Evidence of meeting #18 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 41st Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was criteria.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Carolyn Bennett Liberal St. Paul's, ON
—and that the people had been erroneously removed from the list.
Representative, Mi'kmaq First Nations Assembly of Newfoundland
Yes, and the liability is something that should be decided by the courts, not by an enrolment committee, not by anyone else.
Liberal
Carolyn Bennett Liberal St. Paul's, ON
It seems that the purpose of the bill is to insulate the government from the legal action it is already anticipating. Is that correct? Is that what you see the bill trying to do?
Representative, Mi'kmaq First Nations Assembly of Newfoundland
Yes, it is; that and taking the rights away from those who hold a card right now. I and the committee, the assembly, and other people in my community whom I've spoken with, and I have spoken to many, feel that this right is being taken away from them.
They're also not being told about what's going on. Nobody knew this supplementary agreement was coming, nobody.
Liberal
Carolyn Bennett Liberal St. Paul's, ON
When we heard from the federation and the band last week, they said that they hadn't asked for this indemnification, so clause 4 we see as purely of the government's.... What was portrayed as an agreement between the band and the Government of Canada, actually, this clause, in terms of the indemnification, wasn't even asked for by the band, and they seemed surprised by it.
Going back to the minister's testimony, in which he suggested that the Governor in Council doesn't have the express authority to remove names from the schedule and that this legislation is required to provide the Governor in Council with that authority, it sounds as though the Governor in Council already can add names to the membership list because of subsection 73(3) of the Indian Act. So what is the additional statutory authority required by the Governor in Council to remove names from the Qalipu Mi'kmaq First Nation band order?
Do you think that the real purpose of the bill is to insulate the government from liability and not really to implement the agreement or the supplemental agreement?
What do they really need and what would you need to get this fixed, given that it was such a botch-up? How do you fix it?
Representative, Mi'kmaq First Nations Assembly of Newfoundland
How do you fix it? Well, first, what they're recommending in here by giving the power to the Governor in Council.... Under the Indian Act, the Indian registrar has the power to remove or add names, and that is the same across Canada. So why is someone else receiving the power for the Mi'kmaq people of Newfoundland?
My concern is that the power to do that has been taken away from the registrar and given over to the Governor in Council. There's nothing in there limiting.... I just understood that they're going to be going on the advice of the enrolment committee. We're concerned that it is also an attempt to reduce numbers, because there's no other way to reduce numbers. As well, we believe the supplementary agreement was introduced to do the same thing. So this is another way to take cards away from the people who have them.
I believe that 24,876 people is probably still too many for the band itself. We have 105,000 applications, and only 24,876 have received their cards, so we still have a substantial number of people just standing out there waiting to be processed, and I don't believe they will be.
Conservative
Conservative
Kyle Seeback Conservative Brampton West, ON
Based on what you've said, Ms. Hart, I think your group is composed of people whose applications have been rejected, those whose applications have not been processed, and those whose applications have been approved but who are concerned.
Would those be the three kinds of people in there?
Representative, Mi'kmaq First Nations Assembly of Newfoundland
No, it's in the agreement.
Conservative
Kyle Seeback Conservative Brampton West, ON
Do you have any idea of the numbers? Is it an equal distribution, or do you not have any idea or you don't keep track of it?
Representative, Mi'kmaq First Nations Assembly of Newfoundland
I don't have those numbers.
Conservative
Kyle Seeback Conservative Brampton West, ON
That's fine.
You said that the process was very open and that there was a mismanagement of the process. I think that's what you've sort of intimated about the process early on. I take it by that you accept that there shouldn't be 101,000 people who are eligible for first nation status with the Qalipu Mi'kmaq.
Representative, Mi'kmaq First Nations Assembly of Newfoundland
That's, unfortunately, not for me to decide, but based on what was presented to us to ratify after the agreement in principle was signed, it was very open. What we're concerned about now is that everything that's being done is about reducing numbers.
Conservative
Kyle Seeback Conservative Brampton West, ON
I understand that, but you said it was very open and it should have been more stringent. That's directly what you said today.
Conservative
Kyle Seeback Conservative Brampton West, ON
So if you're saying it was too open and should have been more stringent, by definition you're also saying that perhaps it allows far too many people to apply. Do you think this band should be one-tenth the size of all first nation communities in Canada?
Representative, Mi'kmaq First Nations Assembly of Newfoundland
No, I don't have an opinion on that.
What I will say is that it was open but it wasn't done fairly. That's the other thing. The process wasn't fair.
Representative, Mi'kmaq First Nations Assembly of Newfoundland
The initial process on the agreement in principle wasn't, and I'll give you an example. When I made my application, I was the main applicant. I had brothers and sisters who applied under me. They received all of their documentation, but I did not, although I was the main applicant and all of their applications depended on my documentation.
Conservative
Representative, Mi'kmaq First Nations Assembly of Newfoundland
I didn't receive the document stating that I met the criteria, but they did.
Representative, Mi'kmaq First Nations Assembly of Newfoundland
I did, but it was after the fact. I had to call and demand why I didn't receive my letter. When I called, my letter was not mailed to me. My letter was dropped in a box at my house with no stamp on it. When I got into my house that evening, I received a phone call and the caller said, “You should keep your mouth shut now. You have your letter.” I pressed star 69 to see who the caller was, and the number was blocked.
That's not the first instance of that we've experienced in our community.
Conservative
Kyle Seeback Conservative Brampton West, ON
You've said it's very open, that it should have been more stringent. I know you're not acknowledging, or you're saying you don't have an opinion, that the number is too large, but I think what you've suggested is that's what you're thinking. If we look at that, the process now will re-evaluate these applications on the basis of the supplementary agreement.
Wouldn't you agree it's only fair that every applicant be treated the same? They can't just ignore people who have been granted status under the original agreement. It wouldn't be fair to all applicants if you said, “Well, those people are fine, but these other people here, we're going to review their applications.” Isn't it an issue of fairness that if it has happened everyone should be under the same criteria?
Representative, Mi'kmaq First Nations Assembly of Newfoundland
What I'm saying is that prior to the agreement in principle that was signed, there should have been more consultations done within the community so that the criteria should have been set from the get-go, in the very beginning.
