Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation Act

An Act respecting the Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation

Sponsor

Rebecca Alty  Liberal

Status

Second reading (House), as of Oct. 7, 2025

Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-10.

Summary

This is from the published bill.

This enactment provides for the appointment of a Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation to conduct reviews and performance audits of the activities of government institutions related to the implementation of modern treaties. It also establishes the Office of the Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation for the purpose of assisting the Commissioner in the fulfillment of their mandate and the exercise of their powers and the performance of their duties and functions. Finally, it makes consequential amendments to other Acts.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-10s:

C-10 (2022) Law An Act respecting certain measures related to COVID-19
C-10 (2020) An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts
C-10 (2020) Law Appropriation Act No. 4, 2019-20
C-10 (2016) Law An Act to amend the Air Canada Public Participation Act and to provide for certain other measures

Debate Summary

line drawing of robot

This is a computer-generated summary of the speeches below. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Bill C-10 proposes establishing a Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation, an independent agent of Parliament, to oversee and report on the federal government's modern treaty obligations.

Liberal

  • Establishes independent oversight: The bill establishes an independent agent of Parliament, the Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation, to hold the federal government accountable for its modern treaty commitments and obligations.
  • Advances reconciliation and trust: The bill is a major step towards advancing reconciliation, building trust, and strengthening nation-to-nation relationships by ensuring Canada fulfills its modern treaty commitments.
  • Promotes economic and social growth: Effective modern treaty implementation, overseen by the Commissioner, drives economic prosperity, social development, and self-determination for Indigenous communities, benefiting all Canadians.
  • Developed with indigenous partners: The legislation was codeveloped with modern treaty and self-governing partners, integrating their vision and feedback to ensure the commissioner reflects their priorities for accountability.

Conservative

  • Opposes redundant new bureaucracy: The party opposes Bill C-10, arguing it creates an unnecessary and costly bureaucracy that duplicates the Auditor General's work and existing oversight, which the government already ignores.
  • Demands direct accountability and action: Conservatives demand direct accountability from ministers and departments to fulfill existing legal obligations and enforce treaty commitments, rather than creating another office with no real power.
  • Criticizes Liberal treaty failures: The party highlights the Liberal government's decade-long failure to negotiate any modern treaties, contrasting it with the previous Conservative government's record, viewing Bill C-10 as a distraction.
  • Advocates for economic reconciliation: Conservatives emphasize economic reconciliation through natural resource development and proper indigenous procurement, focusing on tangible results like housing, clean water, and indigenous policing for communities.

Bloc

  • Supports bill C-10 for reconciliation: The Bloc supports Bill C-10 as a crucial step toward reconciliation with First Nations, recognizing modern treaties as living promises that shape future relationships and foster partnerships.
  • Establishes an independent commissioner: The bill creates an independent commissioner for modern treaty implementation to act as a watchdog, ensuring transparency, accountability, and consistent follow-up on federal commitments.
  • Proposes improvements and raises concerns: The Bloc suggests strengthening the commissioner's appointment process, ensuring full access to information, respecting provincial jurisdictions, confirming adequate funding, and calls for a permanent Indigenous advisory committee.

Green

  • Supports bill C-10: The Green Party strongly supports Bill C-10, viewing it as an essential step toward reconciliation that addresses a long-standing request from Indigenous peoples.
  • Establishes independent commissioner: The bill establishes an independent commissioner for modern treaty implementation, a role co-developed and advocated for by the Land Claims Agreements Coalition over two decades.
  • Calls for quick passage: The party urges all members to pass Bill C-10 quickly and without amendments, respecting the direct request from Indigenous leadership and avoiding political obstruction.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

October 7th, 2025 / 12:40 p.m.

Conservative

Ellis Ross Conservative Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Mr. Speaker, basically, yes, we supported it, but we wanted to put protections in, which we debated and we got in. By the way, I do not blame the first nations for their distrust of this, because one day, the government said first nations do not have a veto. I suspect it got that out of the case law, specifically, the Haida court case of 2004. However, the very next day, when it got political push-back, it said it would not do anything without first nations' consent. It then added it would not do anything without national consensus. In both cases, this was not defined.

I think we all agree that we all have to build up the economy. We have to get away from the tariffs, and we have to actually rebuild our economy for the sake of Canadians.

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

October 7th, 2025 / 12:40 p.m.

Liberal

Shannon Miedema Liberal Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Yellowhead.

Kwe. Ullukkut. Taanshi. Hello. I would like to begin by honouring the Algonquin Anishinabe nation, on whose traditional, unceded and unsurrendered territory Canada’s Parliament is established.

