Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on April 18th, 2013

[Guy Lonechild]

I'm very pleased to come back and talk with each of you about first nations people, their development around the country. I've been a long-time advocate for our people. I'm supportive of anything that will truly provide meaningful dialogue with first nations people about our relationship. I don't think we've really got that right yet. We've been studied to death. We need to have an opportunity to gain some meaningful traction. We have a leader in the national chief of the AFN who can provide some space for that growth to happen as a country. I would wholeheartedly encourage the Government of Canada and its members of Parliament to work collaboratively with the national chief to ensure that this takes place.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you.

We'll turn to Ms. Crowder for final questions.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Thank you once again, Mr. Lonechild.

I want to summarize your position. If there were changes to the bill—you mentioned the clauses you support and those you don't—then overall you would support the bill.

[Guy Lonechild]

The short answer is, as long as there's meaningful consultation with first nations people, I would support the bill.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

That leads me to my next question.

In the preamble it says that the “Government of Canada is committed to continuing its work in exploring creative options for the development of this new legislation in collaboration with the First Nations organizations that have demonstrated an interest in this work.”

It doesn't say “consultation”, nor does it in any way indicate a process to get to that place. I'm not suggesting that the preamble should include every single detail, but it seems to me the government is still far too much in the driver's seat with respect to how this should proceed.

Do you have any specific recommendations on how we could change that so it would be more reflective of what needs to happen?

[Guy Lonechild]

First nations organizations can and do play a critical role in facilitating consultation, and so if the offer is there for the Government of Canada to consult with a first nation in British Columbia, or a first nation in Saskatchewan, about these changes, then that should be clearly articulated to the local leadership. It's the local leadership that has demanded that the AFN and other groups ensure there's adequate consultation. If that is done, then I would be supportive of the bill.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

If we couldn't amend clause 2, the clause that outlines the reporting to the minister on the work undertaken by his or her department, would you then not support the bill?

[Guy Lonechild]

You're asking me some complicated questions.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Well, the principle of consultation seems to be essential. We've heard this consistently from first nations' representative organizations, from first nations themselves, and from leaders in first nations communities. If we can't sort out the details around consultation—because it doesn't say “consultation”, but says “collaboration”—that failure would seem to me to undermine the whole premise of the bill.

[Guy Lonechild]

I think that to do this right, instead of “collaboration” it should say “consultation”. That's the legal requirement: that first nations be consulted by the Government of Canada. If “consultation” were put in there, then I would support the bill.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Perhaps we could even talk about consultation in the context as defined by the Supreme Court, because that has been fairly clear, and it would give us some guidance in terms of how we would move ahead.

It's interesting that this bill has been touted as moving away from a colonialist approach, and yet in clause 13, it continues to state that a “fine imposed under a by-law made by the council of a band under this Act belongs to Her Majesty for the benefit of that band.”

I wonder why we wouldn't just say “belongs to the band”. If we could amend that, would this make sense?

[Guy Lonechild]

Sure.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

I have one final comment. Mr. Clarke and I have a different understanding of what the Assembly of First Nations said about the bylaws. Unfortunately, I don't have Chief Wilson-Raybould's presentation before us, but I wasn't understanding her to say that bands do not have the capacity to develop their own bylaws. In fact, I understood her to say just the opposite. First nations are very capable of defining their bylaws.

The sticking point is that the bylaws must be published in a newspaper. My understanding of the argument is twofold: first of all, that it's cost prohibitive, because some of these bylaws can be pages long, and to pay for them to be published in a newspaper doesn't seem to be a good use of resources; and second, that this is a standard that other levels of government aren't held to. I heard her suggesting that we look to first nations for best practices as to how they publish it.

[Guy Lonechild]

I would share that viewpoint. There are best practices out there that we could rely on.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

So we don't need to look at newspapers. In fact, many would argue that newspapers are not the most effective way of getting information to members.

[Guy Lonechild]

Sure.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

That's my last question. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Mr. Lonechild, we want to thank you for your testimony today and for answering the questions that committee members had.

Committee members, we have a little bit of business that we need to work through. We'll suspend for a moment and then we'll move in camera to address that committee business. Then we'll complete our meeting.

[Proceedings continue in camera]