Bill C-5 (Historical)

An Act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code (National Day for Truth and Reconciliation)

This enactment amends certain Acts to add a new holiday, namely, National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, which is observed on September 30.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Before I start, I just want to make it clear that people should not be making assumptions. Karen was a great leader, but we welcome you, Shelby. I don't want you to take this from anyone here at our team. We have worked very collaboratively together. I think making assumptions is the wrong way to go. I just want to set that clear for the record. Welcome, and thank you for being part of the team.

We also want to congratulate Karen. She did a great job.

I want to start with Ms. Gideon. The minister's gone, but I would like your feedback on something.

Bill C-5 passed, receiving royal assent on June 30, 2021. The purpose of the act is to respond to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's call to action number 80.

I was taught as a child that actions speak louder than words. While this is a lovely sentiment, the action of the Prime Minister on the very first national day spoke volumes. Despite receiving invitations to spend the day with survivors and their families, he opted for a surfing vacation in Tofino. In my opinion, his actions spoke volumes to the importance he placed on reconciliation.

How much damage did his actions cause—

National Council for Reconciliation Act

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to acknowledge, before I begin, that we are speaking here today on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

As we begin the second reading debate on Bill C-29, an act to provide for the establishment of a national council for reconciliation, I think it is important to highlight that since locating unmarked graves at former residential schools a year and a half ago, Canada's relationship with first nations, Inuit and Métis has evolved and often in a painful way. Survivors, their families, communities and all indigenous peoples across the country were heard as they shared the violent truth of residential schools.

It is our moral obligation as a country and as people to honour survivors and pursue the truth. It is also our responsibility to support all of those suffering from intergenerational trauma in their search for truth and closure. Addressing these ongoing impacts is at the heart of reconciliation and at the core of truth-seeking and the renewal of the relationship with indigenous people, particularly those who attended these horrible institutions.

This summer, after years of advocacy by first nations, Inuit and Métis, His Holiness Pope Francis visited Canada and offered a formal apology for the Roman Catholic Church's role in the abuse of indigenous children at residential schools. Although this apology was seen as a step in the right direction by many people, it is important to recognize the systemic nature of this harmful legacy and the ongoing impacts of the trauma at residential schools that was both instigated and perpetuated by the Government of Canada and religious institutions.

A few weeks ago, I joined the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation to raise the survivors' flag on Parliament Hill. This flag honours the survivors and those affected by residential schools. It represents our individual and collective responsibility and also our commitment to advancing reconciliation.

At the flag-raising ceremony, the Prime Minister reminded us that reconciliation is something for every person in Canada and all levels of government to participate in, and that includes every member present in the House today.

We are coming up on the second National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, which is observed on September 30 pursuant to the passage of Bill C-5 last year, and I recognize that there is still much work to be done. Canadians understandably want to see more tangible progress. In particular, we must respond to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action. The national day responds to call to action 80.

As we move forward, we need to be able to measure our progress so that the government and Canada are held accountable for our commitments to indigenous peoples. As the Truth and Reconciliation Commission wrote in its final report, progress on reconciliation at all levels of government and civil society organizations needs vigilant attention and measurement to determine improvements.

However, as many partners, particularly indigenous organizations, have pointed out, the government cannot evaluate and grade itself when it comes to reconciliation. Independent oversight is necessary and appropriate. That is why, in 2015, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission asked the Parliament of Canada to create a national council for reconciliation, which is exactly what Bill C-29 will do if it is passed. It will establish a national council for reconciliation as an independent, non-political, permanent and indigenous-led organization. The council would monitor the long-term progress being made toward reconciliation here in Canada and evaluate and report on the implementation of the 94 calls to action set out in the commission's report. That is in keeping with what many indigenous leaders have been calling for for many years: greater accountability, greater transparency and a way of holding the Government of Canada to account for the role it plays in reconciliation and the search for the truth.

If passed, this bill will enable the creation of the national council for reconciliation, immediately fulfilling call to action 53. It would also respond to calls to action 54, 55 and 56, which expand on the funding, responsibilities and expectations of transparency for the council and the federal government. The bill would ensure that Canada responds formally to the council's annual report.

I would like to take some time to reflect on the genesis of this legislation. The road to get here required collaboration and a lot of work. Bill C-29 has been in the making for many years.

In 2019, an interim board composed of six notable indigenous leaders, including Dr. Wilton Littlechild, one of the commissioners from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, made recommendations based on their extensive research and public engagement on the council's mandate, governance and operations, which were the basis for a consultation legislative framework. They also recommended the appointment of a transitional committee to advance this initiative.

Last December, I was pleased to announce and support the establishment of this transitional committee. The committee members reviewed the draft framework, engaged with indigenous and non-indigenous technical experts and provided our government with further recommendations that led to the bill we see before us today.

The bill is a culmination of substantial work and many years of advocacy by indigenous leaders, experts and communities in particular. Therefore, establishing the national council for reconciliation is one of the best opportunities to guide us in achieving truth and reconciliation in this country.

The proposed bill defines the process for establishing the council of nine to 13 individuals and sets out parameters to ensure that a diverse range of people are appointed to the first board of directors. The bill states that at least two-thirds of the board must be indigenous and must include the voices of first nations, Inuit and Métis; indigenous organizations, including a nominee each from the Assembly of First Nations, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and the Métis National Council; youth, women, men and gender-diverse people; and people from all regions of Canada, including urban, rural and remote regions.

The council will be tasked with advancing efforts for reconciliation in Canada, including by monitoring and evaluating the government's progress on all of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action.

This means that the council must have access to the relevant information on how governments are fulfilling their own commitments. Our government will have to develop a protocol for disclosing Government of Canada information, not unlike the disclosure of documents regarding residential schools to the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation in order to hold the government accountable and better understand the legacy of residential schools. I will be responsible for ensuring that the council has the information it needs to do its job. That is imperative.

I also want to point out that the council will be fully independent from the government and will be managed similar to a not-for-profit organization. This means that it will not have any ties to the government or the Crown. The Government of Canada will provide an endowment and initial funding in accordance with call to action 54.

If it is set up as a not-for-profit organization, the council will be required to report annually to Parliament on the progress made on reconciliation in Canada and to make recommendations for advancing reconciliation efforts. It will have to provide annual reports and financial reports to which the government will have to respond. The government will have to respond to the report every year. These reports would help the government set objectives and develop plans to advance reconciliation based on the council's recommendations. This reporting mechanism set out in Bill C‑22 will ensure transparency and accountability as we make progress on the calls to action.

Finally, the bill outlines the purpose and functions of the council. The mission of the council would be to hold the government accountable on reconciliation and the calls to action. The council would be responsible for developing and implementing a multi-year national action plan to advance efforts on reconciliation. The council would also conduct research and engage with partners on the progress being made toward reconciliation in all sectors of Canadian society and, crucially, by all governments. This includes monitoring efforts to implement the calls to action.

The bill is not exhaustive; rather, it is intended to be a flexible framework. The council would have the authority to pursue other measures it deems important and necessary to achieve its purpose.

In closing, I want to emphasize one last important point: We must pass this bill as soon as possible. It has been seven years since the Truth and Reconciliation Commission published its final report and its calls to action. It has been 16 months since the first unmarked graves were discovered in Kamloops. It has been three months since Bill C‑29 was introduced in the House.

With each passing moment, survivors, elders, knowledge-keepers and families are getting older. Many survivors have already passed away without having seen the full scope of our efforts to advance reconciliation. I ask hon. members here today to press forward and support the establishment of the council as quickly as possible. We owe it to the survivors, indigenous peoples and all Canadians.

Finally, I want to thank all residential school survivors, once again, for sharing their truths and their experiences, and I honour those who continue to suffer in silence. Without them, we would not be here today. We see them. We hear them. We believe them.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further Adjourned

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

Madam Speaker, I share that frustration. I saw it with Bill C-5 in the previous Parliament, which is now being slowed down in this Parliament, again by the Conservative Party, for ideological reasons that actually have nothing to do with the empirical evidence behind the bill.

The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby, like all Canadians, wants to get things done in this House. He wants to see us accomplish measures that better the lives of Canadians, and that is what we are doing. That is what we are doing with this bill. As the hon. member pointed out, we are here to extend hours. We are here to give every issue adequate time to be ventilated and for adequate discussion to be had in order to move forward with a progressive, substantive agenda.

That is why we are here. We are here to organize that. These are measures that have been taken in the past in this House. We are doing it again, and we are doing it to facilitate and prolong debate. I, too, share the surprise at the Conservative Party's not wanting to stay for fulsome debate.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, Toronto—St. Paul's, ON]

Absolutely, Jamie. We have a plan for every one of the calls to action that is a federal responsibility or shared responsibility and, as you know, we're either completed or are well under way with 80% of them.

Obviously, with what's happened just now, with Bill C-5 and Bill C-8, as well as Bill C-15, we are making tremendous progress on the calls to action, and we really do believe that calls to action 72 to 76 are well under way.

Indigenous Affairs

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations]

Mr. Speaker, I want to correct the report card the member has given. The TRC road map for reconciliation is so important to our government, and in objective reviews, 80% of the 76 calls to action under the sole or shared responsibility of the federal government are completed or well under way. The recent passage of Bill C-5 is an example of concrete progress, as are Bill C-8 and Bill C-15, which are coming soon. This work will require sustained and consistent action to advance Canada's shared journey of healing and reconciliation.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations]

Mr. Speaker, first, I want to remind the member that over 80% of the 76 calls to action under the sole or shared responsibility of the federal government are completed or well under way; the recent passage of Bill C-5, as an example, Bill C-8, Bill C-15. This will result in sustained and consistent action to advance Canada's shared journey of healing and reconciliation.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès), Alexandra Mendes]

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

RIDEAU HALL

THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNOR GENERAL

Thursday, June 3, 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 3rd day of June, 2021, at 6:34 p.m.

Yours sincerely,

Ian McCowan

The schedule indicates the bills assented to were Bill S-223, An Act respecting Kindness Week, Bill S-3, An Act to amend the Offshore Health and Safety Act, and Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code (National Day for Truth and Reconciliation).

Citizenship Act

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Madam Speaker, 13 years ago next week, the chamber of the House of Commons was filled with tears and a lot of raw emotion. Prime Minister Stephen Harper issued the apology for the treatment that residential school survivors experienced at federally funded schools across the country. It marked a milestone in the healing and reconciliation process for former students.

One of those former students is Bill Sunday, a member of Akwesasne, which is in my riding of Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry. At that time, the grand chief of the council, Chief Tim Thompson, brought seven survivors from the community of Akwesasne to hear the words of the Government of Canada that day. I am thinking of Bill tonight and the number of residents of Akwesasne who, over the course of numerous generations, have faced hardship and discrimination.

What came of the apology at that time was the idea of establishing the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. As alluded to in other speeches, its report came out with tangible calls to action back in 2015. To give context, that is six years ago, or 2,100 days that our federal government has had to respond to and enact the change that has been called for.

We are here today with nowhere near the pace and volume of completion and tangible progress that Canadians want us to have. A few more than a handful of calls to action have been marked as completed; others are under way. However, if we were to speak to indigenous Canadians, first nations leadership and any Canadian, they would agree that the pace of change and of enacting reconciliation has not moved in the past six years as fast as it needs to.

On Monday, our leader, the leader of the official opposition, wrote a letter to the Prime Minister, and over the course of the last couple of days, after the advancement of Bill C-5 regarding a day for truth and reconciliation, which is positive, all parties have worked together to advance that legislation. It was one of the calls to action from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Our leader also wrote in that letter that the legislation we are debating here tonight should come back up, be moved forward, as it will be tonight, and eventually be passed. It will pass with support from our caucus and I believe from all of Parliament.

This is an important measure; do not get me wrong. However, and I say this respectfully, when we look at all the measures we need to do, the tangible, real, meaningful reconciliation is yet to come. There are a lot of big items that we as a Parliament and we as a country need to confront and address in a timely manner.

I want to acknowledge the discussions of another piece of legislation, Bill C-15, which has had many hours of debate here and in committee and is now over in the Senate. I had the honour and privilege of speaking to it, and with my perspective as a young Canadian; as somebody who has a first nations community, Akwesasne, in his riding; and as part of our Conservative caucus, I took a look at the details of the legislation. I want to speak about the opposition to Bill C-15, not because of a lack of support for reconciliation, but to illustrate to Canadians that our work as parliamentarians is far from done and we know that. What I took note of today, as we talked about the motion, is that the work we do here needs to be better.

Let us consider Bill C-15, and a lot of the words and descriptions in it, such as the description of free, prior and informed consent and its definition, or lack thereof. The NDP's opposition day motion today is an important one that I am proud to support. The first few parts of the motion speak to ending litigation in courts, where the government, first nations communities and residential school survivors are spending years and years and millions and millions of dollars, with more and more emotion going from there. That has been exacerbated because we are not taking the time for consultation and the details.

I completely support the idea of UNDRIP and the principles behind it. The details matter on that. I think it is important for Canadians, as the NDP motion said today, as Parliament will be calling on when that vote comes up in the coming days, that we see real, meaningful changes in this country, not more lawsuits, more delays, motions and millions of dollars being spent on lawyers, but rather on frontline differences to first nations communities and indigenous Canadians in every part of this country.

I want to focus some of my time tonight on the fact that we are expediting this legislation with all-party co-operation to move forward, because there are other parts of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that need to move forward now, urgently, and Canadians are saying that.

Thinking of the news that every single Canadian has had to take in over the course of the last week, of the discovery of 215 children in unmarked graves at the former Kamloops residential school, I look, from a personal perspective, at my life and my lived experience. I am 33 years old. I have an amazing, loving family that helped raise me. I am so grateful for the opportunity that I received in public education: the teachers, staff and students at Inkerman Public School, Nationview Public School and North Dundas District High School. My family and my experience in public education helped make me who I am today.

I could not imagine being a child torn away from my parents never to see them again, going to a school hundreds of kilometres away and receiving horrific treatment. We have an example that was laid bare before us last week. Children ended up buried in unmarked graves, only recognized recently. These children did not have the opportunities that so many of us were fortunate to have, surrounded by loving and caring parents in an education system and experience that were second to none. To have them deprived of that, to have that ending, is completely unacceptable.

In the letter I referenced, we talk about the work we need to do as a Parliament. We need to address this specific, dark part of our history. I was rightfully corrected after one of my social media posts where I was struggling to come up with the proper thing to say about this news. Somebody said that it is not all history, that there are still residential school survivors here today living the experience each and every day. It is not history to them. It is lived experience that they have to deal with and struggle with each and every day.

I think parliamentarians from all parties in every part of this country will hear that, yes, we need to move forward on Bill C-5. We need to move forward on this piece of legislation and on Bill C-8. We need to fund the investigation of all former residential schools in Canada where unmarked graves may exist, including where the 215 children were already discovered in Kamloops. We need to ensure that proper resources are allocated for reinterment, commemoration and the honour of any individuals discovered at any of those sites, according to the wishes of their family. We also need to develop a detailed, urgent and meaningful way of educating Canadians on the real and lived experiences of those there.

I am going to wrap up my comments tonight by bringing them back to my community in eastern Ontario. As I wrap up, I think of Leona Cook, an elder from Akwesasne. She actually lives on the American side of Akwesasne, but her story goes a long way. She was sent from Massena to western New York in the Buffalo-Niagara Falls area to a residential school. This tragedy goes even beyond borders. They took her shoes away when she went to school. Her brothers also went there, but they were placed on a different side of the campus, and she rarely, if ever, saw them.

I watched a video earlier today as I was preparing my remarks, and Leona was in it. She said, “I don't want their apology. I don't want anything from them. I would hope that they learn to treat people better than they treated us. You can't make people be somebody they don't want to be.”

We can take the lessons and the words of Leona Cook, embody them in our work and move forward on major sections of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that will matter to Canadians.

I look forward to the questions and comments and supporting the legislation before us.

Message from the Senate

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

I have the honour to inform the House that a message has been received from the Senate informing this House that the Senate has passed the following bill: Bill C-5, an act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code with regard to a national day for truth and reconciliation.

It being 5:40 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business as listed on today's Order Paper.

Opposition Motion—Action Toward Reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples

[Kody Blois, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Parkdale—High Park. My hon. colleague, of course, serves as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice as well.

Mr. Speaker, let me just quickly take a moment to recognize your accomplishments in this House. I did not know the gravity of this and, of course, I have only had a short time to sit in this House, but I have found that our dealings have been jovial. I appreciate your leadership and wish you all the best in the days ahead.

I have said it before, but I will say it again. I have the privilege of representing three indigenous communities in my riding of Kings—Hants: Sipekne'katik, Glooscap and Annapolis Valley first nations. Particularly pertinent to today's discussion is the fact that my riding is home to where the Shubenacadie Residential School existed from 1930 to 1967. I have seen the legacy. This was the largest school in Atlantic Canada. It did not only tear children away from their families in the local area; it brought Mi'kmaq children from across Nova Scotia, indeed across the Atlantic region, to face the horrors of what residential schools represented.

I think for many of us in this House it is very difficult to try to understand because we do not necessarily have that lived experience. I am going to try to explain by using a quote I found from a member of my community, the late Isabelle Knockwood. She was the author of a book called Out of the Depths: The Experiences of Mi'kmaw Children at the Indian Residential School at Shubenacadie, Nova Scotia. There are a whole bunch of passages that I could quote, but this one was particularly jarring for me:

...from our first day at the school speaking our own language resulted in violent physical punishment. Since we knew no English we had to hide to talk to each other in Mi’kmaq. Even after a few years had passed and we had learned enough English to communicate with each other, it still was often dangerous to talk. We were forbidden to talk at night in the dormitory. Brothers and sisters were strictly forbidden to speak to each other.

There is a lot that I could quote, but it is about the language and culture, trying to take that away from indigenous children at that time. It is one illustration among many that I could point out that are problematic.

We recognize, of course, the harm in Kamloops, but we know that it is also in our own backyard. The National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation recognizes the deaths of 16 children. I would like to read their names into the record here today, if I may. Let me also acknowledge that we know there could be more, and indeed that work has to continue. The names are as follows: Albert Pictou, Bryan Simon, Colin Bernard, Doris Acquin, Ella Cooper, Irene Mitchell, James Paul, Josephine Smith, Joyce Delores Mcdonald, Mary Agnes Ward, Mary Gehue, Mary Ginnish, Mary Madeleine Bernard, Mary Toney, Maurice Young and Nancy Lampquin. I wanted to make sure those were in Hansard, in our records.

This past Sunday, I had the opportunity to join members of the community of Sipekne'katik as they gave prayers and a smudging ceremony to those who have been impacted by the legacy of the residential school system.

Many in indigenous communities of course knew that what was found in Kamloops was a likelihood, and indeed this will not be the only type of tremendous harm we will find. We need to prepare ourselves, as Canadians, that this is not an isolated incident. I say this recognizing that we have to continue the work in this domain.

I have asked myself over the last number of days how best I can be an advocate in this particular space. The member opposite last mentioned the $33 million the government had set aside in budget 2019 to be able to do the important work of finding these burial sites. For instance, my understanding is that in Kamloops it was the funding that helped find these individuals, and hopefully bring home even more children.

There is ongoing work right now in Shubenacadie, through The Confederacy of Mainland Mi'kmaq, at the Shubenacadie site. It is a large area, 250 acres. Despite this being a national issue, I ask myself how best I can help in my community, in my riding. That is where I am going to turn my attention, in terms of working with indigenous leadership in Kings—Hants and indeed across Nova Scotia on how we can make sure that this particular site has the recognition it deserves.

For the members in this House who may not be familiar with the area, there is nothing there right now that actually gives credence to the horrors and the tragedy that happened in that place. Although it is not my place to say exactly how that should happen, as it has to be through the eyes of the survivors who had gone to this school, I do think it is important and it will be my focus in the days ahead.

There has been progress, and I say that hesitantly. We should not shy away from the fact that we have moved the yardsticks on reconciliation in the right direction. I am proud to be a member of a government and caucus that I believe have done more than any government in Canadian history in this particular work to reconcile with indigenous people. I say that recognizing and certainly making very clear that there is more work to be done, and that includes of course not only the work in Shubenacadie that I will undertake with my colleagues and indigenous leaders, but indeed a lot of the work that has to happen to be able to implement the TRC calls to action.

I want to highlight some of the work that I believe is important and is going to be fundamental for us, above and beyond the particular issue of the residential school system, to continue to build that relationship, because members and indigenous community members would say it is absolutely important that we recognize and we do right by the harm, but we also have to build on a better future.

I look at UNDRIP, the legislation that was passed in this House and is now before the Senate. It represents a historic opportunity for us, as a government, to continue to move and build partnerships nation to nation with indigenous communities. I look at Bill C-5 and take notice that all members of this House supported the fast-tracking of that particular legislation to establish a national day of truth and reconciliation in this country. Those, although alone they will not be enough, are important to being able to move the yardsticks in the right direction.

I look in my own community. Recently, I sat down with Chief Sack. We had a very important housing announcement through the rapid housing initiative, where we were able to make investments in the community for 20 units. Is there more work to be done? Absolutely, but this is an important investment I am proud our government has made to try to improve the lives of the indigenous communities I represent.

I look at Annapolis Valley First Nation and the ability for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to work with that community to make sure there is access through Canada Creek for their fisheries and their opportunities to exist in that domain.

I look at Glooscap Landing. Although it was a project that was advanced under my predecessor, Scott Brison, in partnership with the Glooscap community, it is a prime example of the opportunities that exist to be able to move and build commercial partnerships with the Glooscap community.

I have about 90 seconds left by my clock, so I will conclude by saying this.

My commitment to the members of my community, both indigenous and non-indigenous, will be to continue to advocate for and advance the priorities of indigenous communities in Kings—Hants, and of course beyond, with my colleagues in this House.

Reconciliation will not be an easy path. We know that. There will be remaining challenges and there will not always be agreement on the best pathway forward, but it is the spirit of being willing partners and working with each other that will be crucial.

To the survivors of the residential school system in my riding, and those who were impacted at Shubenacadie, I will do my utmost to ensure that this tragic legacy and the harms that have been done are known so we can all move collaboratively to reconcile and be able to advance and move forward from this darkest period of Canadian history.

Bills of Exchange Act

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

It being 1:50 p.m., the motion is deemed to have been adopted and Bill C-5, an act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code with regard to a national day for truth and reconciliation, is deemed read a third time and passed.

(Motion agreed to, bill read the third time and passed)

[Jenica Atwin, Green, Fredericton, NB]

Madam Speaker, I wish to acknowledge the unceded Wolastoqiyik territory from which I speak today and the immense privilege I carry as a settler in this land.

I would like to begin by extending my deepest condolences, and to send strength, to all who will be retraumatized by this new and devastating information regarding the realities of Indian residential schools in Canada. The remains of 215 children have been found buried on the site of a former residential school in Kamloops, B.C., using ground-penetrating radar, confirming what families and communities have known but could not substantiate until now. This new knowledge is truth. We need to confront our past and our present with truth before we can build reconciliation.

I remember when I was first introduced to the concept of residential schools. It was during my post-secondary studies, largely on my own and in conversations with family and friends. It was not taught to me in school. We only learned that Canada was a land of peacekeepers and apologetic people whose brave pioneer ancestors defied the odds in a barren land to build the country we have today.

We have worked very hard to erase the history and culture of indigenous peoples. We have also worked very hard to erase the people themselves, as well as the evidence of these crimes.

Prime Minister Harper's historic apology was largely in response to mounting potential litigation as rumours and horror stories became all too real, with well-documented acts of genocide bubbling to the surface. Yes, genocide: not simply cultural genocide, preventing language and tradition from flourishing, but the United Nations' definition of genocide.

From the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, article II, of the United Nations:

...genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

"(a) Killing members of the group,” like throwing a child down a flight of stairs or out a third-storey window, as outlined in Isabelle Knockwood's incredible novel Out of the Depths.

“(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group,” like separating children from their parents and communities, like threatening those who witnessed abuse with the same fate, like force-feeding expired food, shaving sacred hair and stripping children of their given names and mother tongue, as so many experiences across the country have documented.

“(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part,” like deliberately exposing children to fatal diseases and being proud enough, or brazen enough, to take photos and share them in textbooks for years to come in celebration of the efforts undertaken to address the Indian problem. The problem of course in Canada was their existence.

“(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group,” like forced sterilizations, forced abortions and infanticide targeting specific family bloodlines, like those of hereditary chiefs or strong leaders.

“(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.” Sadly, we are seeing this continue, with more indigenous children in care today than were enrolled in residential schools at the height of their operation in Canada.

There were schools in almost every province and territory in Canada. New Brunswick likes to gloss over this fact, but we too had institutions where children were treated like animals or worse, and parents were stripped of their rights right here in our backyard. It was simply before Confederation, so Canada washed its hands of accountability.

In doing my own research, I studied survivor testimonials, historic news articles and official records. It took me two years to pore through the information. I wept. I was angry, and ridden with guilt and frustration.

I particularly remember watching the film We Were Children with my high school students, as their cultural teacher. I was six months pregnant with my second child: an indigenous child who would be born with the same beautiful brown skin his father has. I could not contain my emotion, as I cannot right now. My baby seemed more and more like a miracle, the descendant of survivors.

My sons have never met their great-grandparents. They died too young. We call them survivors because they came from Shubenacadie alive when so many did not. However, the nightmare of their experiences would follow them. It would continue to eat away at their souls. It would be present in their parenting styles, in their substance abuse, in their domestic violence, in their internalized racism and in their pain.

The discovery of the remains of 215 innocent children is beyond devastating. For Canada, apologies, payouts and even days of recognition will never be enough. There are 215 families who were given no answers about their babies, some as young as three years old, which is the same age as my youngest child.

When senators, leaders of political parties and everyday Canadians suggest these schools had good intentions, were not all bad or were a product of the times, I say how dare they.

Systemic murder, often in front of other children, followed with threats and intimidation and a disgusting cover-up of the use of mass graves, forged records and death certificates, this is not an isolated incident for the school. One child's death and erasure are criminal, despicable. There are 215. With the potential of more gravesites across Canada to be found now more likely than ever is genocide.

We are so quick to step on our pedestal and wave our fingers at other countries for their transgressions when our stool may well sit on the graves of indigenous children killed by church and state right here in Canada, shame, shame. There is no apology in the world that will take this pain away.

There has been a lot of talk of reconciliation with indigenous peoples in Canada, but truth must come first, and the truth is that most Canadians have no idea of the full impact of residential schools, the residual effects and the intergenerational trauma.

Bill C-5 is a necessary step to fulfill the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and to bring much-needed awareness to the horrors of the past as well as those that continue.

Make no mistake: Missing and murdered indigenous women and girls and two-spirt peoples is part of this legacy. Joyce Echaquan's death is part of this legacy. Chantel Moore's death is part of this legacy. A national day of reconciliation is only as good as the space it creates for truth, truth about what has been and truth about what is.

I fully support Bill C-5 and I stand with my colleagues in the House today to see that it becomes law. It is long overdue. It is reactive rather than proactive, however. For those children and their families, please, we must do better.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am speaking today from the unceded Coast Salish territories of the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh peoples.

Today is a dark, dark day and the dark clouds that hang in the air as we learn of the news in B.C. at the Kamloops residential school just shake us to the core. I cannot imagine what the families and friends of the children must be going through.