I am honoured to rise and speak today in support of Bill C-10, which would establish a commissioner for modern treaty implementation. The bill has strong support from modern treaty partners, and its introduction is an important step forward on the path of reconciliation. At its core, it is an opportunity to turn shared priorities into shared progress.

To better understand this opportunity, I will speak about how we got to where we are today. That means looking back at the history that shaped our present reality and the history of treaties in Canada. I will also discuss what a modern treaty is and why we have faced calls to improve their implementation, accountability and oversight for more than 20 years.

Treaties have long been the foundation of the relationship between the Crown and indigenous peoples. For example, in the 18th century, the peace and friendship treaties were intended to re-establish peace and trade after conflicts. Meanwhile, the treaties signed after 1763 over first nations territories opened up much of Canada to non-indigenous settlement in return for recognition of specific rights, annuities and goods, among other benefits. The treaties from this period and into the 1920s are referred to as historic treaties.

I would like to take a moment and say that last Wednesday was Treaty Day for all of Mi'kma'ki. In Nova Scotia, we had a flag-raising at the lieutenant-governor's house, which was very well attended. I saw the framed document, which is now 300 years old, in that house. It was a truly special moment.

As members know, during the historic treaty period, Canada adopted colonial, paternalistic policies that inflicted harm on indigenous peoples. These are painful truths that we now acknowledge as part of our ongoing journey of reconciliation. Decades later, Canada entered the modern treaty era of treaty-making. While modern treaties are distinct from historic treaties, they remain a foundational part of the relationship between the Crown and indigenous peoples.

I am now going to explain some of this history.

The modern treaty era began in 1973 with the Supreme Court decision of Calder et al. v. Attorney-General of British Columbia. This case centred around the Nishga Tribal Council in British Columbia, which sought recognition of the title to lands its people had historically inhabited. Until 1951, the Indian Act made it illegal for indigenous communities to use band funds to support any litigation or claim, making it difficult to pursue the title to the land.

Nishga Chief Frank Calder brought the case to the courts. The case was first rejected by the Supreme Court of British Columbia and then by the Court of Appeal of British Columbia. The Nishga Tribal Council escalated the case to the Supreme Court of Canada, where, at trial, it lost the case by one vote based on a technicality in the judicial process. Although the Nishga Tribal Council did not reach the outcome it sought, the decision led to the Government of Canada’s first land claims policy concerning the settlement of land claims by groups seeking title rights to land. This new policy would be important when Canada entered into the first modern treaty with the James Bay Cree.

Around the same time as the Nishga and the Calder case, Hydro-Québec sought to develop land claimed by the James Bay Cree without consulting the indigenous people inhabiting it. In response, the first nation partnered with the Indians of Quebec Association to negotiate with the Province of Quebec, though without success. Later, with the help of the Northern Quebec Inuit Association, the case was escalated to the Superior Court of Québec. Eventually, the James Bay Cree and the Inuit of northern Quebec signed a modern treaty with the Government of Canada and the Province of Quebec. The implementation of that treaty began 50 years ago, on November 11, 1975. The treaty permitted Hydro-Québec’s development of the land, and the Cree and Inuit inhabiting the territory were offered an acknowledgement of their rights to the land. This first modern treaty was a landmark for indigenous peoples across Canada, setting a new precedent in treaty-making.

In 1982, there was another landmark that proclaimed and affirmed the rights of indigenous peoples in Canada: the Constitution Act of 1982. Notably, it was forward-looking, acknowledging that additional rights and freedoms could be defined by indigenous peoples in the future through land claims settlement.

Despite this progress, tensions and disagreements persisted. To find solutions, the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples was established to find ways to rebuild the relationship. It spent five years studying the relationship between the Government of Canada and indigenous peoples and found that the federal government lacked policy oversight and needed better guidance on land claims other than through the courts. The commission proposed that an implementation office be established to oversee the government's treaty claims, self-government accords and other obligations. At the heart of these recommendations was the need for the “foundations of a new relationship”. This included calls for improved review and oversight of modern treaties.

Since then, the Government of Canada has faced many calls to improve modern treaty implementation. For instance, in 2003, an Auditor General report outlined the findings of an audit that studied the department's management of and accountability in its transfer of responsibilities to the Yukon, as well as land claim agreements. The report found that there was a “lack of performance reporting” measures and “ineffective implementation”.

