Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Just to complement that, I think what you're getting at is that currently, in making a decision, the tribunal has the ability to take into consideration first nation traditions in interpreting the provisions of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which is something that I think Mr. He

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  The answer is yes. The Department of Justice obviously has participated in the drafting of this bill. Whether there can be an interpretive clause or not is not for the Department of Justice to say. It's a decision of Parliament, obviously, and there's no.... The answer is yes; t

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Any decision made pursuant to the Indian Act cannot be challenged now before the commission because of section 67, and would be challengeable if section 67 were repealed, whether it's by a first nations member or a non-first nations member.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  If I may, the repeal of section 67 will allow challenges to decisions made pursuant to the Indian Act, which is not possible now. You referred earlier to the possibility of a very significant impact on the Indian Act. This has been alleged by some other witnesses. We do not thin

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  There are certain paragraphs of this proposed amendment that are clearly broader than the scope of the Canadian Human Rights Act, I can say that. For example, new paragraph 67(1)(e) refers to “matters of concern and priority to the community”. As Mr. Hendry mentioned earlier, t