Debates of Nov. 23rd, 2012

First Nations Financial Transparency Act

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I do not want to play politics. However, we had an agreement, which was called the Kelowna accord, in 2004, when the NDP helped to make the government fall. We then had a change of government, and all of a sudden the Conservative government does not acknowledge that the Kelowna accord even exists. All of these items, whether they are targets, accountability, are in the Kelowna accord.

As I said in my speech, we have no problem with transparency. The problem is that first nations were not consulted. As the member was saying, there are financial statements and they are audited. If the government needs these audited statements to be propped up a bit, that is fine, but it should also compensate for that added transparency with some funding. First nations have a lot of administrative burden already.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question has to do with the importance of accountability and transparency, as well as with the Kelowna accord and the proposal for a first nations auditor general.

Does my colleague think that a bill like this is necessary six years after the Kelowna accord?

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this is a complex question and therefore not an easy one to answer. I would like to congratulate my hon. colleague from St. Paul's, who is doing a great job for first nations people in her role as aboriginal affairs critic.

If the Kelowna accord, which was reached six years ago, were in effect today, first nations people would be living in a completely different world. Our prime minister at the time consulted all first nations, which is why it was called an accord. It had a budget attached to it.

The accord included five criteria, among them transparency and accountability. It even proposed appointing an independent auditor responsible solely for the first nations file. Thus, a solution could have easily been found and we would not be dealing with the issue here today. Everyone would have had the opportunity to live together in harmony.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-27, and specifically to speak about the need for Bill C-27 as a way of re-establishing basic lines of accountability between a first nations chief and council and its members.

I begin by referring to a statement made by the Assembly of First Nations, which referred to this bill as “tinkering”. In a document prepared for the Special Chiefs Assembly held in December 2011, it said:

...federal led tinkering around the edges of the Indian Act with legislation that addresses aspects of core governance is not the answer. It will not provide long-term governance certainty and stability for our Nations.

Is this bill nothing more than tinkering with the Indian Act? Absolutely not. The Indian Act is silent on transparency and accountability. There is not a word in the Indian Act that deals with the preparation of financial statements and ensuring they are accessible to the public. The Indian Act is certainly not modern legislation that supports first nations governments. This is why the first nations financial transparency act is so needed.

To be clear, this bill would change the status quo. It would provide long-term governance, certainty and stability. The status quo as it relates to financial transparency is that there are currently no statutes or regulations to outline the financial transparency requirements for first nations governments or to guide the setting of salaries for chiefs and councillors. To the extent that there are any rules anywhere that require first nations to make their financial information available to their own people, it is not in that law, but in the funding agreements with the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development. In accordance with provisions of these agreements, first nations governments are required to provide the department with audited consolidated financial statements and a schedule of remuneration and expenses for all elected officials. However, it is also a provision of these agreements that the statements be made available to the first nations members in their own communities. These agreements do not stipulate the manner or timing for disclosure. As a result, some individuals have found it quite difficult to access these documents. The practices within individual first nations communities vary widely. Some communities may not consistently disclose financial statements or information concerning salary and expenses while others distribute the information to members or post it on community websites.

This bill would change all of this. It would indeed change the status quo for first nations communities. Under the proposed legislation, each first nation would need to make its audited consolidated financial statements available to its members, as well as to publish them on a website. The information found in the audited consolidated financial statements relates to the major activities undertaken by the particular first nation being audited and details how the first nation expended its moneys. The statement with respect to what information is provided in these statements would be determined by the generally accepted accounting principles. Information that would be disclosed in the schedules to the financial statements include the salaries, wages, commissions, bonuses, fees, honorariums, dividends and any other monetary or non-monetary benefit that chiefs or councillors are receiving. The expenses of first nations leadership, such as transportation, accommodation, meals and hospitality would also be included. Chiefs and councillors would also be required to disclose remuneration paid to them by any entity controlled by the first nation. This would reflect current practice, as first nations are already required to report the remuneration and expenses, in separate categories, paid to the chief and councillors as part of their agreements under the funding agreement with the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada.

The Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development would be required to publish the audited consolidated financial statement and schedule of remuneration, when received, for each first nation on the Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada website. This would ensure the information would be available and accessible at all times, and by everyone. The department already publishes on its website a document entitled “Schedule of Federal Funding” for each first nation as a result of the Federal Accountability Act. The bill would require first nations and the department to publish the audited consolidated financial statements and schedules on their websites, as well as remunerations and expenses of first nations to which the legislation would apply. If a first nation failed to do so, anyone, including the minister, could ask a court to require a band council to publish it.

The bill would not only empower first nation members but it would also change the status quo in another fundamental area.

Currently, when first nations members raise questions or concerns about the non-disclosure of financial statements or remuneration and expenses for chiefs and council members, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada encourages them to raise these issues directly with their chief and council, respecting the principles of local community accountability.

If the department becomes aware of a situation where a first nation member cannot gain access to his or her community's financial statements, the department will work with the first nation government to ensure that the information is released. If efforts to have a first nation government release the statements to a member are unsuccessful, the department releases the financial statements or schedule of remuneration and expenses directly to the member.

Not only does this place the minister in a difficult position between the first nation council and its members, it makes no sense to require individual first nation members to have to appeal to the minister just for access to basic financial information relating to their own community that they should be able to get from their own band.

Bill C-27 would create a direct relationship with a clear line of responsibility, accountability and transparency between council and first nations members. The bill would underscore the fact that first nations governments are accountable to their own communities for the decisions they make, in addition to being accountable to taxpayers for the funds that they receive.

The bill would change the status quo by finally putting in place the same rules with respect to financial transparency that apply to other governments in Canada to first nations governments. The bill would provide long-term governance certainty and stability by creating a direct line of accountability between a first nation and its chief and council for access to basic financial information and for the decisions that led to the information that those documents contain.

It is worth noting, too, that the bill would achieve this without increasing the already significant reporting burden on first nation governments. Because the preparation of these documents is already a condition of their funding agreements, there are no new reports required. The bill proposes to place the same requirements in legislation with the only additional requirement being that some of the information already prepared for the department is posted on a website, maintained by the first nation or on its behalf, and on the department's website as well.

I know that members will agree that Bill C-27 is a necessary step forward in empowering and improving the lives of first nations members.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to hear the member say that there would be no additional work for first nations. Many first nations do not have a website and, in fact, their Internet access is somewhat spotty. Therefore, it is misleading to say that the bill would create no additional work.

I want to touch on the member's comments about long-term governance. It is interesting that the Canadian Bar Association believes that the proposed bill would not improve the capacity of first nations to assume control over their own affairs. It says, “By focusing only on the expenditures of first nations, the proposed legislation fails to address larger systemic issues of funding and responsibility for those issues”.

The member said that posting information contributes to long-term governance. I wonder if the member could provide more details on how simply posting financial information improves governance.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, first, posting information that should be widely accessible to the members of each band means that the chiefs and leaders of that particular first nation are being accountable to their own members. I think that is something that we must remember. This is available in every other government across our great nation. Whether it is a federal, provincial or municipal government, it is a requirement. The only exception right now is first nations. The bill would actually bring them in line with the rest of Canadians.

The member asked a question regarding the absence of a website or access to a website. One of the reporting requirements would be that the information be posted on a website. However, I will point out that the legislation does not necessarily require the website to be within that first nation community. It could be tasked to another organization to post it or, as I indicated in my speech, on the Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development website, which would make it compliant.

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL]

Mr. Speaker, the member wants to basically reduce the difficulty for an individual band member to find information on the band's financing. If that particular band member went to the member's office and asked to look at her books as a member of Parliament would she say yes or no?

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member would know that all of the expenses and so forth of members are posted online for my constituents to see, as well as for constituents across Canada.

With regard to the fact that the member is concerned about the inquiries made by first nations, I would point to some statistics. There were approximately 250 formal complaints regarding the mismanagement and misappropriation of remuneration and expenses of officials that were posted or inquired upon over a period of slightly over a year.

