Bill S-2 (Historical)

Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act

An Act respecting family homes situated on First Nation reserves and matrimonial interests or rights in or to structures and lands situated on those reserves

This enactment provides for the adoption of First Nation laws and the establishment of provisional rules and procedures that apply during a conjugal relationship, when that relationship breaks down or on the death of a spouse or common-law partner, respecting the use, occupation and possession of family homes on First Nation reserves and the division of the value of any interests or rights held by spouses or common-law partners in or to structures and lands on those reserves.

Bill S-2--Time Allocation Motion

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, once again, this government has decided to move a time allocation motion to limit debate in the House of Commons. Imposing closure on Bill S-2 is simply an attack on our democracy.

This bill requires in-depth consideration by parliamentarians and continued debate. We are now debating this bill under a time allocation motion. We asked for true consultation of aboriginal peoples, and that is not at all what is happening.

Once again, the government is revealing its hypocrisy by, on the one hand, supporting a bill and, on the other, reducing the number of speakers to the absolute minimum. We are condemning the Conservatives' constant denial of democracy.

How can the minister justify such action?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, currently, as the hon. member alludes to and it is a fact, aboriginal women cannot go to court to seek exclusive occupation of the family home or even apply for emergency protection orders when living in a family home on reserve, a right which every other woman in Canada has.

Bill S-2 extends this basic protection to individuals living on reserves.

In situations of family violence, a spouse would be able to apply for an emergency order to stay in the family home with the exclusion of the other spouse for a period of up to 90 days with the possibility of an extension.

These provisions would allow victimized spouses and common-law partners in abusive relationships to ask for exclusive occupation of the family home for a specified period of time, providing victims and their dependants with a place to stay. That in itself is a good reason--

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable to me as well that on the majority of reserves, most men, women, and children have no legal rights when it comes to their family home.

In cases of family violence, women victims can find themselves re-victimized by being kicked out of their homes with nowhere to go.

With new provisional federal rules and first nations laws, Bill S-2 will ensure that the rights of first nations people during the occupancy, transfer, or sale of their family home are guaranteed, where there previously was not a guarantee.

More important, Bill S-2 will grant them access to the emergency protection orders and these exclusive occupation orders, which would allow spouses and children the consistency and stability that they need in their lives. I cannot believe the NDP and Liberals would use procedure to vote against this important bill.

Could the minister please detail how the emergency protection and exclusive occupation orders would help protect aboriginal women and children?

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I find it puzzling because we remember not that long ago this government was against the Liberal government when it brought in closure.

However, what is really troubling is the fact that the minister says that there has been proper consultation. The bill came from the other place. No one in the other place was elected to represent Canadians, let alone first nations. For him to say that it is okay not only to bring in closure, but to suggest that the bill, which comes from the other place, is legitimate—and we have about 14 of these bills coming to this place from the other place—is very troubling. How can the minister get up and say that it is okay to bring in closure when Bill S-2 came from the other place? It is a form of closure on our very democracy in terms of representation for everyday Canadians. That is not correct in this place.

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre for her excellent question.

As the member said, under the proposed legislation, first nations can choose to enact their own laws on matrimonial real property rights and interests— legislation that would address their own specific needs and respect their customs—or to apply provisional federal rules.

By allowing first nations to enact their own laws, Bill S-2 respects their diversity. As a result, they could pass laws that are aligned with the needs of their communities, enabling them to take a different and effective approach to matrimonial real property rights issues on their respective reserves.

The bill also provides for an implementation period so that first nations have the information and time they need to enact their own laws on matrimonial real property rights.

That is why we made a commitment to create an independent centre of excellence for matrimonial real property that will help first nations either to enact their own laws or to apply provisional federal rules.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, as the minister said, this is the fourth time that we have discussed this issue in the House. One of the key recommendations in the ministerial representative's report on on-reserve matrimonial real property issues, which was tabled in the House of Commons on April 20, 2007, was that the legislative measure include a way for first nations to exercise their legislative power in this area.

In response to those recommendations, Bill S-2 provides for two ways in which on-reserve matrimonial real property rights and related protections can be guaranteed. First, it allows first nations to enact their own laws to reflect their culture and traditions and, second, it provides for provisional federal rules.

Could the minister describe how the ability to enact their own laws would empower first nations and what role the centre of excellence for matrimonial real property plays in the implementation of Bill S-2?

