving forward.

Some of the recommendations, we understand, like I said, may not be pleasing ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᐅᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᓲᖃᐃᒻᒪ for everyone, but they are coming from ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᓕᒫᖅ ᓈᒻᒪᒋᔭᐅᔾᔮᖏᒻᒪᑕ ᐃᓘᓐᓇᖏᓐᓄᑦ. certain reports that we have really looked at ᕿᒥᕐᕈᐊᖃᑎᒌᑦᑎᐊᕐᓂᐊᕆᕗᒍᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑎᒌᑦᑎᐊᕐᓗᑕ closely. We can’t commit to every single ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐊᑐᓕᖁᔭᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᐃᓘᓐᓇᑎᑦ ᓱᓕᔪᒥᒃ ᐃᒪᓐᓇ recommendation from everybody and it would ᑲᔪᓯᓂᐊᖅᐱᑖ ᑲᔪᓯᓂᐊᓐᖏᓚᒍᑦ be quite insurmountable to put everything all ᐃᒪᐃᑦᑑᔾᔮᖏᑦᑐᒎᒐᓗᐊᖅ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ in place, what everybody wants all at the same ᐋᖅᑭᑉᐸᓪᓕᐊᒍᓐᓇᖁᓂᐊᕋᑦᑎᒍᑦ time, if I’m making any sense, but it has been ᑐᑭᑖᖅᓯᒪᔫᔮᓐᖏᑦᑑᒐᓗᐊᑦ ᐃᓚᖓᓂᒃ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ a long process to date. ᐊᑯᓂᐅᔪᒥᒃ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᕆᔭᐅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ.

I want to also point out that the Education Act, also there are provisions wherein five years from now there is going to be another ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖓᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᐃᑦ ᑕᓪᓕᒪᑦ Education Act review that happens. This is an ᓈᑉᐸᑦ ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔭᐅᒋᐊᖃᓚᖓᒻᒥᒻᒪᑦ. ᓄᓇᕘᒥ ongoing thing that we’re going to continue to ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᖓᑦ ᓱᓇᒥᒃ have to do in Nunavut is look at the Education ᐊᒃᓱᕈᕈᑎᖃᖅᐱᑖ, ᓱᓇᓂᒃ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᑎᖃᕆᐊᖃᖅᐱᑖ. Act, what are the challenges in implementing ᒫᓐᓇ ᓱᓇᒥᒃ ᐅᓪᓗᒥᓯᐅᑎᓄᑦ ᓱᓇᒥᒃ it, how can we make it better, and looking at ᐊᑑᑎᖃᕆᐊᖃᖅᑐᓄᑦ ᑭᓲᕙᑦ, ᐃᒪᓐᓇᒃ ᑕᕝᕙ the current realities. This is something that we ᑲᔪᓰᓐᓇᕐᓂᐊᕐᒥᔪᒍᑦᑕᐅᖅ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. will continue to do on an ongoing basis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) As Mr. Workman ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ) ᒥᔅᑐ ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ mentioned, this is something that has been ᐅᖃᖅᑲᐅᒥᒻᒪᑦ

131

ongoing since the creation of Nunavut. It ᑕᐃᒪᓐᖓᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᐱᓐᖑᖅᑎᑕᐅᑎᓪᓗᒍ seems that the work on the Education Act, ᑕᒪᓐᓇᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᑲᔪᓰᓐᓇᕐᒥᒻᒪᑦ. ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊᑦᑕᐅᖅ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓪᓗ revisions, reports, and special committees and ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕆᐊᖅᐸᓐᓂᕐᓗ ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᑲᔪᓰᓐᓇᕐᒪᑦ. ᐊᕐᕌᒍᐃᑦ in five years there will be another process ᑕᓪᓕᒪᑦ ᓱᓕ ᓈᒻᒥᑉᐸᑦ ᓱᓕ ᑲᔪᓯᓚᖓᒻᒥᒐᑦᑕ. beginning. (interpretation) Ms. Angnakak, are (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᒥᔅ ᐊᕐᓇᒃᑲᖅ, ᑕᐃᒫᖅᐱᑦ. ᒪ’ᓇ. you done? Yes. Thank you. Ms. Towtongie. ᒥᔅ ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ.

ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. Ms. Towtongie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I ᒪᕐᕉᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᔅᓴᖃᖅᑐᖓ. ᑕᐃᒪ have a couple of questions. One of the issues ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᔭᔅᓯᓐᓂ ᒪᓕᒐᕋᓛᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ raised in your submission addresses the issues ᐱᓕᕆᖃᑕᐅᔪᐃᑦ ᐃᓚᐅᖃᑦᑕᖏᓐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ of regulations and the lack of involvement by ᓴᖅᑭᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ. ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᕐᓂᖅ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ stakeholders and others in their development. ᒪᓕᒐᕋᓛᓂ ᐱᕕᖃᖅᑎᑦᓯᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᑦ The legislative process in Nunavut does not ᕿᒥᕐᕈᔪᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᐅᔪᓂᒃ, ᑕᐃᒪᐃᓐᓂᖓᓄᑦ currently provide for this Committee to ᐱᒋᐊᓪᓚᕝᕕᖃᖅᑎᑕᐅᕙᓐᖏᓚᑦ. ᑕᒡᕙ, ᐃᒡᕕᑦ review draft regulations before they are ᑕᐅᑐᑦᑖᒍᑦ, ᖃᓄᐃᑦᑐᒥᒃ ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᓇᓲᑎᖃᕆᐊᖃᖅᐸᑦ brought into force. From your prospective, ᐱᕙᓪᓕᐊᔭᐅᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᐅᔪᐃᑦ what process should be followed in the ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᖅᑕᐅᔾᔪᑎᑦᓴᒧᑦ ᐅᓪᓗᒥ ᒪᓕᒐᐅᔪᒥᒃ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ development of regulations to support ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ. Nunavut’s Education Act? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ.

ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᓐᓄᑦ. ᒪᓕᒐᐅᔪᖅ Workman. ᒫᓐᓇᐅᔪᒥ ᐱᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᐊᖏᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᖅ ᑲᔪᓯᑎᑕᐅᓪᓗᓂ

ᑲᓇᑕᐅᑉ ᒐᕙᒪᒃᑯᖏᓐᓄᑦ 2008−ᒥ. ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐊᖑᓯᒪᔪᑦ Mr. Workman: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I ᑕᕝᕙᓐᖓᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒥᒃ ᐱᐊᓂᒃᓯᒪᖏᒻᒪᑕ. thank the Member for the question. The current Act received Royal Assent in 2008. ᐃᓚᒋᔭᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᖓ ᑎᒥᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᐊᑦᑐᐊᖃᑕᐅᔪᓂ The regulations for that Act are not finished. ᐊᓯᐊᓂᒃ ᑲᒪᒋᔭᒃᓴᖃᖅᑎᓪᓗᖓ. ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑎᖃᓯᒋᐊᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᒍᑦ I was part of a stakeholder group in another ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᓕᐅᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᑦᑐᐊᖃᑕᐅᔪᑎᒍᑦ, ᓄᓇᕗᑦ role. We started the regulation process as ᑐᓐᖓᕕᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓚᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᓪᓗᑎᒃ, ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᓪᓗ stakeholders. NTI was there and the coalition ᐃᓚᐅᓪᓗᑎᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᐊᓯᖏᑦ ᐊᑦᑐᐊᖃᑕᐅᔪᐃᑦ was there. Other members that were part of ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᓂ ᐱᒋᐊᓯᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᕗᑦ 2009ᒥ. ᐊᕐᕌᒍᑕᒫᑦ the stakeholder committee started in 2009. We ᐱᓕᕇᓐᓇᖅᐸᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᒍᑦ ᓄᖅᑲᐃᓐᓇᖅᑐᑕ 2013-ᒥ, went through pretty much every year until ᐅᐱᕐᖔᒧᑦ 2013ᒥ ᑎᑭᑦᑐᒍ ᓄᖅᑲᓕᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑕ. 2013. Until the spring of 2013, they stopped. I ᖃᐃᖅᑯᔭᐅᓯᒪᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᓯᒪᕗᖓ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᕐᒧᑦ have only been invited to a meeting regarding ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᕆᓂᐅᔪᒧᑦ ᐅᑭᐅᑦ ᒪᕐᕉᒃ education staff regulation two years ago by ᐊᓂᒍᖅᓯᒪᓕᖅᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᕐᔪᐊᒃᑯᓐᓄᑦ the department as a representative on the ᑭᒡᒐᑐᖅᖢᖓ ᓄᓇᕗᒻᒥ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᑦ Coalition of Nunavut DEAs. That was two ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᒃᑯᓐᓂᑦ. ᐅᑭᐅᑦ ᒪᕐᕉᒃ ᐊᓂᒍᖅᓯᒪᓕᖅᑐᑦ. years ago and we have heard nothing yet. ᑕᐃᒪᓐᖓᓂᑦ ᑐᓴᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅᓯᒪᖏᓚᒍᑦ.

