Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on April 21st, 2015

[The Chair, Conservative, Blake Richards]

We'll call the meeting to order this morning. Welcome to the 37th meeting of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development. Obviously this morning we'll be conducting our clause-by-clause review of Bill S-6. We do have a number of amendments that have been submitted and we'll run through them for each clause. We will be starting with clause 2 because clause 1 is the short title.

(On clause 2)

I see that we have a number of amendments here. Does anyone care to speak to those amendments? Just so that all members are aware, LIB-1 and NDP-1 are in fact identical amendments; therefore, we can only proceed with one. As well, we do have PV-1 and PV-2, which would amend the same lines as LIB-1. So if the latter is adopted, we could not move forward with them either.

Ms. Jones, do you wish to speak to LIB-1?

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Thank you very much.

The first amendment that we have here is an amendment to clause 2. Basically the amendment would delete lines 11 to 18. It deal with the powers that have been delegated to the federal minister. During a number of meetings that we held with representatives from the territory, and also in our public sessions in Yukon, it was quite evident from the majority of presenters that there were huge concerns with the powers given to the federal minister under this particular section of the act. Many people certainly indicated that will be was an erosion of powers normally held by the aboriginal governments in that area, and they were adamant about making changes to this section of the bill.

In fact nearly every person who presented to the committee on that particular day made recommendations that there should be changes with regard to this section of the act. They specifically outlined what the impact would be with this particular change. Therefore, we felt it was necessary to make this amendment in the bill, and I would like to move that amendment this morning.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blake Richards]

Thank you, Ms. Jones.

Mr. Strahl.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

I'd like to point out that the Umbrella Final Agreement permits delegations. Specifically, section 2.11.8 states:

Government may determine, from time to time, how and by whom any power or authority of Government or a Minister set out in a Settlement Agreement...shall be exercised.

We believe that this clause is consistent with the Umbrella Final Agreement.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blake Richards]

Mr. Bevington.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Northwest Territories, NT]

Yes, we'll be supporting this amendment as we put forward a similar amendment. Quite clearly this goes beyond that particular section within that act. It speaks to the evolving nature of the Yukon government, first nations governments in the Yukon, and the relationship that is so important for their future and for the prosperity of that territory. This amendment will take out something that really is inappropriate in this day and age. It is inappropriate that this type of action would be taken without the third party being part of that discussion, part of that agreement. It's very paternalistic that the government has not moved passed a point almost 20 years ago when this agreement was made up. They're relying on something that is part of the past and not the future.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blake Richards]

Seeing no other speakers, I will call the question on the amendment.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Can we have a recorded vote?

[The Chair, Conservative, Blake Richards]

You certainly can.

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Can I say one more thing before we vote?

[The Chair, Conservative, Blake Richards]

Go ahead.

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

There was a lot of discussion around this section in the public forum about significant change in the legislation and what it would mean. Many people who presented to us felt that it wasn't appropriately defined and therefore it could have bearing on how the new section would be interpreted.

I think proposed section 6.1—and this was pointed out by many people—wasn't clear as well, under the designating of powers to a territorial minister, as to who was going to cover the financial cost of that responsibility and whether that was going to be covered by the federal government or territorial government. Who was going to pay for that? That was a concern that was expressed. As well, there were concerns expressed, as I said, around what constituted significant change.

I don't think we can say that it's not different from what we've already seen or how the board was managed in the past because it is different, and the difference hasn't been clearly defined to those people who are going to be impacted by this.

We would again encourage the committee, based of what you've heard and what has been recommended by people in Yukon, to accept the amendment before us today. It's certainly what they desire and wish in terms of practice under this legislation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blake Richards]

We've had a request for a recorded vote, so I'll let our clerk conduct that.

(Amendment negatived: nays 5; yeas 3) [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Conservative, Blake Richards]

As that amendment has been defeated, we will not proceed with NDP-1.

The next one would be PV-1. I do see that we have Ms. May.

Of course, the rules do allow for you to give a brief intervention on your amendment if you'd like to.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Again, on the record, it isn't due to the rules that I'm here; it's due to a motion that was passed by this committee. The rules would allow me to present these amendments as substantive amendments at report stage in the House of Commons, but due to the motion passed by this committee, I'm here to present my amendments here.

The initial Green Party amendment is very clearly required if we are to show the due respect that we should and must, under our Constitution, pay to the first nations of the Yukon. The Council of Yukon First Nations' brief was very strong in putting forward that they had not been meaningfully consulted during the review process and that this was inconsistent with the Umbrella Final Agreement.

To be quite clear, I think the process in this particular bill violates section 35 of our Constitution in failing to respect the constitutionally enshrined rights of first nations. The sharing of authority found in the principle of tripartite power and consultation is a very clear principle. By allowing the unilateral delegation of authority from the federal minister to the territorial minister, this provision as drafted, unless amended by Green Party amendment 1, will potentially violate this principle.

On behalf of the Green Party, I seek to amend this portion of the bill to require explicit consent of the first nations, restoring the duty to consult Yukon First Nations on the delegation of authority. I will just quote from the brief of the Yukon First Nations: “To be consistent with the treaties, Yukon First Nations must be equal partners with Canada and Yukon in decisions concerning handing over authority.”

I'd urge the committee to accept this amendment. It's within the spirit of what the government intends to do with this bill but will ensure its constitutionality and respect for first nations.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blake Richards]

Does anyone else wish to speak to that amendment?

Okay, I'll just remind the committee that if this amendment is moved, then amendment PV-2 would not be moved.

Does the committee wish to proceed with this amendment?

I see no indication one way or the other. I see some shaking of heads no—

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

If I may speak to that, we certainly support paragraph (a) of the amendment and see it in the spirit of what we were proposing early on. While we prefer the amendment we put forward in its entirety, we do want to support the spirit of what is being proposed here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blake Richards]

Ms. Jones.

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Thank you.

Again, I just want to express our support for this amendment. Obviously we would have preferred to have the section deleted, but that not being the case, this at least allows for the consent of first nations in dealing with how the delegation is done, so we would support the amendment that is proposed at this stage.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blake Richards]

Are there any other speakers?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

We will not proceed with amendment PV-2 as it is identical to amendment PV-1.

We next have amendment PV-3. Ms. May, do you wish to speak briefly to amendment PV-3?

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Yes, Mr. Chair.

Our third amendment is to amend, on page 1 at line 18, so that “delegation made under subsection (1) must be made in compliance with the Yukon Northern Affairs Program Devolution Transfer Agreement”. Again, this is to ensure that failures in the bill's drafting can be amended.

The failures in the drafting to which I refer, of course, are the lack of adequate and meaningful consultation with Yukon first nations in bringing forward Bill S-6. At least through this amendment we would ensure that compliance with the previous Yukon Northern Affairs Program Devolution Transfer Agreement authority would ensure that there would be respect for the devolution transfer agreement in the way the bill goes forward.

[The Chair, Conservative, Blake Richards]

Do I have any other members? Mr. Strahl.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Mr. Chair, I don't know how you would like to run this, or if I can direct my questions to the officials and ask them if they have concerns with bringing in another agreement outside of YESAA and linking the two. Could I ask the officials for clarification on that?

[The Chair, Conservative, Blake Richards]

Certainly, Mr. Strahl. We have the officials at the table, and I would welcome their responses to any points or questions raised by members, if members choose.

Mr. Strahl, would you like to address this to—

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

I had some concerns with this proposed amendment and was hoping you could address why it was drafted the way it was and the concerns you might have with bringing in the devolution agreement to this.