Bill C-8 (Historical)

An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada's call to action number 94)

This enactment amends the Citizenship Act to include, in the Oath or Affirmation of Citizenship, a solemn promise to respect the Aboriginal and treaty rights of First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples, in order to respond to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada’s call to action number 94.

Citizenship Act

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

The hon. member is not allowed to mention anyone who sits in the House. He mentioned the Prime Minister by his last name and I would ask him to refrain from doing that in the remainder of his speech.

[Kenny Chiu, Conservative, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is yet another substantive virtue signal by the Liberal government. Canadians are growing tired of this cliché. The government consistently fumbles through crisis after crisis, desperate to take attention away from its failings when it comes to Canada. While the government takes pride in this as a form of reconciliation, Canadian indigenous people are still dealing with drinking water and boil water advisories. The government should be putting more time and energy into steps to ensure such advisories are not necessary in the future, that the safety of drinking water is sustainable and that access to basic priorities like clean water is no longer a concern.

For a government to place such emphasis on reconciliation as a core priority, it must be willing to do what is necessary to provide equality of opportunity for all Canadian communities. Like every Canadian hurt throughout the pandemic, first nations people want to work and do what is best. They have had both opportunities denied under the Liberal government. Before the pandemic, Canada's first nations showed that they wanted to work and contribute to Canada. They sought opportunities by supporting the jobs and benefits to the economy that pipeline construction creates.

As the year has progressed, on the opposite side of the country we have seen first nations continue to seek economic advantage by fighting for their moderate livelihood fisheries. In 2020, jobs have been lost and the deficit is skyrocketing. Canada cannot afford more indecision and meaningless gestures. Canadians need to see meaningful actions taken. Canada has a long and complicated relationship with its indigenous peoples, and I readily agree that further steps are required to strengthen our relationship.

Changing the oath of citizenship does not accomplish this great task. Work done should add to strengthening relations within the Canadian social fabric. For failing to act on this, the government will be held to account by the people. Canadians deserve better than another empty promise of sunny ways made by politicians wishing to cater sympathetic favour to reduce proud citizens of this country to tokens cynically used to curry political favour.

As a Conservative member of Parliament, I stand for the improvement of Canada. My party stands for the improvement of this country. We represent many Canadians who want better than a government that consistently failed in its mandates by changing the rules and not providing urgent or transparent actions to address the concerns. No matter the gravity of the issue facing Canada or the concerns of indigenous inhabitants, the government has served the House unappealing word salads in its responses.

Similarly, the bill is but another response devoid of any substance. Perhaps Bill C-6 is something that should be delayed until such time as call to action 93 or more meaningful action, such as ending all boil water advisories and making real, meaningful progress on reconciliation, is accomplished.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, when the member for Battle River—Crowfoot chastised me for being overly partisan, I actually started to feel maybe I was a little tough on him there, and then I heard that speech.

The member said in his speech that a lot of members in the House probably have not given that oath. I actually have. I am not an immigrant. Both of my parents came to Canada in the fifties, and they would have given that oath, but I also gave that oath on a number of occasions when I was a mayor. Before Stephen Harper got rid of all those great citizenship ceremonies in so many parts of the country, as a mayor I had the opportunity every few months to get up and recite the oath with those new citizens. It was quite an experience to see them experiencing that and being a part of that.

Would the member agree that adjusting that to properly reflect what Canada is, is incredibly important for newcomers to this country?

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I want to remind members: there is a lot of back and forth, and I am sure that the member for Steveston—Richmond East is able to answer that question without any help.

The hon. member.

[Kenny Chiu, Conservative, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Madam Speaker, such is the burden to govern. I imagine the member would also understand that changing the oath is not something that will substantially benefit our first nations people. What I am saying is that if the government is actually genuine about reconciliation and helping improve the lives of our first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples, it should actually consider what I recommend. It should either help restore the clean water provision or implement recommendation 93 instead.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to come back to what my Liberal colleague just said about an oath that properly reflects what Canada is.

This reminds me that I have often heard the Prime Minister say that Canada was the first post-national country in the world. That means there is no nation in Canada. There is no Quebec nation and no indigenous nations. It is a post-national country.

This brings up two possibilities. Either the Prime Minister is not consistent, or he realizes that there are nations in Canada, including indigenous nations.

I will therefore ask my colleague this question: Does he recognize that Canada is not a post-national country and that there are nations, including the Quebec nation and the indigenous nations?

[Kenny Chiu, Conservative, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Madam Speaker, in its early days the Harper Conservative government actually did recognize Quebec as a nation within a united Canada. That was a very bold step that would actually lead to the united Canada that we are enjoying so much today. What I am trying to say is that when we are facing reconciliation with our first nations peoples in Canada, there are many better things we could do, and more substantive actions we could take, than changing the oath of citizenship, as the Liberal government has proposed.

