Jack Iyerak Anawak

[Privilege, June 10th, 1994]

I rise today on a point of privilege stemming from remarks made yesterday in the House by the member for Capilano-Howe Sound. The member's comments about aboriginal people have denigrated me, my work and my value to the House. As an aboriginal person, my character, my background, my credibility, my values, my motivations and my capabilities have been questioned.

Slurs, aspersions and racial stereotypes were tossed out yesterday with no regard for the injurious effects upon myself, the hon. member for Western Arctic and the hon. member for Churchill. I and they have been discredited and dishonoured because of our racial background.

As a consequence, the House has also been brought into disrepute. The member should have kept the people of Canada thinking that maybe he is merely ignorant of aboriginal issues, instead of proving it.

[Aboriginal Affairs, June 10th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, from the Prime Minister on down the government is committed to ensuring that aboriginal people are given a fair representation in the House. That commitment has been made clear in the last six months that the government has been in power.

The government will continue to ensure that the aboriginal people are fairly represented in the House as long as we are here.

[Human Rights, June 10th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by acknowledging the presence in the gallery of the grade six Mutchmore enriched class.

Intolerance, ignorance, misinformation, misunderstanding and racial stereotyping diminish this country and its people. Such attitudes are not acceptable outside or inside the House and all hon. members have a duty and responsibility to condemn them whenever and wherever they occur.

In recent days in different forums Canada has witnessed divisive debates on subjects as diverse as headgear, the future of our nation, same sex benefits, et cetera.

Yesterday during debate on the Yukon land claim and self-government bills, unacceptable and denigrating remarks were made about the character and integrity of aboriginal peoples.

I and all aboriginal peoples are deeply pained and offended by these statements. Such remarks do not belong in this House of wisdom and justice.

The statements must be withdrawn and an apology issued. They are a blot on this House and this nation.

[Igloolik Isuma Productions, May 31st, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, in 1990 Zacharias Kunuk, Paul Qulitak and Norman Cohn founded Igloolik Isuma Productions, Canada's first Inuit owned independent video production company.

Only four years old, the company won this year's Bell Canada award for outstanding achievement in video art. It won this award for its Nunavut series, 13 programs depicting Inuit life in Igloolik in 1945.

The actors are local people, real people doing real things in real life. The series shows Inuit history and culture as told and lived by Inuit, and therein lies its power.

I was in Igloolik last summer for part of the filming and spent some time talking to Zacharias. He is a young man of extraordinary vision and talent. His professionalism and dedication are something to be admired.

I congratulate Igloolik Isuma on its tremendous achievement and wish it continued success.

[Odawa Pow Wow, May 27th, 1994]

The Odawa Pow Wow starts today and continues through tomorrow and Sunday. This major event takes place at the Nepean Tent and Trailer Park. It is an experience not to be missed.

This year's pow wow, the 18th annual, promises to be one of the biggest ever. Four hundred singers and dancers from all over Canada and the United States are gathering. Over 60 vendors and crafts people are displaying their wares, including fine art, jewellery and clothing. Traditional Indian food is being served: corn soup, wild rice, bannock and buffalo.

The pow wow is a great celebration of joy and pride in Indian culture and tradition, a renewal and a strengthening of the spirit. It is an opportunity to renew acquaintances and to make new friends.

I encourage all members of the House, local residents and visitors to the national capital region to join the celebration. Come and share the spirit.

[Sahtu Dene And Metis Land Claimsettlement Act, May 2nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member does not understand. I did not ask a standard question. That may be what he thinks if he gets a question from somebody who is not of that culture. I asked those questions from the intimate knowledge of what I am talking about. That is why I asked the questions, not because I read it in some magazine or some newspaper. I asked them from the point of view that I know what I am talking about. That is precisely why I asked those questions.

As far as self-government is concerned I do not think the hon. member has an understanding of the aboriginal people who want to have the opportunity to exercise that inherent right of self-government.

I would also ask the member how many aboriginal people and from what particular area in British Columbia area are saying to him that they have great concerns and, if so, would he be prepared to say that this particular group opposes those things that we are attempting to do as a government? I find it very hard to believe that a large group of aboriginal people would be saying that whatever we are trying to do is contrary to the wishes of the aboriginal people in Canada.

[Sahtu Dene And Metis Land Claimsettlement Act, May 2nd, 1994]

[Editor's Note: Member spoke in Inuktitut.]