To me it’s incredible that you have an Act ᐅᕙᓐᓄᓪᓕ ᑲᒪᓇᖅᑑᕗᖅ ᐊᐱᕆᓯᒪᓐᖏᓇᑦᑎ that’s 11 years old, going on 12 years old, yet ᐅᕙᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᑭᐅᑦ ᐱᖓᓲᓕᖅᑐᑎᒃ ᐅᑭᐅᑦ 12- the regulations are not completed yet. I don’t ᖑᓕᖅᑐᑎᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓱᓕ ᐱᔭᕇᖅᓯᒪᖏᒃᖢᓂ. get it. I mean, how difficult is it? Some of ᖃᓄᑭᐊᖓᐃ, ᐃᓛᒃ, ᖃᓄᖅ ᐊᒃᓱᕈᓐᓇᖅᑎᒋᒻᒪᑦ? ᐃᓚᖏᓪᓗ

132

those regulations that are left and the ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊ ᒪᓕᒐᐅᔪᑦ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᑕᐅᕙᓪᓕᐊᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᐊᒻᒪ education staff regulation, I thought, was a ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓄᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᐅᔪᐃᑦ piece that should have been dealt with sooner ᑲᒪᒋᔭᐅᓪᓗᐊᖅᓯᒪᓕᕋᓗᐊᕐᒪᑕ ᕿᓚᒥᐅᓂᖅᓴᒃᑯᑦ rather than later, but it has been two years. ᑭᖑᓂᐊᓗᐊᓂᐅᖏᑦᑐᖅ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂᓕ, ᐅᑭᐅᑦ ᒪᕐᕉᒃ Like I said, two years ago we had a meeting. ᐊᓂᒍᖅᓯᒪᓕᖅᐳᑦ. ᐅᖃᖅᑲᐅᒐᒪ, ᐅᑭᐅᑦ ᒪᕐᕉᒃ We gave our thoughts on the matter. We ᐊᓂᒍᖅᓯᒪᓕᖅᑐᓂ ᑲᑎᒪᓂᖃᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᒐᑦᑕ haven’t heard anything back since. ᐅᖃᐅᓯᖃᖅᐸᒃᖢᑕ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ ᐱᔾᔪᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᓂᒃ. I just think that there needs to be a regular set ᑕᐃᒪᓐᖓᓂᑦ ᑐᓴᖅᑎᑕᐅᓯᒪᓐᖏᓚᒍᑦ. of stakeholders that can meet on education matters and we can get those completed if ᐃᓱᒪᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᐳᖓᓕ ᐃᓚᐅᓂᖃᐃᓐᓇᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖓᓂᒃ there’s motivation from the department to ᐊᑦᑐᐊᖃᑕᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᑎᒥᐅᔪᓂᒃ ᑲᑎᒪᖃᑦᑕᑐᑦᓴᓂᒃ have it done. That’s just my thoughts. Thank ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᖅᑐᓂᒃ, ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊᓗ you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you. ᐱᔭᕇᕈᓐᓇᓕᕐᓗᑎᒍ. ᑲᔪᖏᖅᓯᒪᑦᑎᐊᕈᑎᒃ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᕐᔪᐊᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᐊᓂᒃᑕᐅᓯᒪᓕᖁᓪᓗᒍ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. ᑕᒪᓐᓇᓕ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᑐᐃᓐᓇᖅᑕᕋ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ, Towtongie. ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ.

