Bill C-15 (Historical)

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act

An Act respecting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

This enactment provides that the Government of Canada must take all measures necessary to ensure that the laws of Canada are consistent with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and must prepare and implement an action plan to achieve the objectives of the Declaration.

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act

[David Lametti, Liberal, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the annual progress report on the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you so much, Chair.

My first question is for Madam Zinck from the Department of Natural Resources.

You spoke about how your department is trying to integrate indigenous perspectives in revamping your department, but here's the thing. In the last Parliament, this government put into law Bill C-15 to see the full implementation and adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, so we need to go beyond perspectives to actually getting free, prior and informed consent. I want to define that for you: “free” means free of coercion and intimidation; “prior” means prior to development; and “informed” means knowing what the development is about and all of the impacts of that development. It's only when you have those three things that you actually have consent.

I'm going to give you an example. In Wet'suwet'en territory, the RCMP came in and took down the door of two unarmed women on their unceded territory with an axe, a chainsaw and an attack dog. Do you think that kind of behaviour is consistent with FPIC, going back to free of coercion and intimidation, yes or no?

[Leah Gazan, Winnipeg Centre, NDP]

Thank you so much, and it's nice to be a visitor on this committee today. I have big shoes to fill.

Madam Lisson, you spoke about the participation of Canadian companies in violation of the rights of indigenous peoples in the area in the Philippines. You indicated that the Philippines is an “El Dorado of human rights abuses”, including the failure to obtain proper free, prior and informed consent, a direct violation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

I find that troubling because the UN committee came out this week condemning Canada over failing to uphold human rights, particularly in relation to the construction of the Trans Mountain and Coastal GasLink pipelines.

The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination said that it “profoundly regrets and is concerned” that Canada is continuing to forcibly remove Indigenous land defenders from their unceded territory. They went on to say that, in British Columbia specifically, they “have escalated their use of force, surveillance, and criminalization of land offenders and peaceful protesters to intimidate, remove and forcibly evict Secwepemc and Wet'suwet'en Nations from their traditional lands, in particular by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the Community-Industry Response Group, and private security firms.”

There seems to be a pattern of behaviour, whether it's in Canada or with the participation of Canadian mining companies with terrible reputations, as we know, internationally.

We adopted a bill in the last Parliament, Bill C-15, to see the full adoption and implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

How is Canada violating Canadian law by not ensuring that mining activities uphold these basic human rights?

Indigenous Affairs

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, one of the 231 calls for justice calls for the full implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The government committed to doing so in passing Bill C-15, but in courts this week, federal lawyers now say UNDRIP is only an important interpretative aid in the process for discussions. Which is it? Will the Minister of Justice stand to confirm that the rights of indigenous people in Canada are indeed substantive, as stated in UNDRIP?

Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Madam Chair, the member's question gives me the chance to talk about Bill C-15, UNDRIP, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which will turn the page on the colonial legacies within the Indian Act by giving indigenous people the ability to implement that which they fought for at the United Nations for 30 years, that which the Conservative Party voted against.

Our plan and our way of moving forward is to make sure we implement what indigenous nations all across the world have been calling for over the past 30 years. Our government did that historically last year, on June 21, 2021, when it received royal assent, and I am proud to stand with this government, which made sure that was a priority.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you so much, Chair.

Thanks to all the witnesses for being here today for this very important study.

My first questions are for Dr. Palmater.

In the last Parliament, we passed Bill C-15 and now the government is required to ensure that all the laws are aligned with the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. As you mentioned, these are minimum human rights that any human being needs, indigenous or not, to have. These aren't special rights. These are just rights that haven't been afforded to indigenous peoples specifically.

How is the government's failure to uphold this new legislation by ensuring its implementation—including turning a blind eye to the violence being perpetrated against women, girls and two-spirit people around resource extraction—further exacerbating this crisis and normalization of violence?

[Professor Dwight Newman, Professor of Law and Canada Research Chair in Indigenous Rights in Constitutional and International Law, University of Saskatchewan, As an Individual]

Good morning, honourable members. I'm Dwight Newman and I work as a professor of law and Canada research chair in indigenous rights in constitutional and international law at the University of Saskatchewan. I appear today as an individual.