The Auditor General published a report in 2007, four years later, on the Inuvialuit Final Agreement. The report noted the “absence of a formal structure” to oversee implementation, a “lack of a strategic approach” to implement its modern treaty obligations and a lack of monitoring of how Canada fulfilled these obligations. It also noted an inconsistency in the vision between the Government of Canada and claimants regarding their respective roles and responsibilities.

Most striking was the recommendation from the Standing Senate Committee on Indigenous Peoples that said the Government of Canada immediately begin to establish, in collaboration with modern treaty partners, an independent commissioner for modern treaty implementation. A similar call was included in the calls for justice detailed in the final report of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. The report called on the Government of Canada to immediately implement and comply with the calls from international and human rights bodies to establish treaty-monitoring bodies such as the one we are discussing here today.

To summarize, since the beginning of the modern treaty era in Canada, the federal government has been called upon to improve accountability and oversight. Today, we have the opportunity to make history by responding to those calls, fully committing to honouring the relationships and fully meeting the obligations enshrined in modern treaties. Modern treaty partners strongly advocated for the introduction of this bill, and modern treaty partner leadership named establishing the commissioner as a top priority during the Land Claims Agreements Coalition conference that was held in February this year.

It is important to remember that modern treaties are about moving the Government of Canada's relationship with indigenous peoples forward. The social, cultural and economic growth driven by modern treaties creates opportunities for indigenous partners and all people in Canada. It is also central to the one Canadian economy act, which would integrate indigenous leadership into national infrastructure and climate planning.

I ask the members of this House to vote yes on this legislation. I ask them to vote yes on responding to 20 years of calls for greater accountability and transparency in modern treaty implementation and vote yes on living up to the promises enshrined in modern treaties in our laws and Constitution. I ask them to vote yes on a stronger and more resilient Canadian economy, underpinned by thriving indigenous communities and meaningful Crown-indigenous collaboration.

I ask them to vote yes on Bill C-10, the commissioner for modern treaty implementation act.

Meegwetch. Qujannamiik. Marsi.

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

October 7th, 2025 / 12:50 p.m.

Conservative

Eric Melillo Conservative Kenora—Kiiwetinoong, ON

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the member on her election to this place.

What is striking about this bill is that it is really not necessary. The government has the power right now to bring forward and deal with modern treaties. The past Conservative government got six modern treaties signed.

After 10 years of the tired Liberal government, I wonder if the member can share what exactly has prevented the Liberals from doing this work to this point, because the power is in their hands.

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

October 7th, 2025 / 12:50 p.m.

Liberal

Shannon Miedema Liberal Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, the need for this commissioner comes from the relationship that we have now and are continuing to grow with our indigenous partners across this country. This bill was in the last Parliament and up for debate, but it did not get passed.

We have been asked specifically to consider passing it without amendment, because it is a top priority. Part of a healthy relationship is listening to the people in that relationship, and this is very much wanted. It would hold the government to account and it would have a very big role in transparency.

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

October 7th, 2025 / 12:50 p.m.

Bloc

Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague's speech. She referred to a key word, namely “accountability”. There is something I would like her to clarify for me: Where is the accountability in this bill?

The new commissioner will have the power to analyze but not the power to compel action. This means that the commissioner would be able to paint a picture of the government's shortcomings but would not be able to change anything. It is like hiring a referee but not even giving them a whistle.

Could my colleague explain something to me? Could it be that the Liberals are afraid of implementing actual mechanisms for holding them accountable for their actions?

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

October 7th, 2025 / 12:50 p.m.

Liberal

Shannon Miedema Liberal Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, it is pretty clear from some of the details in the bill that there are not teeth like there are in a court. This is more about holding the government to account, being transparent, making sure that we are what we have committed to doing in this relationship, and progressing truth and reconciliation in this country.

The bill is not intended to have those teeth, but it is intended to be a positive step forward in guiding us on this journey we are all taking together.

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

October 7th, 2025 / 12:50 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's advocacy. She is a very powerful speaker, I must say, and has taken a responsible position on Bill C-10.

Let us be very clear. There is an opposing viewpoint. The Conservatives tend to believe that the Auditor General of Canada will suffice, and that we do not need this legislation.

Would having an independent agent who has background experience in dealing with the whole issue of reconciliation and these modern treaties be of great value to Parliament? By establishing the commissioner, all of Canada would benefit from having an advocate who has a special focus on this issue. Would she not agree?

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

October 7th, 2025 / 12:50 p.m.

Liberal

Shannon Miedema Liberal Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, I 100% agree that we need this independent commissioner, who would be chosen in collaboration with our indigenous partners, with whom we have been working on this for so long.