We can say we mourn with them, and we send our strength and support as they are confronted with this horrific news and forced to relive the trauma of colonization and the egregious impact of residential schools. These are, of course, words and they are not our family members who have lost loved ones.

However, I do want to say with all my heart, I know that I and all my colleagues, the New Democrats, the Liberals, the Conservatives, the Bloc members and the Greens, stand with them. We share their mourning and we take in deeply what this means.

The finding is a reminder that the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation has estimated that more than 150,000 indigenous children attended residential school. The centre also estimates that 4,100 children died at the schools. They are identified in death records, some by name and some not. Let us just imagine, for one minute, if that were our child. The exact number of children who died is not known, as many were taken to residential schools and many never returned.

We must remember this and never forget the generational impact of Canada's shameful history. For us to say these words, we must then redouble our efforts in every single action we do to address this shameful history. Reconciliation cannot just be words. It must be action.

We must also never forget that this is not an indigenous people's problem. It is a Canadian problem. I ask members to remember these words each and every day. That is what I ask for all members of the House. I also ask all Canadians to remember those words and act on those words.

Today, we are speaking to Bill C-5, a bill that would honour indigenous people and set the national day for truth and reconciliation as a statutory holiday. It is a recognition of the call to action 80 of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's report.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission's report states, “Reconciliation is not an [indigenous] problem; it is a Canadian one. Virtually all aspects of Canadian society may need to be reconsidered.”

We, as non-indigenous peoples, must carry these profound words with us each and every day in everything that we do, and, as mentioned, this is particularly significant with the news of what has happened at the Kamloops residential school.

What does it mean for us? There is no question that we need to get this bill passed. I want to honour former MP Georgina Jolibois, who brought forward her own private member's bill in the last Parliament. It went through all three stages in the House, and then, when it went to the Senate, the Senate blocked it. The unelected Senate blocked it and it never became law.

I hope that this does not happen again. I call on the government, the Conservatives and all members of the House to do everything they can to ensure that Bill C-5 becomes law. The NDP is in full support of seeing this expedited through the House of Commons so we can honour indigenous peoples, their history and their culture, and remember the trauma and generational impact of colonization.

However, it is equally important that we truly honour and celebrate them, make a statutory holiday not as a day off, but as a day to learn about indigenous peoples, their culture and their history, and take to heart what it means to show the respect they deserve and that was robbed of them so many years ago.

The call for collective action across Canada in recognition of first nations, Métis and Inuit peoples and the history of their rights, cultures and languages must be at the heart of our work. They are the first peoples of this land and we must never forget that, whether we are talking about the conflicts going on now, Land Back or issues around rights. We must remember this not only in the face of news about the Kamloops residential school, but as a guide in the work that we do. When we talk about the voices of indigenous peoples, we cannot just say that we consult with them. It must be in the context of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and honouring their inherited rights, acknowledging these and acting on them.

This bill does not address socio-economic challenges faced by indigenous communities, but it is a reflection on colonial history and its current effects on the rights of first nations, Métis and Inuit communities across the country, and that is an important step. Equally important, though, is the question I asked the minister: Why on earth is the Canadian government taking indigenous children to court? His answer was that this was a complex issue. I say that it is not that complex. The government should step up, own up and stop taking indigenous children to court, period. This is something the Canadian government can and must do. That is how to show reconciliation in action and not just in words.

We talk about water safety. Water is sacred. Our lives depend on it, so why are we still dealing with water advisories? The government will say we are making progress. How about that? We are making progress. How is it acceptable that people do not have access to clean, safe drinking water? How is it acceptable that this is happening to indigenous people? How is it acceptable that we are taking this incremental approach to get there?

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from British Columbia and offer my sympathies to the people of his riding, British Columbia and all across Canada as we learn the details regarding the news from Kamloops, which is so tragic and horrific that words cannot explain.

With respect to his question, as he will see very shortly, Conservatives will be continuing to support Bill C-5. We obviously had a few questions during the committee process that we were able to discuss, including concerns about when the government will be ending some of these boil water advisories, when a lot of these paths to reconciliation will be implemented and what the agenda is on how to get there. Those questions need to be answered through the committee phase. Some questions are still there, but overall I think we are ready to support the bill and move it through the process.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-5, an act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code, a the national day for truth and reconciliation.

Before I begin, I would be remiss if I did not take a moment to speak to the very horrible discovery made yesterday afternoon in Kamloops. The news yesterday of the remains of 215 children found buried at a former residential school in Kamloops is tragic beyond words. We, on all sides of the House, wish to express our deepest sympathies to the residents of that first nation and surrounding indigenous communities who are sharing in this trauma.

We also want to acknowledge the deep sorrow and mourning that all indigenous peoples and survivors of residential schools are experiencing at this time. While communities and families grapple with this unthinkable revelation, we must come together in support and provide whatever assistance is necessary to aid in the healing process and to provide whatever resources are needed to protect, honour and identify those children.

Residential schools are a national shame that has had a profoundly lasting and damaging impact on indigenous culture, heritage and language. In the words of former prime minister Stephen Harper:

The Government of Canada built an educational system in which very young children were often forcibly removed from their homes, often taken far from their communities. Many were inadequately fed, clothed and housed. All were deprived of the care and nurturing of their parents, grandparents and communities. First Nations, Inuit and Métis languages and cultural practices were prohibited in these schools. Tragically, some of these children died while attending residential schools and others never returned home.

We have been reminded that more work needs to be done to address the devastating and hurtful effects that residential schools had and still have on many survivors today. I want to echo the words heard earlier this morning in the House, that those who love those children should know the whole of Canada mourns with them and that their loss will never be forgotten.

With that in mind, I would like to turn our attention to the matter at hand, Bill C-5.

This legislation would establish a national day for truth and reconciliation for federally regulated private sector and federal public sector workers that would be observed as a statutory holiday on September 30. Call to action 80 of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls upon the federal government, in collaboration with indigenous peoples, to establish, as a statutory holiday, a national day for truth and reconciliation.

The choice of September 30 builds on the grassroots momentum of Orange Shirt Day, which is already known as a day to remember the legacy of residential schools and move forward with reconciliation. The Conservatives proudly observe National Indigenous Peoples Day every year and encourage Canadians to participate in local gatherings.

Canada is one of only a few countries in the world where indigenous and treaty rights are entrenched in our constitution. Educating Canadians about their rights is an important part of the path to reconciliation. Unfortunately, at times, the Liberals seem to have no plan to develop a reconciliation education strategy to provide Canadians with learning opportunities about indigenous Canadians and the horrific dark chapter in Canada's history of residential schools. We hope that will be quickly remedied.

Other federal holidays, like Remembrance Day, commemorate through educational campaigns. While this bill does not include such a plan, we hope that one will be forthcoming very soon, and I offer my sincere assistance to the minister in helping get that done.

While the Conservative Party supports and has promoted National Indigenous Peoples Day, we believe more needs to be done to advance the rights of first nations, Métis and Inuit people. Encouraging indigenous businesses, building strong economies in indigenous communities, developing indigenous supply chains and giving indigenous kids hope for a brighter future are essential to the future of Canada.

The Conservative Party supports treaty rights and the process of reconciliation with indigenous peoples living in Canada. As mentioned earlier, in 2008, then prime minister Stephen Harper delivered a historic apology to former residential school students, their families and communities for Canada's role in the operation of the schools.

Our former Conservative government also created the Truth and Reconciliation Commission as part of the 2007 Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement, which recognized that the Indian residential school system had a profoundly lasting and damaging impact on indigenous culture, language and heritage.

The commission's report reflected the hard work and dedication to building public awareness about resident schools and fostering reconciliation, understanding and respect. The final report of the TRC helped to explain this dark chapter in Canadian history and the calls to action addressed the legacy of the residential schools and advanced the process of reconciliation.

As mentioned, more needs to be done to address the outstanding recommendations in that report. They need to be addressed and addressed quickly so we can get on to doing the hard work of tackling issues that will actually improve the lives of indigenous peoples right across Canada.

There is a lot of support for the bill.

Carlon Big Snake and his wife Lisa, descendants and survivors of the residential school system from Siksika Nation and former member of its chief in council, spoke in support, stating:

We were raised with negative impacts of history... adopting the bill would show the government’s sincerity and commitment of the federal governments to address truth and reconciliation for Indigenous people. “Together we can begin to heal the past and look forward to a united, prosperous future.”

Stacy Allison-Cassin, an assistant professor at the University of Toronto and chair at the Canadian Federation of Library Associations, Indigenous Matters Committee, also spoke in favour of the bill, stating:

Creating a national day of truth and reconciliation will create further weight and impetus for a day of remembering and learning for all Canadians.

My colleague, the member for Cariboo—Prince George, reminded us in his speech at second reading that:

While we say every child matters, we need to remember that all children matter even if they are now adults. We have so many people who are still locked in that time when they were in that program.

On a tragic day when we are reminded of the horrific, shameful history of the resident school system, on a day when we must honour and do what we can to make amends to those children whose lives were tragically cut short, we must also remember that there are many survivors of that system who are now still with us today. We must honour their memories and ensure that the racist, colonial practices of the past are never, ever repeated again.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Madam Speaker, in my view, and I think in the view of most member, reconciliation is a path and journey that we are taking with first nations, Inuit and Métis people.

There are a number of things that we as government, as the Crown, need to do on that path to reconciliation. This includes things like the adoption of the bill on UNDRIP and the implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act, for which I have the honour and privilege of being responsible.

Speaking of indigenous languages in our country, I would like to remind the House that when our government came into power in 2015, the federal government invested $5 million for indigenous languages across the country. This year, it will be more than $100 million, and I do not think that is enough. We need to do more. We are working with our indigenous partners to see what the adequate and long-term level of funding would be for indigenous languages.

There are many things we must do on this path to reconciliation, but moving forward with Bill C-5—

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Madam Speaker, as I said the first time that Bill C-5 was introduced to the House, I recognize all of the work done by Madame Jolibois on all of this. In fact, the bill does reflect what had been tabled during the last Parliament.

As the member well knows, the Senate is an independent body of Parliament. That being said, the government has been hard at work for many months, talking to a number of senators to try to ensure that the bill makes it through the Senate in the fastest possible way.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Madam Speaker, I have to say that the NDP absolutely supports fast-tracking Bill C-5. This should have actually become law in the last Parliament, as it mimics the bill that former MP Georgina Jolibois brought forward. With that being said, I hope that this will in fact pass through the Senate this time.

What assurances can the member provide the House that this will become law this time around?

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

moved that Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code (National Day for Truth and Reconciliation), be read the third time and passed.

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by acknowledging that we are all, whether physically or virtually, present today on the ancestral lands of first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples.

This is not just something we say. The land acknowledgement speaks to the context we are living today, and to the new relationship that we are trying to build through our everyday actions. Like many, I am still in shock about the horrors that have been uncovered at the Kamloops Indian Residential School in B.C. Having the remains of 215 children be at the residential school is horrifying.

The residential school system caused harm to generations of indigenous children and communities. For that, the government has apologized, first in 2008 to former students of residential schools, and in 2017 to former students of Newfoundland and Labrador residential schools, for example. As we are all acutely aware, Canadians continue to witness tragedies perpetuated against indigenous peoples. Racism in Canada is an undeniable reality and reconciliation must be more than apologies.

Reconciliation must be about big legislative actions and smaller gestures. It must be about both everyday actions and bold moves. Reconciliation is a long-term commitment that requires the engagement of all. It is made up of many actions, apologies, commissions, family conversations, school assemblies, community collaborations, conversations with colleagues, friendships, distinction-based policy changes, infrastructure support and commemorations.

There are many opportunities that could be seized for real change. We must act now.

In budget 2019, our government invested $7 million over two years to help non-governmental and community organizations recognize and commemorate the history and legacy of residential schools.

Thanks to this investment, over 200 communities and organizations across the country are receiving funds this year for projects to raise awareness and educate Canadians about this dark chapter of Canada's history.

Budget 2021 also proposes to provide $13.4 million over five years, with $2.4 million ongoing, to Canadian Heritage for events to commemorate the history and legacy of residential schools and to honour survivors, their families and communities, as well as to support celebrations and commemoration events during the proposed national day for truth and reconciliation.

These numbers show that despite the pandemic, the need and interest of communities to be able to honour and commemorate as they see fit are high. People want to tell their stories and they want to stand witness so new stories can be told. They want to honour the survivors. They need to heal and they want to learn so they can act for change.

This kind of groundswell of interest shows that indigenous and non-indigenous people alike recognize the importance of commemorating this history.

This commemoration funding and the creation of a national day for truth and reconciliation reflect the recognition that all histories and cultures are important. These actions speak to our capacity to expose the wrongs of the past so we can face this history and commit to do better.

I think we can all agree that it is important to recognize the profound impact residential schools had on first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples.

In fact, the Indian Act legislated government control over almost every aspect of indigenous peoples' lives, including mandatory attendance at residential schools. Governments throughout Canada's history continued to uphold legislation and follow policies that perpetuated systemic racism in our society.

With the social upheaval occurring globally, we must harness the generational potential to reduce racism in our world. Residential schools targeted the children. We can turn that on its head and aim to educate the next generation to uphold inclusive values and to prioritize respect above all in communities, in schools, in families and in digital spaces.

The words from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's final report bear repeating:

All Canadian children and youth deserve to know Canada's honest history, including what happened in the residential schools, and to appreciate the rich history and knowledge of Indigenous nations who continue to make such a strong contribution to Canada, including our very name and collective identity as a country. For Canadians from all walks of life, reconciliation offers a new way of living together.

This statutory holiday helps to build that new way of living together, particularly in the global context of calls for social justice. This day is part of how we build back stronger together. People might ask how one day will make a difference. How will one day that establishes a statutory holiday for a limited number of people make a difference? It is telling that people do not ask these questions about Remembrance Day. Recognizing the selfless sacrifices that veterans made to a global effort against oppression is appropriate and right. Shining a light on a dark history of oppression of our own making is also right. It is uncomfortable, but perhaps it is because it is uncomfortable that we should commit to it.

Dr. Marie Wilson, one of the three commissioners of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, spoke to the importance of a national statutory holiday. She said that reconciliation is “very tied to issues of law and public policy”. That signals the importance of reconciliation to those who work on these issues, and that it is valuable.

As we have said before, a national day reveals our priorities. It says that this issue is important and we should be paying attention to it not just on this day, but throughout the year. Just as Remembrance Day is not only for veterans, a national day for truth and reconciliation is not only for first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples. Just as we honour veterans and highlight our values as a nation on Remembrance Day, we would honour survivors and those lost on the national day for truth and reconciliation, but also reflect on our path as a nation, on our values, on how our values have shifted and on how we can chart a new path for Canada: one that includes everyone who calls these lands home.

In so many ways, our lives and our world have witnessed loss and our realities have been forever changed. There is no doubt that these are complex, difficult times right now, but Canadians do not shy away from the tough issues. Reconciliation is tough, but we can make progress on a just journey together with first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples. The establishment of a national day for truth and reconciliation fulfills call to action 80 of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's final report. It is an important action to take, and we must act immediately so that this day becomes part of our reality this year.

Employment Insurance Act

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, it is quite a pleasure to speak to Bill C-24 at third reading.

Earlier in the week, I spoke on Bill C-24 at second reading. Back then, I emphasized how important the legislation was to the Government of Canada. Since the very beginning of the pandemic, the Prime Minister has made a commitment to have the backs of Canadians. Once again, we have legislation before the House that is absolutely critical with respect to supporting Canadians today and continuing to do so going forward.

When I spoke on the bill earlier in the week, I was somewhat upset and I expressed my feelings about the Conservative Party and how it was filibustering important legislation on the floor of the House of Commons. In fact, I recall citing a tweet by the member for Kildonan—St. Paul about importance of the legislation for workers. However, the the Conservatives were filibustering important legislation during the pandemic, and we witnessed that during the debate on Bill C-14. At the time, I indicated that the only way the House could see legislation passed was if the Conservatives were made to feel ashamed of their behaviour. I am pleased that it would appear as if the Conservatives saw the merit, through a bit of shaming, in allowing the bill to pass. It is important to recognize that.

If we review what has taken place during the week, there are some encouraging signs, at least from some of the opposition parties. However, that is not universally held. I am afraid that the Conservatives still feel obligated to play that destructive force on the floor of the House of Commons, and I will expand on that.

Bill C-24 would provide badly needed funds, essential funds, to thousands of Canadians in all regions of our country. To see how we should proceed, all we need to do is look at the desire and what we have seen this week. I will cite a few examples of that. The reason I am doing this is because I want to encourage members of the Conservative Party particularly to recognize the true value of legislation like Bill C-24, and it appears the member for Kildonan—St. Paul has recognized it, and to see the value in passing it.

The best example I can think of is something that took place yesterday. We had very important legislation, Bill C-7, which is literally on life and death, before us. Because we are in a minority situation, it does not take very much to prevent the government from passing legislation. However, in this situation, the Bloc, indicated that it supported the legislation and would assist the government to bring forward closure. Had we not received that support, we never would have been able to advance it through the House of Commons and people would have been denied the opportunity to have access to this through this legislation.

Earlier in the week, we also had some indication from my New Democratic friends about Bill C-5, important legislation that is not necessarily as direct as Bill C-24 is with respect to the pandemic. Quite possibly it could be somewhat of assistance indirectly during the pandemic.

In this situation, the New Democrats said that they would like to have unanimous consent to allow that additional debate and ultimately see Bill C-5 passed in the House. Of course, much like with the Bloc's suggestion, the Conservatives outright said that they did not want anything to do with it. Again, it is not to come across as not being grateful for the Conservatives recognizing the importance of Bill C-24, but it is more so to encourage the Conservative Party to look at what other opposition parties are doing to facilitate the passing of important legislation.

Bill C-24 was recognized the other day by the Conservatives when they stopped debate, allowing it to get out of second reading so it could go to committee. As a result, we are now at third reading stage today. We know that if the Conservative Party wanted to do more, it could.

For example, look at what the Conservatives did with the Canada-United Kingdom agreement, which is critically important legislation. It would have a direct impact, even during the coronavirus pandemic. The Conservatives requested unanimous consent for a motion with respect to the trade agreement, and we supported it.

It is important to recognize that my New Democratic friends, who have traditionally voted against anything related to expanding trade relations, also supported the motion to see the bill on the United Kingdom trade agreement pass through the House of Commons even though they opposed it. It is important to recognize that. The NDP and the Bloc have, on occasion, have recognized what I have been saying to the House for quite a while, which is that the behaviour of the Conservatives has not been favourable to the House of Commons in passing the legislation that is so badly needed to support Canadians during this difficult time. They have gone out of their way to frustrate the House of Commons and our desire to see important legislation like Bill C-24 passed.

I will continue to remind my Conservative friends that they have an important obligation to Canadians, as the government has since day one, to focus their attention not on an election, but rather supporting Canadians. One of the ways they can do that is by providing support on legislation such as this.

When I spoke on Bill C-24 earlier in the week, members of the Conservative Party were somewhat critical of me, saying that the government had just introduced the legislation so how could I expect them to pass it, implying that I was maybe not being as principled on enabling members to speak to important legislation. I want to assure members of the House that I have always been an advocate for members of Parliament to express themselves on legislation.

Many would say that I have no problem expressing myself on a wide variety of issues on the floor of the House. I am very grateful for the position that I have been put in by the Prime Minister and the support I get from my caucus colleagues. I often speak on behalf of many of my caucus colleagues in expressing frustration and in expressing support for initiatives that are being taken on the floor of the House of Commons.

The bill was introduced for the first time in February, and nothing would have prevented further discussion and additional debate if in fact—

National Day for Truth and Reconciliation

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

Mr. Speaker, earlier this week, our government proudly supported a motion to continue the debate on Bill C-5, a national day for truth and reconciliation. It is disappointing that unanimous consent was not reached to continue to advance this important piece of legislation, because the Conservative Party of Canada refused to agree, obstructing the passage of the motion and ultimately the bill.

This new national day of commemoration would honour first nations, Inuit and Métis survivors, their families and communities while raising more awareness among Canadians about the atrocities committed against indigenous people. September 30 builds on the grassroots momentum of Orange Shirt Day, which is already recognized as a day to remember the painful history and legacy of residential schools and move forward on a path toward reconciliation.

Reconciliation should not be partisan. The obstruction and political games must stop so that the House can advance important elements of reconciliation and the TRC's calls to action.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to everyone for being here to discuss the motion.

I would like to talk about the idea that we not waste any more time in this committee. Obviously, making sure there is time for debate is very important. It is a very big part of our parliamentary process. But I also think there comes a time when Canadians expect their parliamentarians to take action and to actually move forward with things. The worst-case stereotype of a politician is one who can talk about absolutely nothing for hours, wasting the time of the committee, the analysts and the other members of Parliament. I think it would be useful if we could just make a decision on this motion. Of course, I would very much like to see it pass. It is the motion that I brought forward.

One thing I'd like to highlight is that I don't think there can be anything more important to Canadians right now than the government's response to COVID-19 and the government's ability to procure vaccines. I don't think there is a single thing, probably, that will interest Canadians more than that. As much as the NDP have been pushing very hard to have bills like Bill C-5, bills like the net-zero legislation, bills like Bill C-15 and all sorts of them come forward to the House, and the government has chosen not to bring those forward, I think it is still very important that in the House of Commons, all members of Parliament, whether they're part of this committee or not, have an opportunity to look at the issue of Canadian procurement of vaccines and how vaccines are being shared among other countries. I think it's very, very important. I think it's disingenuous to suggest that this wouldn't be something that Canadians and all members of Parliament would be very interested in learning more about.

I'm not interested in filibustering or talking for a full hour. My expectation is that Canadians expect their members of Parliament to move legislation and to move studies forward. I was very, very open to some of the amendments Ms. Sahota brought forward. I had actually verbally agreed during committee meetings that I would be willing to change some of the language within the motion.

That said, I think it's vital that this be something that's reported back to the House. I am not willing to change my mind on that particular portion of the motion. I would like to see all members of Parliament be able to represent their constituents in Canada on something that is so vital, so important, at this moment in time.

I would like to ask that we put the question and that members from all four parties be able to vote on whether or not they would like this amendment to go forward.

I will cede the floor at this point. Of course, the Liberals have every opportunity to continue to filibuster, if that's what they see fit to do. They have every opportunity to say that the reason they're doing this is for clarity, but I think Canadians know better.

That would be my comment. I'm certainly happy to talk about amending the language and happy to work with my colleagues in whatever way I can to move this forward. I'm not terribly interested in sitting for another full hour of one person talking.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Employment Insurance Act

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak to Bill C-24, yet another important piece of legislation designed as a direct result of the coronavirus. I would like to approach this debate in terms of what I have been listening to throughout the afternoon.

My colleague from Kildonan-St. Paul made reference to the idea of hope, while other Conservative members were quite harsh in their criticism, saying, “Where is the plan?” I want to address both of those issues and how this legislation fits in so well.

Virtually from day one, the Prime Minister, cabinet and government as a whole indicated that we were going to be there for Canadians and we would have their backs. We wanted to support Canadians throughout our great nation in making sure that we could minimize the negative impact of the coronavirus. We have been working on that seven days a week, 24 hours a day, in one way or another. I am sure I am not alone: Members of Parliament from all sides of the House are deeply engaged within our constituencies and caucuses with regard to the coronavirus, what is taking place in our communities and what we need to do as a government to minimize the damage.

The Conservative Party talks a lot about the plan, asking where the plan is, and the issue of hope. I have had the opportunity over the past 12 months to comment on the plan that we talk about consistently. There is no list of one to 1,050 thoughts, ideas, dates and so forth. That type of document does not exist, except in the minds of many of my Conservative friends. We have worked very closely with many different stakeholders, provinces, indigenous leaders, territories, different levels of government, school divisions, municipalities, unions and so many others, including small, medium and large businesses, to understand the impact that the coronavirus is having on our society and economy.

The programs that we have developed have done an excellent job of making sure that we minimize the negative impacts of the coronavirus, and have put Canada in a great position not only to build back, but build back better, as many of my colleagues will talk about.

Look at the legislation that we have today. Members will say that I am a government member and I am just saying good stuff because I am obligated to say good stuff. I would like to provide a couple of quotes specifically on this bill.

The Canadian Labour Congress released a statement that said:

Canada’s unions welcome the extension to income supports announced by the federal government today as a necessary step towards providing further financial security to those who need it.

The release also stated:

“It’s good to see the federal government fulfill its promise to take care of workers with these measures, including extending the duration of the federal sickness benefit for those who aren’t covered through their workplace...”

The provinces must step up and offer workers universal paid sick leave.

That is what the CLC has pointed out. I put it to my friend from Elmwood—Transcona that we can talk all we want, but there is nothing that Ottawa could do that would meet the full standards of the NDP. If we extended something to 30 weeks, NDP members would say that we should do 35 weeks. If we did 35 weeks, they would say to do 40 weeks. It is endless in terms of what they would want to see.

If my colleague from Spadina—Fort York who talks about housing could do a comparison between NDP policies and what we have done as a government, we will find that in the last five years, the Government of Canada has far exceeded anything that the NDP could have ever created, even in their minds, yet they still say that there is not enough, even though it is tenfold in terms of the numbers they were talking about.

That is why I put to my friend the question. He himself recognized that when we talk about some of these permanent changes, and hopefully someday we will get to that point, the fact is that governments of different levels all have an important place in this debate. When we see what has taken place during the pandemic and we see the Minister of Labour sitting down with her provincial counterparts, I believe that there is merit in having that debate continue, and hopefully we will see the provinces there. Often it is a province that will take an action that will ultimately see other provinces and even the national government move forward.

On the issue of sick leave, we are, although somewhat temporarily, taking action. It is being recognized, but it is a relatively small percentage of the workforce. I am hopeful that provinces will see what we are doing, and maybe this will assist us going forward when we talk about building back better. I would like to see our workers treated far better than they were in the last 20 or 30 years, and we need to see more co-operation among provinces.

It was interesting that the National Council for the Unemployed also provided comment in regard to this bill, and they are calling on Parliament to swiftly pass the legislation. The council stated, “This extension is important for the thousands of families struggling to get through this crisis. Their fate is now in the hands of parliamentarians. Our message to them is simple: Every citizen has the right to emerge from this crisis with dignity. All of us will be stronger and more united. We must therefore adopt this bill.”

I asked a very simple question of the member for Kildonan—St. Paul: Will she support this legislation? What is the Conservative Party's position on this legislation? Members can read for themselves. There was an absolute non-answer coming from the member, yet the appeal to pass this bill goes beyond Liberal members of Parliament. That is because, as I am sure the House knows, Liberal members of Parliament are constantly working with stakeholders, in particular their constituents, in taking ideas and bringing them back to Ottawa to help us deal with the policies that are necessary in order to implement what is going to help Canadians. We recognize that, and I believe other political entities inside the House also recognize the importance of passing this bill, as does the National Council for the Unemployed.

We are all familiar with Unifor. I would like to share the message that came from Dave Cassidy, the Unifor national skilled trades chairperson for local 444. He wrote, “The expansion of EI coverage is critical to the workers and families of Windsor and Essex, and I urge all parties to come together to ensure swift passage of this important legislation.” He called for all parties to work together and move quickly to support and pass Bill C-24.