Proposals to add indigenous languages to election ballots in Canada have circulated in recent years. There's a new imperative to thinking on these matters insofar as Canada adopted last year the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, or UNDRIPA, which received royal assent on June 21, 2021.

Amongst its provisions, section 5 of that act establishes a statutory requirement for the government taking “all measures necessary to ensure that the laws of Canada are consistent with the Declaration.” That's a far-reaching statutory obligation, and it bears on many topic matters that are seldom discussed.

Article 13.2 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples has a clause requiring that states “take effective measures to ensure...that indigenous peoples can understand and be understood in political, legal and administrative proceedings, where necessary through the provision of interpretation or by other appropriate means”.

That clause of that article has received very little attention in the UNDRIP scholarship, but it represents an important commitment concerning participatory rights of indigenous peoples. Partly because article 13.2 establishes rights for indigenous peoples as collective entities, though, rather than pertaining to individuals, article 13.2 probably does not mandate any specific requirement of ballots being available to individual indigenous voters in indigenous languages.

However, the adoption of such a practice would certainly be in accord with the underlying objectives of the UNDRIP. The enhancement of indigenous participation in democratic decision-making accords with the declaration and represents good policy in a democratic state meant to have full involvement of all voters.

Sections 3 and 5 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, protecting the right to vote and rights against discrimination, may well offer stronger legal arguments against impediments to voting. As with other barriers that Elections Canada has worked to overcome, there are arguments for it to overcome linguistic barriers, particularly in the case of individuals who use other languages and have limited proficiency in English and French.

In some ways, Canada is behind on these issues, notably as compared with the United States. I draw the committee's attention to the 1975 amendments to the U.S. Voting Rights Act that added section 203, which established various forms of language assistance in districts where that was needed for minority language communities. That's decades back that the U.S. has done this, and there have been challenges at times on implementation, which has not always been smooth, but there has been a statutory commitment there in U.S. legislation.

In the context of indigenous peoples, though, the U.S. has had some ongoing challenges. Here, I would draw the committee's attention to the March 2022 “Report of the Interagency Steering Group on Native American Voting Rights”, which was just reported to the White House and has examined a range of factors affecting indigenous participation in elections. There is discussion of language factors, but there is a wide range of other factors that need to be taken into account, which raises questions about what are going to be the most effective means of enhancing indigenous participation in elections.

With regard to the language issues at hand, there are a number of key questions to consider, which I know this committee has already been discussing in some ways: whether Nunavut is a special case and where there's a particularly strong argument; what population cut-offs might bear on whether it works to provide translation of ballots in a particular riding; issues concerning what particular form of indigenous languages might be used on ballots, whether in the form of syllabics or in transliterated forms in the context of languages that have both versions; and other issues concerning the costs generally and whether those costs might be more optimally invested in other ways of supporting indigenous electoral participation.

There are many things that we could talk about. I'll just say that there are also many options the committee could consider in terms of the most effective ways of advancing indigenous electoral participation in cautious ways. The use of sample or facsimile ballots is an option, rather than changing the main ballot. Other forms of language assistance are possible. The committee could also think about something like a pilot program in the context of Nunavut that would test things out in one riding before making Elections Canada try things out across the country all at once.

I'll stop there and just say that there are big questions about bridging principle, the aims of legislation and what legislation can and will achieve in practical ways.

It's wonderful to see the committee working to live up to commitments of supporting indigenous electoral participation. It's important to do that right.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to ask another question regarding the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Bill C-15 was passed last year, and I'm glad for first nations and all indigenous peoples.

In supplementary estimates (C), an additional $11 million is allocated to support the implementation of the Declaration. These are not operating expenditures. I'd like to know what this $11 million in additional funding is exactly and how it moves us closer to actually implementing Bill C-15 at this time.

[Regional Chief Terry Teegee]

Yes, I got part of it. I'll do my best.

I'm a regional chief, not a grand chief.

As part of section 35 of the Indian Act, and also with the new act—the declaration of rights of indigenous peoples, Bill C-15, which was passed federally—I think it's important to share some of the issues we have here in British Columbia.

