Environment Committee on March 1st, 2018

[Norman Shields, Manager, Heritage Designations, Parks Canada Agency]

I'm Norman Shields. I'm the manager responsible for heritage designations. Beside me is Rachel Grasham. She has just stepped out for a moment. She's the director of policies and legislation.

[Karen L. Pearce, Legal Counsel, Parks Canada Agency]

I'm Karen Pearce, Parks Canada legal services, Department of Justice.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Great. Thank you very much for being here. We very much appreciate it.

(On clause 1)

The first amendment is LIB-1.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Where is Rachel Grasham?

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

I think she stepped out for a second. If you like, we can wait.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

It's okay, but I have another question. Where is Paula Garrow? They don't sit at the table?

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

They can come up. They are here in the room to support us. Hang on.

Monsieur Godin, I apologize. I speak very fast, and we have to wait for catch-up.

The idea is we have other representatives in the room who will be here if they need to come to the table. They are here. This is who the department has asked to sit at the table for us.

We're on LIB-1. Does everybody have all the motions in front of them so we can work through it together? It's pretty straightforward. Do I need to read them, or is everybody on the page together? Do I need to read it?

John, do you want to introduce it to everybody? Go ahead.

[John Aldag, Liberal, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

The first amendment is taking my original wording of 19 members and saying of up to 19 members. This arose following consultation and feedback from discussions with those kind of in the know looking administratively at the challenges and issues that may arise on board appointments and the process.

The ideal is to have 19 members, but there may be times where there will be some combinations. We will get into those in the subsequent amendments. This is to give some flexibility for the minister in the appointments so we're saying of up to 19 members instead of a hard 19 members.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Thank you.

Are there any questions?

Go ahead, Mr. Godin.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

As far as I know, the objective of your bill is to provide for more active indigenous representation.

With the possibility of adjusting the number, is there a requirement for indigenous persons to be well represented on the board, or is it simply a random number, without any breakdown or stipulation regarding the percentage of indigenous representation?

[John Aldag, Liberal, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

This was a primary concern I had, in that the indigenous representation could be watered down by being combined into other existing positions. In the subsequent amendments, however, I believe you will see that we've come up with some safeguards to ensure that anybody filling any seat is fully qualified for whatever the requirements are of the position they are filling. I can speak to a couple of examples if you want, either now or when we get to the further amendments.

I will give the example of somebody with a first nations background who is being vetted for that criteria, that is on whether they have the ability to represent a national first nations lens. They could be an indigenous first nations person living in Saskatchewan, and there could be a point where the Saskatchewan provincial position comes open. While the search for a replacement happens—which can often span months or even into a year or more—this would allow the minister to have that person double fill a position. They would also have to meet the criteria of being a Saskatchewan resident, but they would be able to do that. The intention would never be to try to double-bank on an ongoing basis, but it would give some flexibility in cases such as the example I have given, to have diverse and qualified representatives fill dual positions from time to time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Does that answer?

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Yes, but I have another question.

Would it not be preferable for the bill to stipulate an appointment period in order to ensure indigenous representation?

In the current wording, the number is up to 19, and there is no breakdown for indigenous persons. It says there can be up to 19 people because the appointment process can be lengthy. In that case, shouldn't a measure be added to give the minister latitude to establish timelines for appointments?

[John Aldag, Liberal, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Right. In brief, I was trying to respect the existing and longstanding structure of the board. Right now there are three representatives who come from within specific areas within the federal government. There's Library and Archives, there's a Parks Canada representative, and a third, and then the 13 provincial and territorial representatives, and this was trying to respect in the most efficient way the infusion or the addition of those three indigenous positions rising from call to action 79. i, and so this was deemed to be the best wording to achieve that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Seeing no further discussion, shall the amendment carry?

(Amendment agreed to )

Liberal amendment number 2.

John.

[John Aldag, Liberal, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

This one gives the clarification that I just spoke of. It indicates “one representative”. This is where you can get some of that doubling up. The persons referred to in paragraphs 4(1)(a), (b), and (c)—the officer of the Canadian Museum, of Library and Archives, and of the Parks Canada Agency—could be appointed under proposed paragraph 4(1)(e). Those could be filled by a first nations, Inuit, or Métis person. Conversely, one of the indigenous representatives could be able to overlap with one of those three positions.

There would be this addition in new proposed paragraph 4(1)(e), where we get into specifically the indigenous piece:

(e) one representative—who may be a person referred to in any of paragraphs (a) to (c) or a person appointed under paragraph (d)—for each of the following, to be appointed by the Governor in Council:

(i) First Nations,

(ii) the Inuit, and

(iii) the Metis.

Again, this is to enable that first one, “of up to 19”. This gives a very good construct, I think, to achieve what we're trying to do to make sure we're respecting the first nations, Inuit, and Métis presence on the board.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

All right, any discussion?

Mr. Sopuck, or Mr. Kent.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Thank you, John.

The bill has worthy intent. I think with traditional procedure, you would have no quibbles from this side, but just as a matter of clarification, with regard to the addition of the three first nations members of the board, as you spoke to the criteria by which members of the board have traditionally been selected, there is an interchangeability. Your explanation just now was that there is an interchangeability between the skills, the academic and indigenous history....

The qualifications would be a composite, in some cases, and not simply ethnic?

[John Aldag, Liberal, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Yes. That would allow for a....

I think the next amendment, actually, gets more into what you're talking about. It's saying that for whatever position a person will be filling, they have to be qualified for that and meet the requirements of that position. The example I would give is that if you're going to fill a position from Saskatchewan, you need to be a resident from Saskatchewan. If you're going to be the first nations representative, you need to be able to meet whatever the criteria have been determined to be. There would be then some mixing and matching allowed, should that be necessary, but you would have to be deemed qualified for whichever position on the board you're occupying.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Monsieur Godin.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Mr. Aldag, I would like to make sure they are not overrepresented on the board. Earlier, there was talk of under-representation, but now I will talk about overrepresentation of indigenous persons. I think we need to strike a balance.

Is there a mechanism to ensure constant representation in spite of changes in appointments? If there is one, I do not see it.

[John Aldag, Liberal, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

Constant representation in what means? I'm not sure I understand what you're looking at.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

I don't know, the translator is good, but I'll try again in French.

Can indigenous persons be overrepresented? Is there a mechanism to prevent that? Is there also a mechanism to prevent the opposite, that is, under-representation?

[John Aldag, Liberal, Cloverdale—Langley City, BC]

The perspective that I would simply offer is, I don't believe we could ever have over-representation of indigenous on a national commemorations program.

I think that ultimately if we had multiple—you could have a first nations representative who's been deemed to be a qualified representative for Saskatchewan, and you could have a first nations person in this other position, and I don't think that would constitute over representation. I think it just says that we have a lot of qualified Canadians wanting to serve in the commemorations field.

I wasn't concerned about that particular question. I would hope that everybody would agree, that if we had more than three indigenous representatives that that could be a very good thing for the Historic Sites and Monuments Board.

[The Chair, Liberal, Deb Schulte]

Mr. Sopuck.