Bill C-23

Historic Places of Canada Act

An Act respecting places, persons and events of national historic significance or national interest, archaeological resources and cultural and natural heritage

This enactment enacts the Historic Places of Canada Act , which provides for the designation of places, persons and events that are of national historic significance or national interest and fosters the protection and conservation of the heritage value of the designated places.
The Act, among other things,
(a) sets out the powers, duties and functions of the federal minister responsible for the Act respecting, among other things,
(i) the designation of places, persons and events that are of national historic significance or national interest,
(ii) the protection and conservation of the heritage value of certain places that are of national historic significance or national interest,
(iii) the protection and conservation of certain archaeological resources,
(iv) the implementation of the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, and
(v) the establishment of a program for the commemoration of deceased prime ministers of Canada at their grave sites or other appropriate places;
(b) continues the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada and modifies its composition, including to provide for the appointment of representatives for First Nations, Inuit and Métis;
(c) requires the establishment and maintenance of a public register that includes certain information about designated places, persons and events and permits the exclusion of information from the register in certain circumstances;
(d) imposes obligations for the protection and conservation of the heritage value of certain designated places that are under the administration of federal ministers or certain Crown corporations, including
(i) the obligation to ensure that the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada is taken into account before an action is carried out that may result in a physical change to one of those designated places that may affect its heritage value, and
(ii) the obligation to consult with the Parks Canada Agency before that action is carried out and before the disposition of one of those designated places;
(e) contains provisions respecting navigation on certain canals that are designated places;
(f) authorizes the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting certain designated places; and
(g) contains provisions respecting the enforcement of the Act.
The Act also contains transitional provisions, makes related and consequential amendments to other Acts and repeals the Historic Sites and Monuments Act .

Historic Places of Canada Act

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, understanding and appreciating Canada's rich and diverse heritage is so very important, and that is what this bill is all about. I appreciate the fact that the member talked about the significance of indigenous people and paid respect in terms of recognizing the need for name changes. I suspect that same principle could be applied in many different municipalities, urban areas and so forth.

One of the things I would not want to overlook is that there have been other significant historic moments, the Komagata Maru, for example, where a boatful of people who were predominantly Punjabi or from a South Asian community was rejected and sent away, and the outcome and impact that had on society. Not everything is something that was of great benefit, but we need to understand and appreciate our heritage.

I wonder if the member could provide his thoughts on how important it is for us to have a true reflection of our history that we can recognize through things like reconciliation and historic monuments.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would agree that we need to not only celebrate the parts of our history that make us proud, but also remember and learn from the parts of our history that we are not so proud of, that we may be ashamed of, so, yes, we have to remember incidents like that of the Komagata Maru and other incidents from our history, and we should perhaps have historic sites or plaques that teach us about those places and events.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

We just heard him say that we need to remember the darker moments in our history. Sometimes, there is some degree of politicization involved when we want to protect something. We were talking about workers' rights in the case of the Rossland Miner's Union Hall. It took time for funding to be granted to protect and promote it.

In the future, should we not find a way, if not in this bill then in another, to ensure that there is no politicization of the historic sites we want to protect, so that all sites are protected, not just certain ones depending on which party is in government?

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Mr. Speaker, again, I would agree with the member for Saint-Jean that we have to remember these incidents and events in our history.

The Miners' Union Hall represents the growth of labour relations in a Canada that was a very dark place in the 1800s, when those miners first came to Rossland. They made it a better place. That history must and should be known and celebrated. Whether things will change in the future around that or any of these other places and events, these historic sites and places should be marked and maintained so that we can learn about them.

In the future, I do not know how any of these might be politicized. We see some of that happening now, especially with statues and things like that. However, we must know and remember our history, so that we are not doomed to repeat it.

[Gord Johns, NDP, Courtenay—Alberni, BC]

Madam Speaker, Chief Ken Watts waamiiš from Tseshaht First Nation, one of the Nuu-chah-nulth nations, has been advocating for funding directly to first nations, to enable their museums to repatriate artifacts and honour their culture. There is lore and there are stories and oral histories in those intellectual artifacts.

Could the member speak about how important it is to get those resources to those nations as part of reconciliation?

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Madam Speaker, I totally agree. The Osoyoos Indian Band, which I mentioned, are a prime example of that. They have built the Nk’Mip Desert Cultural Centre, which does exactly that. I am very proud of that centre being in my riding.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, I rise today with fond memories, having attended Ataguttaaluk High School in Igloolik in my riding. I send out a special thanks to the Igloolik District Education Authority, Igloolik elders, Nunavut Research Institute, the late Graham Rowley, Susan Rowley, Carolyn MacDonald and John MacDonald. These amazing groups and individuals delivered an archaeology credit course that contributed to my high school diploma. I share my speech today, realizing how investments for youth can have lasting impacts. Qujalivakka. I am so grateful to them.

Bill C-23, an act respecting places, persons and events of national historic significance or national interest, archaeological resources and cultural and natural heritage is of particular importance to indigenous peoples in Canada.

I am glad to see, in Bill C-23, that roles are provided for indigenous peoples in determining historic places. It is great to see that the bill responds to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's call to action 79. Specifically, the bill would add three members to the Historic Sites and Monuments Board, from first nations, Métis and Inuit groups. In addition, it would compel Parks Canada to incorporate indigenous knowledge into the designation and commemoration of historic sites.

Unfortunately, what the bill would do is not enough. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action set a framework, and this framework should have been used in ensuring a better legislation.

