Procedure and House Affairs Committee on June 2nd, 2022

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

Thank you for that. That's extremely helpful.

For my next question—maybe I'll start with the chief and then move on to you, Professor Coburn—is there a clear process of communication with Parliament and your nation? You talked about the ability to occupy the building here, which is set aside for you at 100 Wellington, and that is still not happening. I'm just wondering if there is a problem with the communication lines between the nation and Parliament? Is there work we need to do there that would open up those communication lines?

[Wendy Jocko]

Yes, I can confirm that there is a problem with communication that filters down to Pikwakanagan through the various departments. If that could be improved directly to us, that would be greatly appreciated.

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

Is there anything you would like to add, Professor Coburn?

[Dr. Veldon Coburn]

Yes, if you don't mind. I'm foreseeing some of the issues that would come up, and I think that it would only be in very extenuating circumstances. Ideally we'd like to have a liaison officer who would be, not necessarily 100% devoted as part of their full-time equivalency, but would communicate with Algonquin political authorities or what have you. I know that this was once in a lifetime. Who knows how many more protests and occupations of this sort may ensue?

In the event that the parliamentary precinct is expanded, when there are times of crisis and Algonquins wish to move into the precinct during these times of crisis, they should not be met with resistance or force, or be mistaken as protesters or occupiers themselves. They could say that they have made arrangements through the liaison officer, through their nation, to go to visit, say, 100 Wellington Street during the upheaval that may, hypothetically, be under way in the future, if this were to occur again, and not be arrested and mistaken as a protester. For example, they may schedule a site visit into the parliamentary precinct at a time to ensure safe travels in and out.

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

Thank you for that. I admit that I did check out your tweet site, through you, Madame Chair. One thing that I found compelling was that you were tweeting about comparing the teepee erection that happened on the Hill in 2017 for the 150-year celebration of Canada Day. You talked about the clear distinction that you saw between that, where there were arrests and there was a lot of action by the RCMP to stop the actions that were happening when you wanted to put up a teepee, and what happened with the trucker convoy. I'm just wondering if you want to speak to that and to your concerns that, if the precinct does in fact grow and expand, it will still be an issue.

How can we move forward to address that?

[Dr. Veldon Coburn]

That's the situation I would anticipate and would hope to avoid. I was there on the evening in late June—June 28 or 29, perhaps—in anticipation of, on July 1, Canada Day, erecting the ceremonial teepee for the 150th anniversary of Canada. A number of us—not me—were detained by the RCMP and the Parliamentary Protective Service. They put up an ad hoc detention centre, because I guess they don't really have a jail cell, and they might have those particular authorities. A number of individuals were arrested. It was hours of a standoff. Again, this was the peaceful participation in matters that were quite apart from the disposition of much of the trucker convoy.

Not to restate everything, but I think Chief Jocko pointed out that there were individuals bearing signs of universal hate like the swastika or what have you, whereas we and other Anishinabe were just exercising what would be a section 35 rights. Again, we're not exercising hunting, because we can't do that. We know there are reasonable restrictions on that particular right because they're not absolute under section 35. Even the charter right to protest or gather in public assembly, we weren't allowed to do that. Eventually they relented.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Thank you so much.

We're coming to the very end of our time. We have five minutes for the Conservatives, after which I've asked for four minutes for the Liberals, and that will keep us on time and will bring us to the end of our time together.

Mrs. Block, there is up to five minutes for you.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Through you to our witnesses, I would like to thank you for joining us today. I have appreciated hearing your testimony. I do want to start off by recognizing that June is National Indigenous History Month, and given the comments made by Chief Jocko in regard to her own parents and their service to our country, today they were highlighting the contributions of well over 4,000 indigenous people who served in the First World War and over 3,000 in the Second World War, with many decorated for bravery in action. I just want to recognize that here today.

I think while we have a special committee that's already examining the invocation of the Emergencies Act, which has been referenced throughout the testimony we've been hearing on the precinct study, we also have a long-term group that is reimagining changes to the precinct, and now we have this study before PROC. Your testimony and your comments highlight the complexities with regard to the motion that really initiated this study and the need for consultation, which came on the heels of the protest.

I really have only one question for both of you. I'm just wondering if you have any concerns over the invocation of the Emergencies Act that may well lead to its being more readily used in future events that could include indigenous protesters, not unlike the protest that took place along the rail lines during the blockade of 2020.

[Dr. Veldon Coburn]

I can begin.

Certainly I don't represent everyone, but I know there's a plurality of viewpoints within indigenous communities and even amongst the Algonquins. I have relatives who supported the convoy as well, but that support eventually waned and they were irritated by, I guess, the ongoing occupation. We're living in a time when people are very critical of government overstep. Indigenous peoples have always been critical of it because of the legitimacy of government. It hasn't received our consent to be governed in many aspects. It's been assumed that's changing as well, so I do empathize with a lot of indigenous people who think, well, we might be next.

We would hope, and I believe, that there might be enough balances that it might actually be checked, but as indigenous peoples, we're also well aware that despite the judiciary putting a check on the executive when it carries out its own interpretation of the legislation, the executive still ignores Supreme Court decisions. We see in the Wet'suwet'en territory, for example, going back to 1997 with the Delgamuukw decision, which recognized the Wet'suwet'en as having territorial title and they've never modified that whatsoever. We still see the Province of British Columbia using the course of the powers of the state to remove them, so there's always that worry, I think, amongst many sectors of indigenous peoples.