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

Madam Speaker, I listened with interest to my hon. colleague's remarks. I think I may have heard him describe the amendments before us as a word salad, and the assertion that these are changes brought forward by the government, I believe, is misplaced. These are changes that were recommended to us by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, so I am wondering if the hon. member has read through the other 93 calls to action from the TRC and whether there are other calls to action he would describe as a word salad.

Would he like to share those words with the commission itself?

[Kenny Chiu, Conservative, Steveston—Richmond East, BC]

Madam Speaker, my speech was addressing a long frustration that I have accumulated and what I have observed in the one year that I have had here in the House. There is a lot of promise here. There are a lot of sunny way promises, except it is still snowing and it is still cloudy out there. I am not directly referring to the current proposal of the oath of citizenship that we are looking at here.

Again, a mere changing of words would not help improve our aboriginal peoples' lives.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in this chamber, and for this debate, it is a very big honour for me.

Members have alluded to their experiences with citizenship ceremonies. They are, of course, overwhelmingly emotional. They are, of course, overwhelmingly filled with gratitude by those who are getting their citizenship, as well as those who were born on these shores when we realize the great lottery we won by being born here, the best country in the world.

I have a number of memories, but I will just mention two of them. There is the citizenship ceremony in which my father-in-law, after many years of being a German citizen, received Canadian citizenship, and subsequently my own wife, who received Canadian citizenship. Those were big days.

I also want to recognize a phenomenal citizenship judge who happened to have been the mayor of Hamilton for eight years and then became a citizenship judge for six years. I want to recognize the late Robert Morrow, because he was one of the citizenship judges that I knew who could encapsulate the history of Canada, going from first nations, indigenous and Métis peoples all the way through to modern day. He could capture the entire room for 20 minutes while bringing that whole history to life, and what a beautiful history it is. I thank Bob Morrow very much for his contribution to citizenship.

I would also note what one of my colleagues alluded to earlier, the campaign to make sure that Sergeant Tommy Prince would be pictured on the five-dollar bill. Tommy Prince was the recipient of 11 medals, including battle honours. He served in the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry. I will read from a CBC article, which quoted my colleague for Calgary Shepard, who said:

He's a founding member of Canada's elite first Canadian parachute battalion, and the Devil's Brigade during the Second World War.... He was one of the soldiers who defended hill 677 in the battle of Kapyong during the Korean War. He won 11 medals. That makes him the most decorated Indigenous war veteran, combat veteran, in the history of Canada.

I would encourage my colleagues, because we have talked a lot about not only a message in principle but doing the right thing, to support that initiative.

I will read the oath and note the wording that will be changed. It begins, “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,” and then continues with the addition from Bill C-8, which reads, “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.”

One way we can illuminate this is to get to know our first nations brothers and sisters. My best education about indigenous peoples came from all of the indigenous individuals I have known. I had a dark time in my life, which is public knowledge and I do not mind mentioning it. I was institutionalized when I was young, and there were two dozen first nations individuals I knew who were there from all across the country. They generally were there because they were very poor. In those days, one could be incarcerated as a youth if one was incorrigible, so many of them were incarcerated in what they called “training schools” in those days, which I have spoken about before in the House. They were really prison institutions for boys eight to 16 years old, and there were several institutions for girls in that respect as well. I do not want to dwell on that as much as to say that I got to know first nations boys at that time, and I had never met a first nations individual before.

I grew up in Kingston, Ontario, and the member for Kingston and the Islands may be happy about that or he might not, but I grew up on Alfred Street, Earl Street and Frontenac Street. My brothers went to KCVI, LCVI and QECVI. I went to the old Victoria School, which has now been repurposed for Queen's University. However, I had never met anyone from a reserve or an indigenous person who lived off reserve. It was not until I was there at that institution that I began my education about what it meant to be a first nations citizen.

To my great fortune, I met many more. I was on the board of a charity with an individual named Ross Maracle, a Mohawk leader from Tyendinaga. Ross will be happy that I still remember his Mohawk name, Rowedahowe. Another person I met was a Cree leader from Manitoba, Larry Wilson, who I just found out recently is now a chaplain in prisons helping individuals get back on their feet and into a better way of life. I remember meeting Chief David General too, at a very tough time, in Caledonia. I remember touring first nations with Chief Anita Hill.

All of these relationships were profoundly educational for me and made me understand the history. They also made me understand people's desire to be appreciated as individuals and not to be labelled as groups. So often when we try to solve problems, that is what we do.

I am happy for this addition to the oath, as long as we bring it to life.

One of my friends, and I hope he is okay with me calling him a friend, is named Nathan Tidridge. He recently won a Governor General's award for teaching history. He is one of the most significant Canadian citizens I know building bridges for reconciliation with first nations.