Ms. Towtongie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅ ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ. My final question, in your conclusion on page 3 of your submission you stated, “We need ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ. ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᒪ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ. ᐱᐊᓂᒍᑎᓐᓂ ᒪᑉᐱᒑᓂ 3-ᒥ stronger legislation that will ensure that ᐅᓂᒃᑳᓕᐊᕆᓯᒪᔭᓐᓂ ᐅᖃᖅᓯᒪᒐᕕᑦ, ᓲᖑᓂᖅᓴᓂᒃ students are equipped with all the tools they ᒪᓕᒐᖃᕆᐊᖃᖅᐳᒍᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᐅᔪᑦ require to succeed in the language of their ᐱᓇᓲᑎᖃᑦᓯᐊᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᑕᒪᐃᓐᓂᓗᑦᑖᖅ choice, that protects them and their parents’ ᑲᔪᓯᑦᓯᐊᕈᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ rights to an inclusive environment with ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕈᑎᒋᔪᒪᔭᒥᓂᒃ. ᓴᐳᔾᔭᐅᓯᒪᒍᓐᓇᖁᓪᓗᒋᑦ transparent administrative structure.” Do you ᐊᖓᔪᖅᑳᒥᑕᓗ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᐅᑎᒥᓐᓂᒃ have any specific suggestions? Let’s say the ᐃᓚᓕᐅᑎᓂᖃᑦᓯᐊᖅᑐᒥ ᐊᓚᒡᒐᐃᑦᓯᐊᖅᑐᒥᓪᓗ Education Act passes, but do you have ᐃᓂᓪᓚᖓᓂᖓᑕ ᐊᓪᓚᕝᕕᓕᕆᓂᐅᑉ ᐊᐅᓚᓂᖓᒍᑦ. specific suggestions for specific amendments ᑭᑐᓪᓚᑦᑖᒥᒃ ᐃᓱᒻᒥᕈᑎᑦᓴᖃᖅᐱᑦ? ᓲᕐᓗ, to the current Education Act that you could ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ ᑲᔪᓯᓇᔭᖅᐸᑦ, provide to the Committee for our ᑭᑐᒥᒃ ᐃᓱᒻᒥᕈᑎᑦᓴᖃᖅᐱᑦ ᑭᑐᒧᑦ consideration, provide it so we can consider ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᑎᑦᓴᐅᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᒫᓐᓇᐅᔪᖅ ᒪᓕᒐᐅᔪᒧᑦ those? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My final ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᓂᕐᒥ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᑎᔪᓐᓇᑕᓐᓂᒃ question. ᑲᑎᒪᔨᕋᓛᓄᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᒃᓴᖅᓯᐅᕈᑎᒃᓴᑎᓐᓄᑦ? ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᑭᖑᓪᓕᖅᐹᖅ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᓐᓂ. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Workman. ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑐ ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ.

Mr. Workman: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒍᑦ): ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ thank the Member for the question. You’re ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ ᒪᓕᒐᓕᐅᖅᑎᐅᔪᖅ ᐊᐱᖅᑯᑎᓐᓄᑦ. going to give me a blank cheque? That’s ᓄᐃᑦᓯᒍᓐᓇᑎᑦᓯᐊᓕᖅᐸᒻᒪ, ᒪᐃᓗᐊᖅ. pretty good; I never get that. Boy.

If everything that Bill 25 is looking at go ᑕᒪᕐᒥᒃ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᒥ 25-ᒥ ᑕᐅᑐᒃᑕᐅᔪᑦ ᑕᕝᕙᐅᔪᓐᓃᕈᑎᒃ away and we’re looking at amendments to the ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᕈᑎᖔᕐᓂᓪᓗ ᑕᐅᑐᖔᓕᕐᓗᑕ