We're living in a time of a pandemic too, so there are different viewpoints and perspectives amongst indigenous peoples. Just a sample from my Facebook feed shows, anecdotally speaking, differing perspectives on vaccine mandates, for example, and people asking whether the government can force them to do this and what the government will enforce or force them to do next. They would like to have sufficient checks on the invocation of anything that they might perceive to be infringing upon their freedoms, and I recognize that.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Thank you very much.

Chief Jocko, do you have anything to add?

[Wendy Jocko]

I don't have much more. I won't repeat what Professor Coburn has said, but there's obviously a balance in maintaining civil order, so there certainly has to be a balance there.

I would just thank you for your previous comments recognizing indigenous veterans, and those go for all veterans of this country. I certainly appreciate those comments.

Just for consideration if we're changing things at the precinct, possibly a name change would be in order as well for that area. I'm just throwing that into the equation for consideration.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

That's excellent. Thank you.

Next is Mr. Naqvi.

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you very much to both Chief Jocko and Professor Coburn for presenting today.

I live in Ottawa. I'm an immigrant to Canada, and I consider myself a settler. That's the conversation I often have with my two young children, who were born here, to make them understand our responsibility towards reconciliation. I want to thank both of you for your leadership in educating people like me.

I also want to start by acknowledging something, Chief Jocko. In your testimony, you spoke about the differential treatment by police when it comes to different kinds of protests. You spoke about how indigenous people and their protests are treated by police across the country, and I've seen that in my city, here in Ottawa, as well as towards other racialized communities. There is a systemic challenge when it comes to law enforcement that we have to work towards. I do want to take the time to acknowledge that this is an important conversation to be had as well.

In relation to the work we're doing here in this committee around the parliamentary precinct and what it means, I was wondering if you can help us with your vision of what a parliamentary precinct should look like and what it means to the Algonquins, given that the indigenous peoples space is located right across from Parliament Hill and from Centre Block in particular. As plans are being developed to rebuild block two, which is on the south side of Wellington Street adjacent to the indigenous peoples space and, hopefully, more of our parliamentary square in front of that space, in your view, what should be the vision, keeping in mind reconciliation with indigenous peoples and of course celebrating and understanding indigenous culture and traditions as well?

The question is for Chief Jocko, through you, Madam Chair.

[Wendy Jocko]

I guess I'll go first, Veldon.

I think I did mention before that a name change would be in order for the parliamentary precinct. I actually had the opportunity to visit one of the last tours prior to the construction going on in the building. It's quite an elaborate building, but it really is void of our host nation presence. There's really nothing to signify the Algonquin nation in the architectural design of the building, so I think we could, hopefully, see those aspects incorporated into the refurbishment of the precinct itself.

[Dr. Veldon Coburn]

Mr. Naqvi, I would add that I think a lot of what we might be looking for are the security and the enforcement of indigenous rights through the particular space that's proposed to be the expansion of the parliamentary precinct so that our presence will always be within it.

I think Chief Jocko would agree that there's a special relationship between the Algonquin nation and Canada itself and having the building right across from Parliament is right in the heart and the seat of federal power. We're right next door to it.

In terms of the urban planning, say, Ottawa seems to be quite good. I don't think it does anything necessarily too offensive in any way whatsoever. We know that we're right across the street from Parliament. We can look through the window.... Well, eventually we can, when 100 Wellington is opened up. Again, somebody at the Department of Public Works or what have you is still dragging their feet, but—

[Yasir Naqvi, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you.

I think we're running out of time. I was wondering if I can ask a very quick question.

One of the things being considered is whether Wellington Street should be closed to vehicular traffic. I'm just wondering if you would be supportive of that.

[Dr. Veldon Coburn]

I would be. Yes.

[Wendy Jocko]

Yes. I wouldn't object to that either.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bardish Chagger]

Excellent.

On behalf of the PROC committee members, I would like to thank both of our guests for joining us today. If anything comes to mind, please do not hesitate to provide it in writing to the clerk so that all committee members can consider it.

With that, I want to give the PROC committee members a heads-up with regard to next week. We discussed the agenda in camera, so it's not really out there. June 6, next Monday, will be the deadline for Bill C-14 amendments, as we will be considering that legislation. For June 7, we have sent out invitations to Professor Carty, Professor Taillon and PCO officials. In the second hour of the June 7 meeting, we will have Minister LeBlanc, accompanied by PCO officials again.

At the June 9 meeting, we will continue the operational security of the parliamentary precinct study—the last meeting for that—followed by clause-by-clause for Bill C-14 in the second hour. I would ask that, for June 9, any edits to version three of the code draft report be shared with all members, so that we can pencil it in the following week, following clause-by-clause. We'll have version three of the code following clause-by-clause for Bill C-14. That's the space we will enter into.

You have also received the draft of the indigenous languages report. I'll start some conversations as to when we can have some feedback on that, so that we can put it into the queue following the version three of the code report. That should, hopefully, bring us into the summer season.

With that, everyone, please keep well and safe.

Thank you. The meeting is adjourned.