Part of the problem is that the legislative agenda is fairly substantial. There has been a great need, because of the pandemic, to bring forward legislation that is necessary for us to support Canadian individuals and businesses. When we brought in legislation, at times, especially earlier on during the pandemic, there was a high sense of co-operation coming from opposition parties. However, when it comes to my Conservative friends today, nothing could be further from co-operation. I would argue that they are being a very destructive force on the floor of the House of Commons. They are going out of their way to prevent legislation from passing. The only time we can get something through the Conservatives is if they are shamed into doing it.

I was disappointed earlier, as it was difficult for us to get the Conservatives to agree to vote on Bill C-14. It was all about the pandemic and supporting small businesses. It was hours and days before we could get it to a vote.

What about the games that are being played in the House, again mostly by the Conservative Party? There are concurrence reports and points of order. These are measures being taken to minimize the amount of time for debate so the Conservatives can say a bill cannot be that important if the government has not actually called it up. On the one hand they are going out of their way to prevent legislation from passing, and on the other they are criticizing us for not getting legislation passed. How long will they hang on to Bill C-24 before they will ultimately agree to pass it? It is for the workers. For businesses we saw what they did. Ironically, they even voted against the legislation for them, which surprised me somewhat, I must say. However, we still do not have Bill C-24 through the House.

We have limited time on the House agenda and have tried to extend the time for debate. Even earlier today, a member from the New Democratic caucus asked for additional time to address Bill C-5. However, time and time again, the Conservatives are playing partisan politics in the chamber over and above what is a responsible approach to dealing with legislation that is for supporting Canadians during the pandemic.

Bill C-24 is yet another good piece of legislation, but I do not know when it is going to pass because I do not believe the Conservatives, unless something has happened very recently, have given any indication as to whether they want three hours of debate or 20 hours of debate. I know they will say that we all have the right to debate, and they will want to debate everything extensively. However, they know full well that it does not take much to stop legislation. I could get 12 students from Sisler High School in my area to easily prevent the government from passing legislation. It does not take much to do it. The only way we can get legislation through is if we are prepared to provide some form of time allocation. However, in a minority situation, that could very much be a challenge, even though at times I have seen my New Democratic friends support time allocation when they recognize important pieces of legislation.

I am suggesting that the legislation we have today is both widely supported and progressive. The Conservatives have nothing to fear from allowing it to go through because many of the measures are temporary. At the end of the day, if they want to support workers, I strongly encourage them to get behind the legislation and allow it to go to committee. After all, there are other things the government wants to see additional debate on, and I am sure that many of the issues Conservatives might have with it could be addressed at committee.

We could talk about the Canada emergency response benefit. It is an incredible program that appeared virtually out of thin air last year because of the incredible work of some of the finest civil servants in the world. We, from nothing, created a program that close to nine million Canadians ultimately accessed in some form or another. As it started to wind its way through, we developed three programs via the Canada Recovery Benefits Act: the Canada recovery benefit, the Canada recovery caregiving benefit and the Canada recovery sickness benefit, all of which are referred to within this legislation.

In this legislation, we are seeking an extension of employment insurance. In essence, it would amend the Employment Insurance Act to temporarily increase the maximum number of weeks regular benefits may be paid to 50 weeks.

My New Democrat friend talked about everyone in the House unanimously supporting it. In fact, he implied that there would be unanimous support for it to be a permanent change. Let us see if we can get this to committee.

One of the things I have noted about the minister responsible for the legislation is her openness to hearing what opposition members have to say about legislation she has introduced in the House. There have been some incredible pieces of legislation by this minister, particularly in the area of disabilities, historic legislation recognizing for the first time the significant issue of disabilities and the need to address it in a much more formal fashion, which would ultimately lead to benefits.

This legislation would help workers, and I ask that my Conservative friends to take that into consideration as they caucus and determine whether they are going to filibuster or attempt to prevent this bill from passing to committee.

The government has been very much focused on Canadians since the beginning of the pandemic. We see that with the development of the programs I just referenced. I could talk about those programs for small businesses, whether it was was the emergency wage subsidy, the emergency rent subsidy, the emergency business account and more. These programs support small businesses, which indirectly support workers. Again, millions of jobs have been saved.

Canada is in an excellent position to be able to build back better because we have a government that recognizes the need to be there for Canadians in a very real and tangible way.

Official Languages

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, I wish you a happy International Women's Day.

There have been discussions among the parties, and if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: That, notwithstanding any Standing or Special Order or usual practice of the House, Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code concerning a National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, be deemed concurred in at the report stage; that the House continue to sit beyond the ordinary hour of daily adjournment for the purpose of considering Bill C-5 at third reading; that, when no further member rises to speak or at 12 a.m., whichever is earlier, the Speaker shall interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith and successively every question necessary to dispose of the said stage of the said bill; that, if a recorded division is requested, it shall stand deferred until the conclusion of Oral Questions tomorrow, March 9; and that the House shall adjourn to the next sitting day.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Thank you very much. My apologies for the lateness of my arrival. It seems that events are conspiring against my participation in this committee meeting. We had a fire alarm where I am right now, so we had to exit the building.

That being said, we actually explored the possibility of my joining by phone outside. That was technologically complicated, it seems.

I am joining you from Montreal, on the traditional territory of the Mohawk and Haudenosaunee peoples.

I want to start by acknowledging that, four years ago today, a gunman took the lives of six people at the Quebec City mosque and seriously injured 19 others. They were Muslim fathers, husbands, loved ones and friends. Their sudden and tragic deaths were heartbreaking not just for their families, but also for Muslim communities around the world and all Canadians.

Mr. Chair, I am very happy to be appearing before you again today.

With me is the deputy minister of Canadian Heritage, Hélène Laurendeau; as well as Jean-Stéphen Piché, senior assistant deputy minister.

The pandemic continues to weigh heavily on Canada's heritage, arts, culture and sport communities. We are all committed to helping them get through the crisis and supporting them in their recovery.

I want to thank the committee for pursuing it's important work despite the difficult circumstances. Your study on the challenges faced by the arts, culture, heritage and sport sectors caused by COVID-19 will be a valuable asset in these efforts. Canadian Heritage was pleased to participate.

I would also like to acknowledge the excellent work you have done on Bill C-5, which seeks to establish the National Day of Truth and Reconciliation as a statutory holiday.

When we met for the main and supplementary budget estimates review, I had just tabled Bill C-10, an act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other acts. It will be referred to your committee shortly, and we will welcome your input on this legislation as well.

As I indicated before the holidays, I look forward to better understanding your perspectives and how the bill could be improved.

Like many Canadians, our government is concerned about the current imbalance that favours the web giants at the expense of Canadian businesses. The economic and social stakes resulting from this situation are too important for us to stand idly by.

That is why the Speech from the Throne mentioned that things must change to ensure more equitable sharing of revenues with our Canadian creators and media.

Mr. Chair, our government is committed to regulating digital platforms and putting them to work for Canadians. One of the objectives of Bill C-10 is to require those platforms to invest in our creators, our music and our stories, which could lead to more than $800 million of additional money being invested here in Canada every year.

This bill has been positively received by the community and stakeholders. I must share the credit for this success with the employees of Canadian Heritage, as it would not have been possible without their supporting work. I would like to salute their expertise and professionalism. As you know, it is up to elected officials to lead the development of public policy, and our government has been very clear on how we want to tackle social media platforms and web giants. The Canadian Heritage team is providing excellent evidence-based support in this regard.

Our government will also complement these efforts by levelling the playing field on the tax front, as we proposed in the 2020 fall economic statement. Digital businesses will now be required to collect and remit the GST. We will also ensure that digital corporations pay their fair share of taxes in respect of their activities in Canada.

I must also note that we are currently studying a made-in-Canada formula to ensure fair remuneration of news publishers by online platforms, similar to what you might have seen move ahead in certain other countries.

We have seen during the pandemic that digital platforms are more than ever at the heart of communications between Canadians, and are keeping us connected. Unfortunately, some Internet users are also exploiting these platforms maliciously to spread hate, racism and child pornography. There is currently illegal content being uploaded and shared online, to the detriment of Canadians and our society. This is simply unacceptable.

My apologies, Mr. Chair, but I'm having some technical problems.

Canadian Heritage

[Scott Simms, Liberal, Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the first report of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage concerning the main estimates, 2020-21, as well as its second report concerning the supplementary estimates (B), 2020-21. The committee has considered the estimates referred by the House and reports the same.

In addition, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the third report of the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage in relation to Bill C-5, an act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code regarding a national day for truth and reconciliation. The committee has studied the bill and has decided to report the bill back to the House without amendment.

Citizenship Act

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is great to be here in the House with so many friends to address this important debate, and to follow my friend, the member for Markham—Unionville, who gave an excellent speech. He said he came to Canada in 1974. I came to Canada in 1987, actually, so he has been here longer than I have.

I want to first set off my debate by talking a bit about the content of the bill. I also want to talk a bit about some of the context around the government's agenda and proposals with respect to indigenous issues.

The bill would amend the citizenship oath to read as follows:

I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada, including the Constitution, which recognizes and affirms the Aboriginal and treaty rights of First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples, and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen.

The reference to first nations, Inuit and Métis people, and the references to aboriginal and treat rights, would be new references the bill proposes to add to the legislation.

The genesis for this discussion of amending the citizenship oath is a recommendation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, specifically call to action number 94. As members have observed, the bill seems to have support from all parties and will pass second reading and go to committee. However, there is an issue we will need to hear about more at committee, which is important to note. We will need to hear from witnesses about the difference between the formulation of the oath in the legislation and the proposal that was in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's recommendation 94.

The proposed oath, which I looked up before speaking, from the commission report was as follows:

I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada including Treaties with Indigenous Peoples, and fulfill my duties as a Canadian citizen.

The formula is slightly different between the proposal in recommendation number 94 and the proposal in the bill. The bill references first nations, Inuit and Métis, and is a bit longer. Regardless, it is important to ensure that as we proceed down this road in the spirit of reconciliation, we hear from indigenous leaders along the way. Again, it will be important to elucidate at committee whether the relevant stakeholders and communities that are particularly invested in this have been consulted with respect to the difference in wording between the TRC recommendation and the bill. That will be an important point for us to follow up on.

Before I reflect on some of the specifics regarding changing the oath, I want to say that the Conservatives support the bill moving forward. We think the aspirations behind it and the substance of it are reasonable and valuable, and we look forward to further discussion and debate.

Right now we have before Parliament, at various stages, three pieces of legislation that in some sense deal with or touch directly on the relationship between the government and indigenous peoples in Canada. We have Bill C-5, Bill C-8 and Bill C-10. We are discussing Bill C-8, which amends the citizenship oath. We have Bill C-10, which is a larger, broader bill with many issues in it that would make changes to the Broadcasting Act, some of which put into the Broadcasting Act the expectation that broadcasters have diverse content reflecting different communities, including indigenous communities. Then we have Bill C-5, which deals with a statutory holiday for recognizing and remembering what happened in the context of indigenous residential schools.

All three of these bills contain important elements. The Conservatives have supported Bill C-5 and Bill C-8. We have some concerns about Bill C-10, although they are not related to the objectives, but are related to other aspects of the bill, as it is a broader bill. Regardless, in the context of the legislative agenda of the government right now, we have these three different bills.

If the Liberals are deciding what kinds of bills they are going to put forward with respect to indigenous issues, members might say they have a few different options in front of them. In considering those options, we can divide the bills they are putting forward into two broad categories. There would be bills that represent acts of recognition and then there would be bills that represent actions that target quality of life improvements.

This is an important distinction to make. Acts of recognition are things like putting in place a statutory holiday, changing wording, changing language, the legislature making statements, expressing its acknowledgement of certain facts and its will for reconciliation. These kinds of acts of recognition are things we do often as a legislature. They are important and have a place, which is why we are supporting this bill.

Other examples of acts of recognition this legislature has taken include motions where we express our appreciation for a certain community or the work done. In the last Parliament, we passed many bills that create heritage months, for example. Heritage months are a way of collectively commemorating and recognizing the contribution of certain communities. These acts of recognition and pieces of legislation that call for wider community recognition are important.

Why are they important? They create opportunities for us to call to mind, recognize and appreciate the valuable contributions made by certain communities. We are shaped by our history. As a legislature, we have a role in encouraging a recognition and awareness of that history. That is important and valuable. We can do those things and there is a legitimate place for us to do those things.

Another category of legislation we have are actions that specifically target quality of life improvements, which seek to make changes to practical circumstances in order to make peoples' lives concretely better.

These actions of recognition, whether changing an oath, commemorative day, representation in broadcasting or heritage month, are important. However, legislation that touches peoples' direct quality of life and deals with their ability to access justice with the recognition of their rights, the delivery of concrete services, whether it is health care or other supports, that deals with economic development, I would think are on balance more important.

To me, it is striking when I look at all the recommendations that have been made by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. I look at all of the options in front of the government in terms of prioritizing its response. We see more or less exclusively acts of recognition, as opposed to actions that are aimed at concrete quality of life improvements.

If we saw a mix of both, that would be fine. However, we need to start to be critical and ask that question when we are seeing a focus exclusively on the acts of recognition, as opposed to on those kinds of quality of life improvements I talked about earlier.

What are the areas we are missing? Where has the government failed when it comes to making quality of life improvements? There are many areas we need to look at in terms of concrete quality of life improvements. We can talk about justice and health, and many other things.

I want to start by talking about economic development. Talking to indigenous Canadians in my area and across the country, I know there is a real desire for economic development and for people to have jobs and opportunities in their own communities.

There is also a recognition that when there is economic development in different communities, it gives those communities control and ability to invest in programs that reflect the priorities of those communities. We hear calls from communities for funding from the government for programs around health, around language, around infrastructure and these sorts of things, but to the extent that communities are able to have economic development themselves, they are also able to prioritize, and invest in those priority areas without needing to come and ask the government for funding in that specific area. It is not an either-or. It is not as if communities have to choose between accessing government funding and economic development, but when communities are developing economically it gives them a greater degree of autonomy and control and it gives them the opportunity to invest in those priorities right away.

Many indigenous communities have been benefiting from being part of the energy economy, developing natural resources and pursuing other opportunities. In the course of this debate, the parliamentary secretary responded to my question about concrete actions by talking about Bill C-262 from the last Parliament. It is important to address this directly. If we want to give indigenous communities the opportunity to develop economically, they have to be able to do so in a framework that involves reasonable consultation, but ultimately gives them the opportunity to move forward. If they have, for example, an energy development project where the indigenous communities in an area are actually the proponents of that project and there is a minority that is opposing those projects, in a case where there is overwhelming support within local indigenous communities, there has to be a consultation framework that allows that project to move forward.

This is where Conservatives have parted company with other parties, especially around issues like Bill C-262, because if they put in place a framework that effectively means that one community could have a veto over the desire for the economic development of all surrounding communities, that is a problem. There needs to be a meaningful consultation process in which communities are listened to, but there also has to be an opportunity for communities to develop their own resources and the standard for consultation has to stop somewhere short of unanimity. One cannot expect that every person has to agree before we see any kind of economic development.

It has been something that maybe we have discussed less since, because COVID-19 took up all the attention in terms of discussion, but early in the year we were dealing with a situation where all of the elected community leaders wanted a particular project, the Coastal GasLink project, and a minority of hereditary chiefs were against that project going forward. That was the context, and it was debated extensively. Some members of this House behaved as if a case in which a minority within a community objected, that, in and of itself, was sufficient basis for stopping economic development from going forward. We took the view that when there is strong support within indigenous communities for a project to go forward, then that project has to be able to go forward. The consultation has to happen and if people say yes, they have to be able to develop those resources and benefit from them.

We see cases across this country where indigenous people are seeking the opportunity to pursue economic development, to develop resources. There can be debate, there can be tensions, and those debates happen within communities as well as between different communities, but the opportunity for people to pursue economic development is important.

The government members talk about the discussion we are hearing today, separate from the debate on Bill C-8 but about Bill C-262 from the last Parliament. That is concerning for a lot of indigenous Canadians who want to have this opportunity to develop their own resources, to benefit from the opportunities that flow from them, and to use those resources to invest in things like language preservation, health improvement, infrastructure improvements and so forth. They want to be able to use the benefits that flow from economic development for those things.

I want to also just add, in terms of economic development, one of the exciting and interesting opportunities when it comes to the development of things like pipeline infrastructure is that the expansion of infrastructure could also bring in things like better Internet connectivity into some of these communities.

It is not just about opportunities directly in the natural resource sector, it is about the fact that, when we have benefit agreements, we have the building of infrastructure into and around different communities, which gives people the opportunity to have better connectivity, to access different resources and education, or to work in online businesses. There is so much more opportunity that flows from these kinds of developments, which we are just on the cusp of.

This country has so much potential, and a lot of that potential is around resource development. Those who are most likely to benefit to the greatest extent from that development are those who are more likely to be living proximate to those resources.

We could talk about some of the significant issues around justice, around working to ensure our justice system is fair to all people. We are identifying the reasons there may be disproportionate impacts on certain communities and working seriously to counter those impacts. That is the kind of thing that takes hard work.

The government has made statements to recognize the problems that have existed in the way indigenous people have been treated by our justice system. It is one thing to affirm there is an issue here, again, an act of recognition, and is another thing to say we are going to take concrete action and go from that active recognition and really target those quality of life improvements.

As I said earlier during questions and comments, so often when I hear from government members when we are having debates about indigenous issues, there is a tone in the their speeches as if they are still in opposition. They will say that there have been all these problems and that we need to do better and do more.

I look across the way and think that the government has been here for five years, and it is still constantly blaming Stephen Harper and constantly talking about the failures of history that have held it back. Do I think it is possible to change everything and make everything perfect within five years? No, I do not. Do I think it could be focusing on real concrete progress as part of its agenda? Yes, I do.

I hope we do not have the current government for another five years or another 10 years, but I suspect if we did, we would still hear the same speeches. We would still hear the same members saying that we have failed for too long and we need to do better. At what point does this recognition that we need to do better come back on them and lead them to say maybe not just “we” in the abstract, somebody else needs to do better sense, but “we” as in “we as a government” need to do better?

The government here does need to do much better. The Conservative caucus is supportive of Bill C-8. We are going to be supporting it through to committee. We look forward to the committee's study on it, especially delving into some of these questions I mentioned about the distinction between the version in the legislation and the TRC recommendation. However, we want to see the government take seriously the need to advance legislation and policy that concretely improves the quality of life for indigenous Canadians.

Yes, recognition is important, but if we see bill after bill on the issue of recognition but not targeting concrete quality of life improvements, it looks increasingly like the government is trying to avoid delving into these complex policy areas that would really make a difference. If it recognizes there is a need for more resources and need for economic development, when are we going to see the legislation that is going to really support economic development within indigenous communities and make it easier to grab those opportunities? When are we going to see the legislation that seeks to address those long-standing justice issues?

The government talks about doing better. It is time for it to do better so we can see some of these concrete improvements.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Well, I'm going to give my ruling.

I want to start this ruling by quoting from House of Commons Procedure and Practice. This is from page 770. I'll try to do this slowly for the sake of our interpreters. It says:

An amendment to a bill that was referred to a committee after second reading is out of order if it is beyond the scope and principle of the bill.

If you read the bill, you will see that Bill C-5 amends several acts for the sole purpose of creating a new legal holiday. That was prescribed by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Specifically, call to action number 80 is what people refer to and what this bill refers to, as a legal concept.

This amendment proposes to remove the concept of a legal holiday and replace it with a symbolic holiday. As you know, after second reading, once we accept the bill in principle and scope, we cannot go back on that, as the House by a majority voted for it.

This amendment goes beyond the principle and scope of the bill. Therefore, the amendment is inadmissible. In my opinion, the amendment is contrary to the principle of the bill.

The ruling also applies to other amendments, by the same token. I'll use the numbers that are ascribed, in the top right-hand corner of the sheets that you have, folks. The ruling applies to amendments CPC-2, CPC-3 and CPC-7, since they are consequential in what they plan to do and are similar in purpose to CPC-1.

Monsieur Rayes.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The amendment is:

That Bill C-5, in Clause 1, be amended

(a) by replacing line 4 on page 1 with the following:

“Short Title

1 This Act may be cited as the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation Act.

Purpose of this Act

2 The purpose of this Act is to respond to the Truth and”

(b) by replacing line 6 on page 1 with the following:

“number 80 by establishing the National Day”

That's it, Mr. Chair.

[Caroline Desbiens, Bloc, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Thank you to you both. Your testimonies are very heartbreaking. I'm even struggling to find my voice to ask you questions.

We don't have much time, but I'd also like to thank you for marking the passing of Grand Chief Max Gros-Louis, whom I was fortunate enough to know. I'm a writer-composer-performer, and we met each other together on international stages. He was an absolutely exceptional man who left his mark on my memory. I offer you my most sincere condolences, as well as to the entire nation and to all First Nations.

At home, in Charlevoix, we have beautiful stories with our First Nations brothers. There is a project in Pointe-aux-Alouettes, in the municipality of Baie-Sainte-Catherine, that I'm actively working on with a Charlevoix-Est RCM committee. We would like to set up a commemorative site.

As part of the study of Bill C-5, which would establish a statutory holiday, I was wondering: if there were more memorial sites where we could celebrate and learn, if there were interpretation centres where we could provide information to the public, and if more sites were established across the nation, would this give us a chance to learn more about your history?

My daughter, who is next to me, tells me that she has had only one hour in all her high school years to discuss your history. It's not enough.

[National Chief Norman Yakeleya, Dene Nation, Assembly of First Nations]

Marsi.

[Witness spoke in Dene]

[English]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In my language, I said thank you to my relatives on this call, and today is good weather outside. It's beautiful outside.

Members of the committee, friends and relatives, thank you for inviting me here today to join in sharing the perspectives of the Assembly of First Nations on Bill C-5, an act that will result in a national day of truth and reconciliation as a national statutory holiday.

While I encourage the building of relationships based on understanding and respect every day, I'm here to support the bill advocating for the creation of a national holiday. Creating a national statutory holiday for indigenous people will assist in promoting reconciliation while also commemorating those who need commemoration. We must not forget the past harm done to our communities and the long-lasting legacy of the residential school system and the impact it has had on first nations and indigenous communities.

There will still be challenges to the relationship building between the first nations and Canadians. A national statutory holiday could provide an opportunity for learning, education, and coming together for a better understanding of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, its goals and aspirations, and how all of Canada can move forward on the path to reconciliation.

As indicated in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's final report, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples provides the framework for reconciliation. Article 15 of the declaration states:

1. Indigenous peoples have the right to the dignity and diversity of their cultures, traditions, histories and aspirations which shall be appropriately reflected in education and public information.

2. States shall take effective measures, in consultation and cooperation with the indigenous peoples concerned, to combat prejudice and eliminate discrimination and to promote tolerance, understanding and good relations among indigenous peoples and all other segments of society.

A national holiday could be used to combat prejudice, eliminate racism and promote tolerance. This holiday will serve as an annual act of reconciliation. First nations have welcomed many of the Canadians' recent commitments to promoting reconciliation, including supporting Bill C-262, the United Nations declaration act, and we look forward to continued initiatives that foster reconciliation. Several provinces and territories have already acknowledged the important day to celebrate the indigenous people.

In 2017, the Yukon government created legislation that led to June 21 becoming a statutory holiday. In the Northwest Territories, this date has been celebrated as a statutory territorial holiday for 18 years. This is not a new issue. The Assembly of First Nations has been calling for this legislation since 1982. The Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples recommended this special day, and the chiefs-in-assembly have several resolutions speaking to this matter specifically.

As a party to the Indian Residential School Settlement Agreement, which led to the creation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the AFN has a unique mandate in advocating the full implementation of all 94 calls to action. Among these calls to action is number 80, which calls for a national day in a very measured outline of this proposed bill.

I'm aware of Canada's recent commitment to declare a federal statutory holiday to mark the legacy of the residential school system. We welcome the announcement of a day to honour the history of this period, as called for by the TRC.

The AFN executive committee recently passed a motion to advocate that Orange Shirt Day on September 30 become a statutory holiday for reconciliation. This date is near the time of year when children were separated from their families to attend the residential schools. It was named after the shiny orange shirt that was given to a six-year-old Phyllis Webstad by her grandmother in 1973 and taken from her and never returned when she attended St. Joseph’s Mission school in Williams Lake, B.C.

I paused just now, because I reflected. That also happened to a lot of us in our residential schools in the Northwest Territories.

I'll conclude my statement.

The AFN proposes that this bill be amended so that September 30 becomes a statutory holiday for reconciliation and that June 21 remain a national day of celebration. If Canada chooses to fulfill call to action number 80 through this bill, June 21 must accomplish the important task of ensuring there's an opportunity for all to honour and respect the legacy of survivors while celebrating our culture and our history.

There is a concern over the conflicting tones of these two objectives. Reconciliation is never easy. It will take substantial effort from all of the partners, both public and private, to ensure reconciliation is encouraged and promoted. Sustained reconciliation takes more than just one day.

I urge all governments to ensure that they keep front and centre the interests and the perspectives of the survivors. First nations are committed to action and change. It is time to restore the original relationship of mutual respect, mutual recognition, peaceful coexistence and sharing. It is a time for reconciliation.

I want to thank the committee and MP Jolibois for raising this important issue.

In closing, the Dene Nation, along with the Assembly of First Nations, wants to ensure that we walk together in these footsteps so that our children can truly have a place in society as first nations people.

We thank you. We thank our elders. God bless you. God bless our people who are in the Labrador country. We pray for you all.

We look forward to your questions.

Marsi cho.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Welcome back, everybody.

We're now in our second hour of witnesses where we are discussing Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code (National Day for Truth and Reconciliation).

We have two witnesses for the second hour, and I want to thank them very much for joining us. They're joining us remotely. I will give you the opportunity in just a few moments to correct any mispronunciations, but in the meantime I want to welcome the national chief from the Dene Nation, Norman Yakeleya and also the Innu chief of Ekuanitshit, Jean-Charles Piétacho.

On behalf of everybody, thank you very much.

Both of you, of course, are under the umbrella of the Assembly of First Nations. The way we do this, with witnesses, is that you have up to five minutes for your opening statement. We provide some leeway to finish your sentences. Then we proceed with questioning after that.

We're going to start with Chief Yakeleya for five minutes, please.

[Derrick Hynes, President and Chief Executive Officer, Federally Regulated Employers - Transportation and Communications]

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

Mr. Chair, I need to start with a quick shout-out to my mom, who happens to be one of your constituents. I'm sure she's watching you and me today.

Thank you for inviting me today as a witness.

In my five minutes, I have some general comments. I'm happy to take questions and discuss these important issues with you after that point.

First let me tell you a little bit about FETCO, the organization for which I work. We are an association of private sector federally regulated employers. Our membership includes major airlines, courier companies, railways, telecom firms, etc., as well as others. Our members are businesses that carry out 24-7 continuous operations almost exclusively. They run businesses that essentially never stop. They connect the domestic and global supply chains and provide critical services to Canadians on a daily basis.

Let me start by saying that FETCO and its members fully support and endorse truth and reconciliation. Our members have a tremendous commitment to diversity and inclusion within their organizations, and this fits perfectly within that broad framework. Our members have no opposition to this proposed holiday. They appreciate the significance of setting aside a day of reflection. They agree it's a positive step in the direction of reconciliation, and frankly, they'd like to be partners in this important journey.

In the broader context, what I'd like to talk to you briefly about today is basically the concept of what a paid statutory holiday means within the context of the federal private sector to provide you with, I hope, some insights around what this looks like in practical terms. What I'm not going to do, and I don't want to do, is in any way disrespect this important dialogue by somehow implying that we should put a price on reconciliation. That would be wrong. That's not my intention. However, I think it's important that we all understand what a paid holiday means.