We're going on two years since the Declaration on the RIghts of Indigenous Peoples was passed as law provincially in British Columbia. As I stated in the legislature at the time when we passed the act two years ago, DRIPA is really, as my colleagues have stated, a human rights recognition. It's much more than just an act. It really recognizes our human rights, our sovereignty and our self-determination.

I've stated there how it's related to such initiatives or laws, environmental assessments and major projects, and is a big economic driver in this country. Much of Canada and British Columbia is driven by natural resources, whether we like it or not. There needs to be space. This is related to free, prior and informed consent.

I believe what you alluded to is the uncertainty of perhaps how decisions are made. The free, prior and informed consent in our determination, in first nations' perspective, allows for more certainty. If major companies are proposing these major infrastructure projects or anything of that nature, we need the space for all levels of government, including provincial, federal and indigenous governments together, so that the decisions can be made together.

If there is a blessing of going ahead, there's nothing that gives more certainty than if all levels of government say yes or no to a project. That's really important in terms of the new law, which is the declaration of the rights of indigenous peoples.

[Regional Chief Terry Teegee, Regional Chief, British Columbia Assembly of First Nations]

Thank you.

[Witness spoke in Dakelh]

[English]

I just wanted to acknowledge the territory I'm calling from, the unceded, unsurrendered and continually occupied territory of the Lheidli T'enneh, the Dakelh people.

I appreciate the opportunity to speak here today on behalf of the Assembly of First Nations. I hold the economic development portfolio on behalf of the Assembly of First Nations and continue to work on behalf of many first nations across this country. Seeing that we're so diverse and have numerous communities, well over 630, there certainly are different points of view in terms of economic development.

Many first nations communities rely not only on our traditional economies but also on market-based economies, which we have been accustomed to since colonization began. Certainly, there are many environmental issues that we deal with as first nations in upholding our rights, treaty rights, and different ways of knowing and being.

Yet, the common theme that serves as a barrier to first nations' economic development is the ongoing systemic impacts of colonialism, in particular the persistent failure to recognize and implement first nations' rights and treaty rights, and the ongoing denial of first nations' self-determination and jurisdiction. It's really important to understand that UNDRIP is law as of June 21, and certainly the declaration identifies and sees sovereignty and self-determination as a cornerstone for implementing first nations' rights, title and interests. Most important to the Assembly of First Nations is ensuring that we address these barriers as first nations.

What we need are solutions that address barriers to help first nations. In some cases, those barriers relate to the failure to implement the treaty relationship, or specific treaty obligations and historical treaties. In other cases, those barriers are related to specific impediments found in the Indian Act itself, to federal or provincial policies, or even to corporate Canada.

Barriers include lack of respect for first nations' inherent rights and jurisdictions, as they relate to treaties, and lack of involvement in economic development planning, decisions and financing. Certainly we've seen the lack of respect for first nations' rights and jurisdictions in many historical fights, whether it's on the territory, in the public or in the courts. Our first nations continue to be in the court systems to fight for what is rightfully ours. A perfect case is the Ahousaht case here in British Columbia—fighting for the ability to commercially fish some of the commercially viable species.

There is a lack of involvement in planning. First nations must be included in strategic planning and decision-making processes for economic recovery. In the long term, certainly, those are some of the discussions that we've been having, not only nationally, but also provincially, as we come out of this pandemic—building back better, if you will. We need to be part of those discussions.

One of the core standards recognized by UNDRIP—which is law here in British Columbia and now federal law elsewhere in this country, through Bill C-15—is the need to uphold and live up to many of the articles within UNDRIP, including free, prior and informed consent. The way we see it, it would provide more certainty in terms of how decisions are made.

Finance, as well, is always an issue in regard to funding certain projects led by first nations, or which are in partnership with first nations. It's very difficult to access the necessary financing on many projects out there, whether it's infrastructure or the development of projects that are important not only to our first nations communities but to the economy in general.

Going forward, we'd like to see more working together in terms of joint actions and measures to progress in these areas. I know this is a very short time. Five minutes doesn't allow me to say a hell of a lot, but certainly we're seeing major issues in Ottawa. The political discourse that we're seeing [Technical difficulty—Editor]. Many racialized peoples, including indigenous peoples, are concerned about the state of this country, so we need to do this in partnership.