I got to know him most intimately after he raised money for a monument. In the riding I represent, there is a town called Waterdown. It is growing in leaps and bounds. That means there is lots of development, but traditional lands of first nations are being gobbled up in it. He wanted to make sure there was a marker there for the Souharissen people.

He raised the money for the monument, and got permission from the city to lay the monument. The Lieutenant Governor of Ontario was there, along with me and some others, to make sure there was not only a ceremony but a solemn oath in the community that the Souharissen natural area be remembered. It is the traditional territory for Neutral, Haudenosaunee and Mississaugas of the Credit First Nations peoples.

The more I got to know Nathan Tidridge, the more I admired him. I will quote something he wrote in regard to our stewardship of the promises we have made to our indigenous brothers and sisters:

An Indigenous teaching is that for non-Indigenous People, ceremony often bookends the real work of governments, whereas for Indigenous People, it is interwoven into the entire process. In Canada, the Queen and her representatives sit at the apex of our state and are therefore the keepers of our highest protocols and national ceremony.

The unique relationships between the Queen’s representatives and First Nations provide vehicles for convening community—bringing together diverse stakeholders in a non-partisan way to focus on a particular issue—and fostering communication that are not available to politicians tied to a system dominated by a four-year election cycle.

Invitations from the governor general, an office bound to Indigenous People through Treaty and infused with centuries of history, are more readily accepted than those from a politician or government. This unique power allows members from different communities and perspectives to gather in the apolitical space that is required to reflect the values inherent in Treaty.

The power to convene community in no way interferes with the convention of responsible government. However, it can build on the Crown’s traditional rights to be consulted, to encourage, and to warn, first articulated by the 19th-century British constitutional expert Walter Bagehot. The Crown’s unique ability to convene community above the political fray is even more important in these polarized and volatile times.

It is my hope that not only will this be part of the new oath but the current government and future governments will consider empowering the office of the Governor General, the Queen's representative here, to really deal with the relationship aspect between us and first nations to bring about real change and real reconciliation.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I have a comment more than a question. It is always nice to hear stories from people who once lived in Kingston. The member's elementary school closed, and I regret to inform him that his high school is closing also. This is the last year KCVI will be open.

I was really taken by something the member said at the very beginning of his speech. He said that those who live in Canada have won the lottery, and I could not agree with him more. We live in the best country in the world with an incredible quality of life. Despite the differences we have in this place, I really hope we can all reflect on that comment he made, because it genuinely is the truth of what Canada is and what we are.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Madam Speaker, I was hoping the member was going to call me a Kingstonian because only people from Kingston know that is the real name. I thank him for the kind comments.

This is a really passionate area for me. I think back to the spirit of 1967, our first centennial year, when we celebrated not only the nation but also our first nations people. If we remember that spirit and that time, I think we can have a renaissance and bring about some really powerful change with our first nations sisters and brothers.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Madam Speaker, the Bloc Québécois supports the principle of Bill C-8, and we certainly support a nation-to-nation dialogue with the first nations.

However, we believe the citizenship oath made to the Queen, to the monarchy, must be changed. It is repugnant to Quebeckers. It is a legacy of British colonialism of which Canada is still a part. It is a very questionable legacy right now. The numbers speak for themselves. According to a fairly recent Angus Reid poll conducted in January 2020, over 70% of Quebeckers do not want the country to continue as a constitutional monarchy.

Nearly 45% of Canadians want to withdraw from the constitutional monarchy. It costs over $50 million per year. I think that my Conservative colleagues would agree with me about saving money.

The former finance minister, who was thrown under the bus recently because of the WE Charity scandal, said that the only reason why he wanted to stay in the monarchy was to maintain a good relationship with the Commonwealth. There are 53 countries in the Commonwealth and 21 of them are monarchies, of which 16 fall under the authority of Elizabeth II and five have different monarchs. There are also 32 republics.

When will we stop being a monarchy so that we can finally be free of British neo-colonialism?

[David Sweet, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Madam Speaker, I disagree with my colleague.

If I have a minute, I will speak to something I wanted to get to. When indigenous nations first encountered Europeans on Turtle Island they began incorporating them into a long-established protocol of treaty making. Treaties created the necessary diplomatic space in which very different societies could communicate and negotiate complex relationships despite radically different world views.

The Crown was a natural vehicle for settlers to enter into long-term relationships with their indigenous partners. A treaty, like the institution of monarchy, is an organic creation that evolves or devolves depending on those who are engaged with it. It is meant to be the best reflection of the constituents. Treaties also require personal relationships to be effective.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for his comments. I have had the great pleasure of working with him on the international human rights committee, and I greatly respect his work.

One thing I would like to get his comments on is this. Knowing how important true meaningful reconciliation is to him, as the current government brings forward UNDRIP, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, will he be supporting that legislation?