My colleagues at the Canadian Federation of Independent Business conducted some research a couple of years ago and concluded that a paid statutory holiday across the entire country basically costs the economy, in effect, $3.6 billion. That's assuming all jurisdictions participate in the holiday.

Within the federal private sector, where my members reside, we've done some back-of-the-envelope analysis. It's pretty crude. It looks as if it's probably about a $600-million cost for a one-day paid holiday.

I spoke with some of my members about this specifically. I spoke with a member who employs about 5,000 Canadians in a 24-7 continuous operation. They, in their operation, estimate that a paid holiday costs about $1.4 million for them specifically.

It's important to note that the federal private sector is unique in Canada. As I noted earlier, these businesses don't stop during a holiday. These are not your typical nine-to-five desk jobs. These are businesses that continue to run whether there's a holiday or not. They don't shut down and take the day off.

What happens in practical terms is that those who work typically receive extra compensation, and we all know the expression about receiving overtime at time and a half, for example. What happens, building on that perspective, is that those who receive that time and a half will often take it off later on as time off, and then those who are brought in to replace them for that day are again paid overtime at time and a half, so there's a bit of a compounding effect of what a paid statutory holiday means in the context of continuous operations. Really, in essence, it becomes a cost item, for all intents and purposes.

It's also important to note that a change like this one doesn't occur in isolation. Last year, for example, the government introduced three new paid days to the Canada Labour Code. They're called “personal leave” days. Employees are entitled to them for a multitude of reasons, and the reasons for which they can be taken are quite flexible. Five are guaranteed, three of which must be paid to the employees.

Today we're talking about Bill C-5, which will potentially add one more. Minister Tassi, the Minister of Labour, is planning to soon add another—it's in her mandate letter—under the title of “family day”. This means that over about a two-year period, the government will be adding five days of paid time off in a very condensed time frame.

With all this said, if the government does proceed in this manner, we do have a few recommendations that we hope you will consider in your deliberations.

First, one option is to consider declaring a national truth and reconciliation day without necessarily making it a paid holiday within the federal private sector.

I've looked at the witness testimony you heard earlier in the week. I'm not sure that there's necessarily a huge push from advocates asking that this be a paid day off. Some of your witnesses talked about the fact that this is not meant to be a day for people to put their feet up and watch TV.

If we did it this way and it was not necessarily a paid day off, employers could be actively engaged with indigenous leaders to ensure that the day is commemorated properly and respectfully.

However, if the truth and reconciliation day does proceed as a paid holiday, our second recommendation is that it actually be made effective as a paid holiday in 2022. The 2021 budgeting in most major corporations is done. That financial planning is already complete, and it would be quite disruptive to the process to start that process all over again to accommodate this change.

Our final request, if we do add a paid day for truth and reconciliation, is that the government reconsider its commitment to adding the family day as well. Adding both in the federal sector at this time would mean that the federal jurisdiction would have the highest number of paid statutory holidays within all the Canadian jurisdictions. What ultimately will result from that is a bit of an unfair asymmetry between organizations that operate in the federal sector versus the many—the vast majority—that actually operate across the provincial sector.

That's all I have to add. I'd be happy to take your questions and talk about this. We do believe that this is a critically important issue, and we want to be supportive.

Thank you.

[Stacy Allison-Cassin]

Good afternoon, members of the committee and fellow witnesses. I guess maybe it's good morning for some of you.

I'm Stacy Allison-Cassin, assistant professor, teaching stream, at the Faculty of Information at the University of Toronto, and I'm chair of the Canadian Federation of Library Associations' Indigenous Matters Committee. I am appearing today on behalf of the CFLA.

I'm a citizen of the Métis Nation of Ontario, and I am speaking from Oakville, Ontario, which is the traditional territory of the Huron-Wendat, the Haudenosaunee and the Anishinabe. I also acknowledge the current treaty holders, the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation.

I want to thank the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage for the opportunity to speak on Bill C-5 on the proposed national day for truth and reconciliation.

I want to start off with a brief story. Like many families right now, we are working and learning from home. My youngest daughter is in grade 3, and she currently does her schooling from the kitchen table. On September 30, as in recent past years, we wore our orange shirts. As I came in and out of the kitchen on that day, I was continually struck—being sort of able to listen in on a day of grade 3—by the lessons and discussions that were taking place on the topic of residential schools. The teacher read them Phyllis Webstad's story of her orange shirt, and the children in the class were invited to reflect on the story in different ways, really reflecting on it as children listening to a story about another child.

I found it particularly moving. Throughout the day, they watched videos and did orange shirt-themed artwork, and the teacher led the group of seven- to nine-year-olds through some very difficult conversations.

After school that day, we had further conversations within our own family about residential schools and Canada's role. My child had a one-word question that I think many parents are familiar with: Why?

Although I've not had a family member who has experienced residential school—as far as I know, at this point—I have had to talk to my children about why my grandmother hid her identity and why she did not teach my dad her language. I'm hopeful and encouraged that my children and their classmates are learning about residential schools and indigenous peoples in Canada. I know that we have more work to do, and I am really so grateful for all of those and for Phyllis for sharing their stories to bring us to this point.

As a librarian, a parent and an indigenous person, I was struck by a great number of things that day. Among them are the following. Stories are important for truth and understanding and conversations. Facts are important. Creating deliberate space—time apart from the contours of work and school and our busy days in the lives that we all lead—is really vital to ensuring learning, awareness and remembrance of residential schools and the ongoing impacts of colonization, as well as learning about the vibrancy of indigenous peoples and cultures.

September 30—what is now known as Orange Shirt Day—has in many schools, libraries and other sites become an important day of learning and remembering. Creating a national day of truth and reconciliation will create further weight and impetus for a day of remembering and learning for all Canadians.

This is important because, as we know, the first step of reconciliation is the truth part, which includes learning facts, hearing stories and understanding the ongoing impacts of colonization. That will ultimately lead to reconciliation.

As a librarian and educator, I recognize the importance of access to materials, as well as the importance of infrastructure in the delivery of such materials and learning. As we know, access to online materials is particularly important right now in the pandemic. This includes access to the Internet, to materials that are both age-appropriate and culturally appropriate, and to materials in an appropriate language.

As a parent, I have found myself seeking books and guides to help me have conversations with my children and sharing these with other parents.

Libraries exist in schools, communities, hospitals and higher education, making them key hubs for accessing information, programming and technology across the spectrum of age, location and social position. They enable learning outside the bounds of formal education.

Libraries play an important role in ensuring that people have the ability to learn about not only the residential school system, the Indian Act and treaties, but also about indigenous art, literature, language and culture and the experiences of indigenous people in Canada.

Creating a national day for truth and reconciliation would encourage and support the development of programming and the collection of materials, and it would bring greater learning and awareness to all people in Canada.

In 2017 the Canadian Federation of Library Associations' working group on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission released a report that set out detailed actions for libraries to take to implement the calls to action. Since the release of the CFLA's TRC report, the Indigenous Matters Committee has formed a major component of the work of the CFLA. Numerous calls to action relate to education, language, and programming, and speak to the availability of reports and documentation. Furthermore, calls to action numbers 69 and 70 highlight the importance of compliance with UNDRIP regarding indigenous peoples' rights to know the truth of what happened and to access information regarding human rights violations. It is thus vitally important that infrastructure be present to support both control of and access to documentation.

To return to the story I told at the beginning of these remarks, it's my hope that with a national day of truth and reconciliation, learning and discussion will be amplified across Canada. In this, libraries are able to act as a key component to help ensure that we will not have another generation that will not know the truth and that we will acknowledge and honour the survivors and remember those who have died.

Thank you.

[Carlon Big Snake, Small Business Owner, As an Individual]

Thank you. First of all, I would like to say okya.

My name is Carlon Big Snake. I'm a proud Blackfoot member from the Siksika Nation in Treaty No. 7 territory.

Today I am very honoured to represent and witness a promising historical event for indigenous people and Canadians in making a positive change to Canada's modern society. Not only for ourselves but to look to [Technical difficulty—Editor] these opportunities or to allow an equitable quality of life. Unfortunately, today's society is apportioned, which in turn causes hate and racism.

The acceptance of the TRC call for action number 80 to support Bill C-5's changes will show the sincerity and commitment of the federal government. This action will show a promising future for Canada and indigenous peoples across the nation.

The proposed bill, Bill C-5, will also enhance the education system. It will be prudent to assist Canada's educational institutions for a better understanding of our forgotten history.

My wife Lisa and I are descendants and survivors of the residential school system. We were raised with negative impacts of history. However, we felt it is our responsibility to take that mentality and use our hardship for strength for our future.

We decided to advocate in a positive manner to give hope to our families and communities. We also used those negative impacts to strengthen and create a future for our future generations.

Recently, my wife and I acquired two white buffalo. They are held with honour and respect among the people. In the past, the buffalo provided food, shelter and medicine.

However, when a white buffalo is born, it is a sign of strength and hope that we will see change soon for our people, which I see now. With the proposed acceptance of call to action number 80 through Bill C-5, we as caregivers hope that not only our people but everyone will receive blessings.

It is our way of allowing Canadians to visit first nation territory and see that we, as individuals, have pride in who we are today and to create a united society.

In closing, I would like to thank you for giving me this opportunity to address the matter, and I have faith that the decision will be made to accept and have September 30 as a national day of truth and reconciliation.

Together we can begin to heal the past and look forward to a united prosperous future.

Kiit’aah’mut’tsin. Again, thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

I call the meeting to order.

Thank you for being here today.

This is, of course, a very special day as we welcome legislation that has successfully gone through second reading in the House of Commons .

This is, of course, a hearing about Bill C-5, an act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code. Bill C-5 is also known as the bill for a national day for truth and reconciliation.

Just as a quick note regarding organization, we're going to have two separate hours of witnesses to discuss this bill with our MPs.

For the sake of our witnesses, we have representation from the Liberal party, which is the governing party; the opposition party, which is the Conservatives; the Bloc Québécois; and the NDP.

Most of us are doing this remotely. I just want to say to our witnesses that if there's a conversation that you wish to comment on or in which perhaps you want to correct something, try to get the questioner's attention by just waving your hand, rather than trying to get my attention.

By the same token, MPs, I'd like to ask you to please direct your questions by starting with the name of the person you would like to answer the question. That makes things a lot easier.

That said, we will now proceed.

We have three witnesses on the first panel. Carlon Big Snake is a small-business owner. We also have, from the Canadian Federation of Library Associations, Stacy Allison-Cassin, assistant professor, University of Toronto. As well, from Federally Regulated Employers — Transportation and Communications, we have Derrick Hynes, who is the president and CEO.

The way we do this is that you give your opening statements for up to five minutes. You don't have to use all five minutes, but you have up to five. If you go beyond five, I'm somewhat flexible, but of course for the sake of our timing, we have to keep moving.

We're going to start with Carlon Big Snake, and I hope the connection is solid enough.

Please give us your introductory remarks for five minutes.

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's a pleasure to have you here, Ms. Bennett and Mr. Vandal.

My question is for Minister Bennett.

When Bill C-5 is passed, September 30 will become a statutory holiday, but I realize the funding for that isn't necessarily in supplementary estimates (B).

I'm curious as to how the government plans to mark the holiday, without simply making it a day off for federal employees.

[Phyllis Webstad]

Weyt-kp. Good morning. Hello to everyone here today.

My name is Phyllis Webstad. I'm from the Canoe Creek and Dog Creek, Stswecem'c Xgat'tem First Nation. I am coming to you today from Secwepemculecw, the land of the Shuswap people, in Williams Lake, B.C. Canoe Creek and Dog Creek are approximately an hour and a half southwest of Williams Lake.

Kukstemc. I thank you for the invitation to speak to Bill C-5, about a national day for truth and reconciliation. I am a third-generation Indian residential school survivor who attended the St. Joseph Indian residential school, also known as “the Mission”, near Williams Lake. My grandmother attended for 10 years, along with her 10 children, including my mother for 10 years, and I attended for one year. My son was at the last operating residential school in Saskatchewan when it closed in 1996.

I lived with my grandmother on the Dog Creek reserve until I was 10, and then went to live with my aunt when she finished university. When I turned six in July 1973, Granny took me to town to buy something to wear for my first day of school at the Mission. I chose a shiny new orange shirt. It was bright and exciting, just like I felt to be going to school for the first time. When I got to school, my shirt was taken away and I never wore it again.

It is my story of losing my shiny orange shirt purchased by my grandmother that has spread across Canada and beyond.

Orange Shirt Day was born out of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission event held in Williams Lake, B.C., in May 2013, and as a result of Chief Commissioner Justice Sinclair challenging Canadians to keep the conversation happening after the TRC wrapped up. Our theme was “Remembering, recovering and reconciling”. Our first nations, local government, schools and the RCMP all came together to hear the truth from residential school survivors. I was part of the planning for our TRC event, where I told my story of my orange shirt for the first time. We chose September because that was the time of year the children were taken away. We chose the 30th because it gives teachers and students time to settle in, to teach and learn, and time to plan an event.

At the TRC event in Vancouver, B.C., in mid-September 2013, before the first Orange Shirt Day, I overheard an elder say that September was crying month. I knew then that we had chosen the right day. September 30, Orange Shirt Day, is bringing awareness of the history of Indian residential schools and the impacts on the generations. It is a day to honour residential school survivors and their families and remember those who never made it.

What is forgotten is often repeated. Orange Shirt Day gives Canadians an opportunity to learn about, and to teach, the true history. This day acknowledges that what happened to us as children was horribly wrong, and that it will never happen again. Our slogan, “Every child matters,” began when I first told my story of my experience at residential school and how I felt that no one cared and that I didn't matter.

Residential school survivors were children when they attended those schools. They all mattered, 150,000 of them. Every child matters in the past, the present and the future.

I have two books published telling of my orange shirt story, and I'm working on the third. The first is The Orange Shirt Story, available in English, French and Shuswap, for grade kindergarten and up. There is also curriculum and the poster available.

The second is Phyllis's Orange Shirt. A lot of the illustrations are the same. The nuns and the crying were taken out. The book tells the same story, but rhymes, and is for ages four to six. It is available in English and French.

I am working on a third book, called Beyond the Orange Shirt Story, for grade 5 and up, which will tell more of my and my family's truth.

The Orange Shirt Society was incorporated in July 2015 and opened an office in Williams Lake in April 2019, at which time I became its first staff member as executive director.

The three purposes of the Orange Shirt Society are these: one, to support Indian residential school reconciliation; two, to create awareness of the individual, family and community intergenerational impacts of Indian residential schools through Orange Shirt Society activities; and three, to create awareness of the concept of “Every child matters”.

Our web page is www.orangeshirtday.org. On our web page, we post educational resources from across Canada and we are continually adding as we become aware of resources being developed.

I notice that much of the discussion in the House of Commons was around the need to educate Canadians about the history of residential schools in Canada. I believe that a national statutory holiday, a national day for truth and reconciliation, can help accomplish this. I recommend that the federal government develop curriculum for teachers to use in preparing students for the statutory holiday and in learning the history behind it.

The Orange Shirt Society published a book this past summer called Orange Shirt Day. This is a textbook for grade 5 and up, as well as for adults. I suggest that this book be distributed to schools and into the hands of children across the country. It is obvious from the amount of racism still in this country that this education and the holiday are needed.

To finish, September 30, 2021, will be the eighth year of Orange Shirt Day and, I hope, the first day of a national day for truth and reconciliation. When I see people wearing an orange shirt or a pin, it's like a little bit of justice for us survivors in our lifetime. One day there will be no survivors in Canada.

Honourable members, kukstemc. I thank you for your time today.

[Stephanie Scott]

Good morning. My name is Stephanie Scott, and I'm the acting director of the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation. I am joined today by Stephen Kakfwi, who is a member of the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation governing circle.

First, I would like to acknowledge that I am speaking to you from the original lands of the Anishinabe, Cree, Oji-Cree, Dakota and Dene peoples, and the homeland of the Métis nation.

I want to thank the House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage for the invitation to appear in view of your study of Bill C-5.

At the outset, I would also like to note that we owe a debt of gratitude to Georgina Jolibois, who first introduced Bill C-369, in October 2017, to create a national day for truth and reconciliation. Although Bill C-369 died in the Senate, it provided an important opportunity for dialogue and reflection. As Georgina said, “After 151 years of pain and suffering inflicted on First Nations, Métis, and Inuit people, there will now be a time to reflect and to build relationships to strengthen the Canadian society.”

I could not agree more. I spent five years at the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and almost five years at the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation. As the manager of statement gathering at the commission, I had a unique opportunity to hear directly from survivors about their pain and suffering. My birth mother, who is in her sixties, says that she will never be the same because of the assimilation policies that took her away from the people she loved and the ones who loved her. May she find peace while she is still alive. To me, that's what reconciliation is all about.

My colleague Ry Moran appeared in front of this committee in 2018. At the time, Ry spoke about the TRC's examination of the place of residential schools in the history of this country, and he stated that “the TRC was forced to conclude that there are no words for it other than 'cultural genocide'.”

In 2019, the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls also concluded that there has been “a race-based genocide of Indigenous Peoples [that] has been empowered by colonial structures evidenced notably by the Indian Act, the Sixties Scoop, residential schools and breaches of human and Indigenous rights”.

I too am a Sixties Scoop survivor.

The international human rights legal framework requires Canada to provide redress for past harms caused to indigenous peoples, such as those described by the commission and the national inquiry. Redress can be individual or collective and may have material as well as symbolic components. Symbolic components, such as commemoration, are powerful medicine to bring comfort to survivors and keep the truth of their experiences in front of the nation.

This is why the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's call to action 80 for a national day for truth and reconciliation is so important. Survivors and their families, and others affected by the residential school system, need a day for Canadians to acknowledge them and the history of human rights violations they have endured, while they are still living. The time to act is now.

In addition, we believe that the government must also implement the TRC's calls to action 81 and 82, which call for the federal, provincial and territorial governments, in collaboration with survivors, to establish monuments in capital cities across the country “to honour Survivors and all the children who were lost to their families and communities.”

Canadians need to know the truth and understand what happened in order to foster true reconciliation and healing. Commemoration and education are critical to understand the complicated and difficult history that we share as indigenous and non-indigenous Canadians. We have seen time and time again what a difference education can make to the journey we are now all on together to reconcile our past and create a bright future for all of the generations to follow.

I would now like to turn the floor over to Mr. Kakfwi.

[Romeo Saganash, As an Individual]

Thank you, Scott. It's a pleasure to see you again. I'll put on my timer because I don't want to go over my five minutes, as usual.

First of all, meegwetch to the committee for this kind invitation to appear before you. I also wish also to acknowledge the government for introducing Bill C-5. I think it's an important piece of legislation in moving forward in this country. I would like to express my deep gratitude as well to my former colleague Georgina Jolibois, who did some formidable work on this piece of legislation regarding reconciliation in this country.

I know this legislation only addresses one national day of truth and reconciliation, implementing, I believe, call to action 80, one of the important calls to action by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Let's not forget that there are 93 other calls to action that need to be implemented in this country if we wish to move forward on the path of reconciliation. I think it's important to remember that.

I understand that the government is also on the verge of introducing legislation regarding the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which is great. It's been promised since 2015. It's been a long time coming, but better late than never. I'm looking forward to seeing that piece of legislation in particular, since I had similar legislation not too long ago, Bill C-262, which finally died on the order paper in the Senate after being passed by Parliament.

Of course, UNDRIP legislation addresses calls to action 43 and 44; 44 is in regard to the action plan that's required to implement the UN declaration, and 43 calls on the federal government, the provinces, the territories and the municipalities to fully adopt and implement the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. So we're looking forward to that.

Let's not forget there are at least 16 references to the United Nations declaration in the calls to action by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. I believe that not only legislation in this country needs to be consistent with the UN declaration, but our policies and our operational practices as well.

I see that my time is running out fast, but I wanted to make a couple of points here, one of them being that reconciliation was addressed by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2004 in the Haida Nation case, whereby the Supreme Court said that reconciliation is not an end in itself, but a process that we need to follow in this country, adding that the objective here—reconciliation—is to reconcile the pre-existing sovereignty of indigenous peoples with the assumed sovereignty of the Crown. I think it's important to remember that Supreme Court case.

If we are truly all in this together, I think we need to address all 94 calls to action by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, as well as the calls to justice of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. I think that's an important point here.

Indigenous peoples' rights are human rights. Let's not forget that. There's an interesting principle in the 2014 Supreme Court decision, Tsilhqot'in, whereby the Supreme Court acknowledges that the charter provisions in part I of our Constitution and section 35 in part II of our Constitution are “sister provisions”—that's the expression used—that serve to limit the powers of the federal government and the provinces. It's important to remember that.

In closing, I think those who have no intention of upholding the fundamental rights of indigenous peoples always talk about how we should have patience, or how these things are too complicated and it's going to take time. But they aren't. Just to give you an example, the first modern treaty in this country, which has about 500 pages, took one year to negotiate. This treaty is the most complex and complicated document, the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement. It took one year to negotiate.

I'll just leave it at that, because my time is up. I'm looking forward to answering your questions, of course.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Scott Simms]

Let me declare the meeting resumed.

Thank you, everybody, for showing up. This is our first meeting regarding Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code (National Day for Truth and Reconciliation).

I want to thank our guests for being here today. We would like to thank Mr. Romeo Saganash for being here. From the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation, we have Stephanie Scott, acting director; and Stephen Kakfwi, a governing circle member. Our third guest, Phyllis Webstad, is the executive director of the Orange Shirt Society and founder of Orange Shirt Day.

The way this normally works is that we give you five minutes to do an opening statement from each group, so that will be three opening statements. Following that, we have questions and comments from our members of Parliament for the duration of this hour. Since we started a few minutes late, we will extend the meeting by a few minutes to cover that.

First we have Mr. Saganash.

It's good to see you again, sir. You have five minutes, and we look forward to it. Go ahead.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

Madam Speaker, I would like to acknowledge that I am speaking from the traditional homeland of the Dene, Métis and Inuvialuit of the Northwest Territories.

I am of Métis descent. I am a member of the Dehcho First Nations. We are known as the “big river” people. I believe I am the only sitting member who attended the residential school program, or the hostel program as we knew it.

I am grateful to have the opportunity to speak in support of the government’s bill that would revise the oath of citizenship. It continues our government’s important work to walk the shared path of reconciliation and the implementation of the TRC's calls to action.

I would like to point to a number of key legislative initiatives that address calls to action and advance reconciliation.

Bill C-91, the Indigenous Languages Act, received royal assent in June 2019. This act supports the Government of Canada’s efforts to reclaim, revitalize, strengthen and maintain indigenous languages in Canada. The act was developed to address calls to action numbers 13, 14 and 15; elements of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, or UNDRIP; and the Government of Canada’s commitment to a renewed relationship with indigenous people based on the recognition of rights, respect, co-operation and partnership.

That same month, in June 2019, royal assent was given to Bill C-92, an act respecting first nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families. It came into force on January 1, 2020. This act was codeveloped as part of Canada’s efforts to reform indigenous child and family services, which included implementing call to action number 4. It affirms the rights of first nations, Inuit, and Métis to exercise jurisdiction over child and family services and establishes national principles such as the best interests of the child, cultural continuity and substantive equality, which help guide the provision of indigenous child and family services.

The act was the result of extensive engagement with first nations, Inuit and Métis, treaty nations, self-governing first nations, provincial and territorial governments, and those with lived experience, including elders, youth and women. It reaffirms the government’s commitment to advancing self-determination and eliminating existing disparities between indigenous and non-indigenous children and youth.

The act also lays out flexible pathways for indigenous governing bodies to exercise jurisdiction over child and family services at a pace they choose. Through the act’s legislative framework, they can move forward with their own service delivery models and laws and choose their own solutions for their children and families. It ensures indigenous children are cared for in the right way, with connections to their communities, cultures and languages. Furthermore, since January 1, 2020, every service provider, province or territory delivering child and family services to indigenous children and families will need to follow the minimum standards found in the act.

Bill C-5, an act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code regarding a national day for truth and reconciliation, was introduced by the Minister of Canadian Heritage on September 29, 2020. If passed, this bill will be an important step in responding to call to action number 80 by establishing the national day for truth and reconciliation on September 30 as a statutory holiday for federally regulated workers. This national day would honour survivors, their families and communities. It would also remind the public of the tragic and painful history and legacy of residential schools that remains a vital component of the reconciliation process.

The Government of Canada continues to work closely with partners to address the remaining calls to action.

In June 2019, the government received the final report from the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, entitled “Reclaiming Power and Place”. It responded to call to action number 41, which called for the launch of a public inquiry into the disproportionate victimization of indigenous women and girls.

Furthermore, the Government of Canada is committed to gender equality and reconciliation with indigenous peoples, and has eliminated all the remaining sex-based inequalities in the Indian Act registration provisions, which go back to its inception 150 years ago. We committed to eliminating all sex-based discrimination in the Indian Act registration, and we delivered on that promise.

Bringing Bill S-3 into force also responds to the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls calls to justice and provides justice to women and their descendants, who fought for these changes for decades. We will continue with partners and other levels of government to respond to the findings of the national inquiry and to this national tragedy.

In closing, I reiterate that the government is determined to address the historical, colonial racism and injustice of yesterday, just as we are determined to root out and expose the racism of today. As Canadians have seen all too clearly during this difficult time, racism, both systemic and social, continues to be all too prevalent in our country. It must not and cannot be tolerated, for that, too, is part of the healing process, just as this bill is part of the healing process.

This bill represents progress on the shared path to healing and reconciliation. It responds to concerns expressed in the final report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. It points the way to a more inclusive Canada. Moreover, by amending the oath of citizenship, it represents greater awareness and answers call to action 94.

I am pleased to offer my full support of the bill before us.

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleagues. I am sure my colleague from Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou will be pleased to be able to speak.

Today, I will be speaking to Bill C-8. Although part of my speech will focus on the substance of the bill, I would also like to talk a little bit about how the bill was introduced and debated, both during this Parliament and the previous one.

To begin, I will give a bit of not so ancient history about the government's desire to modify the oath of citizenship. This is not the first time that this bill has come before the House.

The changes to the citizenship oath, as set out in Bill C-8, were first introduced in Bill C-99 during the previous Parliament, the 42nd Parliament. That bill was introduced on May 28, 2019, shortly before the House closed down. Since Parliament was not set to come back until after the October 2019 election, it was reasonable to expect the bill to die on the Order Paper, which is exactly what happened.

Subsequently, a second version was introduced as Bill C-6 in the first session of the 43rd Parliament. Since the bill was being tabled at the start of the session this time, there was hope that it would not die on the Order Paper. As the ways of the House of Commons and the government are as impenetrable as prorogation is apparently inevitable, Bill C-6 died a premature death.

However, Bill C-6 did get one hour of debate. To ensure that it did not die in vain, I will provide a summary of the key points of said debate.

First, the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship stated that in preparing the bill, his department had consulted the Assembly of First Nations, the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, the Métis National Council and the Land Claims Agreements Coalition, an organization that represents indigenous parties in Canada that are signatories to the 24 modern treaties. These consultations had begun in 2016.