The fact that there are complaints out there and the fact that first nations are not accountable right now, this f legislation would actually—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

I see that members are getting concerned about the accountability. I want to point out that many first nations across this country actually go far and beyond exceeding the requirements required by the government. It is only a few that we need to bring in line.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Cooperation]

Mr. Speaker, I know there has been great discussion in the House about the reporting requirements in this bill. I wonder if the member could just clarify some of those disclosure requirements.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as mentioned in my speech, some of the specific requirements in the bill relate specifically to salaries, wages, commissions, bonuses, fees, honorarium, dividends and any other monetary or non-monetary benefit that the chiefs or councillors are receiving.

As a side note, this bill would also require first nations to make their audited consolidated financial statements and schedules of remuneration available on a website for a period of at least 10 years. I think that is important as well, especially to the members of that particular first nations band.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-27 is part of a pattern that I have noticed as a non-first nations person here in the House of policies and practices of the government that are paternalistic, punishing and somewhat prejudicial. This pattern is quite disturbing to me as a non-first nations person in that the government should actually be protecting and enhancing the first nations people of this country rather than punishing them.

The genesis of the bill, as I understand it, was a report from the Canadian Taxpayers Federation about the remuneration received by a band chief, or maybe other band chiefs, that was in excess of what we pay the Prime Minister. There are lots of corporations in this country that pay significantly in excess of what the Prime Minister makes. Whether a band has the resources to be able to pay its chiefs appropriately is not something that we should concern ourselves with unless there is some evidence of fraud or of other nefarious means. That is not the case here. There was no indication and no expectation on the part of the band that the chief was being paid in some manner that was inappropriate.

Indeed, the bill does not even touch on the appropriateness of compensation. It does not provide any guidance as to what would be a conflict of interest or what would be a conflict in terms of remuneration. Instead, it seems to punish the bands that are providing many financial statements already by making them provide even more by increasing the reporting requirements in an extreme way. That, again, seems to be a punishment for bands, perhaps for having spent so much on their chiefs.

In terms of it being paternalistic, once again we see that the government will not consult with the first nations themselves but instead prescribe for the first nations what they must do. We have heard time and time again in the House and from first nations themselves that what they want is be free to run their own affairs and, where the government provides some money, they want to be consulted. By the word “consult” we mean consent. We do not mean just spend a few dollars and bring a few people in to talk. We actually mean that the bands should give consent where there are major changes to how the government provides its services to them and the relationship between the Canadian government and the governments of the first nations people.

It gets even more paternalistic when the government says that if bands do not follow its rules it will hold back money. I cannot for the life of me understand why the government would do that to a band, to punish the children of the band perhaps if the money is for education, or to punish the mothers of the band perhaps if the money is for food or shelter. Why on earth are we punishing these people for the actions of a few? We have tried at committee to move significant amendments to the bill to deal with those issues that have been raised with us by the first nations and the issues that we can plainly read in the text of the bill, and yet every one of those amendments have been rejected by the government. As is the case in almost all the bills before Parliament, there is no attempt to be co-operative or consultative with the other parties in the House. The government does it all on its own.

The bill is punishing to the first nations because, in many circumstances, it would require the proprietary business information be released to the public. We are not talking, as the member for Scarborough Centre suggested, about ensuring that band members have this information. In fact, the requirement is that the information be made completely public and, when it is made public, if it is proprietary information, it puts the band at a disadvantage. It is punishing the band.

Some of these bands have been quite successful in creating businesses and trying to lift some of their members out of the extreme poverty in which we often find Canadian first nation members. The government's reaction is to punish them for doing that by making them release proprietary information in their financial statements that would put them at a disadvantage to non-first nation businesses in Canada and elsewhere. That is just wrong. We should not be putting first nations people at a disadvantage.

When we talk about proprietary information, the thing that I find most ironic is that when a freedom of information request is made of the government, most often the excuse that it gives when turning down the release of information, whether it is financial or otherwise, is that it is proprietary information and protected by the privacy of the dealings with another business or entity. Yet first nations are not given the same ability to protect their information. Instead, they are being told they must disclose it or the government will step in and withhold money.

I believe the government has fallen 30 places in the world's rankings in terms of freedom of information requests. Yet it is telling first nations they have to release information. The government is not practising what it preaches. As we know, the government's accountability is always in question when the Parliamentary Budget Officer has to take the government to court in order to get information released. Yet the way the government treats first nations is to say that if they do not release information, it will withhold their education money or money for housing or food.

