Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 21st, 2006

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

That's my question, though. What is this piece of legislation designed to do? The role of this committee is to review the bill that is now before us. That's why you've been called as a witness to the committee. We're here to review Bill C-292, and that is the crux of our question today. What are we adding to this bill to define the Kelowna accord? As you've witnessed, there wasn't a specific document that could be pointed to that was signed off as saying this is the accord.

The Charlottetown accord was referenced by Mr. LeClair; that was a document signed off by multiple parties. It ended because Mr. Elijah Harper from Manitoba decided aboriginal people weren't at the table and hadn't signed their name to that accord. Nonetheless, a tangible document was signed off and that was what would have been....

For instance, if we look back to the nineties, we would have had a bill to implement the Charlottetown accord. That is my question. What are we attaching to this bill? What tangible document is going to be used for this bill?

[Chief Phil Fontaine]

First of all, Elijah Harper's action was not against the Charlottetown accord. It had to do with Meech Lake and the fact that Meech Lake—

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Well, there's another accord.

[Chief Phil Fontaine]

Yes. The Meech Lake accord was really, from our perspective, a denial of the distinct characteristic of our people. We were being told that our turn would come later but that we had to deal with the Quebec fact in the country.

Elijah took exception to that because clearly, from his perspective and ours, we're one of the founding nations in this country and they're—

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

But would you not agree that Meech Lake had an accord associated with a document with signature pages, and that was what would have been enacted?

[Chief Phil Fontaine]

The objection was the fact that there was no specific reference to aboriginal peoples.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

I don't disagree with that, but I'm just saying, in the absence of something we can enact as a part of this piece of legislation, that's the problem we find ourselves in.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Are there any further questions?

We'll go to the Liberal side. Mr. Merasty.

[Gary Merasty, Liberal, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

First of all, thank you very much. I think your presentations were outstanding.

I have a yes or no question, and maybe another question after that. I'll share my time with my colleagues as well.

Plain and simple, the Conservative government claims that the Kelowna accord does not exist. I think we heard that in a question just now, that there's no signed agreement; therefore, they have nothing to implement.

My view is that this government does not have a written agreement to expend huge fiscal resources to undermine the Canadian Wheat Board. They didn't have a written agreement to tax income trusts. In both cases, they proceeded.

On the flip side, we do have written agreements for aboriginal SchoolNet, aboriginal women's programs, language programs, and so on--written agreements; cancel them anyway. So I think, to paraphrase Chief Stewart Phillip, from B.C., basically this government, through its collective wooden heart and through its wooden smile, had no intention to implement the Kelowna accord. Their argument is fake and false.

So on the question, yes or no, I believe firmly and strongly—and this is from my travels and from my phone calls and conversations across the country, from first nations, Métis, and Inuit people—that a promise was made, the Kelowna accord, and that this promise has been broken by this government. Do you agree?

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Who are you directing your question to?

[Gary Merasty, Liberal, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

To each one of them.

[Marc LeClair]

It has yet to be implemented.

[Gary Merasty, Liberal, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

I see nodding heads as “yes” on the other side.

Do you think the Kelowna accord would have fundamentally and positively altered the course of aboriginal poverty? Would it have begun to alter, fundamentally? This question is to all as well.

[Rosemarie McPherson]

Yes, absolutely.

[Chief Phil Fontaine]

First of all, Kelowna must be seen for what it was designed to do and for what it was. It was really an investment, on the part of the country, to deal with the single most important social justice issue in the country, which is first nations poverty. It was an investment in our future. It was an opportunity for this country to finally turn the corner regarding our situation, and it was but a beginning. It was supposed to be the initial investment in a series of investments that the country agreed to undertake to deal with this situation.

The problem here is simply one where we live in one of the richest countries in the entire world, and there's absolutely no good reason for anyone to experience the kind of poverty that plagues first nations communities--no good reason. There's no good reason why we don't have decent housing, why there are close to 200 communities that operate under a boil water advisory, why we don't and can't expect access to quality health care, or why we're not able to educate our kids in good schools--all those things.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Ms. Simon, please.

[Mary Simon]

Mr. Chairman, may I respond to Mr. Bruinooge, or do I have to respond...?

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

It's up to the person.

[Gary Merasty, Liberal, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Go ahead. Feel free.

[Mary Simon]

I didn't have an opportunity, and I'll be very brief.

I think Mr. Bruinooge raises a very important point. I think that if the government would honour the Kelowna accord, we wouldn't need Bill C-292. It wouldn't be necessary. Bill C-292 doesn't recite all the specific pieces of Kelowna, but it makes it clear that the commitments in Kelowna must be honoured.

People bring up the fact that it wasn't signed. Probably, in that package of documents, you will see documents that were negotiated by representatives of first nations, Inuit, and Métis and deputy ministers of the government and assistant deputy ministers of the government. There's a blueprint on health. There are other documents that start to lay out the relationship that would be built around the partnership envisaged in the Kelowna accord. Everything, as usual, would be negotiated between the federal government and aboriginal peoples.

We've always been very open to negotiating agreements. So there is no reason, if the commitment was made by the government to implement Kelowna, why we could not move forward on discussing what initiatives are needed to implement the funding that has been approved, although we have identified many of those issues ourselves. There are very specific recommendations in the reports that came out of the round tables, which included representatives from all sectors of, in our case, the Inuit community. There are very specific recommendations on education and curriculum development. There is a lot of material, so to speak, that wouldn't be very difficult to put forward if that were the thing we had to do.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

We'll go to the government side, please. Who will speak?

Mr. Blaney.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for coming to meet with us this morning. Your presence is appreciated and shows the importance you give to improving conditions for First Nations people.

I would particularly like to thank Chief Picard for coming this morning. I participated with him in the First Nations socioeconomic forum in Mashteuiatsh, during which our government signed a protocol aimed at transferring the responsibility for Aboriginal education to Aboriginals.

The housing issue was also broached. A committee and follow-up mechanisms were put in place. A meeting is scheduled for the spring.

In that regard, I think that my colleague Mr. Lemay’s idea to give you the opportunity to share your thoughts with us on the forum is brilliant. I think it is in everyone’s interest. I fully support the idea, just as I support the principles mentioned this morning aimed at eliminating poverty, not only in Aboriginal communities but also throughout the country.

It is difficult to run through it again in three minutes. I have a few questions for Chief Picard. Did you attend the preparatory meetings leading up to the first ministers’ meeting in Kelowna?

[Vice-Chief Ghislain Picard]

Yes, just like the other regions.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Were you involved in the distribution process? An amount had been agreed on. Were you involved in determining the amounts to be allocated to First Nations in Quebec?

[Vice-Chief Ghislain Picard]

Mechanisms were to be put in place following the Accord to discuss it.