Second, to justify the fact that the wording of the oath in the bill was different from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada's call to action number 94, the minister said that the parties consulted did not agree on wording. The department therefore chose to go with wording that better reflected the experience of first nations, Métis and Inuit peoples.

Lastly, the minister clearly stated the intent of the bill, saying:

The purpose of this bill is twofold. First, our goal is to ensure that new Canadians recognize indigenous peoples' significant contributions to Canada. The government is also reaffirming its commitment to reconciliation and a renewed relationship with indigenous peoples.

Based on how the bill has been managed over time, I do not think the government is in much of a rush to implement the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. The consultations with first nations, Métis and Inuit peoples began in 2016, so it is a little surprising that the government did not introduce the first version of this bill for first reading until May 2019 and that it chose to do so at the end of the Parliament.

Although the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada's report was tabled in June 2015, little has been done so far. Just 10 of the 94 calls to action have been implemented. It makes us wonder how willing the government is to take action on this matter. To ensure that the implementation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada's report is not just a cosmetic exercise, we must remember that even though every call to action is necessary, each individual call is not enough if it is implemented on its own.

If this is not due to a lack of haste and willingness on the government's part, we at least have to question the government's efficiency. For instance, why not graft the amendment of the oath of allegiance onto Bill C-5 regarding a national day for truth and reconciliation, the bill we just debated and passed at second reading earlier today?

Why did the government not propose amending the oath of allegiance in the 42nd Parliament, as part of Bill C-6, which also amended the Citizenship Act?

If a separate bill is required to implement each of the remaining calls to action, then we have a long way to go. We have every right to ask ourselves the following question: By addressing each call to action through a separate piece of legislation, in addition to rehashing them, is that also the government's way of trying to cover up the fact that its legislative agenda is pretty meagre, to say the least?

In short, either the government is not being very convincing when it says that first nations issues are a priority, or it is being not terribly effective or deliberately ineffective in order to hide another defect, that is, its legislative laziness.

That concludes the editorial part of my speech, and I will now turn to the substance of the bill.

It should come as no surprise that the Bloc plans to vote in favour of the bill. The Bloc Québécois has already made it very clear that we want to be an ally to first nations. In that regard, it is only natural that we support the implementation of one of the recommendations from the report of Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada.

As I already mentioned, even though each individual call is not enough when implemented on its own, every call to action is necessary, and I intend to vote in favour of a bill to implement this one.

Amending the oath of citizenship to include a promise to recognize the rights of first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples is a step in the right direction toward reconciliation with indigenous peoples. First nations peoples are absolutely right to ask for a reference to indigenous rights in the oath.

Obviously, the Bloc Québécois supports a nation-to-nation approach. That is the approach that Quebec will take when it declares independence. Indigenous peoples will be equal founding peoples with us when we create the new country of Quebec.

In the meantime, we hope that this new version of the oath will raise newcomers' awareness of the reality of first nations and their history, but also their new country's shameful treatment of first nations in the past. This is an opportunity to open a dialogue between newcomers and first nations. They will be able to speak to each other as equal citizens so newcomers can learn more about not only the history of first nations, but also their contribution to society.

To prevent history from repeating itself, as it sometimes tends to do, we hope this knowledge of the past will better prepare us for the future.

I personally hope the government will ramp up its reconciliation efforts. If it does, it can count on the Bloc Québécois' steadfast support.

Bills of Exchange Act

[The Speaker, Anthony Rota]

Pursuant to order made on Wednesday, September 23, the House will now proceed to the taking of the deferred recorded division on the motion at the second reading stage of Bill C-5.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

moved that Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code (National Day for Truth and Reconciliation), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Madam Speaker, it is my honour to be speaking virtually from Toronto, but in the House of Commons, on Bill C-5. This is an important piece of legislation on the path to reconciliation, which I firmly believe will help in shaping a better future.

I want to note, first of all, that when I speak from my riding of Parkdale—High Park, I am located on the traditional territory of the Haudenosaunee, the Huron-Wendat, the Anishinabe and, most recently, the Mississaugas of the Credit. I would also like to say meegwetch, which means “thank you” in Algonquin, for giving me the chance to speak before the chamber on this important topic, acknowledging that the parliamentary precinct where you are, Madam Speaker, is on unceded Algonquin territory.

Before beginning, I also want to acknowledge the important work done on this initiative by former NDP member of Parliament, Georgina Jolibois, who presented this bill in the 42nd Parliament. At that time, during debate, she said:

This bill will not solve the housing crisis indigenous people live through and it will not fix the overrepresentation of indigenous children in foster care and it will not close the education gap that leaves indigenous children behind.

However, it will give Canadians the opportunity to fully understand why those problems exist.

That is a very succinct and sound analysis of the situation and also of the importance of the bill. I thank her for her advocacy during the 42nd Parliament.

We have heard during debate on this bill about the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, the TRC. We know it released its final report in 2015 and that the Liberal government under the Prime Minister accepted the conclusions of the TRC. This in-depth study of Canada's history was mainly looking at the legacy of the residential school system. There were 94 calls to action, of which we have heard about many. Bill C-5 will address, in particular, call to action number 80, which states:

Bill C-5 will address, in particular, call to action number 80, which states:

We call upon the federal government, in collaboration with Aboriginal peoples, to establish, as a statutory holiday, a National Day for Truth and Reconciliation to honour Survivors, their families, and communities, and ensure that public commemoration of the history and legacy of residential schools remains a vital component of the reconciliation process.

The relationship with indigenous peoples is a critical one and the implementation of this call to action is one step forward toward that reconciliation. Clearly, there is a long way to go, and we have heard about that from many speakers on this bill today and last week. Canada, indeed, has a poor history and track record when it comes to its relationship with indigenous persons. In a debate like the one we are having today, it is important to acknowledge mistakes from the past in order to build forward better.

We are all now well aware of the atrocities that happened in residential schools and their consequences, and I will touch on the point of education a little later. We are aware generally of the intergenerational impacts on survivors and their families. We are also aware of the consequences of the sixties scoop that took so many indigenous kids away from their families. Finally, we are aware of the ongoing systemic racism and discrimination that is still happening in Canada. We saw the heartbreaking video published by Joyce Echaquan during the last minutes of her life, mentioned by the previous speakers of the Bloc Québécois.

We know about the systemic racism being faced by Mi'kmaq fishers in Nova Scotia as we speak, fishers who dared to exercise their treaty right to fish for a moderate livelihood, as upheld in two Supreme Court decisions in the Marshall case 21 years earlier. The violence we have seen in Nova Scotia is never acceptable, and the systemic racism we have witnessed in Nova Scotia must be eliminated via leadership on the part of all parties, including law enforcement in Nova Scotia. That is why we need to move forward with all of the calls to action from the TRC. However, I want to focus now on call to action 80 and urge my colleagues to support this piece of legislation.

This piece of legislation talks about September 30 and we have heard about this in the context of Orange Shirt Day, the current moniker for September 30. Established in 2013, Orange Shirt Day helps raise awareness about the long-lasting impacts of residential schools and honours the resilience and courage of survivors, while focusing on the experiences of students at residential schools and, indeed, those who did not survive.

This day is based on the heartbreaking story of Phyllis Webstad, which remained, unfortunately, unknown to many Canadians. For those who are not aware of it, Phyllis was sent to the Mission school out west in 1973. Even though her family did not have a lot of money, her grandmother bought her a brand new outfit before she had to leave for her first day of school. Part of that outfit was a shiny new orange shirt. Her joy at attending school at the tender age of six did not last very long. When she arrived at the school, the authorities took away all of her possessions, including her clothes, and that brand new orange shirt was never returned.

I had the opportunity to meet Phyllis Webstad in the government lobby during the last Parliament and she talked to me about her story.

She also provided me with a copy of her book and inscribed it for my children, who at the time were about three and seven. They are now nine and six. What I have done since that time is read my kids that story periodically and educate them about this very basic concept. During this pandemic I can say that the anticipation my children had of returning to school was very high, but the notion of them being prevented from wearing something that I or my wife might have purchased for them really hit home as a visceral example of the injustice and unfairness of the residential school system.

I am glad my kids are learning about this, but the point is not just about Phyllis's book or my children. It is about all children and all of us, as Canadians, learning about this important story. We know that Phyllis, at the age of 27, started a healing journey. Since then she has been able to share her story, but that story needs to be shared widely. We also have to think about the unshared stories of those who did not come out of that Mission school, who never returned from residential school, or who never found their voice or had the courage to tell it the way Phyllis has. That is why this is such an important initiative.

I want to acknowledge that there are those who push the envelope on the part of reconciliation and indigenous awareness all the time. I am proud to call many of those my constituents in Parkdale—High Park. There are many people who are actively engaged at a local level, community by community, around this country with reconciliation. People speak to me about the pace of reconciliation and how it needs to be hastened. People in my riding speak to me about the legacy of residential schools. I have been heartened by the fact children at a very tender age in my riding are already learning about this in their classrooms. This is critical, because it is not learning I ever received in the 1970s or 1980s as a young student here in Toronto.

I am also heartened by the fact that people are aware of the territory we are on, here in Toronto; of the naming of streets, and how that was occasioned in places in and around High Park; of blanket exercises, and even of such things as the magnificent indigenous murals and art that decorate parts of my riding, including the beautiful mural by Philip Cote at the corner of Roncesvalles Avenue and Garden Avenue. While there are those who are aware in my community, throughout the city and throughout this country, there are still far too many people who are unaware. That is what this bill clearly seeks to address.

Let me talk a bit about education at this point.

To move forward on the path to reconciliation, it is imperative that we continue to educate our society on the issues facing first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples. As a government, we have a duty to ensure that Canadians are aware of the difficult history of indigenous peoples and the consequences of the trauma they have experienced. Statistics show that around half of Canadians have little to no knowledge of the residential schools and their impact.

That is why it is so important to create a national day for truth and reconciliation. By creating this day, we will help increase general knowledge about the first peoples and their history. These conversations need to take place, at home, among friends and among colleagues, to raise awareness about reconciliation.

I want to talk about my own education. I alluded to my own experience at elementary school as a young boy here in Toronto. I practised law prior to becoming a parliamentarian and did so for 15 years. I practised constitutional law. Obviously, that means I was at law school and then was engaged in practice.

While at law school I learned very little, almost nothing, about the residential school system. During my practice, I did not touch this area of law. It was generally understood at the time that aboriginal law, as it was then known, was quite complicated, complex and usually quite desperate in terms of leaving one feeling despondent that nothing was going to improve.

Upon entering life as a parliamentarian in 2017, I had the occasion of serving as the parliamentary secretary to the then minister of heritage, who at the time was charged with working with first nations, Inuit and Métis individuals to co-develop language protection legislation. She turned to me and asked if I would help her in this work. Originally, I was puzzled as to why the ask was put in and what I could contribute, but that ask has been quite pivotal to my understanding of this issue, my understanding of the broader cause of reconciliation, and my maturation as a parliamentarian.

What I learned as I led those consultations around the country, from coast to coast to coast, meeting with teachers, elders, academics, leaders, pupils and chiefs from first nations, Inuit and Métis communities, is how critical language is as a feature of reconciliation, and how critical it is to work on initiatives like this in a co-development model.

One study resonated with me, and I will repeat it now. We learned in British Columbia that those groups who have knowledge of their mother tongue, their own indigenous language, have a suicide rate six times lower than the provincial average. When the language was removed, it removed people's connection to their people, to their culture and their community. Suicide rates elevated sixfold, far outstripping the provincial average for non-indigenous people. That told me there is a clear link between restoring people's language and people's connection to their culture, their sense of self-esteem, their confidence and, indeed, suicidality rates. It is not far-fetched or hyperbole to say that these are literally life-and-death matters for indigenous people. This bill is more symbolic in nature, but it touches upon the same concept that we need to learn about history in the context of language. Residential schools contributed to erasing that language.

I raise the issue because the question has come up, in the context of this debate, of whether enough work is being done. Clearly, more work needs to be done, but I would say that passing the Indigenous Languages Act, passing child welfare legislation and eliminating over 80 boil water advisories are steps in the right direction.

Does more need to be done? Absolutely: not one of the 338 members of the House would dispute that. However, it is unfair to say that work has not been done since 2015.

I will say that Bill C-5, talks about call to action no. 80. In this bill, we recognize that indigenous people continue to face ongoing discrimination, as I mentioned at the very outset. Systemic racism continues to be a reality. We know that, in the past, indigenous communities have gone out on the streets to express their frustration and their desire for change. I am glad to see now that the rest of society is catching up: slowly, but it is catching up. We see solidarity with indigenous people voicing concerns about the Mi'kmaq and solidarity with indigenous persons voicing concerns about Joyce Echaquan. Non-indigenous people are awakening, and that is a good sign. The fact that parliamentarians are awakening is a critical sign and a necessary one. That solidarity is what this bill endeavours not just to capture but also to promote.

Bill C-5 is in line with some of our government's previous actions, such as an announcement in budget 2019 to provide $7 million, over two years, to communities across the country to commemorate the history and legacy of residential schools. By taking this step forward, we keep raising awareness across Canada of the trauma indigenous people have undergone and the intergenerational impacts of such trauma.

It is important that we recognize that it is not just about learning this history on one day, on September 30, but each and every day: that we think about it in terms of the practical work that we do as parliamentarians and, indeed, how we live our lives day to day as Canadians.

It is a common responsibility and a duty to remember this dark chapter in Canadian history and to ensure a better future for all people in this country. We owe it to indigenous peoples on this land. We owe it to the survivors of the residential school system. We owe it to those who never returned from the residential school system. We owe it to the parents from whom children were taken. We owe it also to the generations to come.

Having an open conversation about residential schools and the legacy of racism and colonialism, and the hardship and pain and violence that were endured, is difficult. It is painful. It is uncomfortable. However, we recognize that this is nothing compared with the actual experiences lived by indigenous people who went through these schools.

We are committed to doing what is right with respect to Bill C-5, even though that is not an easy path. I hope all members, in a strong spirit of non-partisanship, will support this bill and recognize its importance, so that September 30, 2021, can be the first national day for truth and reconciliation in Canada. Learning our history and moving forward should never be an issue that divides on party lines.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Joliette.

Today, I want to begin my speech by extending heartfelt greetings to the Innu and Naskapi communities in Nitassinan on the North shore, which is in my riding.

Essipit, Pessamit, Uashat Mak Mani-utenam, Ekuanitshit, Nutashkuan, Unamen Shipu, Pakua Shipi, Matimekosh, Kawawashikamach: It is for them and for all indigenous communities that I rise today in the House to talk about Orange Shirt Day and Bill C-5, which would create a holiday of commemoration and celebration of indigenous first nations and their culture.

I would like to speak to them in their language, Innu.

[Member spoke in Innu]

When we think about the residential schools, it is impossible to really understand or experience what these first nations peoples went through and, I would add, what they are still going through.

What we can do, and what we should humbly do, is to listen, to try to understand and to work toward reconciliation. I listened with respect, friendship and trust and I felt and still feel sick. I understood and I am still listening to what the first nations have to say and what they want for our common good.

Canada's efforts to wipe out indigenous peoples would not succeed, but the first nations paid dearly for it. Children were abused and kidnapped. Children disappeared to never be seen again. Children were stripped of everything: their language, culture, land, family and future.

We must not mince words. Canada's objective in the past was to eliminate indigenous peoples. Today, in the chamber where members voted on the Indian Act, we are taking the time to speak in an attempt to repair the horrors of the past, the effects of which are still felt to this day.

We must certainly learn from the past, but it is important to put into practice what we have learned about the Indian Act, residential schools and missing and murdered indigenous women and girls. Orange Shirt Day is a step in the right direction, but everyone agrees that we need to do much more.

It is much easier to understand when we take the time to listen. Today I decided to give a great woman and constituent of mine, Marjolaine Tshernish, an opportunity to speak. She is the executive director of the Institut Tshakapesh, which advocates for Inuit culture and identity. Here is what she has to say:

Let us remember in order to draw closer together. On September 30 of every year, Canadians across the country participate in Orange Shirt Day. The Innu nation in particular, most of whom live on the North Shore, commemorate Orange Shirt Day to show support for every individual whose life was and may still be affected by residential schools.

It is a day to reaffirm to survivors and all those affected by residential schools that they are important and that their experiences are respectfully acknowledged.

Every child counts, even if they are now an adult. We recognize and honour all residential school survivors and all those who never came home.

There are as many stories as there are children who were sent to residential schools, children who were taken away from their families, their communities and their culture, people who are still in search of their lost identity and pride. Imagine, as a parent, having your child taken away from you. Imagine, as a child, being forced to learn a language and live in a culture different from one's own, finding oneself in a whole other world. Imagine if they had resisted.

Some families never saw their children again, do not even know what became of them and cannot find them. They do not know how they died. There is no greater pain than the loss of a child. Imagine.

Need I remind the House that it has been proven that having one or more parent who attended Indian residential school increases one's likelihood of experiencing childhood trauma or spousal abuse?

Intergenerational transmission has also been well documented. Imagine the repercussions: having to reclaim your past; living your present while constantly struggling; having difficulty envisioning your future because everything has been taken away from you; having to defend your own identity; fighting prejudice; being subjected to looks, comments, actions or inactions; suffering violence; and being asked to be content with resilience and patience.

We must remember in order to understand not why it happened, but rather the needs that exist and why there has been so much suffering since. We must remember in order to share the story and the need to become oneself and have a common future that respects everyone. We must remember to respect everyone's desire to live fully and to understand. We must remember to support the right of all children and all individuals to have a dignified and serene life and to look to the future with as much optimism as possible. We must remember to share and to come together. That is the way it should be.

I stand in solidarity with all the families and friends of the Innu nation. I hope we will all have the privilege of remembering, learning and making connections, one day and one opportunity at a time, and especially to add all sorts of colours in our lives.

[Member spoke in Innu]

I wish to thank Ms. Tshernich whose message I am conveying in my own words. I would like to say that, when it comes to respecting first nations and working with them in their best interest, the Bloc Québécois will naturally be an ally.

My Innu and Naskapi friends, I respect and admire you. Know that I will always be by your side to march from history to truth, from truth to reconciliation, and reconciliation to the vitality of first nations. We must never forget. We owe it to our children, to our nations, to humanity.

[Member spoke in Innu]

[Anthony Housefather, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise to speak in support of Bill C-5 to amend certain acts to add a new holiday, namely national day for truth and reconciliation.

Bill C-5 addresses a very important issue that every member of the House takes very seriously. The residential school system is a national tragedy, a stain of colonialism upheld by systemic racism. It is important to never forget this tragic part of our history and the legacy of residential schools. For that we must acknowledge the past and tell Canadians about the experiences indigenous children had in these schools.

As part of the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission documented the experience of survivors, families, communities and those personally affected by residential schools. The commission presented a final report in 2015 with 94 calls to action to redress the legacy of residential schools and advance the process of reconciliation.

I want to read call to action 80. It states, “We call upon the federal government, in collaboration with Aboriginal peoples, to establish, as a statutory holiday, a National Day for Truth and Reconciliation to honour Survivors, their families, and communities, and ensure that public commemoration of the history and legacy of residential schools remains a vital component of the reconciliation process.”

Although Bill C-5 seeks to address call to action 80, the Government of Canada remains committed to fully implementing the 76 calls to action that fall under federal responsibility.

As part of that commitment, the Government of Canada took an important step toward responding to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's call to action 80 by introducing a bill to create a national day for truth and reconciliation that, for federally regulated workers, will be observed as a statutory holiday on September 30.

September 30 was chosen because it is also Orange Shirt Day. Orange Shirt Day is about commemorating the legacy of residential schools and promoting reconciliation.

When it comes to such an important issue, creating a day for truth and reconciliation seems like a small gesture, but I would suggest it is an important one. It is important because there are too many people and too many communities in this country that continue to suffer from the injustice and stigma of racism.

During the current pandemic, we have seen the disproportionate impact of this crisis on racialized people, indigenous people, immigrant communities and other vulnerable Canadians.

Recently, we have seen racial injustice right before our eyes across the border. The killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis by police shocked many of us. We also saw the killing of Breonna Taylor in Louisville, Rayshard Brooks in Atlanta, Daniel Prude in Rochester, and we cannot forget what happened a few years ago to Eric Garner in New York. Those brutal killings of Black people by police have shocked our consciousness.

Canadians cannot say that everything is fine in Canada. In my own province of Quebec in the Joliette hospital, we saw the death of Joyce Echaquan, an indigenous woman who livestreamed racist slurs, neglect and abuse while she was in the care of nurses and the staff of the hospital. This was in my own province.

This is a tragic example of the racism and intolerance indigenous peoples continue to face in Canada. It was heartbreaking and beyond unconscionable. If anyone dares to say that systemic racism does not exist in Canada, they should be ashamed.

How can we create a climate of trust, respect and mutual understanding?

We need to take time to acknowledge the oppression and discrimination that indigenous peoples experienced in Canada for centuries and to reflect on the challenges faced by indigenous communities.

The national day for truth and reconciliation will provide federally regulated workers with the opportunity to reflect on this issue and participate in educational and commemorative activities.

In 2018-19, the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage studied private member's Bill C-369, by our former colleague, Georgina Jolibois, which sought to make a national indigenous peoples statutory holiday. Witnesses from indigenous organizations were in favour of the creation of a statutory holiday to commemorate the history and legacy of residential schools.

Now let me address the legislation itself, which would amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and part 3 of the Canada Labour Code. Part 3 of the Canada Labour Code would be amended to establish the national day for truth and reconciliation as a holiday. It would provide federally regulated private sector employees with a paid holiday. It is on this portion of the bill that I focus.

Part 3 of the code covers approximately 955,000 employees and 18,500 employers. It contains provisions setting out minimum labour standards for workplaces in the federally regulated private sector and in most federal crown corporations. It includes important industries such as interprovincial and international transportation, banking, telecommunications and broadcasting, as well as some government activities on first nation reserves.

Part 3 does not apply to the federal public service, the Canadian Armed Forces, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police or parliamentary employees, but due to existing provisions in all federal public service collective agreements, as well as past practices to extend similar terms of employment to the RCMP and the Canadian Armed Forces, employees in the federal public sector would also be entitled to the new federal holiday.

Of course, as we all know, the Government of Canada does not have the constitutional authority to impose a statutory holiday for those employees who fall within the authority of provincial governments. That said, I would like to say a few words about the implementation of this new holiday.

A national day for truth and reconciliation would give over 955,000 federally regulated private sector employees an opportunity to participate in educational and commemorative activities related to residential schools and reconciliation. The day would also focus on the experiences of first nations, Inuit and Métis men and women, including those who work in federally regulated private sector organizations and in the federal public service.

The Government of Canada remains committed to reconciliation and to fully implementing the 76 calls to action that fall under federal responsibility.

Reconciliation remains a priority for us and the introduction of Bill C-5 is a step forward in the healing process for survivors who were harmed under the federally operated residential school system. Let us work together toward a renewed partnership built on respect, dialogue and recognition of rights.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code (National Day for Truth and Reconciliation), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Madam Speaker, I am honoured to be here today to speak in support of Bill C-5. I wish to honour the important work of sister Georgina Jolibois that initiated the development of the bill, and to commend the government's effort to ensure that this legislation is realized. This is a critical piece of legislation: a small piece of justice as we begin to move forward learning about the true history of Canada. These are stories I also possess as somebody who has had to work through her own intergenerational impacts.

My mother was from Wood Mountain Lakota First Nation in Treaty 4 territory in the province of Saskatchewan. She was a street kid who ended up in child welfare after my grandmother abandoned her and her younger brother in a motel room in Moose Jaw when she was five years of age. Due to the fact she was the eldest child, my grandmother left her in charge of her younger brother with specific instructions to ration a loaf of bread and a jar of peanut butter and jam for the five days she had to leave them in search of money.

There were no supports for indigenous women in the 1930s. There were no social safety nets. There were no human rights. Sexism was rampant and racism was fierce. My grandmother had no one to turn to, especially as an indigenous single mother, so she left her children. I remember my mother telling me how she, along with my uncle, gleefully ate the loaf of bread, resulting in a complete depletion of their food ration in only one day. Hungry, scared and alone, my mother decided to contact the Children's Aid Society. At five years old, my mother had become street savvy and, having no other relatives to turn to at the time, contacted the Children's Aid Society. My mother and her brother needed to eat. They were hungry.

It is beyond most people's imaginations, especially those persons who have been privileged with human rights, how a mother could leave her young children in a motel room. It is beyond the minds of many privileged persons to genuinely appreciate what events in my mother's life led her, at five years of age, to understand how to deal with her and her brother's hunger. My mother knew who to call, and how to work with the bureaucratic child welfare system, to get fed. She had learned to survive just like my grandmother, who had absolutely no resources or supports to assist her. I am sure my grandmother's struggle rang so loudly that she could not hear the musical and healing reverberations of the jingle dress. The jingles were too faint and muzzled to hear above the noise of the struggle she faced every day. There was no time for healing or inner reflection. She was hungry and alone while the Canadian government wilfully perpetrated acts of genocide, making it impossible for her to survive.

My grandmother's choice to leave her young children in a room did not stem from a lack of love. My grandmother started living on the streets as a child and eventually became an alcoholic in adult life as a way to deal with the violent genocide she experienced as an indigenous child and then woman. Dislocated from her family for reasons directly impacted by the Indian Act of 1876 and the institutional disruptions to my family, including residential schools and the child welfare system, she did not have anyone or anywhere she could turn to. She was not even considered a human being by the Canadian government under the 1876 Indian Act, which defined a person as any individual other than an Indian. This violent colonial history has often been invisible to settler populations, due to the masterful way governments have hidden their dirty little secrets of genocide. This has supported a level of cognitive dissonance in Canada that has paved the way forward for ongoing human rights violations against indigenous peoples.

It is not surprising that many indigenous people suffer from unresolved colonial trauma today, and continue to suffer as a result of the wilful human rights violations perpetrated by governments. One only has to look at the number of indigenous children currently in care, more now than at the height of residential schools, to see the long-term impacts that violating indigenous people's fundamental indigenous human rights has had on indigenous nations.

The contemporary child welfare system, or what I like to refer to as the dumping ground of society, is there so that no one has to see the legacy of cultural, social and family disruption that has resulted from colonization.

Understanding the impacts of colonialism in Canada is imperative if we are going to move forward in a manner that honours all persons. Going back in our shared history and reflecting on historical disruptions to better understand why things are the way they are today is imperative. For Canada, it is about exposing truth and working through all the cognitive dissonance that keeps it sick. For families and communities that have experienced genocide, it is about relearning how to be together as families, communities and nations. This is the journey I have had to follow while trying to understand my grandmother's reasons for causing such pain towards my mother, whom I love dearly. This has been a very difficult journey for me.

As a result of my family history, for most of my younger years, I grew up without extended family. In fact, we were so devoid of family connections that my parents asked a close friend if we could call him “Uncle” Larry. He was not a biological uncle; however, they wanted us to experience having family outside of our own immediate unit. I remember how excited I was to meet Uncle Larry. It was my first time ever being able to call somebody “uncle”, and I remember talking about my Uncle Larry to my friends. Finally, I was able to participate in playground conversations about weekend family engagements with extended family members. I was not close to Larry. In fact, if I saw him today, I would not even know what he looked like. I do not even remember his last name, but our relationship made me feel normal.

