Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 2nd, 2022

[Wendy Jocko]

Yes, I believe I did mention in my opening statement, just as Professor Coburn has mentioned, that the Algonquin nation is one heart and one soul, so we are in constant communiqué on various issues.

At Pikwakanagan, we do have our own consultation department, so any consultation of any description certainly does come through, including, I should mention, certain projects within the city of Ottawa. We are aware of certain activities that go on. We are consulted, and it doesn't necessarily get filtered down to the membership, but on various occasions, we do get reports. We do have elders who sit on certain committees as well as youth and other members of the community.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Chief Jocko, through the chair, do you have any feedback on any of the proposals that have been discussed or put forward so far—again, the transit loop or shutting down Wellington. We heard how it could perhaps affect access to the Chaudière Island.

[Wendy Jocko]

I don't live in Ottawa. I live in Pikwakanagan, so I visit Ottawa from time to time. I'm quite aware of the district.

Obviously the expansion of the parliamentary district is going to have more than just security implications as we look forward—

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

That's what I'm trying to get at, the non-security. What does your community think? Have you been consulted? Do you have any feedback on it right now?

[Wendy Jocko]

No, I have not been consulted. I was basically asked to participate in this witness appearance. We weren't consulted in any way.

[Kelly McCauley, Conservative, Edmonton West, AB]

Okay. I'll cede the rest of my time. Thanks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Excellent. Thank you so much.

Now we will move to Mr. Fergus for up to six minutes.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I would like to begin by acknowledging that we are on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe Nation. As the member of Parliament for Hull-Aylmer, that is a fact that I always acknowledge.

I would like to ask you a question, Chief Jocko.

I enjoyed your testimony this morning. We are currently discussing the operational security of the parliamentary precinct to avoid a repeat of what everyone experienced with that illegal occupation earlier this winter.

From an indigenous perspective, especially that of the Algonquin Anishinabe Nation, what aspects should we be paying attention to, when we are going to discuss security in the context of the expansion of the parliamentary precinct? How can we ensure the security of the parliamentary precinct in a way that is respectful of and in partnership with indigenous peoples?

[Wendy Jocko]

I did miss a bit of the conversation because my translation was not on; however, I did catch the latter part of your comments and questions. I would say that we would like to be part of the discussion going forward and not to be excluded from those discussions, if that captures your question.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Thank you for your brief response to my question. This is an important aspect that can have a lot of consequences.

Professor Coburn, I would like to ask you the same question.

As part of the expansion of the parliamentary precinct, what attention should be paid to ensure safety not only on the Hill, but also for all Canadians, including indigenous peoples who will be visiting or occupying their space on the site?

[Dr. Veldon Coburn]

Thank you, Mr. Fergus.

I believe that the Algonquins are very amenable. Quite a few projects have been advanced across the city of Ottawa, working with the municipality and the provinces. I know that Chief Jocko has worked on that quite a bit. It's not that we would hold up things. We don't have an expansive reach such that we would unduly impose burdens and requests upon Canada, or the federal government itself, to undertake the measures, but I believe that there is the obligation to reach out to I think each of the 10 Algonquin nations, including the tribal council itself, for a response to be involved going forward.

I've just heard that nothing has passed through us. Otherwise, through our consultation department, I would have received something long ago. We do receive these quite frequently. Our administration of our first nation under Chief Jocko is quite on the ball. As soon as we get something, it comes out through the mail—information packages—for our input. As of yet, we have yet to see anything whatsoever, but I would definitely welcome it, and you would see some feedback.

Again, I don't think anything would be unduly burdensome to the extent.... The point that I'd still underscore and restate for this purpose here is that there are a few sites for which we would still ask for compliance with and enforcement of our access and mobility. That would be the Algonquin nation's building at 100 Wellington as well as movement through. I know that perhaps under emergency measures your business as carried out by Parliament can be relocated; however, for these particular sites, with the significance for us, the same can't be done as well.

They're not very large, and again, I'm also cognizant of the fact that there is a charter right to protest, but to the extent that it can infringe upon, say, the section 35 constitutional rights of aboriginal peoples—namely, the Algonquins who are on this territory, where they are recognized and affirmed—there is a duty to ensure that people can't necessarily just occupy to the extent that we couldn't practically enforce it. The formal recognition has to be met by effective compliance. A convoy, for example, can pass through without being an undue burden on our aboriginal rights as well, and we would hope that the federal Crown would do what it can to uphold that partnership with us as the Algonquins. That would be a good discussion to begin things.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Thank you for your testimony.

Unfortunately, my time is up. So I will turn the floor over to the chair of the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Gaudreau, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The previous questions were excellent and many of them were answered.

In my opinion, there is something that is non-negotiable, and that is the fact that conciliation has to be through collaboration, through communication and through partnership. That is what I see, and it will be clearly written in our report. We have heard you and I am glad that you have been able to express yourselves in this regard.

Unfortunately, there are some things that I don't understand, and I will have more difficulty explaining that. You talked about the concern about access and mobility rights. You talked about the building on Sparks Street and the fact that occupying the downtown area infringes on your rights.

I would like you to explain that further. A lot of people are looking at us and want to know what's going on.

The witnesses can answer my question in turn, Madam Chair. I don't know who wants to answer it first.

[Dr. Veldon Coburn]

I'm happy to answer that.