133

Act to make it more supportive, certainly. One ᒪᓕᒐᖅ ᑕᕝᕙᐅᓕᖁᓪᓗᒍ, ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᓇᓐᓂᖅᓴᐅᔪᖅ. of the comments that were made earlier this ᓇᓗᓇᖏᑦᑐᖅ, ᐅᖃᐅᓯᐅᖅᑲᐅᔪᖅ ᐅᐊᑦᑎᐊᖅ morning was “Have something in the Act that ᐅᓪᓛᖑᔪᖅ ᑭᑐᒥᒃ ᒪᓕᒐᒦᑦᑐᖃᓕᐸᔭᖅᐳᖅ clearly supports our position on the student- ᐃᑲᔪᖅᑐᐃᓂᖃᓪᓚᑦᑖᖅᑐᒥᒃ ᐃᓱᒪᒋᔭᑦᑎᓐᓂᒃ educator ratio.” I can think of one community ᖃᑦᑎᐅᑎᒋᒋᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᑕ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑦ in particular; I’ll just say it. Arviat a few years ᖃᑦᑎᐅᓂᕆᒋᐊᖃᖅᑕᖏᓐᓄᑦ. ᐃᖅᑲᖅᓴᕈᓐᓇᖅᐳᖓ ago lost a lot of teaching positions because of ᓄᓇᓕᒻᒥᒃ ᐊᑕᐅᓯᕐᒥᒃ ᐱᓗᐊᖅᑐᖅ, ᐅᖃᑐᐃᓐᓇᕈᒃᑯ, this student attendance issue. It was ᐊᕐᕕᐊᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᒍᒐᓴᐅᓕᕇᖅᑐᓂᒃ ᐊᒥᓱᒻᒪᕆᓐᓂᒃ devastating for that community. I had several ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᒃ ᐊᓯᐅᔨᓚᐅᕐᓚᒪᑕ ᑕᐃᒫᒃ friends who were on the DEA that were ᐅᐸᖃᑦᑕᖏᓐᓂᖏᓐᓄᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ. ᑕᐃᔅᓱᒧᖓᓕ contacting us at the coalition and expressing ᐱᐅᓐᖏᑐᒻᒪᕆᐅᓚᐅᕐᒪᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᒻᒥ. ᑕᐃᒪᓕ their concerns over a loss of a great number of ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᓂ ᐅᖃᓚᔪᖃᒐᓚᖃᑦᑕᓚᐅᕐᒪᑦ teachers. There have been other communities, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᓐᓂ ᐃᓱᒫᓘᑎᒋᔭᒥᓐᓂ even the Iqaluit DEA lost positions last year ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒐᓴᓐᓂ ᐊᓯᐅᔨ ᐃᖃᓗᓐᓂᓘᓐᓃᑦ and fortunately the Inuk teacher who lost her ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᒪᔨᖏᑦ position had found another job at our high ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᖅᓰᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᐊᕐᕌᓂ. ᐊᐃᑦᑖᖑᒐᓗᐊᑦ ᐃᓄᒃ school, which was to our benefit. ᑕᐃᓐᓇ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔮᖃᕈᓐᓃᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᐳᑦᑐᓂᖅᓴᒥ ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᒃᓴᖅᓯᐊᓚᐅᖅᑑᒐᓗᐊᖅ Having a transparent formula entrenched in an ᐃᑲᔫᑎᒋᓪᓗᓂᐅᑦ ᐅᕙᑎ. Act that supported class sizes to where we can actually focus on student achievement would ᑕᐃᒪᓕ ᓴᖅᑭᔮᑦᑎᐊᖅᑐᒥ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᒥ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᓂᖅᑕᖃᖅᐸᑦ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᒡᓗᕈᓯᕐᒦᑦᑐᑦ be helpful, student support assistants ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᐊᒥᓲᓂᖏᓐᓂ ᐃᒪᓐᓇ entrenched in the Act. See the problem with ᐱᔭᕇᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᔪᓐᓇᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂ ᑕᑯᓈᓂᖅᓴᐅᔪᓐᓇᕋᑦᑕ regulations, regulations are fine, but they ᐃᑲᔫᑎᖃᕋᔭᖅᑐᖅ. ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᓂᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᓂ don’t have to go through a legislative process ᑕᕝᕙᓂ ᑕᒪᒃᑯᐊᓕ ᒪᓕᒐᕋᓛᑦ ᐊᑲᐅᓐᖏᔾᔪᑎᒻᒪᒍ for modifications. It’s my understanding that ᒪᓕᒐᕋᓛᑦ ᐱᐅᔫᒐᓗᐊᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᖅᑕᐅᓇᓱᓪᓗᑎ it’s really up to the department to do that and ᒪᓕᒐᖅᑎᒎᕆᐊᑐᓐᖏᒻᒪᑕ. ᑕᐃᒪ maybe it goes through cabinet, but nobody ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑐᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᑦ ᐃᓱᒪᖅᓲᑎᖏᑦ else actually ever sees the regulations until it’s ᒥᓂᔅᑕᑦᑎᒎᖅᑑᒐᓗᐊᑦ ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂ ᒪᓕᒐᕋᓛᑦ finished, right? We might be involved with ᑕᑯᔭᐅᔪᓐᓇᓐᖏᒻᒪᑕ ᐱᔭᕇᖅᑕᐅᓚᐅᓐᖏᓐᓂᖏᓐᓂ. the drafting.