I was pretty much without extended relations until my mother's side of the family had a reunion when I was 13 years old, and I was reunited with my aunts, uncles and cousins who had been separated by child welfare. It felt like I had known my relatives my whole life. Our instant closeness flowed through our blood members' shared stories of resistance, struggle, survival, hope and pride in our ancestors.

We are the descendants of Sitting Bull: one of the most revered leaders in North America. Our nation's history, in fact, has become a Hollywood story, often romanticized in movies like Dances with Wolves, which chose a Caucasian woman to star as the leading Lakota lady. Painted in brown theatrical makeup, she was swept off her feet by the white soldier who was part of the U.S. army. They fell in love, and she willingly chose to leave her family to build a new life with this heroic, white settler. I vividly remember that, for at least two years after Dances with Wolves was released, any time I mentioned I was Lakota, I would frequently hear, “Wow, Dances with Wolves.” That comment would make me nauseous, because it epitomized the myth of the kind white settler who lived side by side with indigenous peoples resulting in a respectful, lasting and loving relationship: the great colonial lie.

This myth makes a mockery of the violent colonial attacks against the Lakota Nation, and contradicts historical accounts passed down orally by my ancestors who settled in Wood Mountain after the Battle of Little Bighorn. This battle between the U.S. army and indigenous nations, including the Cheyenne Nation, occurred as an act of resistance to the wrongful dispossession of our ancestral lands. Led by Chief Sitting Bull, indigenous people bravely fought to defend our lands from the U.S. army. Under the barbaric racism and violent leadership of General George Custer, white settlers attempted to encroach on our territory.

Although I often hear about the sad death of Custer during this battle in history books, rarely do I hear any discussion about the many women and children who were violently murdered while the army attempted to attack one of our camps. To me, Custer symbolizes the greedy white settler with a compromised moral character who stole our lands.

Our story was not of great white saviours, but of a massacre led by the racist American army under the leadership of the violent and savage General George Custer. Canada has now celebrated over 150 years as a nation on stolen indigenous lands and talk about reconciliation with indigenous peoples seems to be the new trend.

However, there is no reconciliation in the absence of justice and it is becoming clearer that the present Liberal government is unwilling to move beyond mere rhetoric. I have become increasingly annoyed each day watching the news, seeing my indigenous brothers and sisters fighting for justice without action by current governments. Who really needs to reconcile?

In the case of the Lakota nation, our only goal was to stay on our lands, maintain our families and our culture. We did what any community members would do if a group of people came onto their land, forcing them to move without cause. Of course, their first action would be to defend their lands. Moreover, if the same party continued to violate their human rights, tensions would continue to rise, resulting in a need to take action. That is exactly what we did.

The experience of my beautiful Lakota nation was violent, exploitive and marked by grotesque violence against our women and girls by our colonizers. Great leaders such as Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull, our women and girls, children, grandmothers and grandfathers were murdered or forced to flee our ancestral land to make room for the settlers. We were forced off the very lands we had lived on since time immemorial. Our beautiful way of life was disrupted by violent colonialism, and it is not over.

In Canada, governments continue to violate our ways of life with wilful and violent acts with almost a complete disregard for our fundamental indigenous human rights. That was the kind of violent colonialism my grandmother experienced throughout her lifetime. She was born into colonial violence and as a result never lived a life where she was honoured as a life-giver and a human being. Unlike the main character of Dances with Wolves, she could not wash the brown off her skin and enjoy all the privileges that one's pigment can offer. She had to endure the violent racism that was perpetrated against her every day. In spite of all her barriers, she survived. It may not have been a story of My Fair Lady, but she survived. That does not speak of her weakness, but to her resilience as an indigenous woman finding her way through daily human rights violations.

My grandmother was a human being, deserving to be loved and to experience joy. This was made impossible through the insidious violence and racism enacted by the Indian Act of 1876. She did not have many choices. When people are stripped of the basic necessities they require to have joy such as housing, food and safety, growing into a whole person becomes difficult. That was also true for my grandmother, whose life journey was defined by the systemic impoverishment of indigenous people that began with the dispossession of our lands. Based on justifications rooted in the doctrine of discovery, they deny our right to self-determination and continued to wilfully violate our fundamental indigenous human rights. It is exactly that belief, enforced through colonial policies and legislation, that left my grandmother homeless.

I only met my grandmother twice. The last time was when my mother welcomed her to stay in our home prior to a lung operation that would end her life. My mother, in spite of being abandoned in a hotel room, took her mother home. She shared love, compassion, laughter and care with my grandmother in her final days, in spite of her own struggles that resulted from her being a child in care. My mother's kindness came from a place of non-judgment, a place of love and a place of compassion.

I remember asking my mom how she could take my grandmother into her home when she had abandoned my mother as a child. She responded by saying her mother was pretty much on her own when she was 12. She was completely alone in the world. She had no rights and no way to support herself. There were no social safety nets at the time and she did the very best she could with the tools she had.

That was the most powerful teaching of forgiveness that I have ever heard in my life. As I sit here and think of my grandmother, the very thought of the isolation she must have felt brings me to tears. How sad that due to racist, paternalistic and misogynistic policies, my grandmother was never given an equal chance to have joy. Instead, her life consisted of finding ways to survive the obstacles of human rights violations that continue to be enforced under the Indian Act and within Canadian policies.

My mother deeply understood the realities that my grandmother faced and instead of becoming resentful, she focused on the love her mother demonstrated while she was pregnant with her. Although my grandmother was an alcoholic, she sacrificed her addiction to alcohol to support a healthy pregnancy with my mom. I remember my mom saying that in spite of the fact that my grandmother was an alcoholic, “she abstained from alcohol while she was pregnant with me, gifting me with all the physical tools I needed in life to succeed and it was for that reason that I would always love her”. My mother understood that as a result of colonizations, relationships became messy and that ethical decisions extended beyond an individual's choices because injustice left individuals without choices.

I often wonder if people could physically see what a heart looks like when it has been broken or wounded. Maybe it would encourage them to be a little kinder, a little more gentle, a little less judgmental, a little more loving and a little less hurtful. Unfortunately, the life of my grandmother reminds me that when we completely dehumanize a person, we can begin to justify unthinkable acts and are able to turn a blind eye to human suffering.

I think I carry some of her pain and sorrow in my blood memory. It is the kind of intergenerational trauma that brings on feelings of being unlovable and unworthy of joy. These are the words we learned in Canadian institutions that tried to assimilate us. I still hear those voices in my mind and heart at times, but I have found ways to overpower those voices. It is the resiliency I inherited from my ancestors, the kind of resiliency that was emulated through my mother's spirit.

Unlike the trauma that overtook my grandmother's life, my mother managed to overcome great obstacles. She became a statistical miracle and because of that, I was afforded the good life. Can anyone imagine living through the trials and tribulations that my mother did and making it out sane? This was in spite of the genocide and the gross human rights violations she experienced early on in life. She was one of the first indigenous psychiatric nurses in Saskatchewan, an awarding-winning researcher, a scholar and a social justice warrior who assisted in changing child welfare legislation to support former children in care and rights for persons experiencing mental health issues. My mother was a woman of beauty and grace.

I honour my mother and grandmother today. It is a day, one day of remembrance, one day to honour. We need that day, as do thousands and thousands of Canadians who are open to learning about Canada's true and consistently evolving history in our relationship with indigenous peoples. There is no reconciliation in the absence of justice, so I am here to state loudly that we need to honour this little piece of justice.

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

Bill C-5 is really exciting and interesting. As we know, it resonates with many Quebeckers because they have always been close to indigenous peoples and they want to maintain that closeness.

When we talk about the right to redress in the bill, we are talking about the right of victims to get redress for the harm that was done to them. This finds its expression in the duty that the state has to satisfy the victims by restoring their past status, fairly compensating them for the harm done or offering them the opportunity for rehabilitation.

What does the government have to say about the Bloc Québécois motion? That is exactly what we are asking for, redress and an apology from the federal government.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, virtually since the leader of the Liberal Party became the leader of the Liberal Party, one of the strongest senses of commitment that I have seen in the leader, who is now Prime Minister, is his sense of commitment toward indigenous peoples and wanting to establish that nation-to-nation relationship.

If we take a look at what we have been able to accomplish as a government over the last number of years, we can all share in recognizing the valuable contributions as legislators that members on all sides of the House have made on this very important issue. Members would be very familiar with the calls to action in regard to reconciliation. There are 94 calls to action asking for governments and other agencies to do what they can to move towards reconciliation.

The bill we are debating today, and have debated for a couple of days, is just that. It is one of the calls for reconciliation. I would encourage all members to seriously consider supporting this legislation.

I have had the opportunity and am very proud to represent Winnipeg North. Winnipeg North has an interesting, diverse makeup of people. One of the largest and growing communities is the indigenous community in Winnipeg North. I estimate it is probably somewhere in the area of 18% to 22%, with some areas of the riding having a higher percentage than others. I like to think that, going forward as a community, Winnipeg North wants and should push for and encourage, wherever we can, reconciliation, by taking the actions necessary to ensure that there is more harmony within our society.

We have such a wonderful, diverse community. For me personally, I think the bill we are debating today will go a long way in being helpful. It does not matter which member of Parliament or which area of the country we represent, the community of Canada will in fact benefit from the recognition of this statutory holiday.

I have taken the initiative, and it is not too often I do this, to quote something from constituents in regard to this specific bill. I have two quotes I would like to share with members. These are from constituents with indigenous backgrounds. I indicated that I would be debating Bill C-5, the need for a statutory holiday, and I asked for their thoughts. I would like to share a couple of the comments I received.

This comes from one of my constituents, who says, “As a parent, we teach our children about the tooth fairy and Santa, and as children, they eventually outgrow these make-believe images and beliefs. Contrasted to racism and some Canadians' lack of understanding of residential schools, Indian-based schools and treaties negotiated with my peoples, which are the cornerstone of our nation's legal foundation, many Canadian children are growing up with a false or make-believe history, which contributes to the latter intolerance we see in hospital beds in Quebec and at the fishermen's wharf in Nova Scotia. Education is the only solution and is needed to create understanding. Understanding is the sunlight where racism and falsehoods die. September 30 should be a day when all Canadian people reflect on our true history and the hardships that first peoples continue to face, in a day focused on culture, language, history, understanding, truth and the united path of reconciliation.”

Another constituent, in this case a mother of indigenous background, sent me this. She says, “As stated in the TRC report, reconciliation must inspire indigenous and non-indigenous peoples to transform Canadian society so that our children and grandchildren can live together in dignity, peace and prosperity on these lands we now share. Imagine the opportunities for families, individuals and businesses to grow their understanding and make progress towards reconciliation, to pass this down from one generation to the next. Imagine the events that would be hosted in communities from coast to coast to coast. Reconciliation is every Canadian's responsibility. It is not enough to leave this to certain sectors like education in school. As a government, as individuals, as Canadians, we need to honour the spirit and intent of the call to action number 80 and establish a statutory holiday and enact a day of truth and reconciliation in partnership with indigenous people.

I have a very short quote from her 12-year old daughter who, by the way, had a grandmother who actually went to a residential school. She said, “It would be so much better if everyone could participate instead of just having Orange Shirt Day at school.”

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada conducted an extensive public review in terms of what we needed to do during this era of Canada's history where it is really important for us to try to make amends. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission came up with 94 recommendations. If we look at all 94 recommendations, 76 of those fall, at least in part, under federal responsibility. What we have seen over the last number of years is a government, with support from other parties, dealing with issues such as language and child welfare. We have seen budgetary measures to support the principles of reconciliation in different forms.

The call to action we are talking about today is number 80. Allow me to quote from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action:

We call upon the federal government, in collaboration with Aboriginal peoples, to establish, as a statutory holiday, a National Day for Truth and Reconciliation to honour Survivors, their families, and communities, and ensure that public commemoration of the history and legacy of residential schools remains a vital component of the reconciliation process.

Whether it is my constituents or the calls to action, these are good reasons for members to recognize the value. We have seen that in different forms. It was not that long ago that I was talking about recognizing Filipino Heritage Month in June, or standing in the chamber calling for members of Parliament to recognize a Sikh Heritage Month in April. On many occasions I have stood in my place and talked about the importance of heritage and the designation of days, weeks or months.

We are saying here that we need to have a statutory holiday to recognize the true value of what has taken place in order for us to move forward and be part of reconciliation in a positive way, to reflect on the many speeches in which we talk about Canada's great diversity, and to understand and appreciate the value of what Bill C-5 is offering all of us. Today is an opportunity to send a strong, powerful message to our indigenous peoples.

The House resumed from October 23 consideration of the motion that Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code (National Day for Truth and Reconciliation), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Business of the House

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I am equally happy, pleased and enthusiastic to answer my colleague's question.

This week, we wrapped up debate at second reading of Bill C-6, on conversion therapy, and Bill C-7, on medical assistance in dying. I would like to thank the opposition members for their co-operation on these bills.

This afternoon, we are continuing the debate on the Bloc Québécois opposition motion.

Tomorrow, we will resume debate at second reading of Bill C-5, regarding a national day for truth and reconciliation.

On Monday, we will start second reading debate of Bill C-8 concerning the implementation of Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action 94.

I would like to inform the House that Tuesday, November 3 and Thursday, November 5 shall be allotted days.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-5, an act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code (National Day for Truth and Reconciliation), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Bills of Exchange Act

[Jenica Atwin, Green, Fredericton, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to acknowledge the land on which I speak today in Fredericton, which is Wolastoqiyik territory, unceded, unsurrendered land operating under the Peace and Friendship Treaties. We cannot just say these words. We must have intention and action behind them, and I implore each member of the House to do just that.

It is an honour to have the opportunity to speak to Bill C-5, and I wish to thank my Conservative colleague for sharing his time with me today.

The issue of meaningful reconciliation is an issue that is important to my constituents and to people across this country, and it is particularly close to my heart for many, many reasons. The first is as a mom of indigenous children. My boys are Wolastoqiyik. They are being raised with an appreciation for their identity, language and culture.

My oldest son is in grade 3 in a public school that has made incredible efforts to not only include indigenous knowledge, history and culture but to truly celebrate it. It is front and centre at every school assembly and event, and in daily routines. There are integrated educational opportunities for all children, and there are unique learning opportunities for indigenous youth through permanent staff employed by our local first nation community, who work at the school every day in innovative and exciting ways.

My youngest son is three years old and attends an on-reserve head start program at the Welamukotuk Early Learning Centre. He receives instruction from his family members and some of our close friends. He is surrounded with love and care and dedication to culturally responsive education. Incidentally, his first day of school was on Orange Shirt Day last year. I could not help but think of the beauty of coming full circle like that, and the symbolic significance that his education will begin and proceed so differently than so many of his ancestors'.

My oldest child looks more like me, with Celtic roots and light skin, although he is proud to be indigenous. My youngest looks more like my husband, with dark skin and dark eyes. My prayer for him is always that he will not grow to experience racism and discrimination because of who he is. I pray he will not feel like he does not belong or that he is not represented in the curriculum he learns throughout his educational journey, as my husband has felt.

Another reason Bill C-5 is so important to me is due to my passion for teaching. My work in the public school system in New Brunswick was on behalf of first nation communities. I worked to include accurate history and improve access to language and cultural experiences for indigenous students, as well as to advocate for institutional reforms for enhanced social justice equity in our provincial education system.

I have seen the many ways our system continues to fail indigenous students. I have also seen the incredible resilience of indigenous students, and I have had the honour to witness inspiring growth, activism and leadership. This generation of youth is ready to tackle our biggest challenges and to lead Canada into a brighter future as the fastest-growing demographic. The seven generations concept comes to mind and reinforces the idea that we bring with us the lessons and experiences of our ancestors and that both trauma and healing pass through the bloodline to the present day, that the decisions we make today should result in a sustainable and equitable world seven generations into the future.

This brings me to our responsibility as Canadians. Orange Shirt Day, in an educational context, is an opportunity to learn, honour and acknowledge the calls to action, and to create space for indigenous elders and survivors to share their truth and feel our love and appreciation. Schools, businesses and organizations across New Brunswick proudly wear orange and undertake events and activities. This takes the form of healing walks, school assemblies, language lessons, mini powwows and other creative and formative expressions.

I worry Bill C-5, which would make this day a holiday, could have the consequence of losing some of the momentum that has been built around awareness, particularly in our schools. I also worry that the concession of this day being only for federal employees may have the consequence of losing the power of the intent of a national holiday. I will certainly do all I can to prevent this in my community, and I would like to see some extra assurances with dedicated investments around this bill.

I am also not convinced the bill represents a meaningful act of reconciliation with indigenous peoples, especially considering events that are transpiring around the country. It seems to me the government makes a habit of selecting only the easiest calls to action from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, abandoning those that require genuine effort, abdicating responsibility for the hard work we must undertake.

I remind the House there is a long list of education and health outcomes that should be our focus, those that would have lasting impacts for positive change, the sorts of changes that would mean indigenous women would not have to suffer as Joyce Echaquan did in her last moments of life and the sorts of changes that would mean Chantel Moore and Rodney Levi might still be with us today.

So far, most of the change I am seeing in Canada is a result of the efforts of indigenous communities and individuals. This is unacceptable. Canada has a responsibility to make things right. Canada must make amends. Canada must have these difficult conversations and must show leadership.

Our success will be measured in the way we respond to indigenous nations on an ongoing basis when questions of sovereignty arise, as they have in Nova Scotia in recent weeks. It will be measured in the way we embrace the collective and inherent rights of indigenous peoples, the way we carry out our relationships with these nations, and the way we embolden or chastise racist commentary from Canadians who do not yet understand these rights.

I recognize that a national memorial holiday was included in the TRC, and I have committed to stand behind each call to action; therefore, I will certainly vote in favour of the bill. However, I hope the government understands its continuing responsibility to support educational initiatives and to fund events and activities around this national holiday. The work we do today in the House will have repercussions on the next seven generations. It will be the foundation of a future in which we understand the truth of our past and celebrate what we have built together.

I implore Canadians to observe this holiday, to learn the true intention behind it and to take on the challenge of becoming allies and champions of reconciliation.

I will end with a metaphor sent to me by Eddy Charlie, a member of the Cowichan Nation and a residential school survivor. He described the long-term intergenerational impacts of the trauma inflicted by residential schools as poison leeched into a river, contaminating everything along the way. He said, “We've been contaminated by hate, pain and aggression, and until we clean up that river, we'll always be stuck in a really bad place.”

The process of cleaning up that river is under way. It is our job as parliamentarians, and as Canadians, to roll up our sleeves and get to work.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Mr. Speaker, on the technicality of that, I was sitting here and I did not realize who said what. I just assumed it was coming to committee. The heritage committee is meeting right now and the parliamentary secretary is at that meeting, scheduling Bill C-5 to come before it. I was looking forward to it coming to committee, not from the point of view of voting against it but to learn more about those things and having witnesses come to speak to us about that.

I understand what the member is saying, but it had been moving along that line. We thought it was coming to committee as did the parliamentary secretary. That is being organized in another room on the Hill at this moment.

[Pam Damoff, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to start by acknowledging that I am on the traditional territory of the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation.

I think we can all agree on the importance of acknowledging the history and legacy of residential schools and their tragic impact on first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples. It is my hope that Bill C-5 will receive the support of all members of the House.

The last residential school closed its doors in 1996, just 24 years ago. This is not ancient history. The number of survivors is great, the victims and their families greater. The healing process will take time, and this bill is a step toward righting the wrongs inflicted throughout our colonial past.

September is a painful time for many indigenous peoples. It was the month that their children were taken back to school year after year and forced to leave their loved ones and communities behind. It is appropriate to mark this pain experienced by generations of indigenous children, parents, families and communities, a pain that continues to be passed on today in the form of intergenerational trauma, with a solemn day of reflection, remembrance and action toward reconciliation. It is a day to honour residential school survivors and their families and to learn about their stories.

On September 29, the Minister of Canadian Heritage announced a response to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's call to action number 80, which seeks to establish, as a federal statutory holiday, a national day for truth and reconciliation. This day will honour survivors, their families and their communities while ensuring that public commemoration of the history and legacy of residential schools remains a vital component of the reconciliation process.

This bill seeks to establish a national day for truth and reconciliation that will be observed on September 30. As members may know, this is a particularly significantly date for indigenous peoples. It is the date of a grassroots movement called Orange Shirt Day, started by Phyllis Webstad, named for the orange shirt that she and her grandmother chose for her first day of residential school, only to have it stolen away when she arrived. Her orange shirt has become a symbol for the cultures, languages and childhoods that were ripped away from the more than 150,000 students of residential schools.

Every year on Orange Shirt Day, we encourage Canadians to take time to listen to the stories of survivors, learn about residential schools and come together to give hope to every child of current and future generations. This day would further spread these stories of pain and hope.

This year, on September 30, I walked by a school in my riding during lunch hour and on the playground I saw a sea of orange. Students had all come to school wearing orange shirts and, more importantly, were learning the legacy of residential schools. This is something that did not happen when I was their age or even when my son was in school.

The work of preserving these stories and educating Canadians about the horrors perpetrated at residential schools is extremely difficult and painful. That is why I would like to praise the work done by the amazing people at the Woodland Cultural Centre in Brantford, Ontario. Opened in 1972, the centre aims to preserve, present, create and educate people on the history, art, language and culture of the Haudenosaunee people of the Eastern Woodlands. It was established at the site of the Mohawk Institute residential school, the oldest residential school in Canada, which was operated from 1829 through 1970. It was nicknamed the Mush Hole by its students, as the children were fed only oatmeal three times a day, every day.

With its museum, art galleries, library and language centre, I encourage anyone able to visit the Woodland Cultural Centre for a unique and sobering learning experience to do so. It will be offering a virtual public tour on November 18 at 7 p.m. More information can be found at woodlandculturalcentre.ca.

Earlier this year, I attended a performance of The Mush Hole at The Burlington Performing Arts Centre. Telling the terrible story of what happened at the Mohawk Institute through dance and theatre, The Mush Hole is based on interviews and writings by residential school survivors. It explores not only what happened at the Mush Hole, but the intergenerational trauma experienced by the survivors and their families.

To further preserve and spread the history of residential schools, the Portage la Prairie residential school in Manitoba and the Shubenacadie residential school in Nova Scotia are being declared national historic sites this year. It is my hope that the Woodland Cultural Centre will also be declared a national historic site.

The residential school system is a national tragedy, a stain of colonialism upheld by systemic racism. Acknowledging its past and educating Canadians about the experience of indigenous children in these schools will ensure that this history is never forgotten and never repeated. It is a step toward righting past wrongs.

The introduction of Bill C-5 is a step forward in the healing process of survivors and their families who were harmed under this federally operated system. Once this bill has passed, the residential school system would be designated as an event of national historic significance, helping Canadians understand our history and its consequences.

While the government has taken important steps toward reconciliation, much more needs to be done. Canadians' understanding of the painful legacy of residential schools is vital to truth-telling, reconciliation and the recognition of past injustices. It will inform our future actions with the full knowledge of what has been done to indigenous people across this land.

A few years ago, in my riding, I held a screening of the documentary We Were Children. It tells the story of two children who were taken from their homes and placed in residential schools where they suffered years of physical, sexual and emotional abuse. Afterward, an 80-year-old former MP said he learned more in that night than he had in his entire life. New Canadians in attendance asked why they had never learned about this when they came to Canada. This all speaks to the importance of educating Canadians about our colonial past and the impact on generations of indigenous peoples.

In 2012, I had the opportunity to visit Pelican Falls First Nations High School in Sioux Lookout, a former residential school that is now run by the Northern Nishnawbe Education Council. While there, I had the honour to meet executive director Norma Kejick, an incredible woman whose good work was highlighted in the book Seven Fallen Feathers. Norma gave us a tour which included the surrounding forest, where many students died while trying to find their way home when it was a residential school.

When I left the school, I broke down in tears. How could a country treat innocent children in such a horrific way? How could we strip them from their families, the love of their parents and their broader community? How could we try to erase their culture and language? It is unimaginable to me that we could treat other humans this way, and yet we did it in the not so distant past.

A national day for truth and reconciliation would give us the opportunity to listen to all indigenous voices, reflect on past wrongs, learn from our mistakes and take action to advance meaningful reconciliation. On Orange Shirt Day, every child matters, and ever indigenous child deserves to be cared for, feel the full sense of their worth and feel hopeful for their future. Every single person in Canada shares the burden and shame of our reality.

As Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indigenous Services, I know how important reconciliation is to our government, but I also know there is much more work to be done. Designating September 30 as the national day for truth and reconciliation would represent a national acknowledgement of our country's history and a way to honour survivors of residential schools.

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

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today to speak to Bill C-5, an act that would amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code to add a new statutory holiday, a national day for truth and reconciliation.

I want to begin by acknowledging that I am speaking from the largest Mi'kmaq community in the world in my home community, which is also the unceded territory of the Mi'kmaq.

Today, we are discussing an important step forward on the path of reconciliation and healing for first nations, Inuit and Métis people. It is a step forward in publicly honouring survivors, their families and communities by implementing calls to action 80 of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to establish a statutory holiday, a national day for truth and reconciliation.

Before my time as an MP, I was a professor at Cape Breton University. I taught Mi'kmaq history and about the Indian residential schools. I was also the treaty education lead for Nova Scotia, which meant that I would do presentations for schools, businesses, industry and all those who asked about the truth and reconciliation and the Indian residential schools. People would ask me why they were never taught this before, why they were just learning this for this first time.

The Indian residential schools operated in my home province of Nova Scotia between 1929 and 1967 in Shubenacadie. In my home province, for more than 40 years, children were forcefully removed from their homes. They were forcefully removed from all they ever knew, taken from loving Mi'kmaq families.

I will share two startling facts that I always shared in those presentations.

The first comes from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The odds of dying for a soldier in World War II was one in 26. The odds of dying for children in the Indian residential schools was one in 25. Let that sink in. These were not soldiers with guns and helmets. These were children wearing their Sunday-best clothes, Sunday dresses, and they never came home. That is why we call them survivors, like my Aunt Eleanor Mitchell, my Uncle Fudd Lewis and the brave author from Sipekne'katik, Isabelle Knockwood. When I was a young student at that same university, I read her book and realized the horrible legacy of the residential schools and the horrible treatment of these children.

When we talk of truth and reconciliation, we speak of the children. However, I want members to think about their children at home. For all who are listening and for all in the House right now, imagine all the joy children bring into our lives, the birthdays, Christmas. Imagine all the things we do with our children that brings utter joy into our lives. Now imagine a community without those children, without that joy—

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am very proud to be here today to speak to Bill C-5, an act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code, National Day for Truth and Reconciliation.

I want to take this opportunity to thank the MP who brought this bill forward initially, Georgina Jolibois. I am continuously inspired by her work and by her amazing representation of indigenous communities across Canada.

We are here today for many reasons. This bill is really about the reality that on September 30 we celebrate Orange Shirt Day, a national day to recognize truth and reconciliation. We want to take that day and make it into a statutory holiday, one where all members of Canada are committed to being a part of recognizing this part of our history: the stealing of children from their families; the many deaths of indigenous children during these terrible, long, dark times; and the trauma and torture they and their families experienced.

An elder from my riding named Alberta Billy once told me to imagine what would happen to myself and my community if every child from the age of four to 16 were suddenly removed. No one knew who they were with and who was caring for them. That always hits me hard. I cannot imagine any of us thinking about all our precious children, however we know them, being removed from our communities, and the silence and sadness that would hit all of us as we looked around and did not see their beautiful faces.