There are some who have spoken at committee about the punishing nature of the required information. John Paul from the Membertou First Nation on October 24 stated:

In addition to what we do publicly, our first nation community must also still comply with all the detailed reporting requirements as decreed by the Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada reporting handbook, developed by AANDC alone, as per the conditions of the five-year multi-year funding agreement that we have signed with AANDC. The time my staff has to spend to complete these obligations is significant and is done at our own first nation's cost.

The government does not help with any of this.

These reporting requirements and the need for documentation seem to have increased, even though a few years ago the Conservative government committed to an improved funding relationship. The continual and increasing reporting burden on our first nation must be addressed.

We are going in the opposite direction with the bill. We are creating a greater burden and more funding requirements, and there is no additional money to provide for it.

In terms of the policies of paternalism and some would say even prejudice toward the first nations, I am reminded of the comments of the Prime Minister when the Attawapiskat First Nation crisis came to our attention last fall. His knee-jerk reaction was to say, “We gave them lots of money. Where did they spend it?”

That was not the problem. The problem was not that the government gave them lots of money, it was that the government did not give them enough money. It has frozen their funding at 2% raises since 2000, first by the Liberal government and continued by the Conservative government, when their population is increasing at a greater rate than that and the inflation rate in Canada is higher than that on many occasions. Every year that funding arrangement stays in place, first nations fall further and further behind.

We are told that 85,000 new homes need to be built on first nation reserves. The Conservatives bragged yesterday about how it built 16,000 houses since 2005, which we should remind them was money that Jack Layton got out of the Paul Martin government to create new housing. In fact, the Conservatives voted against providing money for housing. Native North Americans in Canada are 85,000 houses short and yet the government is going ahead without providing any new housing infrastructure money for first nations. It is frozen at 2%.

As far as education goes and as far as we can tell, the first nations who must report on this money now are being paid half of what other Canadian children receive in terms of education dollar spending. In some cases this paternalistic attitude toward the first nation education system is such that when a first nation is given space to have a school, the government deducts the value of that space from the money it gives the first nation for education, even though it did not cost anyone anything. It is shameful that the government—

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order, please. The time allocated for the member's speech is finished.

Questions and comments. The hon. Minister of Aboriginal Affairs.

[John Duncan, Conservative, Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the member's comments and I must say I disagree with the basic premise of virtually everything that he said. It is obvious that he has not been listening to this debate or to the presentations at the press conference yesterday from band members across the country, from progressive chiefs and from others.

If NDP members wish to align themselves with those people who would deny transparency and accountability, then more power to them. We are in the 21st century. These are basic expectations of the public, whether first nation band members or other Canadians. Other Canadians have this basic ingredient as part of their democracy.

I know my time is limited but I would just like to say quickly that there would be no extra burden. This is reporting that already occurs. It is all about disclosure. That is the only difference. There is no issue with the proprietary business information. It is an aggregation. This is already happening.

Progressive first nations get it. Why does the NDP not get it?

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

We do get it, Mr. Speaker. We do not align ourselves with organizations such as the government opposite that would hide information from people, such as the Parliamentary Budget Officer, who must go to court to get financial information from the Conservative government. We do not align ourselves with that. The government should be more transparent than it currently is. It should be quicker in responding to freedom of information requests. It should respond. It should give the Parliamentary Budget Officer and Canadians the information we need.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is clearly the Conservatives who do not get it.

Thousands of letters have been sent to the minister about a variety of things. Let me pick something out here from one of the letters that was sent to the minister. The minister received a letter from Chief Shining Turtle on November 6. The chief says:

I have written thousands of emails, and letters on issues like aboriginal and treaty rights violations, UNDRIP recommendations, Youth suicides, Auditor General Reports on band reporting requirements, MRP, health cuts, capital funding cuts for Indian Affairs Regional Offices, elections....

He goes on to say:

To simply the ignore the First Nation[s] that don't agree with your political agenda on assimilating Indian Bands into the fabricate of the State of Canada is absolutely despicable!!

We have heard this from many first nations. They believe that the Crown is trying to assimilate them.

Given the fact that the Prime Minister gave an apology on the residential schools and given his comments at the Crown-first nations gathering, could the member tell me how this piece of legislation fits in with that?