[Susan Truppe, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary for Status of Women]

Mr. Speaker, for most Canadians undergoing a breakdown of a conjugal relationship or the death of a spouse or a common-law partner, there is legal protection to ensure that the matrimonial real property assets are distributed equitably. For couples living on reserves governed by the Indian Act, sadly this is not the case.

For more than 25 years, since the 1986 Supreme Court of Canada rulings in Paul v. Paul and Derrickson v. Derrickson, aboriginal women and children living on reserves have not had the same rights to matrimonial real property. For them, the breakdown of a relationship or the death of a spouse or a common law partner could mean insecurity, financial difficulties or homelessness.

Now is the time for action. I do not know why the members opposite do not support women having rights on reserves.

Could the minister explain how time allocating Bill S-2 would help fill this long-standing legislative gap and enhance access to justice for first nation communities and, in particular, for aboriginal women?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the fact is that if we look at the family homes on reserves and matrimonial interests or rights act and we look at the hours that it has been debated and studied, five hours in the House on a previous incarnation of Bill S-2, in the Senate for another number of hours—

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

Mr. Speaker, I hardly think it is believable that the New Democrats do not support aboriginal women and children. We are consistently in the House day after day speaking up on those issues.

Our House leader has ably pointed out that this is the 31st time the Conservatives have shut down debate, and it is a very sad record in Canadian history. This time we have Bill S-2 on matrimonial real property and once again it is an example of the government unilaterally imposing its legislative agenda on first nations without allowing appropriate debate. The bill has been before the House a number of times, but on this occasion it has been barely debated in the House and it has never before made it to a parliamentary committee.

Why does the minister not want all the members in the House to perform their duties as parliamentarians and have an honest, legitimate debate on this very important legislation?

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

moved:

That, in relation to S-2, An Act respecting family homes situated on First Nation reserves and matrimonial interests or rights in or to structures and lands situated on those reserves, not more than one further sitting day shall be allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the Bill; and

That, 15 minutes before the expiry of the time provided for Government Orders on the day allotted to the consideration at second reading stage of the said Bill, any proceedings before this House shall be interrupted, if required for the purpose of this Order, and, in turn, every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the Bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment.

Bill S-2—Notice of time allocation motion

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I have a few points. First, for far too long, women living on first nation reserves in Canada have been without the legal protections available to all other Canadians. Our government has introduced Bill S-2 to correct this inequality and to provide greater protection for aboriginal women. I must advise, however, that agreement has not been reached under the provisions of Standing Order 78(1) or 78(2) concerning the proceedings at second reading of Bill S-2, an act respecting family homes situated on first nation reserves and matrimonial interests or rights in or to structures and lands situated on those reserves.

Under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), I give notice that a minister of the Crown will propose at the next sitting a motion to allot a specific number of days or hours for the consideration and disposal of proceedings at that stage.

Business of the House

[Peter Van Loan, Conservative, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the opposition House leader for his very kind, thoughtful and sensitive comments and concern for our welfare over here.

This afternoon, we will continue the third reading debate on Bill S-9, the nuclear terrorism act. This will be the third time that the bill has been debated at third reading. In the previous two days that it was debated, we actually heard from the comments of the New Democrats that they were quite supportive of the bill and that they called for it to be passed without delay. We are asking them to heed their own advice and allow this matter to come to a vote. The government shares the view that it does need to proceed quickly. If we do care about giving people a safe and peaceful Easter now and in years to come, we certainly want to have this kind of legislation in place to protect Canadians and ensure their peace from nuclear terrorism. I hope the NDP will back up those words and allow a vote to occur.

Monday, April 15, when we return from the time in our constituencies, will be the first opposition day of the new supply period where I understand we will debate a motion from the NDP.

Tuesday, April 16, will be the second opposition day, and I understand we will debate a motion from the Liberals.

On the Wednesday of that week, the House will return to second reading debate of Bill S-2, the family homes on reserves and matrimonial interests or rights act. The bill would finally provide the legal protections for the women on reserve that they have lacked for far too long. This discrimination should not exist. That is why aboriginal people and even the Manitoba NDP have been calling for the passage of Bill S-2. I would hope that the federal NDP would heed that call and allow a vote to take place, giving aboriginal women rights regarding matrimonial property.

If debate on S-2 concludes, the House will then debate at report stage Bill C-15, the strengthening military justice in the defence of Canada act. I believe that this is also very close to the finish line.

Following that, we would consider Bill S-12, the Incorporation by Reference in Regulations Act at second reading. Thursday, April 18, will be another opposition day for the NDP.

Before I conclude, let me wish all the MPs and the parliamentary staff a happy Easter.

