Bill S-13

An Act to amend the Interpretation Act and to make related amendments to other Acts

This enactment amends the Interpretation Act to provide that Acts of Parliament and regulations are to be construed as upholding the Aboriginal and treaty rights of Indigenous peoples recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 , and not as abrogating or derogating from them. It also amends or repeals similar provisions in other Acts known as non-derogation clauses.

Department of Justice—Main Estimates, 2024-25

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parkdale—High Park, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member opposite for raising this, because I do not think we have talked enough about indigenous reconciliation in the context of this evening's interventions.

What Bill S-13 would do is simply and surgically amend the Interpretation Act, such that all federal legislation would be interpreted so as not to derogate from aboriginal and treaty rights that are protected under Section 35 of the Constitution.

Right now, we have a checkerboard, where every individual piece of legislation has to insert this interpretive provision. If we simply amend the Interpretation Act, it would oversee the interpretation of all federal legislation and obviate the need for doing so.

We have consulted on this. We have worked with indigenous leadership on this. We have a bill that has worked its way through the Senate. That bill is something that actually should command unanimous consent in this chamber. I hope we can expeditiously pass it to do right by aboriginal and treaty rights that are constitutionally protected and need to be interpreted in that manner.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for his leadership and his engagement on this critically important file, as well as working alongside other levels of government, collaborating with all who share the same concern to combat it. The minister is doing a fine job.

I also want to ask about the indigenous community and the issue of reconciliation, specifically around Bill S-13. Could the minister update us on that issue, in terms of how we are advancing the issue to support the first nations people?

Interpretation Act

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Minister of Justice]

moved that Bill S-13, An Act to amend the Interpretation Act and to make related amendments to other Acts be now read the first time and printed.

(Motion deemed adopted and bill read the first time)

Message from the Senate

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I have the honour to inform the House that messages have been received from the Senate informing the House that the Senate has passed the following bills, to which the concurrence of the House is desired: Bill S-13, an act to amend the Interpretation Act and to make related amendments to other acts, and Bill S-14, an act to amend the Canada National Parks Act, the Canada National Marine Conservation Areas Act, the Rouge National Urban Park Act and the National Parks of Canada Fishing Regulations.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would like to move the amendment. I think this is more housekeeping than anything.

We're asking that Bill C-53 be amended by adding after line 17 on page 10 the following new clause:

26 If Bill S-13, introduced in the 1st session of the 44th Parliament and entitled An Act to amend the Interpretation Act and to make related amendments to other Acts, receives royal assent, then, on the first day on which both section 1 of that Act and section 3.1 of this Act are in force, that section 3.1 is repealed.

This is something I believe we all agreed on. It's more of a housekeeping issue than anything.

[Julia Redmond]

I am saying that given ongoing work on another legislative initiative with S-13—

[Julia Redmond]

Yes, you understood my point correctly.

There are, among the amendments before the committee, certain ones that concern a more universal non-derogation clause and others that appear to be more specific. As I'm sure you're already aware, there is a legislative initiative dealing with a universal non-derogation clause—that's Bill S-13—that would apply to all federal statutes. This would be included within that, of course. Including a non-derogation clause in this bill is not strictly necessary, assuming Bill S-13 becomes law, because it would already be covered by that.

A broader non-derogation clause would cover everything that CPC-1.1 and NDP-4.2 are trying to cover. Those are a narrower statement of the same idea, which is not to abrogate or derogate from the rights of other indigenous peoples.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

I have only five minutes to ask questions.

Would the legal counsel be comfortable...? We have legislation that's currently going through, Bill S-13, which reads:

Every enactment is to be construed as upholding the Aboriginal and treaty rights of Indigenous peoples recognized and affirmed by section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, and not as abrogating or derogating from them.

Would AFN be more comfortable if we inserted that exact language within this legislation to ensure that nothing in this act could abrogate or derogate from first nations' recognized rights?