Mr. Chair, I think that kind of attitude needs to be dropped right now. I know this may shock some people, and there are even people in my own entourage who do not like it when I say things like this, but that attitude of thinking that you know better than others and know what is best for them, it is so very white.
We are talking about 215 children buried in an unmarked grave, over a period of nearly a century. The cause of death is unknown, their ages are mere estimates, their names are generally unknown and their parents are also unknown.
That is the tragedy, and it is terrible. Beyond words, Parliaments, upholstered chairs and plush carpeting, that is the tragedy of this kind of attitude, an unbelievably arrogant colonial attitude from people occupying the territory by force and claiming superiority.
I am an anthropologist by training. It can be awesome, and it can be awful. It can be awful because, in an allegedly scientific framework, anthropologists claim to know their subject better than the subject knows themselves. As a result, the anthropologists think they are in a better position to decide matters for the subject than the subject themselves. However, it is a construct, beyond the desire to create a science out of finding differences captivating and enriching, somewhere between the extremes of vile prejudice and naked idealization. True acceptance is the mutual enrichment we gain from our differences. It serves no purpose whatsoever, all these years later, for parents to experience something that should never happen. A parent should never outlive their child. It makes no sense. It goes against the natural order.
Like some other members have mentioned, this past weekend, I too had issues with my children. I have several kids. You are a parent for life, except when your children are taken away. These children were locked away, uprooted, hidden, in order to be acculturated and robbed of their collective identity as members of a nation who have their own perspective and relationship to the Earth and to nature. They do not see it through the lens of appropriation. They do not experience the idea of nation as we do. Rather, they experience it in a relationship that is fundamentally and rightfully different.
Then someone came along and, allegedly without malice, but with immense interest, thought that it would be better to strip children of their identity, erase who they are and, perhaps worst of all, take away their relationship with their parents, under conditions so horrific that a staggering number of them would die before reaching adulthood, very likely from mistreatment and neglect, all in the name of religion, all supposedly for their benefit.
We are still reckoning with this history. Politics will come into it eventually, but today I am still coming to grips with the realization, because this day is forcing us to face facts. Before we can do any political analysis, which in some ways is fairly simple, we must deal with the constant agony of knowing that, by God, we did this.
It is not just 215 children near Kamloops. It is potentially thousands of children, because they came from nations whose land was being appropriated, and the white colonizer despised and envied them at the same time.
After all these years of suspecting this, it is now increasingly clear. We are starting to see the light, or better yet, we know that we could see the light. We can get to the bottom of this. Beyond the commissions, the analyses, the words, the commemorations, or before all that, there needs to be knowledge without complacency. The first step is to acquire that knowledge.
We learned that a technology that is used on construction sites, but is also used quite regularly in archeology and anthropology, helped pinpoint the location of this sad discovery in a rather simple way. It is true that this could be done elsewhere, and it can be done everywhere. There are no pleasant surprises in store, but the pain must not be used as an excuse to spare us from the need to get to the bottom of this matter.
That will take resources, but, honestly, I will say quickly that I do not care. It will definitely take some money, and the first nations will obviously not be asked to pay for it. The federal government needs to pay for that. It will take science, knowledge and the ability to use those technologies, so we will need the help of institutions, research centres and universities. To avoid any temptation, it will inevitably take quick, immediate, strong, unequivocal and lasting action to protect the sites. We have a duty to bring to light the truth.
We need to be aware of the worst parts of history, not so that we can brood about them but so that we can come to accept a profound loss, become aware of a former denial of dignity and remember that every first nation is one that has often been disenfranchised and humiliated. The government purported to be helping them while making them disappear. That was also said of French Canadians back in the day, but we are still here.
Beyond apologizing, what should we do? I do not know. Perhaps even the first nations do not really know yet either.
However, we must not tell them that we know what is good for them. When we talk about Bill C-15, we are talking about their initiative. We must not tell them that we are going to look into this. No. We need to listen. We need to focus on, receive and accept their requests and recommendations.
This morning, I was saying that there is no culture in the world that does not consider its children to be its most precious asset. It is therefore with humility, without self-pity and in the spirit of sincere friendship that we can perhaps admit that this is becoming political, if, and only if, the word “political” is used in its most noble sense, that of serving, taking action and correcting wrongs.
The first nations are kindred nations and friends on the same continent and, let us not forget, on one earth.
