Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on April 18th, 2013

[Guy Lonechild]

To address the point you made in terms of unintended consequences, I think there's a deep mistrust from first nations toward any type of federal legislation. The Indian Act is just one piece. There are others.

We really need a good, thorough, and honest discussion about the relationship itself, what state we're in. We saw in the last few months with Chief Theresa Spence and other leaders across the country and the Idle No More movement that people are ready to have a dialogue. If this private member's bill moves that along, then I'm supportive of any type of consultation that includes first nations people.

I can't turn back time. This is not my bill; it's the Government of Canada's, so we need to work with that the best way we know how. I heard some suggestions earlier that we should have some very bright people like Regional Chief Wilson-Raybould, who would be happy to add some value to this, based on consent from first nations people.

It's important for us to move this discussion along. We've had far too many studies tabled. I'd like to see some level of government in Canada, both past and present governments, take the duty to consult seriously. The federal government as a whole has been absent in many cases, whereas provincial governments have been struggling with this issue right across the country. I don't think it's fair to first nations. I think the federal government must come to the table when it comes to access to land and resources.

Pretty significant discussion is going on around the country about resource revenue sharing. The national chief talked about that. Our own premier, Brad Wall, said there will be no resource revenue sharing with first nations. Somewhere, at some point, we have to expand this discussion so lives are improved. If this bill moves that discussion along, then so be it. I'd be happy to participate.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you.

We'll now turn to Mr. Seeback, for the last seven minutes.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Lonechild, thanks for your testimony. I found it interesting and informative.

When we are talking about the Indian Act, there seems to be some consensus that the Indian Act needs to be reformed or redone. It seems that there's great difficulty in getting consensus on things like this.

When I hear that you have to have consultation with all 631 first nations, I think you'd find great difficulty in getting consensus on a new Indian Act or significant changes to the Indian Act. Would you agree with me on that?

[Guy Lonechild]

Yes.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

In a practical sense, it would seem to make sense that if you were going to make changes, making incremental changes might be a better approach. I don't know if you agree with that or have comments on that, certainly in the context of the difficulty of getting consensus on replacing the entire act.

[Guy Lonechild]

Yes, there have been some great leaders in the past, who have even passed on, leaders of the AFN, leaders at the community level, who have long advocated for some meaningful changes to replace the Indian Act with something that's more suitable for them and their self-government and self-determination.

At this point, given that this dialogue is longer than 40 years, we have to find a way to approach it incrementally. As long as these committee sessions, these dialogues around the country with the AFN and so forth result in something, and incremental is the way to go, then I would be supportive of it.

I don't think we can make changes to the whole system in the next year or two. It's going to take some time.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Moving along from that, with respect to this particular piece of legislation, I want to make it clear which sections I think you support. From my listening to your testimony, I think you support the repeal of the sections that deal with bylaws, ministerial approval of bylaws. Am I correct?

[Guy Lonechild]

Yes, there are some sections where it just doesn't make sense for the minister to be signing off on them and then having the band and council wait on those.

There are some of them, however, as mentioned, where we would like the minister to stay involved, in terms of wills and estates. That's important.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Right. That's a different set. I'm just talking about it section by section. On the bylaw section, I think you support that.

[Guy Lonechild]

Yes.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

To be fair, I think you might have some reservations with respect to wills and estates.

[Guy Lonechild]

That's right.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

I think you support deleting the sections that deal with residential schools. Am I fairly clear on that?

[Guy Lonechild]

That's right.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

I think you probably support reporting by the minister on progress in developing new legislation.

[Guy Lonechild]

Yes.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Do you have any recommendations, then? You support those sections. Do you have any recommendations you'd like to see included in the bill, in addition to the sections you've said you support?

[Guy Lonechild]

I think the piece we're missing here is how to consult. I would be open to supporting a process that outlines very clearly to first nations and Canadians the level of consultation that needs to be defined. If that's the case, then I would support this annual reporting back to Parliament on progress made on legislative changes.

We're going to get into a whole host of discussions about treaty implementation. Yes, I would support that if those parameters were put in place clearly.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

To talk about the wills and estates section, would your concerns about that be alleviated if, for example, there was a transition period for coming into force? Would that be something you think would be helpful on those sections?

[Guy Lonechild]

That probably would be one option. However, at this point, I couldn't say that should be the only option explored. I think there needs to be a range of recommendations on whether that not be included, to be repealed, amended, or a range of options, but transition is one of them.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

What other options do you think would be helpful?

[Guy Lonechild]

As mentioned before, there is going to be a tremendous amount of cost. I think there are going to be questions, such as whether our wills that are currently done up are going to be grandfathered. Are they going to take effect once the legislation has changed? Is there going to be additional financial support from any other agency outside the minister's office in the government? I don't know that and there is no certainty.

This is very cost prohibitive. There's not a whole lot of first nations taking up and doing wills anyway. I think the Canadian Bar Association has outlined some recommendations, and I'd like to refer to them. Those are some of the suggestions that I think are worthwhile discussing.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

That's what I was looking at, actually. I take it you think that those would be helpful, the Canadian Bar Association's recommendations, specifically those dealing with wills and estates.

[Guy Lonechild]

I think that those would be helpful in laying out what the issues are and what the unintended consequences may be. After having reviewed that document, I further think that changes to it may not be in the best interests of first nations people.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Do you have any last comments you'd like to make?