Parliament Hill site chosen for residential school survivors monument
Monument will be located west of West Block, the National Capital Commission reveals at board meeting
On this National Capital Commission graphic, the site chosen for the Indian Residential Schools National Monument is marked in red on the west side of Parliament Hill. (Photo by the National Capital Commission)
A Parliament Hill site has finally been selected for a national monument for residential school survivors.
“The site of the Residential Schools National Monument is on the west side of Parliament Hill and highly visible in downtown Ottawa,” said David Larose, a spokesperson for Canadian Heritage, the federal department responsible for national monuments and Call to Action 81, in an email.
“Reflecting the national significance of this commemoration, the survivor-led steering committee worked in collaboration and sought consensus from the Anishinabe Algonquin Nation and survivors before selecting the monument site, which is located on traditional unceded Algonquin territory.”
The National Capital Commission board of directors approved the site on Jan. 23.
The budget for the monument is $20 million, commission documents say. A design competition will open this fall, with shortlisted designs expected to be identified in spring 2026.
More than 150,000 Indigenous children were taken from their families and forced to attend the government-funded institutions over a period of about 150 years. The last residential school closed in the mid-1990s.
In 2008, the federal government established the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to document the history and lasting impacts of the residential school system on Indigenous Peoples and their families.
Among the commission’s 94 Calls to Action, number 81 said a publicly accessible, highly visible Residential Schools National Monument should be built in Ottawa to honour survivors and children who were taken from their families.
Sixteen options were identified for the site and nine were shortlisted before the location was selected by a steering committee led by residential school survivors. Larose said the consensus was a first for any Parliament Hill monument.
The monument is to “be a contemplative space to remember, honour, educate, heal, and reconcile, and will speak to the country and the world for centuries to come,” a National Capital Commission presentation document said.
A ceremony was held in Ottawa in 2023 for the announcement of the approximate site location on Parliament Hill, with residential school survivors and their families and politicians including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in attendance.
Wonder why there’s no monument for USA residential school survivors in Washington DC?
Because, while these sorts of events are extremely common in the history of most countries, Canada is one of the very few countries that has acknowledged them, or in any way sees them as something worth more than a footnote in a history book.
Despite the national self-flagellation on recent years, Canadians should be quite proud of how rare they are when it comes to acknowledging the victims and the schools’ legacy.
In the grand scheme of things, the US Indian schools are so minor as to barely merit a footnote.
Nothing to be proud! You’re basically saying Canada should be proud it’s genocidal past
I disagree. I’m proud of our country, not for what it did in the past, but for the fact that we as a society have been willing to acknowledge it happened, admit responsibility for it, and steps to reconcile to our relationships. While the actions being taken can never be enough, it can’t be denied that the legacy of residential schools is now firmly imprinted in our national consciousness as part of who were are as a country. Compare this with the U.S., where numerous states are passing laws prohibiting schools from teaching history that might make white people feel bad about themselves. Here in Canada, it’s a long-term and sometimes difficult struggle to restore proper relationships with Indigenous peoples, but at least it’s on our public agenda from the top to the bottom, with widespread support among Canadians everywhere. That’s my view.
Canada built on genocide you’re proud of that!
oh ima, are you proud your ancestors killed off the Tuniit? Because they did..
To say Canada was built on genocide is hyperbolic and untrue.
The poster said no such thing, read it again.
It clearly says that Canadians should be proud of acknowledging their historic wrong doings ,unlike so many other countries.
People like oh ima have a vested interest in the lack of resolution here. To him reconciliation is a system of endless gestures that create perpetual benefit and status for him and generations to come.
No he’s saying it must be acknowledged, unlike our American counterparts who would rather ignore that part of history or stand proud that the “indians were conquered”.
Canada is a good country and one of the few countries in the world that acknowledges and embraces our past mistakes.
I hope MPs make a habit of walking by there often and reflecting on the decisions they make.
Colonialism still occurs today. It’s more gentle, wrapped up in lexicon of child protection, a continuing lack of opportunities in terms of economic participation and education.
No one will acknowledge this, but it’s why Nunavut continues to lag behind the RoC. The continued reliance on imported staff for positions like teaching, nursing and government administration shows that a critical function of education remains unadressed after 25 years of territorial politics.
Inuit are able to participate in government at the representation level, but they remain shut out daily from other opportunities because after 25 years we still don’t have sufficient education. Until this is addressed, nunavut remains run by rotating functionaries from a dominant culture, far, far, away.
It is unfortunate that so few have taken advantage of education which is available essentially at no cost. There are two sides to education , teaching and learning. Both of which require active participation. Look at some who have participated in learning and the success they have. Don’t sit and grieve about past injustices, use this as motivation to take advantage of the present.