This day should be a day where Canadians understand the incredible resilience of indigenous communities, because they are still here in the face of such adversity.

Today, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize my husband, Darren Blaney, who is a survivor of residential school. When he was in residential school, his number was 97. When I think about a soul, a human being, identified by a number and losing so much more of their identity, I am absolutely heartbroken.

Many members in this House have spoken about the importance of education in this bill. I want to let people know that as of March 31, 2019, the government had only spent $4.5 million over its four years on education initiatives around indigenous history and residential school. This is simply not sufficient and not strategic, but is another piecemeal approach to this complex and dire situation the country needs to understand more fulsomely.

I want this day to be treated in the future with the sacred solemness it deserves. That means resources so all Canadians can take the moment and the time to remember these beautiful souls and the reality they and their communities are faced with. We want people to remember the story of Phyllis Jack, whose beautiful and sad story gives us Orange Shirt Day. She was six when she went to residential school. Her grandmother bought her a beautiful orange shirt to wear.

Who does not have a memory attached to those first days of school? It is a moment where, as kids, we felt proud, a piece of clothing that tells a child they are loved. As a parent, grandparent, aunt, uncle or loved one, we sometimes buy a special piece of clothing for the first day of school knowing that in that act, we are sending that child into something new and sometimes scary, with a little bit of love.

In residential school, imagine how much more important this was. Not only were we buying a beautiful piece of clothing for a beloved child. We also knew that child would be leaving their family. They would leave and not understand how long it would be until they got to see their family again.

Imagine being a grandmother and feeling the utter hopelessness and fear of being forced to send a beloved grandchild to residential school, knowing all that grandmother can do is buy a shirt to somehow comfort that small body who will soon be longing for family and home. All too often in the history of Canada and today in Canada, indigenous people, communities and children are dehumanized.

Today there are still just too many children being taken from their homes into care through apprehension. These numbers are even higher than the numbers of children taken from their families to be put in residential schools. This is something that we all must be accountable for as Canadians. We must all understand that we have an obligation. Every time the government does not fulfill the compliance orders that are asked of it, it shows again that the dehumanization of indigenous children is continuing and it is not okay. We must always speak against it, not just in platitudes but in action and in resources so that those communities can begin to rebuild in a more profound and sustainable way.

We know that there are still too many suicides in indigenous communities across Canada. One chief in my riding told me not too long ago, “I am working so hard to build up an economic base of strength for my community so that we can have a future that is positive and something hopeful for our young people, but when I have young people hanging themselves in our community, it is so hard to continue to push and to build. These are the everyday lived experiences of indigenous communities across this country. We cannot pretend that it is not directly linked to colonialism and to the residential school history that this country holds and still does not disclose in a more profound way so that we can all carry this burden, not just indigenous communities.”

We continue to work in our indigenous communities across Canada because of generations of residential school. That is important to recognize. This is generations of residential school, generations of communities that were suddenly empty of every child between the ages of four and 16. What does that do to a people and a community, and how do they rebuild after generations and generations? They only rebuild by resiliency, which indigenous communities have displayed again and again, but they also need the resources to be able to do that.

Parents are still learning how to parent. Traditions are still coming back to our communities and those communities need to be supported to allow parents the time to learn how to parent, build those capacities. A lot of communities across my riding have been asking for support. They want to see things get better in their communities. They see those beautiful pearls of resilience and growth and strength, but they need the resources to invest in them.

When I hear people say again and again, sadly, that it is over, that those days are over, the history is over and indigenous people need to get over it, I am both devastated and angry. It is not over. We are seeing that today in situations in indigenous communities across this country. We are seeing that today with the RCMP not responding appropriately when they should, because they do not know how to do it. We need to do better than that and Canada needs to do better than that. The impacts of residential schools and colonialism are not over; they are resounding through this country every single day.

The Truth and Reconciliation Commission report stated, “Reconciliation is not an Aboriginal problem; it is a Canadian one. Virtually all aspects of Canadian society may need to be reconsidered.”

The bill is a small step, but it is a step toward all of Canadian society reconsidering, reviewing and looking at things differently. One of the things that I know to be true is that impact and intent can totally be separated. When we look at systemic racism and we look at racism, some people know an intent that they may have, but they do not understand the impact. We must be responsible for our impact, not only our intent.

Today, as we go through the reality, we know that systemic racism continues to be a huge issue and all Canadians have to be responsible for addressing it.

I want to talk about systemic racism because I have people tell me that they do not understand what systemic racism means. We are seeing it right now in the Mi'Kmaq community. The reality is no one should be surprised that this has been the outcome. The fact is that the federal government did not take leadership, did not create a plan and did not create space for this disconnect; it created a space for discontent and violence and for it to continue to grow.

Reconciliation is a Canadian problem, and one that has a long history.

We need a government that will actually pay attention and create a plan so that we do not get to these places where people are incredibly unsafe, where the disruption in the community is profound and the wounds will take a long time to heal. It is unfair that the federal government does not take leadership and instead allows small indigenous communities to face these challenges with few or no resources to address them. That is systemic racism. Not having a plan is systemic racism.

Systemic racism can also look like other things, and this brings me back to the intention and the impact. My son, when he was in grade 5, went to school one day. When he was in class, the teacher brought them to the library and sat the classroom down. The librarian showed a picture of a class of children at a residential school and asked them, “What do you see in this picture?” The indigenous children, all with their hair severely cut, looked very sad. They were all wearing uniforms.

A lot of the children had things to say, like, “Maybe they didn't get their hot lunch” or “Maybe they were planning to go on a trip but they didn't get to, and that is why they are so sad.”

My son talked about sitting in that room, listening to a lot of non-indigenous young people give their ideas. He talked about his pain and frustration as he looked at that picture were because he knew immediately what that was. As he listened to the other children not knowing what it was, it made him realize how alone he was, how so few people understand the history of this country, and how much pressure he felt to have to educate and disclose the reality.

Finally, it burst out of him. He said, “Maybe it is because they are indigenous children in residential school and all they want is to go home to their parents.”

I do not think this teacher had any bad intention. I believe her complete intention was to educate and to show the kids in the class the history of Canada, but she did not think about the impact.

This is so important. I have had a lot of young people talk to me and their parents about Orange Shirt Day, and how that day actually scares them. As indigenous children, as they learn this history, they become fearful that they may be taken from their families. The impact can often be unintended. That is why it is so important, when we address systemic racism, that we begin to ask questions, that we be curious about these issues, and that we stop putting the burden of educating on indigenous families, children and communities.

Years later, when my son moved up to middle school, he was actually able to work with his father on a piece of art for his school to recognize the history of indigenous residential school. This piece of art is still hanging in Southgate Middle School. It was a transformation mask that talked about the intention of residential school to take the Indian out of the child. On the front of it, there is a white face that opens up and shows an indigenous face. My son was very proud when they brought it to the school. It gave him the ability to talk about the history that was a reality for him every day in his life.

It is important, as this bill says, to dedicate a day to recognize the amazing power and resilience of the first people of this land. I want to make sure that this is really recognized as a part of this day. My granny went to Lejac Residential School in British Columbia for the majority of her childhood.

She was a fierce woman who I admired greatly and was slightly terrified of. I never once in my life saw her in a pair of pants. Even in the coldest parts of winter, she was always done up, wearing a dress, her hair and face made up, and often wearing a fabulous hairpiece, which she was known for.

She used to tell me, frequently, “No complaining, Rachel, we are still here. If you don't like it, work on fixing it.” It took me years to understand that she was teaching me the power of indigenous people across country, We are still here, and the guilt of non-indigenous people and what they feel is really not helpful.

In the face of colonial history, including initial contact, there has been smallpox, residential school, racism, systemic racism, child apprehension and constant interference, at all levels of government, in indigenous communities and their ability to create economic development. In the continuous face of all these challenges, generation after generation, indigenous people are still here, still fighting and still finding a way to hold on to their traditions and their history. They are still here.

When I think of Orange Shirt Day, I think of my granny who survived tremendous challenges, and of my dad and my aunties and uncles who have worked so hard to reclaim our culture and our history and make sure that her grandchildren have had that connection.

This bill would help acknowledge, for one day, the history of this country and the current reality of this history. There is so much work to be done. I hope that all members in the House and all Canadians understand that we must all be part of working toward that. This is one step. It is not enough, but it is a step, and in all the steps that we take we continue to move forward. This bill moved through the House before, in the last Parliament, and it died in the Senate. I certainly hope that does not happen again.

In closing, there have been conversations among the parties and if you seek it, I hope you will find unanimous consent for the following motion: That, notwithstanding any standing order or usual practice of the House, at the expiry of the time provided for government orders this day or when no members rise to speak, whichever comes first, Bill C-5, an act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code, National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, shall be deemed to have been read a second time and referred to a committee of the whole; deemed considered in committee of the whole; deemed reported, without amendment; deemed concurred in at report stage; and deemed read a third time and passed.

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Mr. Speaker, on September 29, the Minister of Canadian Heritage introduced Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code (National Day for Truth and Reconciliation), an act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code regarding a national day for truth and reconciliation.

The purpose of this bill is to respond to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada's call to action number 80 by creating a holiday called the national day for truth and reconciliation, which seeks to honour first nations, Inuit and Métis survivors and their families and communities and to ensure that public commemoration of their history and the legacy of residential schools remains a vital component of the reconciliation process.

If passed, the bill would add a new holiday, namely, national day for truth and reconciliation, which would be observed every year on September 30.

The Bloc Québécois has repeatedly pledged to be an ally of first nations people. That is why we will vote for this bill in principle, because it is part of the process of reconciliation with indigenous peoples, responds to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's recommendations, and will keep the memory of the tragedy experienced by residential school survivors alive and foster an ongoing public dialogue about our national history.

There is no denying that residential schools are a real blot on Canada's history. Between 1874 and 1996, there were 130 residential schools in Canada attended by over 150,000 indigenous children. The living conditions in those schools were poor. One of the direct causes of the sickness and deaths that occurred was the grossly inadequate funding from the government, which meant the food was of low quality, quantity and variety. The children in most residential schools had to cope with loneliness, a lack of contact with parents and family, frustration with not being allowed to speak their mother tongue, poor quality teaching, hunger, institutionalization, overwork, strict rules, brutality, and the fact that there was no one they could trust.

When they arrived at the residential schools, the children were stripped of their personal belongings and traditional clothing. They had their hair cut off and their names changed, and they were assigned a number. They were given new clothing, white people's clothing, which differed depending on what age group they were in. The children were punished if they spoke their mother tongue. These schools left them scarred and deeply traumatized. Most residential school survivors tell stories of loneliness, strict discipline, and physical, sexual, pedophilic and psychological abuse. Being separated from their parents and families was just the first trauma they endured. The children had to deal with a new culture, a new language and a new disciplinary system imposed on them by white people. Taking these children out of their communities, uprooting them, stripping them of their culture and destabilizing communities that had been shunted onto reserves resulted in deep trauma and social upheaval.

Every year, since September 30, 2013, we have been encouraged to wear orange in honour of the indigenous children who were sent to residential schools. Orange Shirt Day has become an opportunity to keep the discussion on all aspects of residential schools happening. The date was chosen because it is the time of year in which children were taken from their homes to residential schools, and because it is an opportunity to set the stage for anti-racist and anti-bullying policies for the coming school year. It is also an opportunity for first nations, local governments, schools and communities to come together in the spirit of reconciliation and hope for generations of children to come.

Phyllis Webstad started Orange Shirt Day to teach Canadians about the residential school system and to honour the survivors and their families. This day was inspired by Phyllis's own experience. On her first day at a residential school in British Columbia in 1973, her new orange shirt, a gift from her grandmother, was confiscated. She never got it back. This story is a sad example of how the residential school system sought to assimilate and colonialize indigenous children.

From a more technical point of view, the bill we are debating today amends three acts to bring about a single change: establishing September 30 as the national day for truth and reconciliation and making it a statutory holiday. The three acts in question are the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code.

Clause 1 of the bill clearly situates its purpose within the context of the work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

Clause 2 of the bill amends subparagraph 42(a)(i) of the Bills of Exchange Act to add the new national day for truth and reconciliation to the list of statutory holidays covered by the act. In practical terms, what this means is that, if Bill C-5 is passed, September 30 will no longer count in the calculation of deadlines shorter than three days as set out in the Bills of Exchange Act. Consequently, a bill of exchange or cheque payable by September 30 will be payable on the next business day.

Clause 3 of the bill amends the portion of the definition of “holiday” in paragraph (a) of subsection 35(1) of the Interpretation Act to include the new national day for truth and reconciliation. The act guides the courts in interpreting federal legislation. The new statutory holiday would therefore be enshrined in federal legislation.

Clause 4 of the bill amends section 166 of part III of the Canada Labour Code to include the proposed new day in the definition of “general holiday”.

Clause 5 of the bill amends subsection 193(2) of the Canada Labour Code to entitle employees to a holiday with pay on the working day immediately preceding or following the general holiday if the holiday falls on the weekend.

Clause 6 provides that the bill will come into force two months after it receives royal assent on the day with the same calendar number as the day on which it receives royal assent or the last day of that second month. For example, if the bill receives royal assent on December 30, 2020, it would come into force on February 28, 2021. It it receives royal assent on January 1, 2021 it would come into force on March 1, 2021.

As you know, the riding of Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, which I represent here in the House, has several families who survived residential schools. It is therefore important to me that this bill is passed out of respect for them and in the interest of remembrance.

In the report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, two quotes caught my attention.

The first is, “Survivors shared their memories with Canada and the world so that the truth could no longer be denied. Survivors also remembered so that other Canadians could learn from these hard lessons of the past. They want Canadians to know, to remember, to care, and to change.”

All those who attended residential school suffered terribly from being separated from their parents, their brothers and sisters and their culture.

This is the second quotation: “The federal government's policy of assimilation sought to break the chain of memory that connected the hearts, minds, and spirits of Aboriginal children to their families, communities, and nations.”

Imagine for a moment being taken from your family, denied your culture, your nation and your language, having to wear different clothing than what you are used to, and living entirely differently. We would be damaged for the rest of our lives.

In closing, commemoration requires more than just the declaration of a special day as proposed in Bill C-5. It needs to happen through ceremonies and activities that will spark dialogue on the history of Indian residential schools. However, these measures must not relieve society of its responsibility for past mistakes.

[Caroline Desbiens, Bloc, Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d’Orléans—Charlevoix, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in the 1973-74 school year, when she was six years old and went to St. Joseph Mission residential school for the first time, a young Phyllis wore a beautiful orange shirt her grandmother had just bought her.

Just imagine being five or six years old and getting a present from your grandmother, and think about what a special gift that would be.

As soon as she got to the residential school, officials there stripped off her clothes and took away her orange shirt, and she never saw it again.

That should be enough to spur us to action to try to repair the damage caused, as is our ultimate duty. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of stories like that of young Phyllis. Thousands of children like Phyllis had everything taken away from them—the light that was inside them, the peace and love they had once enjoyed, the great and noble values of their nation that already defined who they were, the comfort provided by their families.

That is what hurts the most: when everything that comforts us and defines us is lost. These victims and their families endured immense, terrible grief. This huge void will remain if we do not find a way to help heal the memories of first nations peoples,

Often the best way to fill such a void is to draw on the teachings of our elders. From my grandfather, I have kept the memory of an expression that has always stayed with me and, believe it or not, is directly related to Bill C-5.

On this particular Friday, where there seems to be unanimity, I will share the origin of this expression. My grandfather Bouchard had his rituals. A 90-year old proud retired seaman and farmer, he spent his afternoons sitting on his rocking chair on the porch of his home on Chemin des Coudriers. Every day after his midday prayers he would be joined by his old friend and best audience who was nicknamed, and I am not joking, “Canada”. Grand-papa would tell legendary stories of treacherous winter crossings in an ice canoe, his anecdotes about horses chomping at the bit and his tall tales of the water's edge. He had an endless supply of these stories to the great delight of tourists who would greet him with, “Hello. Your stories are great. We do not often hear stories told that way these days. Can we record you?”

So many people would gather around the porch that sometimes there would be a bottleneck in the street. One day a tall, tanned man, with very dark eyes and hair, stopped, listened for a long time and took a great interest in the way my grandfather spoke, in the accent typical of Île-aux-Coudres. The indigenous man approached him and said, “Memory is a treasure that allows us to build a future of peace. It is most important that you tend to it, sir.”

My grandfather repeated this phrase every day until he died. He was not ill and, as he liked to say, he died from living. His indigenous friend's phrase were his last words to us: “Memory is a treasure that allows us to build a future of peace.”

There is a good chance that the memory we are referencing today in the House and that bears the heavy burden of the past is the most valued tool that will help us take another step, and then another, and then others towards this reconciliation that is often mentioned but too infrequently made.

There were 3,200 children who died in residential schools and who were abused in every sense of the word. Their bodies, their hearts and their spirits were abused. What about the families and parents who had their children snatched from their arms? What about all the wounds of the past, but also those of today, that are very real, absurd and so sad?

Our memories harbour a thousand and one reasons, and it is up to us to make the present better.

Bill C-5 is a small step, compared to everything that needs to be acknowledged, reconciled and repaired, but it is a meaningful one. We hope to see many more steps, but this is at least something.

The idea of voting in favour of a national day for truth and reconciliation will be met with arguments about the economic costs of legislating another statutory holiday. However, how can we put a price on the more than 150,000 children and families who were torn apart and stripped of the very nature of their existence?

I want to address all of the parents here today. How much are our children's lives worth? What price would we put on their mental and physical health, their laughter, their joy, and their hearts? How much is that worth? Let us think about it. How much will this legislation cost? We can compare.

Let us get back to what really matters. I want to read an excerpt from the final report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada:

The federal government's policy of assimilation sought to break the chain of memory that connected the hearts, minds, and spirits of Aboriginal children to their families, communities, and nations.

Survivors shared their memories with Canada and the world so that the truth could no longer be denied. Survivors also remembered so that other Canadians could learn from these hard lessons of the past. They want Canadians [and Quebeckers] to know, to remember, to care, and [most importantly] to change.

In order for us to know, to remember, and to care about what can be done to bring about deep and lasting change, we must designate this day dedicated to truth and reconciliation. The Bloc Québécois has repeatedly pledged to be an ally of first nations peoples. That is why we will vote for this bill in principle, because it is part of the process of reconciliation with indigenous peoples. It responds to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's recommendations because it will keep the memory of the tragedy experienced by residential school survivors alive and foster an ongoing public dialogue about our national history.

As part of its work, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada refined its definition of reconciliation, and that, in and of itself, is an important sign of progress and a willingness to act. These principles, which can guide us toward reconciliation, are based on and supported by four pillars. They are the right to know, the right to justice, the right to reparation, and the guarantee of non-recurrence, which is the ultimate goal of this process.

This day should be an impetus for us to carry out our individual duty on the other 364 days of the year by carefully assessing the importance of our own actions in fulfilling our obligation to wholeheartedly, honestly and diligently participate in the advancement and improvement of the quality of life of first nations and peace and harmony between our respective nations. That is what it means to take care of something, and caring heals.

In closing, I invite everyone to take out their cellphones, open the “Notes” app and type in this precious memento from my grandfather Bouchard: “Memory is a treasure that allows us to build a future of peace.”

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code (National Day for Truth and Reconciliation), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

moved that Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code (National Day for Truth and Reconciliation), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by acknowledging that the House sits on the traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe.

It is a great honour to rise today and speak to Bill C-5, an important bill that seeks to create a new federal statutory holiday, a national day for truth and reconciliation. It is important that we recognize and thank Georgina Jolibois for bringing this bill forward in the last Parliament, but more importantly for being a strong advocate for indigenous rights and a voice for indigenous peoples not only in her riding, but across all of Canada. I also want to thank and acknowledge the hon. member for Burnaby South for supporting this important piece of legislation.

I have had the honour to speak in the House on our country's path toward reconciliation, and I know that reconciliation does not belong to a single political party or single individual. It is a shared responsibility for each and every one of us.

This bill is an important step on the journey that we are taking together. I am proud to work with members of all political parties on this legislative measure.

Some members of the House may have had the privilege of hearing the testimony given before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage when it examined Georgina Jolibois's bill in the previous Parliament. The testimony we heard strengthened our conviction that it is important to pass this bill.

Much of that moving and powerful testimony focused on the potential benefits of a national day for truth and reconciliation. For example, National Chief Robert Bertrand of the Congress for Aboriginal Peoples said:

A statutory holiday will be an important opportunity to reflect upon the diverse heritage and culture of our people, which remain so vitally important to the social fabric of this country. In doing so, each and every one of us will be working towards the reality of true reconciliation between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples.

Similarly, Mrs. Theresa Brown, the chair of the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation's Survivors Circle, spoke powerfully about the importance of a national day of reflection for residential school survivors. She said:

A special, separate day when our grandchildren could go out and lay a wreath, lay tobacco, pray and remember is important to me and other survivors. It is also a time for this country to remember and say “never again”. We want to know that when we are gone, our spirit of truth and reconciliation will live on in our future generations.

Natan Obed, president of the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, testified as follows:

...the creation of a statutory holiday provides a greater weight and allows for more education and a bigger platform for us. If you think about holidays, statutory holidays, and how they've been allocated over time, they have been colonial in nature and they have thought about the founding of this country, not necessarily about indigenous peoples within Canada. This would be a marked departure from that legacy.

He went on to say the following:

This holiday can go a long way to making sure that from a very early age, all Canadians have a positive association with first nations, Inuit and Métis.

Mr. Obed's first point speaks to the importance and status of national holidays in Canada, and I would like to remind this chamber that the act of creating a new statutory holiday is, in itself, quite significant. Right now there are nine federally legislated statutory holidays in Canada. A national day for truth and reconciliation would join in rank of importance with holidays like Labour Day and Remembrance Day, highlighting the significance and scope of this day.

During the testimony we heard, many groups expressed points of view similar to those I just quoted about the meaning and impact of a day of commemoration.

The residential school system was indeed a national tragedy. Over the span of 130 years, more than 150,000 first nations, Inuit and Métis children were placed in residential schools. These children were forcibly separated from their parents, their homes, their culture, their language, their land, their relations and their communities.

This day is important. It is an opportunity to reflect on the harm inflicted on first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples throughout our history and to this day by the legacy of residential schools. We are working to repair that harm by responding the the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada's calls to action.

Call to action number 80 calls upon our government to:

establish, as a statutory holiday, a National Day for Truth and Reconciliation to honour Survivors, their families, and communities, and ensure that public commemoration of the history and legacy of residential schools remains a vital component of the reconciliation process.

Today, we want to answer that call to action.

After careful consultations and respectful consideration, September 30 was the date chosen deliberately for its significance. Currently, September 30 is the date of the grassroots movement called Orange Shirt Day, started by the formidable Phyllis Webstad. It was named after the orange shirt that Mrs. Webstad was given by her grandmother on her first day of residential school, only to have it forcibly taken away from her upon her arrival. Her orange shirt is symbolic of the vibrant cultures, languages, traditions, identities and childhoods that were repressed within the residential school system. It is also a symbol of survivors like Phyllis and the monumental efforts by first nations, Inuit and Métis in protecting and revitalizing their cultures and languages for future generations.

From testimony in committee we learned that September is a symbolically painful time for indigenous families and communities. Every year during the month of September children were separated from their loved ones and their community to go back to school. It is important to acknowledge this pain with a solemn day to remember the past, reflect on it and learn together to gain a better knowledge of the history and legacy of residential schools.

It has always been my belief that one of the pillars of reconciliation is education. Establishing a national day for truth and reconciliation is education in action. For all those living in Canada, this would be a day of commemoration, but also a day to learn about a dark chapter of our past. It would serve as a reminder to never forget and never veer from the path toward reconciliation.

Students still go back to school every year in September. The proposed date, September 30, for a national day of truth and reconciliation not only has symbolic importance, but it also provides an opportunity for learning within our schools about our journey toward reconciliation. Teachers across the country will be able to build on discussions about residential schools that are already under way in many schools. Families will have a reason to talk about reconciliation at home. Canadians will have a day to reflect on our history and our values as a society.

I like to think about the day when schools across the country will mark this holiday with ceremonies, as a day of learning. I hope they will invite elders or survivors, indigenous knowledge holders and educators to come into classrooms to talk with the children.

I think of the way that schools across the country use Remembrance Day as an educational tool for children of all ages to learn about the historic conflicts that Canada has been involved in, to understand the horrors of war and, above all, to honour the women and men who have sacrificed so much in serving this country. I believe that a new day for truth and reconciliation is an excellent learning opportunity for this equally important part of Canada's history.

Unfortunately, only half of Canadians know the history of the Indian residential school system and its long-term effects on indigenous peoples.

The final report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada states that too many Canadians know little or nothing about the the deep historical roots of these conflicts. This lack of historical knowledge has serious consequences for first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples, and for Canada as a whole. Setting aside a special day each year to take the time to acknowledge this painful history will help everyone learn and understand more about the realities of the residential school era. This is a positive step on our path toward reconciliation. This type of commemoration is a collective, public act of recognition.

This will also be a day of listening and healing for the entire country. Together we can continue our conversation on social justice.

As Dr. Marie Wilson, former commissioner for the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, noted in her testimony to the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage:

It makes it everybody's call to attention, call to remembrance, and call to respect, and hopefully...there is ongoing education about it. We don't just talk about wars; we talk about peace in the context of talking about wars. In the context of residential schools, we can talk about mistakes of the past and what we are trying to do to address things going forward.

Mr. Tim Argetsinger, political advisor to the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, agreed. He said:

I think there's a way of achieving that balance where the focus of a day could be a focus on the past human rights abuses that indigenous peoples have experienced and have worked to overcome. At the same time, it could be the day to focus on the agency that we all have to take positive actions to address some of the challenges that flow from those past experiences.

I want to underscore that reconciliation and advancing indigenous rights remain a constant priority for our government. Some people will say that a single day will not resolve the horrors of the past and will do nothing to improve the unacceptable living conditions that still exist in some communities to this day. I believe, however, that remembering the past is an effective way to ensure that history is not repeated.

Systemic racism and overt racism exist in Canada. They are not and will never be acceptable. Recently, we were reminded of the horrific consequences they can have. The events that preceded the death of Joyce Echaquan shocked us all. They outraged us, but should not surprise us. They are not isolated events.

Addressing systemic racism in all our institutions requires active listening, strong public policy and making more equitable representation at all levels of society. Honouring the victims of institutional racism, whatever form it may have taken throughout history, is a first step. Making sure that these atrocities against indigenous peoples cease completely is our everyday priority.

This national day for truth and reconciliation will be an opportunity for Canadians to reflect on and question their own individual biases and assumptions. Working on them will require a continuous and collective endeavour beyond September 30.

I implore members of the House to listen carefully to the testimony of the survivors and indigenous leaders who are telling us how a national day of recognition would help heal the wounds of the past, honour survivors and move forward together towards reconciliation.

We must also continue to work tirelessly to quickly resolve the many problems faced by indigenous communities today. Access to drinking water, for example, is vital.

Our government is committed to eliminating all boil water advisories, in the long term, in first nations communities living on reserve. We recognize and affirm the right of communities to have access to safe drinking water. As a result of this commitment, 95 boil water advisories have been lifted since 2015.

In the preceding parliament, we passed an important law to reform child and family services with the goal of reducing the number of indigenous children in care. The law also allows first nations, the Inuit and the Métis to have full authority over child services so they can make the decisions that will ensure the well-being of their children, families and communities. There is a crisis in indigenous communities. Too many children are taken away from their homes and communities.

