Evidence of meeting #2 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was crowder.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:10 p.m.
NDP
Jean Crowder NDP Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC
That was my point as well. If we're going to re-engage in the debate around the substance of the bill, fine, but if we're dealing with the motion, let's deal with the motion.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
November 20th, 2007 / 4:15 p.m.
Liberal
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Barry Devolin
Okay. Then it sounds to me that everyone would like to move to a vote on the motion as amended. I'll read it again.
It's been moved by Ms. Crowder that the committee go to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-21 after completing a thorough review of the supplementary estimates by December 4, 2007, so as to delay no further the granting of access to the Human Rights Act to all aboriginal Canadians.
(Motion agreed to)
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
4:15 p.m.
Bloc
Yvon Lévesque Bloc Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC
Mr. Chairman, before the end of the last session, the Canadian government and the Quebec government were negotiating with the regional government of Nunavik with a view to concluding an agreement on regional government. One particular nation, which has always occupied the interior of the Nunavik territory and which was claiming that area, has made repeated requests. They had never had the opportunity to discuss their requests with the government. The Naskapis, who occupy part of the Nunavut territory, had asked to appear before the committee in order to state their point of view.
Given the adjournment and the prorogation of the House, their appearance was delayed, but we had agreed to reschedule it at the beginning of the session. Therefore, I ask that we hear from them at the earliest opportunity. An agreement in principle was signed, but negotiations are currently under way with respect to the final agreement. We really should therefore hear from the Naskapis before this agreement is signed, so that we will not infringe on their rights, if ever they have any.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Barry Devolin
Just before I go on to the floor, one of the things that was discussed this morning in the subcommittee in the context of the schedule was that obviously it will take a few days to organize. If these people are to come here, it's not something that can be arranged overnight. I think the date of Tuesday, December 11, was a date that was discussed this morning. In recognition that the day after tomorrow, Thursday, is probably simply not possible and that next week we are involved with the supplementary estimates and that the following week we will be starting with clause-by-clause, this was the date that was circled as the next available date, so to speak, for that meeting.
I have Ms. Crowder and then Mr. Bruinooge.
4:15 p.m.
NDP
Jean Crowder NDP Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to speak in favour of Monsieur Lévesque's motion. As the committee members are aware, we had the Naskapi commissioners before this committee last year. One of the areas that they highlighted as an area of concern was the fact that the Naskapi people were not being appropriately considered in negotiations and in agreements that were happening. Subsequently, I know a number of us met with the Naskapi Nation, who reinforced those concerns. So I fully support Monsieur Lévesque's motion to have the Naskapi appear before the committee to give a firsthand view of what their concerns are and the impact on their territory.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Rod Bruinooge Conservative Winnipeg South, MB
Mr. Chair, of course this is a challenging topic. However, the perspective I would bring is that Bill C-51, the former bill, which has now been reintroduced to the same point that it was previously as Bill C-11, was endorsed by all parties. I think there are a lot of people in northern Quebec who are expecting this to occur. It is our hope that there is nothing that stands in the way of that.
It would be our suggestion not to meet at this point. I know that Mr. Lévesque has brought this up a number of times. It sounds like the committee may in fact endorse his motion. Should that be the case, we would like to recommend that the Makivik Corporation also be allowed to provide some balance during this discussion.
4:20 p.m.
NDP
Jean Crowder NDP Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC
I want to make it clear that in no way does this mean that the NDP does not support that agreement and that bill. I think that's clear. And I believe the Naskapi as well have said that they agree that other people in other territories have a right to move forward with their agreements. But what they are simply asking for is a consideration of the impact on their territory. I think that the bill can proceed but we can still hear from the Naskapi.
4:20 p.m.
Bloc
Yvon Lévesque Bloc Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC
Mr. Chairman, to my knowledge, the Naskapis have produced a annual report every year since my election, that is to say for three years, asking for meetings with the government in order to settle this thorny issue. The negotiation between the two levels of government, Quebec and Ottawa, and the Makivik Corporation took place behind closed doors, that is to say that the Naskapis were not invited to present their perspective. It is simply a matter of agreements. We know that the Makivik Corporation was heard from. The government of Quebec listened to them, as did the federal government. It is simply an issue of giving a forum to the Naskapis. It is possible that no one has heard them yet.
I do not want to restart negotiations that have already taken place. I simply would like us to be aware of the Naskapis' claims. The federal government and the Quebec government are already aware of the Makivik Corporation's claims.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Rod Bruinooge Conservative Winnipeg South, MB
Mr. Chair, I'm not sure where the Liberal Party is on this topic, but if they are in agreement, I again put forward my suggestion that we also invite the Makivik Corporation for some balance during said meeting, should it occur.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Anita Neville Liberal Winnipeg South Centre, MB
We would support Mr. Lévesque's motion. I don't see the need for it, but if it's the will of the committee, we would support others appearing as well.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Barry Devolin
Mr. Bruinooge, are you putting this forward as an amendment to the motion?
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Barry Devolin
Mr. Lévesque, are you willing to accept that as a friendly amendment?
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Barry Devolin
Pas de problème. Okay.
Let me take a crack at reading the notice of motion in an amended form: That the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development should invite the leaders of the Naskapi Nation of Kawawachikamach—
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Barry Devolin
I live on Lake Kashagawigamog.
And that we invite representatives of the Makivik Corporation, as soon as the committee resumes sitting this fall, to explain their position on the agreement in principle--and so on and so on—among Canada, Quebec, and the Makivik Corporation regarding self-government for Nunavut Inuit versus their own land claim.
Now, do we want to identify the date in the motion as well, or can we do it in this way and kind of have an agreement that we'll try to schedule that for December 11?