Past injustices? Look at the rates of high school graduation, the availability of training within Nunavut, and then let me know when the injustices ended.
Leaving Nunavut isn’t the same thing as leaving a small town in the south. After 25 years of government the levels of education haven’t moved.
The quality of education hasn’t improved. Retention rates haven’t improved. Poverty rates remain outrageous. Housing availability is only starting to reflect southern levels due to the deterioration of southern availability, not because it’s improved locally.
You can tell yourself whatever helps you sleep, but inuit still suffer from decisions from faraway.
and those ‘far away’ decisions are in Iqaluit. Go figure.
Contrary to what this story says and the erroneously accepted narrative, attendance at an IRS essentially always required parental consent. There was often more demand for placement than there were beds, See this link for the consent form:
https://indianresidentialschoolrecords.com/applications/
Consent is often manufactured on behalf of marginalized people.
Consent provided under duress, due threats of withholding benefits, or due to the use of coercive agents, like the Indian Agents, police officers or child protection workers is a well documented issue.
Children were removed from their families, culture and community.
If we consider the notion of informed consent, freely provided, without undue duress, your comments ignores of the greater context of a dominant culture that was willing to impose its values by whatever means were necessary, including destroying any established culture. Dog slaughters, imposed settlement, reliance on benefits and other means including IRS, were all means of gaining manufactured consent.
WW2 is another example. It changed the north to suit the needs of the time, without any thought to the long term impacts.
It has ever been thus. I do quibble though, Canada doesn’t have a ‘dominant culture’, it has dominant cultures.
Equally, within Nunavut, there is one clear dominant culture with many sub factions, and that is Inuit. To argue otherwise is a fool’s game.
They should have taken down Macdonald or Laurie’s monument and replaced it with this one. With a plaque that reminds us that the replacement occurred. Also if they did replace Macdonald it would be up front and seen all the time.
Why would you want to remove a monument to Canada’s first and greatest Prime Minister? A childish suggestion.
Kenn, you’re a great author, but you of all historians should know how problematic Sir John. A “kill the Indian to save the child” Macdonald is to FNMI.
It would be like defending Confederate statues in the States.
I’m surprised you continue to support such a dated point of view. McDonald is getting ,rightly, I’m much more nuanced and even handed treatment by history recently.
The time for the reactionary, tear down the statues approach is ending. Your opinion is showing its age.
You should talk to some of the survivors, if they would be willing to talk to you. You are right not every school was abusive to the students, not all kids were forced. however there were kids stolen. And if someone came to you and talked about how if your kids stayed with you they were going to die, so only option was to send them away, that would be hard to say no to. That’s not the same as consent.
Name the vested interest! Let Europe be proud of the holocaust and Zionism for attempting of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians
Really? Huh, I blame Yassar Arafat and the many times he refused to create a Palestinian state.
Oh well, I encourage you to hold to your opinions, not matter how wrong-headed and contemptible as ideas I find that they may be. That is the strength of diversity after all.
While i may hate much of JAM’s legacy, he was responsible for establishing a nation.
We must start to acknowledge all of JAM’s legacy.
Hiding history has never served anyone well.
Exactly. Macdonald is like any other human, a complex person with many facets.
His comments on Indians were extremely typical and accepted for his time.
The general rule of thumb.as I’ve understood it for historic figures, is that those ideas that they promoted that are still used by mainstream society today should be promoted, such as the idea of a United Canada. Those that are no longer supported by mainstream society should not be supported., that does not mean his entire legacy should be thrown out. It’s part of the thinking behind, “retain and explain”.
Even folks like Mahatma Gandhi should, rightly, for his incredibly racist attitudes, be canceled. Instead, we instead remember him for his beliefs and ideas that survive into today, and ignore the parts such as his racism, that haven’t.. MacDonald is the same.
As soon as I see the word ‘problematic’ I assume the speaker (or writer) has approximately the same level of insight as a parrot.
Well that’s going to be… problematic. Do you have a cracker?
I think this is good news. Kudos to everyone involved. What the indigenous people suffered in this country should always be remebered, and this is a good step towards that.
Harper is right. The slander of MacDonald has begun to change to a more appreciative view. This is as it should be. Such historic revisionism promoted by the leftist academy is in retreat worldwide.
So, basically, you’re saying the Nunavut experiment has, so far, been a failure? Okay, what have the Nunavut politicians been doing wrong? Everything you list are the responsibility of our politicians, so why aren’t they on top of it?
Or, are you saying that Nunavut now mirrors Cape Breton, Hamilton, and Winnipeg and its done something right?
Help me understand.