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

October 7th, 2025 / 12:55 p.m.

Bloc

Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like my colleague to clarify something for me in terms of words and actions. She speaks of reconciliation and transparency and yet, in June, this government tabled Bill C‑5 without first consulting indigenous communities, for which it was criticized.

How can we trust a government that completely ignored indigenous communities only a few months ago but is now saying that it wants true reconciliation?

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

October 7th, 2025 / 12:55 p.m.

Liberal

Shannon Miedema Liberal Halifax, NS

Mr. Speaker, we have been consulting indigenous communities across this country on Bill C-5. We have been in these conversations for months now. I disagree with that statement.

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

October 7th, 2025 / 12:55 p.m.

Conservative

William Stevenson Conservative Yellowhead, AB

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to speak in strong opposition to Bill C-10, the so-called commissioner for modern treaty implementation act.

Let me begin by stating what should be obvious but often gets lost in the noise of the Liberal government's grandstanding: Conservatives support treaty rights. We support the process of reconciliation with Canada's first nations, Inuit and Métis people, not just in word but in meaningful action, and we have the record to back that up. Under Prime Minister Harper, five modern treaties were successfully negotiated in just six years. These were not symbolic gestures; they were real agreements that advanced indigenous self-government and secured land and government rights that had been long delayed.

Contrast that with the current Liberal government: zero modern treaties negotiated in over a decade in office. That is not progress; it is paralysis, and the Liberal record is shameful. Now, after years of doing nothing, the Liberals are suddenly telling Canadians that the answer to their own failure in bureaucracy is another office, more Ottawa insiders and a new commissioner who, let us be honest, would duplicate work that is already being done by the Office of the Auditor General.

My riding of Yellowhead is home to seven indigenous communities and is located on Treaty 6, Treaty 7 and Treaty 8 lands. These are proud nations with deep roots, strong traditions and growing aspirations. I have had the opportunity to meet with leaders and members of the communities since my election this spring. What they need is not another report from another commissioner; what they need is for government to do its job. Imagine what an estimated $2.6-million annual budget for the proposed office could accomplish in indigenous communities in my riding and across the country.

Throughout the country, indigenous communities need housing, better infrastructure and clean water, something the government has promised but has repeatedly failed to deliver. They need the federal government to live up to existing treaty commitments, not to kick the can down the road while claiming moral high ground from behind a new desk in Ottawa. Bill C-10 is not about reconciliation; it is about political theatre.

Let us take a closer look at what the bill would actually do. It would create a new agent of Parliament, the so-called commissioner for modern treaty implementation. This commissioner would write reports, table findings and issue recommendations, but as we have already heard today, would not have any authority to enforce anything. The kicker is that the reports would go to the minister first, the same minister who is failing to implement the treaties in the first place, before the reports are even tabled in the House. That does not sound very transparent to me.

Proponents of the bill, including many indigenous stakeholders, have expressed support, saying it would improve accountability. I respect their voices and their opinions on the legislation. I also respect their frustration. After a decade of broken promises from the Liberal government, I understand the desire for any measure that might force Ottawa to pay attention.

However, we need to be honest about what the bill is. It is not real accountability; it is bureaucratic theatre, and it comes with a price tag. We are told the new office would cost $10.6 million over four years, employing about 15 full-time bureaucrats. That may not sound like much to the big spenders on the other side of the House, but let me remind them that Canadians are hurting right now. Inflation is out of control. Families across Canada are struggling to heat their home, fill their gas tank and put food on the table.

These struggles are not exclusive to indigenous communities, nor are they exclusive to communities in my riding. Every member of the House sees the impacts of Liberal spending in their riding and hears about the needs of their constituents on a daily basis. As a CPA, I have seen first-hand the effects of increased Liberal taxes on my community. Small businesses are drowning in red tape. The Liberal government's solution is to spend millions more dollars creating yet another office in Ottawa. This is not common sense; this is Liberal nonsense.

Let me remind the House that we already have a respected independent institution that audits federal indigenous programs and treaty obligations: the Office of the Auditor General. Since 2005, that office has issued over twenty reports on everything from treaty land entitlements to self-government agreements and to the implementation of modern treaties. As a new member of the public accounts committee, I am dismayed to learn how so many of these reports and recommendations have gone unimplemented.

Although I have been assigned to the committee for only a short time, I have seen time and again that the work is being done. The Auditor General and her office are spending time and money to dig into the issues and to table reports in Parliament, yet again and again, their tangible recommendations that the government cannot bother to follow through on are ignored. In fact some of the most damning evidence of the government's failure has come from the Auditor General's reports.