It is obvious listening to the hon. member that he really does not support any aboriginal self-determination and does not really understand the nature of what the Sahtu Dene and Metis are trying to do through this agreement.

For the last couple of hundred years the aboriginal people in those land claims have been at the receiving end of the generosity of a different group of people who did not have the understanding that they were dealing with a totally different culture when they were dealing with aboriginal people in the country.

It is obvious from his remarks that this hon. member does not understand nor does he want to understand what the aboriginal people want.

It is all very fine to say: "Well, it would be very nice for the aboriginal people in that area to have economic self-sufficiency". It is years of being under a system like the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development that has created that so-called dependency which we would not necessarily have to be dealing with today if so-called well meaning bureaucrats had decided that these people were much better off making their own decisions and the bureaucrats implementing those decisions for those aboriginal people.

I would like to ask the hon. member this question. Has he ever met with the Sahtu Dene and Metis and has he discussed at length the concerns of the Sahtu Dene and Metis? Has he discussed at length the concept of self-government with the Sahtu Dene and Metis? What is his understanding of the inherent right of self-government as we understand it? If he is that much in support of economic self-sufficiency, does he agree that the aboriginal people's inherent right of self government should be recognized? If so, how would he see that recognition through the House of Commons?

[Sahtu Dene And Metis Land Claim Settlement Act, April 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think we are here to debate hypothetical questions. That is a totally hypothetical question.

I suspect if Christopher Columbus had not come over, North America would be a lot more cleaner place to live. I would hate to think if not the aboriginal people but the people whose forefathers came first, what state of affairs the aboriginal people would be in. I cannot imagine the despair we would be in.

However I acknowledge what the hon. member has stated, that he is ignorant about the aboriginal issue. I accept part of his comments. Ignorance is bliss.

[Sahtu Dene And Metis Land Claim Settlement Act, April 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, it always amazes me when members talk, as the previous speaker just did, about giving away land. It seems to me incredibly naive to say that the government gives away land. After all, I cannot describe well enough what has happened to the land that we now call crown land or Her Majesty's land or whatever the case may be.

The member talks about the large size of the land that has been given. He compares it to how Manitoba would fare if it had a similar type of land claim in that regard.

We have to remember that the boundaries were not set down by the aboriginal people. As far as the aboriginal people are concerned those are artificial boundaries when they talk about their land.

The aboriginal people, the Dene and the Inuit of the Northwest Territories, the Denesuline from Manitoba and the people from Prince Albert did not sit down and say: "Okay, here is Manitoba, here is Saskatchewan and here is the Northwest Territories". It was imposed on them. As far as they were concerned they had some boundaries but not necessarily defined when they hunted and survived around that area.

When the member talks about how large the land is in ratio to if they tried to do that with Manitoba, that is not an applicable question.

The hon member talks about how self-government is undefined. I go back to a response I made some weeks ago about self-government.

When the British parliamentary system was being set up here who asked the aboriginal people of Canada? "We are going to set up a government. We are going to set up the Parliament of Canada, but you do not have a choice. You are just going to have to go along with it". That is basically what happened. We did not have a role in defining how the system of government was going to be set up in our land.

There has to be some understanding and I am sure the understanding is there. It is just being chosen to be ignored.

We talk about the bureaucracy which is going to be set up. In the Nunavut area I hope that the bureaucracy is going to be comprised of a large number of Inuit in our area. Hopefully the same will be true in the western Arctic, and there will be a large number of Dene within the bureaucracy.

In order to save time and money in dealing with issues we want a bureaucracy and a government sensitive to the people being served. After all the bureaucracy is there to serve the people. Even though sometimes the bureaucrats seem to think it is the other way around, that is the way it is supposed to be.

Does the hon. member not understand that this is setting up a system or settling claims which are long overdue? The hon. member asks whether the aboriginal people will be paying for their own medical care and so on. He talks about the food-mail program which he says is a good one and I agree. However that subsidy cannot be taken away from the people it presently serves when in large part those people have the least earning power.

In some cases they are paying $4 for a loaf of bread, $4 for a dozen eggs, $5 for a litre of milk. They regard apples and oranges and other fruit as treats rather than a nutritional part of their diet.

Does the hon. member not think this is the settling of some claims which has been long overdue?

[Sahtu Dene And Metis Land Claim Settlement Act, April 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, just a point of order to correct what I believe is a small error. In Canada we have reserves, not reservations.