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it does not fit in. It is clearly the opposite direction. The bill is not the result of consultation with first nations. It is a knee-jerk reaction to a discovery by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation that some first nation leaders are doing really well. We should be proud of the fact that some first nations are doing well. We should be proud of the fact that some first nations are not in the poverty that the Conservative government would like to keep them in. Therefore, we should be proud of the fact this is happening. We should not be punishing them further.

[Philip Toone, NDP, Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I was listening intently to my hon. colleague's discourse. First of all I want to congratulate him for all the great work he does in his riding. I do not think his constituents have ever had such a good representative in Parliament.

I was particularly interested in his comments on the lack of housing in first nation communities, the deplorable lack of housing in fact. Could he go further down that road and just explain to me how the lack of housing contradicts what the bill is trying to do? There is incredible poverty in first nation communities. With respect to women whose relationships break up, where exactly are they supposed to go if first nation communities are missing 85,000 homes?

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-27 is part of a pattern of paternalistic and prescribed regulations on first nations that may in fact be leading toward assimilation. However, it also highlights for all Canadians the problems in first nation communities, such as the lack of housing and the fact that women whose marriages break up will lose their ability to live in their first nation because there are not enough places for them to live.

The government is doing virtually nothing to correct the 85,000 spaces that are missing in first nation communities.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment]

Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in the House and today it is an honour to rise to debate Bill C-27, the first nations financial transparency act.

Over the last six years, our government has consistently demonstrated our commitment to creating the conditions for a healthier, more self-sufficient aboriginal communities. Fundamental to achieving that are strong, stable and accountable first nations governments. Bill C-27 would strengthen first nations governance by increasing accountability and transparency, giving first nations community members the information they need to make informed choices about their leadership.

Bill C-27 complements Bill S-6, the first nations elections act, which we introduced in December 2011. Together, these pieces of proposed legislation demonstrate democratic practices and would empower first nations people.

First nations residents expect to know how funds are being spent in their communities. Like all Canadians, they want assurance that these funds are being used to improve their quality of life. Bill C-27 would improve their access to the financial statements of their governments and provide information on the salaries and expenses of their elected officials.

Indeed, democracy depends on citizens being able to call their leaders to account and ensure they represent the community's best interests.

Currently, community members may ask for financial information related to their band but unless their leaders choose to release it, it can be difficult for them to access the information required to make informed decisions about their leadership and the direction of their community. There are still community members who have no other option but to contact the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development each year seeking assistance in obtaining this information.

A real or perceived lack of transparency and accountability from first nation leaders can also erode investor confidence and impede a community's ability to take full advantage of economic development opportunities. Ultimately, this delays or can destroy job opportunities and economic progress for the first nation and its members.

I also point out that parliamentarians already have a duty to inform Canadian taxpayers of how their tax dollars are spent, including for first nations.

A question was raised during the second reading debate of the bill on whether public disclosure of financial statements of band-owned businesses would undermine their competitiveness. It is important to note that Bill C-27 would not require each individual business owned by the band to publish its detailed financial statements. Instead, it is only the consolidated financial statements of the first nation that are covered under the proposed legislation. Some of my colleagues, in their speeches in the House today, have reiterated this point. These statements would not, in most cases, reveal any proprietary information that would undermine their competitiveness. There seems to be some misunderstanding on this. I understand that during the committee stage amendments were made to clarify these concerns.

Members of first nations are ultimately the owners of any businesses owned by the band and they have a right to know the financial position of those businesses, just as other Canadians have the right to know about businesses owned by other levels of government. The bill would ensure that this occurs.

Although some first nation-owned businesses may have concerns about providing financial information to the public, it is important to point out that these reporting rules are not our rules but the rules set out by the Public Sector Accounting Board of the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants. In other words, these are the exact same rules that apply to businesses owned in other governments in Canada. To be absolutely clear, the proposed legislation would not create any additional paperwork for first nation governments. They already produce audited financial statements each year as a requirement for their funding agreements with the department, and this bill would not require anything new in that regard.

Similarly, what we are asking of chiefs and councillors is no more than what we ask of ourselves as parliamentarians. For example, the Government of Canada posts its financial statements on the Internet and each of us, as members of Parliament, now disclose our salaries and special allowances to the public as required under the Parliament of Canada Act and the Salaries Act.

