Canadian Heritage Committee on Jan. 29th, 2019

[Natan Obed]

I think Canada is still in an educational phase with regard to first nations, Inuit and Métis and how we fit within this country. Almost all the work that we're doing on the legislative front and also on the renewal of the relationship front is pushing back against ignorance, pushing back against the lack of understanding of the rights that we have as indigenous peoples globally and the rights that we have as first nations, Inuit and Métis in this country.

A statutory holiday, especially one around celebration, gets us closer to this acceptance that we are first nations, Inuit and Métis in this country but that we can also celebrate as Canadians as well, that there can be these bridging places because there still are many indigenous peoples in this country who do not feel very comfortable about being a part of this country.

Inuit specifically have often talked about being first Canadians and Canadians first, but we often have been alone in rooms where we have expressed that view. It would be great if there were just more buy-in from all Canadians about the amazing contributions of first nations, Inuit and Métis in this country and celebration of that, and celebration of the growth of this country with that as a hallmark, not necessarily as something that has to be dealt with by this country.

I often talk about how to be a really good public servant, to be a really good bureaucrat within what was formerly known as INAC and however it is now different, you had to know how to limit the expenditures by the Government of Canada to indigenous peoples in whatever file you were working on. Whether it was rights, whether it was programs or services, whether it was policy, you were a good public servant if you figured out a way to ensure that the least amount of money or no money at all or no time at all went to those things that indigenous peoples ask for in this country.

We want to turn that on its head. We want to figure out how to create a country that imagines indigenous peoples succeeding alongside all other Canadians for the benefit and health of all of Canada. I don't think we're there yet. 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. That isn't the case now, and we're not building that in the way that we should be.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Thank you. That is all of your time, and a few minutes on top.

It is now over to Mr. Blaney.

You may go ahead for five minutes.

[Steven Blaney, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, CPC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Hello to my fellow members and thank you to the witnesses for being here.

Mr. Obed, your vision is very inspiring. I have no doubt there is an appetite in Canada for an all-encompassing and positive vision of indigenous communities, be they first Nations, Métis or Inuit. That’s why we supported this bill. I listened carefully to what you and Ms. Lomax said.

As a former veterans affairs minister, I used to take part in National Indigenous Peoples Day celebrations on June 21. Here, in Ottawa, we would honour the contribution of indigenous peoples in times of conflict and war, at a ceremony held right next to the National Aboriginal Veterans Monument. It was an opportunity to recognize the contribution indigenous people made for our freedom.

On July 1 last year, I witnessed the paradox of a touching moment while in Beaumont-Hamel, France. I learned that, on that day, Newfoundlanders close all their shutters in the morning, for a half day of sadness to recognize the sacrifice of a generation of Newfoundlanders, whose lives were brutally cut short during the First World War. In the afternoon, however, Newfoundlanders celebrate the province’s union with Canada. It is that sort of paradox we have to deal with.

What I now realize is that June 21, the day currently designated National Indigenous People’s Day, is not a holiday. You are teaching us a lot this afternoon. We also learned that no consultations were held on Bill C-369, in its current version, and now there is talk of two days instead of one. How do we balance remembrance and celebration? We don’t know what the date should be. June 21 strikes me as an appropriate day to bring Mr. Obed’s vision to life. I’d like to hear your thoughts, but I just wanted to share my comments with you.

At this point, adding another day so there are two holidays would essentially distort the bill. We would have to either go back to the drawing board or hold more consultations. After listening to everything that’s been said today, I have more questions than answers, but I’d like to give you the remainder of my time to share your thoughts.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

You have about two and a half minutes left.

[Tim Argetsinger, Political Advisor, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami]

In response to your question, 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. It could be both one of recognition and also one that highlights some of the positive work that has been taken by first nations, Inuit and Métis communities, organizations and governments to address some of the challenges that are associated with past experiences such as residential schooling or relocations.

I think that could be a way to balance.

[Steven Blaney]

Ms. Lomax, would you like to add anything?

[Virginia Lomax]

It's my client's position that there should be two separate days, and that's what I'm able to speak to at this time.

That being said, any legislation that is drafted that will impact indigenous people should be done in very clear consultation with them. If there are questions still surrounding this bill and its potential impacts on first nations, Métis and Inuit people, then there should be further consultation to know those impacts. It's a possibility.

I can't comment on whether or not this specific bill needs more consultations, because quite simply I don't what consultation has gone into this. I can't speak to that. It's generally our view that what is done that impacts indigenous people must be done by indigenous people or at the very least with them.

[Steven Blaney]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

That was quite extensive.

[Virginia Lomax]

Thank you.

