Debates of Nov. 22nd, 2012

Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

No.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

In my opinion the nays have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was negatived on the following division:)

Vote #508

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

I declare the motion defeated.

Resuming debate. The hon. member for Newton—North Delta.

[Jinny Sims, NDP, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak today to the bill. When I read the title of the bill, an act respecting family homes situated on first nations reserves, the word “respecting” strikes me because what is absolutely missing out of this legislation is respect for the independence and sovereignty of our first nations people.

I have sat here and listened to my colleagues across the way say that they have been consulting for years. However, if we consult but we do not hear, do not absorb and do not adapt to what we are going to do, then it is not listening.

What we have here is a total side-stepping of the key issues facing our first nations communities. It is just so the Conservatives can go to the United Nations and say that they have done something. As we know, the United Nations has been urging the government to take action to address the matrimonial rights on first nations lands for years and years and it has failed.

This reiteration of legislation fails once again on fundamental values that we hold dear and that the government committed to when they met with the leaders from the first nations communities. One of them is consultation. Consultation does not just mean getting to speak and then going home and then doing exactly what one intended to do all along.

Second, there is that fundamental right that has been recognized in Canadian Parliament of our first nations to self-governance and the right of sovereignty over their own land. This legislation shows utter disrespect for those values and disrespects the very people the government says it will try to help.

If I were a woman living on first nations lands, I would ask what I need the government to address. First, I do not need a patronizing piece of legislation. Second, what I need is for the government to address the issues and to help to fund programs in order to build strong families and strong communities.

I hear the mantra over and over again from my Conservative colleagues about how the fundamental core of Canadian society, and especially of their platform, is the family. I agree with them because I think there is nothing as important as family. When we have strong families we have strong communities.

However, when we get legislation like this that does not even address the key issues facing our first nations communities, we begin to realize that my colleagues across the way have one set of rules for their own families and another set of rules for families, whether they are first nations, newcomers or the hundreds and thousands of Canadian families separated from their loved ones because of the government's policies and living in many different countries.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Order, please. It being 5:30 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's order paper.

The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-383, An Act to amend the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act and the International River Improvements Act, as reported (with amendments) from the committee.

Transboundary Waters Protection Act

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

There being no motions at report stage, the House will now proceed without debate to the putting of the question on the motion to concur in the bill at report stage.

[Larry Miller, Conservative, Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, ON]

moved that the bill be concurred in.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

No.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Pursuant to Standing Order 98 the recorded division stands deferred until Wednesday, November 28, immediately before the time provided for private members' business.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

Fisheries and Oceans

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to be able to revisit my question on heritage lighthouses and the Mississagi Strait lighthouse in particular. I will take a brief moment to acknowledge the people who have been driving this issue and keeping me up to date with the efforts of the La Cloche—Manitoulin Lighthouse Association as it strives to become the caretaker of this historical gem. I recognize the hard work of people such as Bill Caesar from Meldrum Bay and Rick Nelson, curator of the Kagawong museum, for their passionate efforts to save our historic lighthouses. I imagine they are watching this intently. They are joined by other groups across the country who are working to preserve these grand structures, which are not merely surplus in the eyes of their communities but are wonderful reminders of our history.

I also acknowledge the open door treatment I have received from the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans who has shown that he understands the important role that the Mississagi lighthouse plays in the local economy, and has kept himself up to date on the issues that surround the potential divestment of this asset. I also pass on my best wishes for a speedy recovery. We certainly look forward to having him back here in the House.

From the time it became known that Canada's surplus heritage lighthouses would be divested, the La Cloche—Manitoulin Lighthouse Association has been hard at work to ensure it would preserve Manitoulin Island lighthouses, and the Mississagi Strait lighthouse in particular, as tourist sites and anchors for the local economy. Currently, the Mississagi site supports a nearby restaurant and hotel while receiving many visitors a year. However, lately people have not seen the grand old structure in the same condition as they would have when it was a functioning lighthouse that played a significant role in our Great Lakes maritime history. Instead, they see a structure that is just hanging on. Tarps adorn the building to protect it from the elements and it could not be described as anything near shipshape.

Yet, this is an official heritage site as designated by the Federal Heritage Buildings Review Office and is the cornerstone of significant efforts to foster a tourist industry centred on Manitoulin lighthouses. In an area with relatively few economic opportunities, it is a unique attraction that locals hope to preserve, promote and develop. In fact, there is already strong interest on the part of both Canadian and American tour operators to develop a theme-based tour centred on Manitoulin lighthouses generally, and the Mississagi lighthouse in particular.

