French DEA reopens debate on Bill 1

PATRICIA D’SOUZA

The Government of Nunavut’s education bill is still vulnerable to legal challenge, despite amendments submitted last month by representatives from the GN and the Francophone Association of Nunavut, the chair of Iqaluit’s French District Education Authority says.

Pascal Bruyère, chair of the FDEA, or Administration scolaire de district francophone, was part of a working group formed in October after the Francophone Association of Nunavut declared its intention to challenge the bill in court.

The association argued that Bill 1 did not recognize the constitutional right of francophones to manage and control French-language education programs in Nunavut, as set out by Section 23 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The working group, made up of representatives from the departments of education and justice, along with the Francophone Association and the FDEA, proposed a series of recommended changes meant to bring the bill into compliance with Section 23.

The recommendations were signed Feb. 24 by Tom Rich, the deputy minister of the department of education, and Paul Landry, president of the Francophone Association, and submitted to the legislative assembly standing committee reviewing the bill.

However, Bruyère says it was premature to submit the recommendations, which were formed after only four meetings of the working group.

He refused to add his signature to the document until he could have it examined by Michel Doucet, a lawyer and constitutional expert contracted on his behalf by the Fédération nationale des conseillères et conseillers scolaires francophones, a national organization of francophone school board trustees.

Doucet said the bill as originally worded is unconstitutional, and the recommendations don’t significantly change his concerns. He suggested the GN submit the bill for review by the Nunavut Court of Justice to pre-empt a court challenge.

“While we are aware of the special situation in Nunavut as regards culture and language, we would stress that the rights set out in Section 23 are constitutional rights, which no government may derogate from,” he said in his report.

“To avert costly and time-consuming court proceedings, it would be wise for the territorial government to undertake a detailed analysis of its obligations under Section 23 and make appropriate amendments to the bill.”

But Rich was dismissive of the concerns, Doucet says in a subsequent letter to the national organization. “Mr. Rich has adopted those points in my analysis that support his conclusions and has omitted those points that are not consistent with his agenda.”

And in a letter to the chair of the standing committee last month, Education Minister Peter Kilabuk said the concerns were unhelpful. “The further review undertaken for the Administration scolaire was … not particularly helpful as most of it concerns the original wording of Bill 1 and little comment was made on the proposed amendments from the joint working group.”

Bruyère is frustrated Kilabuk has moved ahead on the consent of the Francophone Association, which has little or no involvement in the education system in Nunavut — and without the consent of the FDEA, which is an integral part of the system.

“He don’t take my recommendations even though I’m in his structure,” Bruyère said.

He wants the education department to form a second working group to formulate questions to put to the court. The new group would be made up of the original parties, plus other concerned parties and a representative from the federal office of the commissioner of official languages.

But Kilabuk has not even acknowledged that he’s seen the report. Under questioning in the legislative assembly this week by Iqaluit Centre MLA Hunter Tootoo, Kilabuk was unable to provide a definitive answer.

He said that he was aware of the concerns, and that his staff were in close contact with the FDEA. Bruyère said there has been little contact between the department and the FDEA since the working group’s last meeting in October.

Tootoo submitted a written list of six questions regarding the FDEA to Kilabuk on Wednesday. But Bruyère is not confident he’ll like the response.

“After four years and a couple of million, how can Mr. Kilabuk explain this big mess?”