The particular site was negotiated with the Crown back in July 2019 for our presence there. Nevertheless, the entire region was settled where the three rivers meet. The Rideau River comes in with the Gatineau River and the Kitchissippi, which is the Ottawa River, to the sites around Parliament.

This has always been a site, and it is still unmodified under the land claims that have moved forward. However, we still retain those section 35 aboriginal rights under the Constitution. Those rights aren't something that we could just go back to our homes, if we happen to be Algonquin, and say.... We can't. It's site-specific, so it's geographically specific and we require access to it.

Also, through our territory, there are no restrictions on our mobility to pass through certain sites. It just so happens that what is now the downtown core and overlaps quite a bit with the parliamentary precinct is on those particular sites for which we have agreements with the Crown to continually access.

We understand there will be protests on a number of occasions. That happens even in the summertime on a daily basis. There are differing scales and magnitudes, but it is never so much that it interferes with our access to these particular sites where we might carry out our section 35 rights.

We don't exercise section 35 rights for, say, hunting in the downtown core, but we do for other ceremonial reasons and to gather for less formal, political deliberations among the nations and meeting places.

Victoria Island is going to be closed off for about 10 years for remediation, because of the ordnance that was found underneath. I guess it's the old tannery or what have you. There's contamination. That's a burden that we live with. However, it's not something imposed by other people that is transitory in nature.

I think the extent and length of the protest, which evolved into an occupation quite quickly, put a restriction on the Algonquin. We still have the right to pass through here and, eventually, settle for temporary reasons—not for residential reasons—at the site at 100 Wellington. To make our way across the city, of course, we would have to be detoured through a number of streets and whatnot if we were to make our way through to the Chaudière Bridge if we wanted to go to Akikodjiwan.

Other environmental and infrastructure reasons don't have quite the same nature and characteristics as those that are being put up by people of their own voluntary nature.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Coburn.

I have about 30 seconds left to ask a question.

Ms. Jocko, do you have anything to add?

[Wendy Jocko]

Professor Coburn mentioned 100 Wellington Street. That building has sat empty for years now, with three directors general responsible for this since I became chief, which was less than three years ago. The willingness of the government is well known and acknowledged. However, how long will we have to wait to occupy the building promised to the Algonquin nation if this means dealing with the same public servants focused on doing things right instead of doing the right thing?

Anyway, on that topic alone, on the change of the jurisdiction and some activity that might be going on at the precinct, just ensure that there won't be a heavy-handed approach by, presumably, the RCMP, if that's going to be their jurisdiction, for the safety and the dignity of the people occupying all the buildings there. You obviously know that in the past there have been some big issues regarding the police and indigenous people.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I want to emphasize how important this meeting is, Madam Chair. Not only are we learning things, but we are clearly seeing the importance of consultation. The topic we are now dealing with is really security, and the whole issue of cohabitation also comes out of the proposals we have received.

Madam Chair, I invite the witnesses to look at what we have received from the architect who came to meet us. It could be used as inspiration for possible consultations following our project.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you, Ms. Gaudreau.

Ms. Blaney, you have the floor.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Thank you, Chair. Through you, I'd like to thank the witnesses so much for attending today and for their important testimony.

I hope the members of this committee understand some of the specific things that were said about process. I really appreciate Chief Jocko sharing with us that if an indigenous community is in one place and another indigenous group comes, they don't do anything in that space until they talk to the first people of that territory. Obviously, that process was clearly not done. Those protocols that across this country we understand were not done. I thank Chief Jocko for clarifying that. I think it was very important to get that on the record.

Through the chair, I have a question for Chief Jocko. It's my understanding that during the occupation, her nation was informed by the indigenous liaison in the Ottawa city police and OPP during the occupation. Of course, if the precinct does change and there is an expansion of that, I'm wondering if that similar relationship is followed through with the Parliamentary Protective Service. If it's not, is that something we would have to consider if we expanded the precinct?

[Wendy Jocko]

Is your question for me, Madam?

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

It is.

[Wendy Jocko]

Okay.

You are correct. I must say that I was very impressed with the Ottawa city police liaison officer as well as the local OPP detachment. Killaloe is our closest serving OPP detachment. They were very good to inform me of all the activity that was taking place on the territory and within the city of Ottawa. I would hope that the RCMP would have a similar liaison officer who could keep in touch with us in a similar fashion. That was very helpful. I did feel that I knew exactly what was going on, especially pertaining to the indigenous activities that were going on within the city.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Thank you so much.

Through you, Madam Chair, I want to come back one more time to Chief Jocko.

Chief Jocko, if the parliamentary precinct were expanded and that region overseen by the Parliamentary Protective Service, does that mean you would like to see a very similar process where the discussions are there, where you're informed about different things that are happening, and where it would be something similar to the experience you had during the occupation? Perhaps I could get clarity on that so that we know what to put in the report.

[Wendy Jocko]

Yes, I would like to make it very clear that I think it's very beneficial that we have that relationship, of course, going forward. Looking behind at the relationship we have now, like I mentioned, with the local OPP detachment in Killaloe, we have a very good relationship as well as with the City of Ottawa. I've never met former police chief Sloly in person. We have corresponded on numerous occasions involving other significant events that have taken place within the city. I do feel that relationship should be maintained going forward, and we should form a new relationship with the new security force that will be taking over that jurisdiction, if, in fact, that's what's going to happen.