While local municipalities and residents are willing to take on responsibility for area lighthouses, these cash-strapped municipalities simply do not have the resources to bring these structures up to a reasonable standard of repair from their current state. They feel it is imperative that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, as the present owner of these structures, ensure the lighthouses are transferred to local municipalities in reasonable condition or with adequate financial resources to fund essential repairs including leaking roofs and deteriorating foundations. Simply put, the costs to repair these aging structures are prohibitive for Manitoulin municipalities acting alone, and it will take federal support to ensure this initiative is possible.

The future caretakers of the historic and socio-economically significant Manitoulin lighthouses implore the federal government to do the right thing. Will the government commit to handing off these structures in a reasonable condition or with the funds needed to ensure the lighthouses are shipshape?

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans and for the Asia-Pacific Gateway]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to respond to the member opposite on the issue of the maintenance and preservation of Canada's lighthouses, in particular the Mississauga Straits lighthouse on Ontario's Manitoulin Island.

Lighthouses have made significant contributions to maritime safety over the years. The role of lighthouses has evolved over time as a result of advances in marine navigation technology. In many instances the principal value of lighthouses is now reflected in the tourism-based ventures that have been established at these sites. In fact, the Mississauga Straits lighthouse property has been leased since 1983 to local interests that have developed the site as a popular regional tourist destination.

In recognition of the historic importance of lighthouses, the government enacted the Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act on May 29, 2008. Three hundred and forty-eight federally owned lighthouses were nominated for heritage designation during the act's two year petitioning period. All lighthouses for which petitions were received will be considered for designation by May 29, 2015.

It is anticipated that the act will enable the preservation of many of Canada's historic lighthouses in a manner that will conserves heritage values and promotes public visitation and enjoyment. Given that retaining formal ownership of lighthouses is seldom required for program purposes, many lighthouse structures, including the Mississauga Straits lighthouse, have been identified as surplus over the past 20 years and made available for alternative ownership opportunities, either through the regular divestiture process or the provisions of the Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act.

Funding to maintain real property assets is limited and must be prioritized in a manner that sustains federal programs and services. Long-term investments and assets that are expected to be divested are not prudent to hold and would require that funding be diverted from projects that are critical for ongoing program mandates. For surplus lighthouses, short-term repairs are recommended to safeguard the structural integrity of the buildings, pending their eventual divestiture.

Although the Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act is expected to accelerate the pace of lighthouse divestitures, it is in fact consistent with existing practices that have been in effect for many years. Many former federally owned lighthouses, including those with active aids to navigation, have been successfully divested in order to benefit local economic development and tourism. Communities such as Southampton, Ontario; Matane, Quebec; and Yarmouth, Nova Scotia have assumed control over the conservation of their historical landmarks and many more are willing and able.

I am pleased to inform the House that the Mississauga Straits Lighthouse has been nominated for designation under the Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act. In accordance with the provisions of the act, a community-based organization has developed an alternative ownership proposal for this property. Negotiations to establish mutually acceptable terms of transfer are ongoing between the parties.

While Fisheries and Oceans Canada maintains a limited budget to subsidize the cost of certain site and building maintenance as part of the transfer process, it will consider such requests on a case-by-case basis.

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Mr. Speaker, his speech was similar to mine. The parliamentary secretary talked about the Heritage Lighthouse Protection Act. He talked about the importance of these lighthouses to the communities with respect to the economy and tourism. He talked about public visitation and enjoyment. I think that is very clear and that it is the same message that we have been putting forward. This is basically the goal these groups have been trying to achieve.

The problem here is the limited funds. Again, these lighthouses' maintenance has basically been abandoned by the government for many years. They have been “neglected”, I guess the word is.

Again, the important point is that these lighthouses can be saved and that these associations want them, but they need funding and to know where they can get that funding in order to be able to maintain these lighthouses. Otherwise, it would just not be a viable project.

[Randy Kamp, Conservative, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge—Mission, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague opposite for raising this issue.

The fact is that funding for real property assets is prioritized to support program needs. Long-term investments in assets that are expected to be divested, as I have said, are not deemed to be prudent.

For surplus properties, such as the Mississauga Straits lighthouse, short-term repairs are done to safeguard the structural integrity of the buildings pending their eventual divestiture.

Negotiations with community-based interests to establish mutually acceptable terms of transfer for this particular lighthouse are ongoing and could include provisions to subsidize the cost of certain improvements as part of the transfer process.

This government will continue to invest prudently in lighthouses within the federal inventory and facilitate opportunities for divestiture to ensure their preservation for future generations.