What has the Liberals' response been? It has not been action or implementation but more delay, more excuses and now more bureaucracy. Creating a new commissioner would not hold government to account; it would just add a middleman. What we need is not more paper; we need more performance. We need ministers and departments to do the job they are paid to do, with no more shifting of blame or hiding behind reports. They should just do their job.

I want to speak directly for a moment to the indigenous leaders and communities in Yellowhead and across the country. I hear them, I see their frustration, I know they are tired of waiting, and I know they have heard a lot of promises from governments of every stripe, with too few results. We do not need more layers of government to make good on its obligations. Government just needs to take leadership. We need accountability and action.

Conservatives are committed to advancing reconciliation through real results, negotiated agreements, infrastructure development and ensuring that indigenous communities have the tools they need to succeed on their own terms. Reconciliation is not served by bloating the bureaucracy in Ottawa; it is served by empowering indigenous communities at home.

The Liberal approach to reconciliation has become performative and bureaucratic, and Canadians are seeing through it. Bill C-10 is not a solution; it is a diversion. It is a smokescreen for a government that has failed to act. It is a press release disguised as policy. It is, ultimately, a waste of time, energy and taxpayer money that would be better spent actually implementing the treaties we already have

On June 11, 2008, former prime minister Stephen Harper said the following about the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, during the government’s apology to former students of Indian residential schools:

It will be a positive step in forging a new relationship between aboriginal peoples and other Canadians, a relationship based on the knowledge of our shared history, a respect for each other and a desire to move forward together with a renewed understanding that strong families, strong communities and vibrant cultures and traditions will contribute to a stronger Canada for all of us.

What the bill proposes would not improve the lives of the communities it seeks to help. It would only create another hurdle, another level of bureaucracy and another barrier for indigenous communities that simply need the government to do its job, to honour existing treaties and to follow through on its promises.

Let me close by returning to my riding of Yellowhead, a region rich in history and tradition and home to proud indigenous peoples who want the same thing as every Canadian: the opportunity to build a better life, to raise a healthy family and to move forward with dignity and respect. They do not need another commissioner. They do not need another report. They need a government that will stop talking and start doing. That is what Conservatives will fight for and what I will fight for.

I urge all members to vote against Bill C-10.

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

October 7th, 2025 / 1:05 p.m.

Liberal

John-Paul Danko Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON

Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to point out that members opposite and members in the opposition actively deny some of the horrors of residential schools and subsequent intergenerational trauma, so will the member take this opportunity to state on the public record that he acknowledges the horrors of residential schools, acknowledges the deaths of indigenous children at residential schools and acknowledges the need for genuine truth and reconciliation?

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

October 7th, 2025 / 1:05 p.m.

Conservative

William Stevenson Conservative Yellowhead, AB

Mr. Speaker, as I stated in my speech earlier, the Conservatives have a long history of stating that they do recognize that there were problems in the past and that we have addressed them, starting with Mr. Harper. There were several times when actual action was done; it was not just words but things that were actually produced and going forward. I do recognize that there were these problems.

We on the Conservative side want action, not just more words.

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

October 7th, 2025 / 1:05 p.m.

Bloc

Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC

Mr. Speaker, I listened carefully to my colleague's speech. I will wait until he puts his earpiece in so that he can understand one of the two official languages in the House. Here is my question for my colleague.

We know full well that the Conservative Party is the champion of accountability. In this bill, the new commissioner only has the power to observe. They have no power to enforce and to actually change things. They can watch, but their hands are tied. They cannot change anything.

I would like my colleague to tell me whether his party agrees that the commissioner should be given real mechanisms so that they can actually change things when the government acts against first nations.

Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

October 7th, 2025 / 1:05 p.m.

Conservative

William Stevenson Conservative Yellowhead, AB

Mr. Speaker, I agree that the commissioner would have absolutely no teeth. It begs the question, would they really have any ability to do anything that is not already in existence? It would be very similar to the Auditor General, who has made all kinds of recommendations, but nothing is accomplished. The government can choose to ignore things.

I do see the proposal as a waste of money, when we already have the ability, with the Auditor General, to do the reports that the commissioner would now have the ability to do. It is just a repeat of the same abilities we already have, so it would be very much a waste of time. However, I am not sure that I would actually want to give the commissioner any more power unless we wanted to extend to the Auditor General the power to make implementations. They would be on the same level, as far as I see it.