Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on July 26th, 2007

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

Mr. Chairman, if we proceed with the clause-by-clause consideration, we'll be able to present the bill to be amended to the House upon its return. That is the reason—and I'll close on this—why I think it is important to stick to the agenda set for this morning.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

There is a motion, there's been debate, and I am going to proceed. There is no more debate on that.

Point of order.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Point of order, Mr. Chair. First of all, I don't believe you're allowed to call for a vote within a point of order, which I'm sure Mr. Lemay knows.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

You're correct.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

Secondly, Mr. Chair, I actually want to bring us back to the motion we have in front of us. I want to clarify that there are two motions there we will be moving through, whether it be Monsieur Lemay's or Mrs. Neville's that we'll be moving to first.

Mr. Chair, my last point I want to make is that Monsieur Lemay and Ms. Crowder are absolutely right: we are on the record, we are in clause-by-clause right now, so if they do want to bring it back to the agenda, if they want to change the agenda, that is absolutely the committee's right to do, Mr. Chair. Unfortunately, I would find it somewhat sad that the opposition has to resort to procedural tactics to escape giving human rights to first nations.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

This is a discussion on the point of order. First of all, I want it to be clear that the motion Madam Neville brought forward was to deal with her motion, because that was the first one received. That's the one we'll deal with first.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

My motion was to change the agenda of the meeting, to establish the agenda. If we are concluding debate on it, Mr. Chair, I would like to speak.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

I'm going to go to Mr. Albrecht and then I'll go to Mr. Lévesque and then Madam Crowder can have the last say.

Please be brief.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Chair, I intend to vote against this motion simply because this is another delaying tactic keeping us from moving ahead with important work that all Canadians want us to move ahead with. We've had this on our plate since December. This has been studied and has been put before Parliament a number of times in the last 30 years. It should have been a temporary measure. It's time to act now. So I'm opposed to the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Thank you, Mr. Albrecht.

Mr. Lévesque and then we'll go to Madam Neville.

[Yvon Lévesque, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Mr. Chairman, you admitted that Mr. Lemay's position was the right one. Considering that the time of all the members around this table is precious, I ask you to put Ms. Neville's motion to a vote.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Thank you, Monsieur Lévesque.

Madam Neville, do you have any further comments before we go to a vote?

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Yes, I do, Mr. Chair, and I am in part repeating myself.

My understanding is that four members can call a meeting or request a meeting to be called. You have done it on your own authority, not on the request of four members. We've established that.

My understanding as well is that when the committee is called, the committee determines the agenda of the meeting. It cannot be determined by four members of the committee. It cannot be determined by you acting alone. And I sincerely hope this is not part of the playbook that we heard so much about six weeks ago. This is a very serious issue. We have heard over and over again of the importance of this issue to first nations communities, of the importance of it being done properly, of it not being done through a father-knows-best approach to it.

So I am asking the committee to reorder the agenda so that we can deal with it in the manner that I believe is most appropriate to first nations, aboriginal peoples, and to Canadians generally.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Madam Neville, the chair can request a meeting for a specific issue to be dealt with, and the committee can change the order of business or the purpose of the meeting. So you have that ability--

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

And that's what I'm asking for.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

--but I do have the ability to call a meeting for a specific purpose, which I did.

Now we'll move on to the motion, which is that we deal with the motions prior to the clause-by-clause.

[An hon. member]

A recorded vote, please.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

I'll ask the clerk to record the vote.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Ms. Bonnie Charron]

On the question that we change the agenda to move to the motion of Anita Neville first.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 7; nays 4)

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

We'll move on to the motion that has been presented by Madam Neville.

Madam Neville, would you like to speak?

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Would you like me to read it, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Yes, if you would, please.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

My notice of motion, which I provided to you earlier this week, Mr. Chair, reads:

Whereas the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development agreed at its meeting of May 10, 2007, that the clause by clause study of C-44 “be reserved until September”,

Whereas the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development adopted a motion on June 19, 2007, calling on “all debate on repeal of section 67 of the Canadian Human Rights Act be suspended for a maximum of 10 months, following the adoption of this motion by the Committee”,

That the clause by clause study of bill C-44, An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act, should immediately be suspended until proper consultations have taken place pursuant to the motion adopted by this committee on June 19, 2007.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Do you wish to speak to the motion, Madam Neville?

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Mr. Chair, I do wish to speak to the motion. What I'm going to say is not new to any of the members of the committee sitting here, and I don't know that it is going to be new to many Canadians.

We have heard many, many representations over the months. We've heard from first nations communities, we've heard from first nations leadership, and we've heard from men and women right across this country who have come to speak to the motion. Overwhelmingly, Mr. Chair, we have heard that first nations communities are not prepared for this motion to be put forward.

I want to reiterate, Mr. Chair, what I have said on the record several times in committee and in the House of Commons. While we support the intent of this bill, we do not support the process by which it is being foisted upon aboriginal communities across the country.

We have heard overwhelmingly of the importance of consultation--consultation that is meaningful, consultation that takes place in the communities, consultation that speaks to the impact of this legislation, and consultation that will impact the lives of ordinary aboriginal Canadians on reserve. We have heard that they're not ready. We have heard that they need this process.

I strongly support the motion that was put forward on June 19 that this consultation process take place.

We've had a month already and nothing has happened. We put a maximum of ten months for it to take place. The clock is ticking. It is important. We have heard overwhelmingly--and I will come back to this later in debate--from women, who this bill is intended, as we have heard many times, to help, support, whatever, that they want the consultation process. Just the day before yesterday I attended the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association in Manitoba, and I heard overwhelmingly from first nations women: “Don't use your standards to make policies for us. Consider our culture. Consider our concerns. Consider our heritage and our way of doing things.”

I think the consultation process is important. I think it is equally important that the will of this committee be supported. We said unequivocally in early May that we would not be dealing with clause-by-clause until at least September.

So there are two issues: the issue of consultation and the will of Parliament. I do not understand how, as chair, as a government, you are choosing to override the unanimous consent of this committee to move ahead in the middle of July. The committee of--