Marsi cho.

[David Lametti, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Thank you, Mr. MacGregor.

Just before I turn it over to Ms. Campbell, I'd like to thank you for the compliments on Bill C-15. Thank you. I certainly have saluted the leadership of Romeo Saganash throughout this whole process. He deserves a great deal of credit for the passage of Bill C-15. He did a lot of advocacy for it in the meantime, as well as for his own private member's bill.

We, as a government, recognize—and I, as the Minister of Justice, recognize—that we need to work hard at improving the justice system in all of its forms. That means, as per the UN declaration, helping the reflourishing, if you will, of indigenous normative systems. I have just recently announced, in response to call to action number 50, $10 million for funding across Canada for 21 projects aimed at reviving specific indigenous justice systems.

That's part of it. Part of it is encouraging better access to justice. Part of it is encouraging a better and more participatory justice system. Part of it is having more indigenous justices—and I've done that too, by appointing indigenous justices to the Superior Court and elevating currently sitting Superior Court justices in the Courts of Appeal. It's a priority for us, as well, to make sure that representation, at the earliest possible point, also extends to the Supreme Court of Canada.

With that, I'll turn it over to Ms. Campbell.

[Alistair MacGregor, NDP, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC]

Thank you so much, Madam Chair.

I'd like to welcome Minister Lametti and Ms. Campbell to the committee.

We really appreciate having you both here to discuss this nomination process.

Minister Lametti, maybe I'll start with you. I'll just offer congratulations on Bill C-15 having received royal assent yesterday. I had the honour of serving with Romeo Saganash in the previous Parliament, so this has deep, personal meaning to me, as well as to many indigenous people across this country.

The preamble of Bill C-15 talks about how the declaration emphasizes the urgent need to respect the legal systems that indigenous peoples have. Clause 5 of that bill requires that the government take all measures necessary to ensure that the laws of Canada are consistent with the declaration.

Within the qualifications and assessment criteria, number one, under “Demonstrated superior knowledge of the law”, says that “knowledge of indigenous legal traditions may also be considered”.

Ms. Campbell, you might want to chime in on this. With respect to qualifications and assessment criteria, under number one, “knowledge of indigenous legal traditions”, can you expand on that a little? I want to know how much that figured into your consideration of applicants given the context we're now operating under in Canada, in which indigenous rights and title are becoming much more prevalent in Canadian society and will certainly be a big part of legal decisions going forward, especially with the passage of Bill C-15.

[The Speaker, Anthony Rota]

I have the honour to inform the House that a communication has been received as follows:

Rideau Hall

Ottawa

June 21, 2021

Mr. Speaker:

I have the honour to inform you that the Right Honourable Richard Wagner, Administrator of the Government of Canada, signified royal assent by written declaration to the bills listed in the schedule to this letter on the 21st day of June, 2021, at 6:35 p.m.

Yours sincerely,

Ian McCowan

Secretary to the Governor General

The schedule indicates the bills assented to were Bill C-210, An Act to amend the Canada Revenue Agency Act (organ and tissue donors); Bill C-8, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada's call to action number 94); Bill C-15, An Act respecting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; Bill C-33, An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2022; and Bill C-34, An Act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2022.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Chair, if I understand Ms. Pauzé correctly, she is asking whether, because C-15 references all other Canadian statutes, it is really necessary to go both directions and have new statutes reference the framework on C-15.

My sense is that, given where C-15 is, and because the co-formation of that framework hasn't taken place yet, it's important in this new legislation that we have a reference to that so that it doesn't get missed.

While it may seem duplicative, I think indigenous rights are important enough that we should make sure that when we're passing legislation we include reference to them, especially a piece of legislation aimed specifically at environmental racism, which affects so many indigenous people.

[Monique Pauzé, Bloc, Repentigny, QC]

Mr. Chair, I have a question.

It seems to me that Bill C‑15 states that the laws will automatically be consistent with the United Nations Declaration. So is there any point in adopting Mr. Bachrach's amendment, and will we have to bring his amendment back to the table on a regular basis, since it seems to me that Bill C‑15 covers all of that?

I wonder whether this amendment is necessary.