Mr. Hogg, I understand that you had one more question. You had extra time the last time around, so could you try to keep it to three minutes, please?

[Gordie Hogg, Liberal, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

In some ways, Mr. Blaney covered some of that, and you've started to touch on it. There are all kinds of expectations with respect to consultation in terms of what consultation looks like, whether it's genuine and how engaging it is, with a number of principles around that.

I'll give each of you one minute out of what I have left. Could you comment on what you would see as an appropriate process for consultation with respect to this piece of legislation? Even if it's passed, how do we move from that to looking at what's going to happen on those days and what's appropriate in terms of engagement? Could each of you comment on that briefly for me? Thank you.

[Natan Obed]

There have been a number of pieces of legislation that have had consultation over the past few years.

I think the first nations, Inuit and Métis languages legislation comes to mind as the federal government doing a distinctions-based approach to consultation with indigenous peoples and having sessions that bring together a diverse group of our constituency—for Inuit—to be able to speak on the legislation. It also requires there to be information provided about the intent of the piece of legislation.

That said, I think this is a Canadian issue writ large, so the consultations should happen all across the country.

[Virginia Lomax]

My addition to those comments would be that the consultation should happen first. We're commenting on this legislation after it's written. Perhaps some of these issues could have been solved.

[Gordie Hogg, Liberal, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

On consultations, you've both described broadly the concept of consultation. Does this mean finding people to come here again? Does it mean going out into those communities? Does it mean holding round tables and sessions with people? How robust is this? What does this look like?

[Virginia Lomax]

I think it would mean a combination of all of those things. Certainly, if the aim is to find what it is that indigenous, first nations, Métis and Inuit constituents require, it requires asking them about their needs.

[Gordie Hogg, Liberal, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Is that something that we would go out to the governing bodies for and ask them to do?

[Natan Obed]

This is a Government of Canada bill. Often, we, as representatives of indigenous peoples, are put in pretty precarious conditions when we are asked to do consultation on behalf of the federal government, because in the end it is not our piece of legislation. We also cannot guarantee our constituency that the federal government will or will not implement any of the things we ask for.

[Gordie Hogg, Liberal, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

I've just been reminded that it's not a government bill. This is a private member's bill that is coming forward, so in that sense it's not a government bill. At the same time, the principle of good public policy is that it does engage those people who it's going to impact most, the people who have a vested interest in it and want to see it.

That's what I'm trying to get to, because so often the processes do not adequately engage people in a meaningful way so that they feel they've been heard and policy-makers or decision-makers are well informed. That's a frustration that I think all of us have in terms of being able to get that visceral emotive sense of how this impact.... You've started to give some of that to us, but I don't want to go through this process and find, my gosh, there's something else we should have done.

I spend a lot of time studying public engagement processes around the world. I don't think there are any fantastic ones, but certainly there are some that are a lot better than others. That's what I was struggling with. What is it that we can do? If you were sitting here, what would you say should be done? How would you do that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Mr. Hogg, I'm really sorry to do this to you, but you have taken all of your time.

The last two minutes are yours, Mr. Nantel.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much for your appearance today.

As my honourable colleague mentioned, it is not a government bill. It is my colleague's: Ms. Georgina Jolibois, a Dene person from La Loche in Saskatchewan. I think the idea behind the official writing of the bill is to actually.... The debate around the dates has been coming, but the bill is not evoking a date. It's evoking “the day fixed by proclamation as National Indigenous Peoples Day”.

According to me, the date is something that of course we have to agree on, but the principle we have to agree on is that it should be a statutory holiday. If we pursue this tandem approach of a comparison between July 1 and Memorial Day, National Indigenous Peoples Day could be a statutory holiday so that we can all celebrate our heritage and our shared relation with the first nations and indigenous people, Métis and Inuit. This is what this bill is about. It's not about the date. We can come up with a proposal for a date, but the bill itself is about the fact that shouldn't “the day fixed by proclamation as National Indigenous Peoples Day” be a statutory holiday? As I've heard many times from the other side, this is surely a worthy investment. We need to celebrate this, and we need to fix this.

Do you want to intervene, Mr. Obed?

[Natan Obed]

I'm sorry about the cavalier nature of my description of the bill. From where I sit, we have Inuit governance and Inuit democracy, and this is a Government of Canada exercise. I'm not necessarily meaning to conflate a private member's bill and a Government of Canada bill.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Of course. Understood.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dabrusin]

Thank you very much.

It was a very interesting discussion today. You brought many ideas that in fact we had not heard before. That was very helpful to all of us. I really want to thank you for your time.

That brings to an end this panel discussion. I will briefly suspend so that we can move in camera.

[Proceedings continue in camera]