Furthermore, Canadians can easily find all of these facts and figures, and much more, since we introduced the Federal Accountability Act. This act has also increased the public's access to information about government activities and spending.

Provincial and territorial governments have adopted similar practices and the vast majority of them have legislation that requires municipal governments to make these documents public, as well. In addition, some provinces, such as Manitoba and Ontario, have extended beyond the legislature to require public sector bodies to disclose the public amount of compensation it pays to its employees over a certain threshold.

In short, under the Indian Act, first nation governments are the only governments in Canada that do not currently have a legislated requirement to make basic financial information public. Again, the bill would address this gap.

Some have noted that not all first nations have websites. This came up in debate in the House today. This is true, and Bill C-27 addresses this point. A first nation will not be required to have its own website as a result of the bill. If a first nation were not able to publish the information electronically, it could ask another organization to post it on the community's behalf. Alternatively, the first nation could ask the department to post the information on its behalf. However, we should be clear that having these documents published on a website does not fulfill a first nation government's obligation to make copies of financial statements available to its members.

Many first nations members do not have easy access to the Internet, a fact the department is also addressing through its connectivity efforts. As a result, first nations will need to continue to find ways to make this information available to their members who do not have Internet access. Many already do this by distributing printed copies to households, or making the information available in readily accessible locations in the community, including band offices.

As I mentioned at the outset, the department receives many requests each year for assistance in obtaining basic financial information from their own first nations government. Enhancing the accountability of band councils more directly to its members would be achieved by making more tools available to its individuals.

All that the bill changes is that first nations government will now join other Canadian governments in sharing basic financial information with its members and other Canadians. Once passed, the bill would also help assure potential investors that they could safely enter into joint financial agreements and business undertakings with first nations. This could and should contribute to social and economic improvements in the lives and livelihoods of first nations members.

I know members will agree that Bill C-27 is a necessary step for empowering and improving the lives of first nations members, and I urge all members of this House to vote in favour of the bill.

I will close with some of the statements I have heard in the House today. There has been some implication that requiring transparency that is similar to other levels of government is somehow paternalistic. I would disagree with that characterization. It is very positive for the bill to undertake the step of moving first nations members in the same direction as other levels of government when it comes to the transparency in the disclosure of financial records to its members and to other Canadians.

I want to note that the proposed legislation is asking that first nations use generally accepted accounting principles, which is consistent with expectations of governments from all other levels. We are not trying to prescribe salaries or the spending habits of first nations communities with Bill C-27. It is simply to move the financial reporting requirements and transparency requirements into alignment with other levels of government across this country.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I know the member to be hard-working and clever. She always does the right thing, and I know she works very hard for her constituents. However, there is a bit of a disconnect in her thinking. She talks about improving accountability for first nations members, but I do not see the connection with all Canadians having to know that information.

I understand that first nations members certainly have a right, and they do now without the bill, to get that information from their leadership. It is sort of like Bill C-377, the so-called union transparency bill. If I worked 45 years for a union and I retired, if that bill passed, every Canadian would have biographical information on me and how much I make in my retirement. Quite frankly, that is not anyone else's business.

The other thing, Mr. Speaker, and I know I have one second left, she also talked about all the other governments being transparent. For example, I know for a fact--

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order, please. We are running short of time.

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Centre-North, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his complimentary comments, especially on a Friday when we are all looking forward to getting home to our ridings to serve our constituents.

The comment was made about why Canadians need to know this information. I, for one, believe that first nations have the same equality, the same rights, as any other Canadian constituent who any of us might serve. When we look at standards of transparency in any other level of government across this country, there are standards for the disclosure of government expenses.

The bill moves first nations communities into alignment with that standard, and this is a very positive thing. As I talked about in my speech, this would help improve transparency. It may increase investment opportunities because of that predictability and transparency. It would also provide easier access for members to evaluate these concerns. I think it is a very positive thing.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

It being 1:15 p.m., pursuant to order adopted on November 22 it is my duty to interrupt the deliberations and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the report stage of the bill now before the House.

The question is on Motion No. 1. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?