The TRC call to action 79 specifically reads:

We call upon the federal government, in collaboration with Survivors, Aboriginal organizations, and the arts community, to develop a reconciliation framework for Canadian heritage and commemoration. This would include, but not be limited to:

i. Amending the Historic Sites and Monuments Act to include First Nations, Inuit, and Métis representation on the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada and its Secretariat.

ii. Revising the policies, criteria, and practices of the National Program of Historical Commemoration to integrate Indigenous history, heritage values, and memory practices into Canada’s national heritage and history.

iii. Developing and implementing a national heritage plan and strategy for commemorating residential school sites, the history and legacy of residential schools, and the contributions of Aboriginal peoples to Canada’s history.

In 2017, the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation raised concerns about the state of conservation of the 17 remaining residential schools and said it was urgent for the government to respond to call to action 79. It is unclear to me what has happened since 2017, and whether this bill addresses those concerns.

The Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development's 2017 report entitled “Preserving Canada’s Heritage: The Foundation For Tomorrow” provided clear recommendations, which I will speak to in more detail later.

During its study, the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development learned that Canada is the only G7 country that has not passed legislation to protect historic places and archaeological resources under its jurisdiction. Unfortunately, alongside many other recommendations not implemented by this government and previous governments, this is not a new recommendation. In 2003, the Office of the Auditor General of Canada also recommended that the federal government strengthen the legal framework built for heritage in Canada.

The committee I mentioned earlier examined the issue of preserving indigenous heritage places. Unsurprisingly, the committee found that indigenous peoples define their heritage in a more holistic manner than the western model. As a result, solutions currently used to protect heritage places must be adapted in order to preserve indigenous heritage places.

The committee amplified the need to implement TRC calls to action 72 to 75, which create the process to commemorate the indigenous children who never returned to their families. Canada’s heritage includes genocide of indigenous peoples. As such, incorporating these calls to action is just as important as implementing call to action number 79. Indigenous peoples should be able to protect their own heritage. Indigenous-led heritage would involve coordination among communities, elders and knowledge keepers.

I will conclude by entering into the record recommendation 17 from the committee's report.

Recommendation 17 of the report also recommended that:

The Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada revise the policies, criteria, and practices of the National Program of Historical Commemoration to integrate Indigenous history, heritage values, and memory practices into Canada’s national heritage and history.

Parks Canada develop and implement a national heritage plan and strategy for commemorating and, where appropriate, conserving residential school sites, the history and legacy of residential schools, and the contributions of Indigenous peoples to Canada’s history.

The federal government, in collaboration with Residential School Survivors, commission and install a publicly accessible, highly visible, Residential Schools National Monument in the city of Ottawa to honour Survivors and all the children who were lost to their families and communities.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, one of the important aspects that maybe has not been noted strongly enough is that within this legislation there would be a response to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action, and the member is so correct in terms of the general assessment in regard to the importance of reconciliation. It is important to recognize that this legislation could go a long way, in terms of ensuring there is a great deal of truth that needs to be said. Protecting and encouraging that particular industry would be healthy for all of us.

I am wondering if she could just provide her thoughts in regard to that educational component.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, I do recognize that TRC call to action 79 would be implemented, but there are also calls to action 72 to 75, which would not be implemented. Given Canada's heritage of genocide against indigenous peoples and trying to hide for years that indigenous children were buried and have grave sites next to residential schools, this needs to be part of that education. It would help to make sure more Canadians understand why it is so important for reconciliation to happen in this time.

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

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Nunavut for her speech.

I hope she will forgive me if I misunderstood something. My question has to do with a point she mentioned that I thought was a somewhat intangible piece of first nations heritage. One of the things she mentioned was genocide, which she seemed to want to add to the current bill. However, as I understand it, the bill is more about physical sites that are owned by Parks Canada and other organizations.

I would like to know if I understood her correctly. Does the member want to broaden the scope of the current bill to cover a more intangible form of heritage? Should that be addressed in a different bill? I would like to hear her comments on this possible distinction, and I would like to know whether I have understood the essence of what she is saying.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, as mentioned in the committee's report in 2017, indigenous peoples do have a different way of interpreting heritage, and it is not just about physical locations or monuments. It is one thing to ensure that indigenous people are added to the membership of boards. There will need to be more to make sure that indigenous heritage is actually incorporated in all of Canada's heritage.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Madam Speaker, going back to some of the recommendations by the fine member of Parliament for Nunavut, and certainly brought up by the Bloc, we have different understandings of what a monument is. One of the improvements that can be made to the bill is ensuring it reflects greater diversity in our understandings, even of what “physical” is: inanimate and animate objects.

Can my hon. colleague please respond to that recommendation?

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, that is a huge question. I remember being taught by Professor John Borrows, who is an amazing legal scholar. I hope the people in Parliament look up John Borrows and the great work he does. He talks about indigenous laws and how animate and inanimate laws are also monuments. Stuff like that should be incorporated into this kind of legislation.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, what a great way this is to wind down government business at the end of the week.

Once again, we have before us legislation of a substantial nature, which says a lot about how important our heritage is as a nation. We have an infrastructure in that regard from coast to coast to coast, and it is important that we recognize our history. Whether they are parks, monuments or whatever they may be, they speak a great deal not only for our current generation but for future generations.

I will wait for the next time the bill is called to conclude my remarks.

The House resumed from December 2, 2022, consideration of the motion that Bill C-23, An Act respecting places, persons and events of national historic significance or national interest, archaeological resources and cultural and natural heritage, be read the second time and referred to a committee.