Canadian Heritage Committee on Nov. 8th, 2018

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

I'm sorry about that.

[Ry Moran]

I'm going to quote Willie Littlechild, because I think he said it very beautifully. The treaties and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples are not problems; they are solutions. They have to stop being seen as problems. We have to start seeing them as fundamental mechanisms that are already in place, have been broadly recognized; as being a path for us to follow to ensure that we don't repeat the same mistakes of the past.

That's why we have human rights. That's why the United Nations declaration is part of an overall, broad human rights framework. We have to protect us from us. Humans are extraordinarily valuable. We need these aspirational and tangible steps to help protect us against that.

[John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough—Guildwood, ON]

Thank you for that thoughtfulness.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Thank you.

We will now go to Ms. Wagantall, please, for five minutes.

[Cathay Wagantall, Yorkton—Melville, CPC]

Thank you so much for being here today. I appreciate this opportunity to sit on this committee and hear this conversation.

I'd like to carry on a little in the same vein as the member from Winnipeg in regard to the youth and the next generation. I totally appreciate what's trying to be achieved here and the whole issue around educating the 95% in a balanced way, remembering, but also the importance of celebrating. When I think about reconciliation, something like that requires truth to come forward, an apology—a very intentional apology—to be made and accepted. It requires the opportunity to move forward in ways that forgiveness and healing enable you to do.

I had a wonderful opportunity with a young chief. He was not from my riding, but we sat and he talked to me for hours about his experience. His father, who had also been a chief, and his mom had both been in the residential school system and suffered significantly. When former prime minister Harper gave his apology, this young man called his dad and said, “Dad,” and his dad replied, “I'm listening. I'm listening.” He couldn't talk. He was so overwhelmed with emotion and just sobbing that this was taking place.

This young chief said, “You know, I grew up in a home where both of my parents were survivors.” At that point that's what they were—survivors of the residential schools. They grew up in an atmosphere where they were told to duck if they saw a policeman coming along. He said, “I grew up thinking that I too was a residential school survivor,” until his dad had this experience and began the healing process. He said, “I came to the realization that I am not a residential school survivor,” and he talked about how he chose to go on with his life and is now leading his community and making huge impacts.

There is a lot to celebrate as we go through this whole process. I understand the angst of putting the two together, and yet if we don't I feel like we're failing to accomplish what we truly want to accomplish with my children and your children. I have 10 grandkids. I'm boasting a bit, I know. It's very important to me that they.... Quite honestly, my children grew up in schools where I called them the token whites. It's a different world out there now in so many ways.

When it comes to wrongs done, I come from a Ukrainian heritage. My grandfather came over just before Holodomor, and on Saturday night I'm going to remember millions of Ukrainians who were basically starved to death. They moved to Canada, and they remember, but in the midst of all that they also say to me, “Cathay, we kept our culture. We have our language. We are proud.” In some ways, they feel more Ukrainian here than they did in Ukraine—that is what they literally have said to me.

There are all those dynamics of, yes, remembering and making sure our children know and that we don't repeat, but also to make sure we're celebrating how far we've come and continue to go.

I have one more really brief thing. I'm on the veterans affairs committee as deputy shadow critic. We've travelled this whole last session, visiting with first nations, indigenous, Métis and Inuit veterans, and with Canadian Rangers. They're so amazing. They were not treated fairly, but not one of them regrets having served. This is where I see we have so much hope.

I also have a grandson whose birthday falls on Remembrance Day. As a young boy he said to me, “You know what, grandma? In the morning we are sad. In the afternoon we have a party.” It's important to teach our children that we need to remember, but we can also celebrate.

I just hope you feel there is room for both of those in that expression for this reconciliation day that you're looking for.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

You have 20 seconds left.

[Cathay Wagantall]

Okay. It's too bad we can't have more time.

[Ry Moran]

We have to come back, again, to what we are trying to achieve. The process we are working our way through is truth and reconciliation. It implies a relationship between those two. Reconciliation is the goal, but it has to be built on the truth.

There is no question about that dualism being fundamental. How we achieve that is what we're grappling with right now. It's a bit of everything.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Thank you.

We will be going to Mr. Boissonnault, for five minutes, please.

[Randy Boissonnault, Edmonton Centre, Lib.]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to both of the witnesses for being here today.

I will start by saying that Remembrance Day is a federal holiday. Federal employees get Remembrance Day off. One of the limitations of the federal government is that we can't regulate what provinces and territories do, even though we may want to. This PMB would extend the same holiday to federal employees and the agencies that the federal government regulates.

To both of the witnesses today—maybe I'll start with Ms. Brown—my great-grandmother, a full-blooded Cree woman, Lucy Brown Eyes, told me when I was five and she was 88, “We come from the land, Randy, and some day we'll go back to the land, and the land will be all shared in the future.”

Do you believe that truth-telling is the first step to healing?

Ms. Brown.

[Theresa Brown]

Yes, I do believe that truth-telling is very important, although truth-telling on the topic of Indian residential schools is not very old. We have just begun that. In fact, it was first brought out with the royal commission—

[Randy Boissonnault]

RCAP

[Theresa Brown]

—RCAP, in 1993 or something.

[Randy Boissonnault]

In 1993 or 1994.

[Theresa Brown]

That was the first time the country came to realize this horrible atrocity had happened, and it was still happening at that point.

While this conversation isn't very old, there's much education to be done. We're saying that memorializing a day, a special day separate from all other days, is important. We have only begun to tell our story. We want this remembered, and not put in side by side with people making dream catchers, necklaces and stuff like that. It will get buried.