We are also committed to the reclamation, revitalization and strengthening of indigenous languages. A historic piece of legislation, the Indigenous Languages Act, received royal assent on June 21, 2019. This legislation was developed in collaboration with indigenous peoples. It recognizes the language rights of indigenous peoples and sets out how we will support these languages.

Canadian Heritage is working collaboratively with indigenous partners to implement the Indigenous Languages Act. The department is consulting with indigenous governments, governing bodies and a variety of organizations on the appointment of a commissioner and three directors of indigenous languages, as well as the development of an indigenous languages funding model. These are important successes, yet we can all agree that there is so much more we need to do.

I look forward to continuing to work hard with indigenous peoples across the country to make further progress on these and other crucial issues.

Canada has embarked upon a path to reconciliation. With each step, Canadians are able to better understand the lives, challenges and points of view of indigenous peoples from the past and present.

In introducing this bill to create a national day for truth and reconciliation, the Government of Canada is hoping to encourage people across the country to learn about indigenous history, come together and get involved to support these efforts and help their communities move forward on the path to reconciliation.

Although we all have different journeys and experiences, every Canadian has a unique and essential role to play as we walk together on this path toward reconciliation and a stronger, more resilient Canada.

I think it fitting to close with the words of Ms. Georgina Jolibois, who said, “People in Canada are capable of mourning the past while also celebrating the present and looking toward the future.” I urge all members to support this legislation so that our country can honour survivors and mark the history of residential schools with a day for recognition, reflection, commemoration, education and engagement.

We must recognize that others have come before us to chart this path. The commissioners of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission gave so much of themselves to ensure that the voices of others were heard. Those who testified, leaders and indigenous communities across Canada, as well as current and former parliamentarians, including Georgina Jolibois, called for a national day, as is set out in this bill. I thank them all.

Meegwetch, marsi.

Business of the House

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I noticed that my colleague came at his gracious question in a roundabout way.

This afternoon, we will continue with the debate on the Conservative Party's motion, of course.

We still have a number of important bills on the legislative agenda, including the MAID bill, the conversion therapy bill and the judicial training bill.

Tomorrow, we will begin debate on Bill C-5, regarding a national day for truth and reconciliation.

Starting on Monday, we will take up the second reading debate of Bill C-6, the bill regarding conversion therapy.

Lastly, I note that Thursday, October 29, will be an allotted day.

Judges Act

[Jenica Atwin, Green, Fredericton, NB]

Madam Speaker, we absolutely need to move quickly. We need to speed things up for sure. I would love to get to Bill C-5. I also have my support on the table for that.

To say that I would not allow other parliamentarians to speak to this bill, as I have just been given that opportunity, would not be fair. If that is what the opposition needs, to continue to speak to this bill, then I think those members should have that opportunity. Again, it is a day of opposition time when we have had five weeks of Parliament prorogued. In comparison, this is part of the process and I would allow them to use the time as they need it.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, “Reclaiming Power and Place” is the final report that came from the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. I recall advocating for that inquiry to take place when we were in opposition. I am very concerned and impassioned, as I know all members are, that we move on the issue of reconciliation. One of the bills that we were hoping to get to is Bill C-5, which deals with one of the calls to action.

Does my colleague believe that we need to continue to have a dialogue and deal with some of these issues in a more timely fashion so that we are able to deal with more legislation?

Business of the House

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and for the clarification. Indeed, we will be in our ridings, not on vacation.

This afternoon, we shall continue debate on Bill C-3, an act to amend the Judges Act and the Criminal Code.

Tomorrow, we will begin second reading of Bill C-7, an act to amend the Criminal Code with regard to medical assistance in dying.

When we return after our constituency week, we will resume debate on Bill C-7. We hope we can begin the debate on Bill C-5, an act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code regarding a national day for truth and reconciliation. This bill has to do with Orange Shirt Day.

Lastly, I wish to inform the House that Tuesday, October 20 and Thursday, October 22 will be allotted days.

I wish all members a pleasant week in their ridings. I hope members will take care of themselves and their loved ones and come back in good health.

Judges Act

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, the member made reference to Bill C-5. I suspect he meant Bill C-3, the bill we are debating today. Bill C-5 is a very interesting bill about reconciliation. I look forward to that debate and the position the Conservatives will have on it.

Listening to what members of the Conservative Party have to say, I would assume that the bill will pass unanimously in the House. That is what I am expecting. However, there is this desire to have not only the content of this bill debated, but the broader issue of sexual assault debated in the House.

The opposition has a good opportunity when we come back, with two opposition days coming. Would the member not support having a debate on the broader issue, maybe even with a Conservative motion that would then allow for an expansion on some of their thoughts? Would the member not think that would be a good thing?

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to rise in the House to speak to Bill C-3. While important and something I was happy to support in the 42nd Parliament, I am afraid it is just a drop in the bucket in what we as a society must do to fight sexual violence against women.

Bill C-3 will, I hope, like its predecessors Bill C-5 and Bill C-337, find unanimous support as this legislation is a rare product of bipartisan support.

I thank the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada for sponsoring this reintroduction of the bill that found its genesis in a private member's bill created by the Hon. Rona Ambrose, former member of Parliament for Sturgeon River—Parkland and also former leader of Canada's Conservatives and the leader of Her Majesty's loyal opposition.

This legislation is about ensuring that trust is maintained in the judicial system, that survivors of sexual assault are respected by the judicial system when they step forward. The bill, when passed, will require federal judges and those seeking the office to participate in continuing legal education with regard to sexual assault law. It also strives to combat the myths and stereotypes that often cause victims of sexual assault to hesitate to come forward.

Federal judges will also be required to provide written reasoning for their decisions in sexual assault cases in order to promote transparency in the reasons that lead to their decisions. The bill would require the Canadian Judicial Council to submit an annual report to Parliament on the delivery and participation in sexual assault information seminars established by it.

In my mind, to be truly effective, provincial court judges should be required to take this training. I encourage those provinces to take a serious look at the work that has been done by parliamentary committees and listen to the words spoken in the House with respect to this issue and to strongly consider passing complementary legislation in their respective jurisdictions.

It is a shame, though, we find ourselves in this place at this time where we must pass legislation to train arguably the highest educated group of individuals in the country on sexual sexual assault awareness. Where we should be focusing our energy is educating the next generation of men and women to be advocates, especially men, for ending sexual violence and not perpetuating the myths and stereotypes that enable others to think it is acceptable.

Yesterday, the member for Calgary Nose Hill made one of the most impassioned and important speeches I have heard in this Parliament. Our colleague stood here and challenged men to stand up and be a voice for women and men who are victims of sexual violence. Far too often it is women who are forced to stand on their own and shout enough is enough.

Statistically, women constitute the overwhelming numbers of victims of sexual assaults. Adding to the personal trauma, they must often rely solely on their own strength to report these heinous crimes. As men, we have historically dismissed women's voices on these issues or left it to them to demand action. It is time for men to recognize their role in preventing sexual violence in all its forms. Let me be clear: It is not enough for a man to say, “Well, I would never do that so I've done my part.”

We need to do more. We all need to do more. We need to stand with those incredibly brave survivors who are taking a stand to end sexual violence, and not just for women. Men are victims of sexual assault as well and it needs to end for all victims. Men need to challenge the myths and stereotypes about how survivors of sexual assault are expected to behave.

As a father of a young boy, I have a responsibility to guide him in his journey to become a man. There are many things I must teach him, and for him to learn from me and I from him. However, in order for him to take his place as a productive member of society, I need to be that role model. I need to be putting forward the messages and encouraging him to be better.

One of the most fundamental things I need to impress upon him is to respect others. He needs to understand that men should not feel entitled to sexually harass people or perpetuate sexual violence, that every person has power over his or her own body and how to give and receive consent. He needs to understand that men and boys must never obtain power through violence and that the notion that sex is a right of his gender is false. Sexual violence ends when all of us understand the fundamental truth that no one is permitted to sexually harass or invade another individual's body or personal boundaries.

Girls and women are given advice about rape prevention, and we heard this from many members in this place in the ongoing debate today and the debate yesterday, such as not letting their drink out of sight, not wearing revealing outfits or high heels and not walking alone at night.

As a society, we must go beyond what girls can do to prevent being victims. We need to focus on the attitudes that boys have about women and their own masculinity. The next generation of men needs to promote mutual respect for women and embrace equality for all people, regardless of their gender or sexual orientation. Working toward ending sexual violence is a constant collective effort and, as men, we all need to do our part.

While Bill C-5 is just a ripple, it is my sincere hope that it will eliminate victim blaming, an attitude that suggests a victim rather than a perpetrator bears responsibility for an assault, that victims' sobriety, or the clothes they were wearing or their sexuality become irrelevant in the courtroom. To end sexual violence, perpetrators must be held accountable. By trying sexual violence cases, we recognize these acts as crimes and send a strong message of zero tolerance.

Canada's Conservatives were proud to support Bill C-337 and Bill C-5 in previous Parliaments. We recognize that far too often the justice system fails to respect the experiences of victims of sexual assault.

The Canadian bench must be held accountable and ensure that judges have the updated training that Canadians expect them to have. That is why we committed in the last election to ensure that all judicial appointees take sexual assault sensitivity training prior to taking the bench. We will always look for ways to stand up for survivors of sexual assault and ensure they are treated with dignity.

I would like to thank Rona Ambrose for being such a passionate advocate for victims of sexual assault and for her work on this very important file. This bill addresses the simple fact that victims going to trial should expect that judges are educated in the law, yet what it does not address is the absolute necessity that all of us, every single person has the same responsibility to be educated in what it means to be human and protect and respect the dignity of our fellow citizens.

[Arif Virani, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada]

Madam Speaker, I want explore this issue of getting the bill expeditiously through the House.

I will confess that there is some level of concern on this side of the House with respect to the Conservative Party being the sole party that is standing in the way of getting the bill expeditiously to the standing committee, where amendments could be made. I take the member's point that the standing committee has not yet been constituted, but the first meeting of the standing committee is next week. That would also free up parliamentary time to scrutinize other pieces of legislation, such as the heritage minister's truth and reconciliation bill that deals with the indigenous community, which the member is a strong advocate for.

Given the member's close work with Rona Ambrose, and given Rona Ambrose's strong support of the bill in its current form, is the member amenable to getting this quickly to committee so that further amendments, if required, could be addressed there?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, the government demonstrated just how important the legislation is when it introduced it last Friday, even ahead of the throne speech. We also have other important legislation dealing with truth and reconciliation, Bill C-5, as well as assisted dying legislation. These are good, substantial pieces of legislation that I know opposition members would also like to debate.

In terms of the comments coming from the Conservative Party, I am wondering if the member would not agree, given the sensitivity of the topic and the importance of the issue, that maybe this might be a good opportunity for the official opposition to use one of its opposition day motions. If the Conservatives feel so passionate about the issue and want to see that debate take place, would the member not support having a wider spectrum of debate on this very important issue and use it as a day of opposition?

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, the last thing I would want to do is contribute to an ongoing debate, when I know the Conservatives are anxious to see this bill ultimately pass.

I will leave it at this. I would ask my Conservative friends to support what is a very good idea, something that has been debated not only inside this House, but the House of Commons on Parliament Hill. There has been a great deal of debate. Everyone is in support of it. We have seen legislation pass relatively quickly inside this House. We even saw it with reference to this piece of legislation in another session with another bill number. Therefore, I implore my Conservative friends across the way to give serious consideration to allowing Bill C-3 to go through so that we can debate Bill C-5, as I am very much interested in hearing where the Conservatives might fall on the important issue of reconciliation.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, the member might not necessarily like it, but there is a direct link that I have made between Bill C-5, which in all likelihood is going to be the next item for debate, when I focus my attention on the importance of Bill C-3 and getting it passed. There is a direct link between the two issues, and that is what I have been referencing.

[Michael Barrett, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON]

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member is making repeated reference to Bill C-5. I wonder if, even though the rules of relevance are loosely applied in this place, we ought to speak to the bill that we are debating. We are talking about Bill C-3. We have heard a lot about Bill C-5, so if the member does not want other members to speak to it, perhaps he could actually speak to Bill C-3.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I want to take a different approach on this debate.

Looking at Bill C-3, I anticipate unanimous support from the House. I believe that every member, all 336 of them, actually supports this proposed legislation, and justifiably so. After all, it is not the first time that we have had this legislation before us. In fact, the former interim leader of the Conservative Party brought the idea forward.

The Prime Minister has inferred in the past that no one owns a good idea, and if it is something that is for the betterment of Canadians, let us do it. Back then, the government of the day said that it supported the bill, and when that did not work, we ended up bringing in a government bill. The previous bill not only passed in the House, but it also went through the committee stage and on to the Senate. There was plenty of opportunity for good, healthy debate.

Sex assault is a very serious issue. Again, I suspect that all 336 members have something to say about this very important issue and the impact it has on our society. All of us, I am sure, have something to share with the House. However, if we look at all the private member's bills and all of the government's proposed legislation, we see that, mathematically, it would be impossible for every member to talk about every piece of legislation.

It was not possible even when we sat during the summer in a different forum in the House. At the end of the day, there is a limited amount of time, and the official opposition knows that. Those members understand that, last Friday, if they wanted to, they could have passed the bill. This is a very important issue, which all members of Parliament are very passionate about, and it could have actually passed last Friday.

What would have happened had that taken place? Well, we would be debating Bill C-5, the national day for truth and reconciliation. I have heard from some that the Conservatives might not support that piece of legislation. I am hopeful that the majority will, but I suspect that there will be huge demands from the Conservative Party that we debate that piece of legislation. When it comes to legislation inside this chamber, the only way we get the Conservatives to pass it is to either bring in time allocation or shame them into doing the right thing.

At the end of the day, when we look at what we have before us, I challenge any member to indicate their opposition to this legislation. As I pointed out, the very essence of the issue is of the utmost importance to all Canadians. I am sure that there is not a member in the House who would speak about this legislation not passing, and we recognized that years ago when the interim leader of the Conservative Party brought it forward.

I would like to challenge my friends across the way. I have been affiliated with House leadership teams for a while now, and I can tell members that, at times, we need to allow bills that have unanimous support to go through the process.

I know a member of the opposition can stand up in a righteous way and say that every member should be able to speak to this legislation, I am not going to deny that. If members want to speak to this piece of legislation, let them speak to it, but we must remember that not every member can speak to every piece of legislation; it is not possible. We cannot do that and the Conservatives know that. It does not take much to put off any piece of legislation, because after we debate it, with all 100 members speaking between questions and answers, and the speeches themselves, which are a half hour for the first five hours, then 15 minutes afterward, we could be speaking for weeks on this legislation, and all because the Conservative Party does not want legislation to pass so it can criticize the government in the future for not passing legislation. If we try to pass legislation, the Conservatives ask why we have to bring in time allocation.

The opposition members need to come to the realization that if they do not want time allocation, if they want to see a consensus, and if they behave like this, that is what they will get. I am focusing on the Conservatives, At the end of the day, what I would like to see, and I did it when I was in the third party, is support for the government of the day with respect to certain time allocations, because I believe that unfortunately at times we need to bring in time allocation. I would like to think that on this piece of legislation we do not need to bring in time allocation; rather, what we could do is recognize the fine work that has been done to date on this legislation.

Maybe it is because I am eager to get on to Bill C-5, which is about truth and reconciliation and one of the calls for action. I understand the Conservatives will be demanding a lot of time for debate on that legislation. I would think that call for action is something there is a great deal of interest in with respect to finding out where the Conservative Party is at. We know where MPs are at with respect to this piece of legislation. I would suggest the members opposite in the Conservative Party will no doubt want to continue to talk about this debate. I will no doubt be one of the first to remind them in the future why it is we did not get as much time to debate Bill C-5, because I suspect they will not provide us the opportunity—

[David Lametti, Liberal, Minister of Justice]

moved that Bill C-3, An Act to amend the Judges Act and the Criminal Code, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand in support of Bill C-3, an act to amend the Judges Act and the Criminal Code, which is identical to former Bill C-5.

I am delighted to be reintroducing this important piece of legislation today. I know we in the House are all anxious to see the work that was started by the Hon. Rona Ambrose in 2017 with the introduction of Bill C-337 come to fruition with the quick passage of this bill in this session of Parliament.

Regrettably, Parliament's consideration of Bill C-5 was abruptly interrupted and the study of the justice committee halted by a health crisis that has created unprecedented challenges to all aspects of Canadian society, including our justice system. The pandemic has exposed and exploited underlying conditions that have long plagued our justice system. It brought into stark relief the unacceptable barriers to accessing justice for the most vulnerable in our society. The reintroduction of the bill comes at a time when the need to protect our most vulnerable has never been clearer, nor the importance of ensuring a justice system that treats everyone fairly and with respect more critical.

Bill C-3 is designed to enhance public confidence in our criminal justice system, and in particular the confidence of survivors of sexual assault. It is hard to imagine anyone more vulnerable in the criminal justice system than the women who find the courage to report sexual assault.

The bill will ensure that survivors of sexual assault are treated with dignity and respect by the courts and will give them confidence that the judge in their case will enforce sexual assault laws fairly and accurately, as Parliament intended.

It has never been more critical that all of us who serve the public are equipped with the right tools and understanding to ensure that everyone is treated with the respect and dignity that they deserve, no matter what their background or their experiences. This would enhance the confidence of survivors of sexual assault and the Canadian public, more broadly, in our justice system. There is no room in our courts for harmful myths or stereotypes.

I know that our government's determination to tackle this problem is shared by parliamentarians from across Canada and of all political persuasions. The bill before us today will help ensure that those appointed to a superior court would undertake to participate in continuing education in relation to sexual assault law and social context.

As the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, I take very seriously my responsibility to uphold judicial independence, a constitutional principle that is a cornerstone of our democracy. Judicial independence means that judges must be free to decide each case on its own merits without interference or influence of any kind from any source. For this reason, judicial independence requires judicial control of judicial education, and I salute the work that is being done by the Canadian Judicial Council as well as the National Judicial Institute in Canada in the training they have already begun to provide. Applying this principle to the current bill means that our government's efforts to ensure judges participate in education on matters related to sexual assault law and social context must not undermine the independence of the judiciary.

In that vein, I would like to describe the key elements of the proposed legislation. Bill C-3, as noted previously, is identical to former Bill C-5 and essentially the same as former private member's bill, Bill C-337. Importantly, the bill includes the amendments to Bill C-337 passed unanimously by the House of Commons to include social context education within the requirements of the bill. This requirement is specifically aimed at providing those who preside over cases with deeper insights and best practices to help them better navigate the social and cultural factors that they will likely come across in their time on the bench.

Bill C-3 also includes the amendments recommended by the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs in its study of Bill C-337.

The first key element of the bill is that it proposes to amend the Judges Act to require candidates for superior court judicial appointments to commit to undertaking training in matters related to sexual assault law and social context. This becomes part of the application process. This commitment will become an eligibility requirement for appointment to a superior court.

It is no easy task to bolster public confidence, in particular the confidence of sexual assault survivors, that our criminal justice system will treat victims with dignity, fairness and respect. This is a particularly acute challenge when there are reports in the media of judges doing exactly the opposite. We hear of highly publicized cases in which judges have relied on stereotypes or myths about how a victim of sexual assault should have behaved and have misapplied the carefully crafted law intended to prevent this.

The undertaking to commit to training is aimed at ensuring that Canada's highly developed law and jurisprudence on sexual assault are appropriately applied in the courtroom. It will also ensure that newly appointed judges receive the education and training necessary to understand and appreciate the social context within which they perform their functions, so that personal or societal biases or myths and stereotypes do not have any bearing on their decisions.

Over the past three decades the criminal law has undergone significant reform to encourage reporting of sexual assaults, to improve the criminal justice system's response to sexualized violence and to counter discriminatory views of survivors that stem from myths and stereotypes about how a true victim is expected to behave. As a result, the Criminal Code prohibits all forms of non-consensual sexual activity, provides a clear definition of consent, identifies when consent cannot be obtained and sets out rules for the admissibility of certain types of evidence to deter the introduction of these harmful myths and stereotypes.

Canada's sexual assault law is robust, but is necessarily complex. It applies to the most intimate of human interactions, so to be effective it must be properly understood and applied. This is why judicial education in this area is so significant and Bill C-3 so important.

The second key element is to require that the Canadian Judicial Council develop this sexual-assault training only after it consults with groups and individuals that it considers appropriate, including sexual assault survivors and the groups that support them. This will give the council the opportunity to gather different perspectives on sexual assault informed by the experiences and knowledge of the community.

Transformative change across the criminal justice system will require a sustained collaborative effort by all actors in the justice system, with the support of stakeholders and civil society. Training is needed not only for judges but for all actors in the justice system. We are working with our provincial and territorial counterparts and justice sector stakeholders toward more comprehensive efforts. However, the pivotal public and determinative role judges play must also be taken into account.

The third key component of the bill will require the Canadian Judicial Council to submit to the justice minister an annual report to be tabled in this Parliament about the training on sexual assault law that has been provided and the number of judges who attended. This requirement is designed to enhance accountability in the training of sitting judges on these matters while still acting as an incentive to encourage their participation.

The final element of the bill would amend the Criminal Code to require judges to provide reasons for decisions under sexual assault provisions of the Criminal Code. This amendment is intended to enhance the transparency of judicial decisions made in sexual assault proceedings by rendering them accessible, either in writing or on the record of the proceedings. I would like to mention that this proposed amendment to require judges to provide reasons in the determination of sexual assault matters specifically is complementary to three existing requirements.

The requirement to provide reasons will be placed in the other sexual assault provisions in the Criminal Code. This will help ensure that all provisions related to sexual offending are clear and accessible to those applying them. This is part of the effort to prevent the misapplication of sexual assault law by helping to ensure that decisions in sexual assault matters are not influenced by myths or stereotypes about sexual assault victims and how they ought to behave. This is consistent with the Supreme Court of Canada's finding that such myths and stereotypes distort the truth-seeking function of the court.

Being a judge comes with great responsibility. I would like to quote the Hon. Justice Charles Gonthier, former justice of the Supreme Court of Canada:

The judge is the pillar of our entire justice system, and of the rights and freedoms which that system is designed to promote and protect. Thus, to the public, judges not only swear by taking their oath to serve the ideals of Justice and Truth on which the rule of law in Canada and the foundations of our democracy are built, but they are asked to embody them....

Justice Gonthier then added the following:

...the personal qualities, conduct and image that a judge projects affect those of the judicial system as a whole and, therefore, the confidence that the public places in it.

Since judges play such a crucial role in upholding democracy and the rule of law, the public rightly expects their conduct to be exemplary. To quote the Canadian Judicial Council:

[1] From the time they are considered for appointment to the Bench, and every day thereafter, superior court judges in Canada are expected to be knowledgeable jurists. They are also expected to demonstrate a number of personal attributes including knowledge of social issues, an awareness of changes in social values, humility, fairness, empathy, tolerance, consideration and respect for others.

[2] In short, Canadians expect their judges to know the law but also to possess empathy and to recognize and question any past personal attitudes and sympathies that might prevent them from acting fairly.

In order for judges to be able to meet these public expectations, it is imperative that they keep abreast of developments in the law and the ever-changing social context in which they carry out their duties. To ensure excellence in judgments, judges must have legal knowledge that is as relevant as it is excellent so that they can make the difficult and life-changing decisions entrusted to them. For this reason, legal education is an essential element of the legislation under consideration.

The bill is carefully tailored to uphold the principle of judicial independence. In particular, it includes the recommendations of the Senate committee for amendments to Bill C-337 that were carefully designed to address the specific concerns raised by representatives of the judiciary.

In that regard, I would like to point out that members of the judiciary appeared before the House committee to call for additional amendments to Bill C-5. It is important to note that a respectful dialogue occurred between representatives of the judicial and legislative branches with regard to Bill C-337 and Bill C-5. I trust that this will also be the case with this bill. The partners in this dialogue all want survivors of sexual assault to have faith in the justice system and to be treated with the respect and dignity they deserve when dealing with that system.

Canada is lucky to have one of the most independent, competent and reputable judiciaries in the world. The Canadian Judicial Council, with the support and co-operation of the National Judicial Institute, is a world leader in training judges. The Canadian judiciary is very committed to ensuring the best training for judges. I commend them for their co-operation in this regard. Finally, Canada is a pioneer in social context education in the justice system.

In its professional development policy, the Canadian Judicial Council recognizes that, in order to be effective, training for judges must include social context education so that court decisions are not influenced by personal or social bias, myths or stereotypes.

Given how important this is, the National Judicial Institute seeks to ensure that all programs cover substantive law, skills development and social context education.

It is important to acknowledge the significant contribution of both the Canadian Judicial Council and the National Judicial Institute to ensuring judges have access to the training they need.

We are blessed with a strong and independent judiciary in Canada. We cannot take this for granted. As parliamentarians, we must ensure that we safeguard and promote it. This bill seeks to balance a legitimate need to enhance public confidence with carefully preserving the judiciary's ability to control judicial education.

The government also allocated significant resources to support this undertaking. The 2017 budget contained $2.7 million over five years for the Canadian Judicial Council and $500,000 per year thereafter to ensure more judges get access to professional development with a greater emphasis on issues related to sex, gender and cultural sensitivity.

Our government is also working with stakeholders to ensure that appropriate training is available to all members of the Canadian judiciary, specifically those not appointed by the federal government.

That said, I hope this bill will prompt everyone in the justice system to take a close look at other measures we can take to bolster the confidence of survivors of sexual assault and the public in our justice system.

Finally, following Ms. Ambrose's introduction of the former Bill C-337, a number of provinces followed suit and did just that. At least one province, Prince Edward Island, enacted similar legislation, and I understand that others are carefully considering policy and legislative responses. I note that other countries have already enacted legislation similar to what is being proposed. It is time for all of our jurisdictions to act.

While we believe that reintroducing Bill C-3 is a crucial step, it is not the only action we can take as a government. We have prioritized supporting victims and survivors of crime by a range of different avenues. These include providing funding to provinces and territories to allow them to develop enhanced programs, to provide free and independent legal advice and, in some cases, representation for survivors of sexual assault. Also included is our government's commitment, as emphasized in the Speech from the Throne, to build on the gender-based violence strategy and work with partners to develop a national action plan.

This bill sends a message to all Canadians, and survivors of sexual assault in particular, that their elected officials are listening, that we care about what happens to their cases, and that we are prepared and committed to take whatever action we can to ensure that our justice system is fair and responsive. It is incumbent on all of us: legislators, judges, prosecutors, police and the public.

Right now, there is considerable enthusiasm across the country for meaningful, sustainable changes to our justice system.

This bill is a small but important step toward achieving that. It gives parliamentarians an opportunity to act on their beliefs and show all Canadians, especially survivors of sexual assault, that their voices matter and that anyone who has the courage to report an assault will be listened to and treated with the dignity and respect every member of our community is entitled to.

I urge all of my parliamentary colleagues to take this step toward a more constructive, resilient justice system that is more responsive to the needs of those it serves.

I call on all of my colleagues to support this important non-partisan bill.

Bills of Exchange Act

[Steven Guilbeault, Liberal, Minister of Canadian Heritage]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-5, an Act to amend the Bills of Exchange Act, the Interpretation Act and the Canada Labour Code (National Day for Truth and Reconciliation).

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)