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Edmonton—Spruce Grove, AB]

Bill S-2 is our latest attempt in the House of Commons to close the gap that exists, which the Supreme Court identified over 25 years ago. It's a rights gap in that aboriginal women living on reserve do not have the same rights to matrimonial property that women in the rest of Canada have. I think this is the fourth legislative attempt to pass this bill, so I do urge all of the members from all parties on the committee to think about that. It's been over a quarter of a century since the Supreme Court ruled that women living on reserve are without access to the legal rights they deserve.

This particular bill, Bill S-2, which you're familiar with, will give women those rights to matrimonial property, and—I think most importantly—it will allow a judge to enforce emergency protection orders and remove a violent partner from the home. At this point, we don't have that protection for aboriginal women on reserve. I think that's a really important part of this, because it addresses the issue of violence against aboriginal women and girls living on reserve. So I do urge all members of the House to support this. Of course, the consultations on this have been very thorough and lengthy. They've taken place over 25 years. This is the fourth legislative attempt. If there are discussions to be had among parties, let's have them, but by all means let's expedite this bill through the House.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister and officials, for being here.

I know that in the first round of questioning, Minister Ambrose, you spoke extensively about the commitment to engage men and boys in the fight to end violence against women. While you were saying that, I was thinking about a member's statement that was read into the Alberta legislature on March 14 of this year by Donna Kennedy-Glans, MLA for Calgary-Varsity. She was a member of Canada's United Nations Commission on the Status of Women, and she was speaking about the importance of engaging men and boys in leadership, a position that you have taken, Minister, in this particular area.

I brought it with me, and I'd like to read it in, because a lot of what she says, I think, is really important. I'm just going to read it. Again this is not my personal statement. I'm reading another statement:

Last week I attended the 57th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women with my colleague from Barrhead—Morinville—Westlock. Our Canadian delegation was very capably led by federal Minister Rona Ambrose. The goal of this session was to identify ways to eliminate and prevent violence against women and girls.

As a mother of three sons it was particularly reassuring to me that the vast majority of the participants at this UN session recognized the need to engage men and boys in preventing violence against women and girls. In fact, this strategic imperative was concretely advanced by the Canadian delegation.

It’s heartening...to know that this approach is already being applied here in Alberta. [Here are just few examples.]

The Calgary YWCA hosts the Walk a Mile in Her Shoes campaign, inviting men to walk in high heels to raise awareness of men’s roles in combating violence against women. The Alberta Council of Women’s Shelters hosts Breakfast with the [Boys] events to bring male leaders together to inform and inspire action to help end domestic violence.

I’m [very] excited about an initiative launched by the B.C. Lions football team, [which] I’m hoping...will be adopted by the Calgary Stampeders and the Edmonton Eskimos. Football meets feminism when high-profile athletes

—I heard a giggle—

stand alongside women as allies.

I think that's really true, though.

Wally Buono, former coach of the Calgary Stampeders and [new] coach of the B.C. Lions, even steps up to share his own story of growing up in a home with domestic violence.

This is not part of the statement, but the next two points I really want to stress because they really drive home the need to engage men and boys.

These initiatives have the potential to be gamechangers. Too often we see gender equality as a women’s movement, dependent on male support and encouragement, yet it isn’t enough for my father, my husband, and now my sons to stand along the sidelines and root for me. They need to get in this game and participate.

I thought that was fitting, and I wanted to read it into the record today. I think the last two points this person made were very fitting as to why we need to bring men and boys into the equation now. So thank you for the good work we're doing in that area.

I wanted to touch very briefly on another point. You mentioned Bill S-2 in one of the first questions. You didn't refer to the bill by name, but you were talking about matrimonial property rights on reserves. I'm just wondering whether you could speak a moment on how important this bill is, how we currently have a legislative gap here in Canada that does not protect women on reserves, and how, in terms of marital breakdown, the fact that there is such inequality right now plays a large part in domestic violence in those particular areas. I'm wondering if you could touch a little bit more on that particular issue.

Aboriginal Affairs

[Candice Bergen, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Now the Liberals are calling for us to build new prisons, Mr. Speaker. I do not know if they know what they want.

The fact is that our prison systems are working to help aboriginal women. We are a leader. Correctional Service of Canada is a leader in terms of the services we are providing for aboriginal women who are serving sentences.

We need to look at the whole issue of why women are getting involved and becoming criminals. I think they are in a vulnerable stage. When the opposition is not supporting Bill S-2, which empowers women on reserve, it is not helping aboriginal women.