I would like to see some of those items that ᑭᓯᐊᓂᓕ ᑕᑯᔪᒪᒐᔭᖅᑐᖓ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᕆᓚᐅᖅᑕᑦᑕ we talked about, student standards of ᐃᓚᖏᓐᓂ ᒪᑯᐊ ᐊᔾᔨᒌᓂ education would be good; the target dates for ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᔭᕆᐊᖃᕐᓂᖏᑦ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ the implementation of Inuktut at a better, ᐱᐅᒐᔭᖅᑐᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᑕᐃᒃᑯᐊ ᐃᓱᓕᕝᕕᒋᓂᐊᖅᑕᖏᑦ faster, and more rigorous rate; teacher ᐃᓄᒃᑐᑦ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᑎᑕᐅᓂᖅ ᓱᒃᑲᓂᖅᓴᒥ recruitment and retention. It would be ᓱᒃᑲᓕᓂᖅᓴᒥᓪᓗ ᐊᑐᓕᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᓗᑎ. ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᓂᑦ awesome if they were in the Act because ᐃᖅᑲᓇᐃᔭᐃᓐᓇᖅᑎ ᒪᓕᒐᒦᑉᐸᑕ ᐱᐅᒐᔪᒐᓗᐊ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂ they’re harder to play with once they’re in the ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕋᕐᓂᖏᓐᓂᖅᓴᐅᒐᓗᐊᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᕙᐃᑦᑕᐅᖅ Act. You know as well as I do, I know you’ve ᐅᕙᑦᑐᑦ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᓂ ᒥᔅ ᑕᐅᑐᓐᖏ ᒪᓕᒐᕐᓂ had some legal training, Member Towtongie, ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᖃᑕᐅᓯᒪᔫᒐᓗᐊᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪᓕ but once you put it in law, it’s hard to change. ᒪᓕᒐᕐᓃᓕᖅᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᕋᕐᓂᖏᑦᑑᒻᒪᑕ. ᑖᒃᑯᐊ I think those would really help support what ᑕᕝᕙ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓱᐃᔾᔪᑕᐅᔪᒥᔪᖅ ᖃᓄᐃᓕᐅᕋᓱᑦᑕᑎᓐᓂ we’re trying to do as we move forward. Thank ᓯᕗᒧᐊᒃᐸᓪᓕᐊᑎᓪᓗᑕ. ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑖᖅ. you, Mr. Chairman.

134

Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Thank ᐃᒃᓯᕙᐅᑕᖅ: ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒥᔅᑕ ᐅᐊᒃᒪᓐ, ᒪ’ᓇ. ᒫᓐᓇ you, Mr. Workman. (interpretation ends) ᐱᕕᖃᕈᓐᓃᕋᑦᑕ ᐅᓪᓗᒧᑦ. ᑕᐃᒪ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᒍᕕᑦ ᒥᔅ Right now we’re out of time for the day, but if ᐃᔨᑦᓯᐊᕐᓗ ᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᐅᔪᓐᓇᕈᔅᓯ ᐊᐱᖅᓱᕐᓇᕈᖅᐸᑦ you are available, along with Ms. Eegeesiak, I ᑲᔪᓯᔪᓐᓇᖅᑐᒍᑦ 9-ᒥ ᖃᐅᑉᐸᑦ ᐅᓪᓛᒃᑯᑦ. would propose that we can continue this ᖃᓄᐃᓐᖏᑉᐸᑦ? (ᑐᓵᔨᑎᒎᕈᓐᓃᖅᑐᖅ) ᑲᑎᒪᔩᓪᓗ question-and-answer session tomorrow ᖃᓄᐃᕼᐊᖏᓐᓂᖅᐸᑕ? ᓈᒻᒪᑦᑑᖅ? ᐄ. ᐅᑲᐃ. ᐄ. morning starting at 9:00 if that’s alright (interpretation) and if it’s okay with the Members. Is that okay? Yes.

We thank you, as well as the Minister and your officials. Thank you, Members, ᑕᐃᒪ ᒪ’ᓈᕼᐃᓐᓇᓕᖅᐳᒍᑦ ᐃᓕᑉᕼᐃᓐᓂᒃ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ including our staff. Our hearing will resume ᒥᓂᔅᑕ ᐱᓕᕆᔨᑎᓪᓗ, ᑲᑎᒪᔩᑦ ᒪ’ᓇ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ tomorrow at nine o’clock in the morning. ᐱᓕᕆᔨᕗᑦ. ᐊᖃᒍ ᑲᑎᒪᓐᓂᕆᔭᕗᑦ ᑲᔪᕼᐃᓂᐊᖅ 9- Have a good evening. ᒧᐊᖅᐸᑦ ᐅᓪᓛᒃᑯᑦ. ᐅᓐᓄᖃᑦᓯᐊᓂᐊᖅᐳᕼᐃ.

>>Committee adjourned at 16:58 >>ᓄᖅᑲᖅᑐᑦ 16:58ᒥ

135