People, for one thing, don't want to talk about this. It was very difficult for people to hear our stories. Believe me, I don't like telling my story either. If I didn't see some benefit to it—a huge benefit to it—I would not have gone there. In fact, even telling you today what I did is difficult. It's difficult every time I talk about it.

That's why we need to have a day when we can talk about it together and have that difficult conversation, and not try to forget it by making dream catchers or by offering our foods to you and that kind of thing.

I want this day put aside so that we can tell the absolute truth into eternity. We suffered at those schools. We don't want to cover it up anymore. It's not something that is pleasant; it's difficult. But it will get us to the next level as a country—to a better country, a better place for everyone.

[Randy Boissonnault]

Absolutely.

It's like when I speak with veterans and some of the older vets say that the only day they talk about their experiences is Remembrance Day. They stay silent on it for the rest of the year. Remembrance Day is their safe-space day. It's a similar concept.

I think there's a way to respect the TRC and have a day where we pause to remember, and also have another commemorative day when we do other activities. I think there's certainly the possibility of that.

You mentioned a monument for truth and reconciliation.

How would you see that incorporated into the day, either of you, Ry or Ms. Brown?

[Ry Moran]

Briefly on that one, there's a call to action for a national monument here in Ottawa and one in every provincial capital, and then for the national Historic Sites and Monuments Board to deal with the actual sites of the residential schools.

I can see something happening in all of those places, plus additional ones. I can certainly see there being something very powerful happening here at the national monument, wherein national leaders would gather together to reflect on this terrible national crime.

We have to remember, going back in time, that there was a very scathing report issued in 1921, which referred to this as being “a national crime”. That's the name of John Milloy's book. He was the main researcher, who Terri talked about, on the RCAP file.

I can see there being a very solemn day wherein, as Terri was saying earlier, tobacco is put down, wreaths are put down; there is that moment of silence, that honouring and commemoration. We know how to honour people who have fallen in terrible circumstances. We just have to recognize in some ways, when we take a step back and think about this in terms of human rights, that the children who fell in these residential schools were largely non-combatants. They didn't deserve to have their lives shortened in such a terrible way.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

That brings you to the end of the time, and the end of the time for this panel.

[Robert-Falcon Ouellette, Liberal, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I have some suggestions for the chair here. I hope you'll take it in a friendly way.

I think there are a number of questions that need to be asked of the witnesses as they come forward, and that should be previously given to them by this committee.

The question we're really trying to get answered is whether we should have a memorial day versus a statutory holiday. I'm concerned that we're having a number of witnesses come, and we won't be able to answer these important questions that are going to impact this private member's bill and whether it will be going forward.

We also need to answer the question of the balance between lifting people up and the idea of a memorial day. Can we do both? We need to ensure that we hear from survivors, youth, chiefs, women and men; from not only indigenous communities but also from non-indigenous communities.

Specifically, we're very concerned about a date. I think it's going to be very hard for the committee to come to a consensus if we don't hear dates, especially in testimony here.

We need the groups that come to demonstrate not simply an overall vision of why this is important. We also need specifics, because that's what we're actually dealing with in this. We need to hear the direction that they want, recognizing that we as parliamentarians also suffer under some terrible constraints. We have a time constraint coming up. There is an election in a very short time, bills have to be done in a certain period of time—45 days, I believe—and we have to vote on it in the House of Commons.

If we haven't answered those questions, it's going to be very hard for parties on both sides of the aisle to come to a consensus. It could lead to more division, cabinet voting one way, caucus voting another, opposition voting one way and splits. This is not what this bill should be about.

Also, I think there's a large constraint: we need to hear from businesses, because there are concerns about businesses involved in this and what a statutory holiday or a memorial day...the balance between culture and what we do.

Those are some of the questions I would pose not only to you but to the witnesses. I think it's very important that when people do come here, they've done a lot of work with the people in their organizations to give us those answers. It's nice to spend time discussing the importance, but a lot of us already recognize the importance. Today I've heard everyone discuss how we want to, but we're asking questions about how and what measures we should use.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

I appreciate that feedback. Thank you very much, Mr. Ouellette.

That's the end of our time with this panel. I would really like to thank both of you for the time you gave. You did hear a number of questions. You might not have been able to answer all of the questions that came, or there might be other ideas that you've had since you heard all of these questions. Please do feel free to put in written submissions as well. I would just ask that you try to do so as soon as possible.

I am not suspending, as I see some of the members moving. I am saying to this panel, thank you very much, but there is a motion that we must deal with from Mr. Blaney.

Thank you for your help.

Mr. Blaney.

[Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

After hearing Mr. Ouellette speak, I would simply like to add that we would be open to the idea of letting future witnesses know in advance what subjects may be brought up during testimony.

As you know, the Minister of Finance, Mr. Bill Morneau, has presented a budget implementation bill. It is actually the biggest budget implementation bill ever presented. Certain parts of this omnibus bill concern the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage, as you know. Moreover, I was at the House of Commons yesterday and a few government members bragged about parts of the bill that pertained to copyright. As certain clauses in the bill directly concern our committee and it is our responsibility, as parliamentarians, to hold an informed vote on the bill presented by Mr. Morneau, I would like to propose to the committee that we invite minister Pablo Rodriguez to come and present his arguments.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

I just want to clarify something.

I have a notice of motion before me.

[Steven Blaney]

Actually, I have two of them. Is it the motion that is only one paragraph long?

Is it the one you have?

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

I simply want everyone to understand the motion that we're going to vote on.

[Steven Blaney]

That's this one.