Evidence of meeting #102 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was undrip.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Member, National Indigenous Economic Development Board
The money spent on social programs, prisons, everything else—
Member, National Indigenous Economic Development Board
—some $27 billion. Take a look at that report.
You were saying, sir, that something was not clear.
Conservative
Kevin Waugh Conservative Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK
I wanted a clarification. The board also believes that implementing the declaration would ensure the protection of reserve lands and traditional territories—and here's where I need clarification—and would allow for reserve sizes to go back to what they originally were.
What were they originally? How far back are you going here?
This is the first time this committee has seen this piece. I'm sure everyone around here is saying, “back to where they originally were?” Please clarify.
Member, National Indigenous Economic Development Board
If you look back at our history, you see that we are the first peoples. It's a simple answer. You look at land claims today. Quite frankly, it's simple. In fact, our board chair, Chief Clarence Louie of Osoyoos—I'm sure you've heard of him—is the one who asked that we raise this issue of lands. He said we don't want anything done with the lands; just give them back to us. We're first peoples here.
Conservative
Kevin Waugh Conservative Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK
This is the first time it's been brought to this committee. I think it shocked a lot of us. It shocked me. I just wanted that clarification on record.
Member, National Indigenous Economic Development Board
Does that clarify it for you?
Conservative
Member, National Indigenous Economic Development Board
It's a big piece.
Member, National Indigenous Economic Development Board
I just mentioned in my remarks, in answer to an earlier question about going through the land claim process, that we'll never get the land back. I can say that. Chief Clarence can say that.
Member, National Indigenous Economic Development Board
Yes, but it was taken.
Liberal
NDP
Romeo Saganash NDP Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair, and to our guests this afternoon.
I'm sorry, Kevin, that we shocked you. It wasn't intended, really.
Thank you for those presentations. I think all three testimonies were incredibly well expressed. I think it will help this committee in understanding what they're trying to do through this study and through Bill C-262.
First of all, I want to start by asking you a question, Sheryl.
In the Edwards case at the Supreme Court of Canada, in I believe 1984, I think it was one of the first occasions when the Supreme Court talked about the Constitution as “a living tree”. One of the reasons they said that back then was that for the framers of the Constitution, in particular with respect to section 35, not everything could have been predicted at that time. Not everything could have been imagined by the framers of the Constitution at that time. We have seen over the years with the rulings from the Supreme Court that our Constitution has grown, developed, and evolved, in particular with respect to the recognition and respect of indigenous peoples' rights.
Do you think the living tree doctrine applies also to the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples?
Canada Research Chair in Global Indigenous Rights and Politics, University of British Columbia, As an Individual
Thank you, Mr. Saganash.
Yes, I do, completely. I think the living tree doctrine is a perfectly appropriate framework when you're talking about development of democratic institutions in Canada from the 1982 Constitution forward. I now see that the UN declaration, especially in light of the human rights framework internationally and the expectations and the calls on Canada to align itself with those expectations, is the next logical step in that evolution.
NDP
Romeo Saganash NDP Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC
Now, all of you expressed the idea that Bill C-262 is the first step in the right direction. I'd like to hear from all three of you on what you think the next steps are after Bill C-262 is adopted. You talked about sharing a meal, and I like that idea, but beyond that, what are some of the things you would like to see after this bill is adopted?
Maybe I'll start with you, Jessica.
Executive Director, 4Rs Youth Movement
That's a good question.
For me, I think that once this bill is adopted, an important process of informing the communities needs to happen. As young people, that's an important piece to us: to be informed about what's happening so that we can understand and engage with it in a way that's meeting young people where they're at.
I think the different levels of government naturally need to have conversations about what their role is in relationship to the communities that they need work together with on this and to start to identify the different laws and legal systems that we need to change. I think of the Indian Act, of course, as a big one, and a good challenge for us to all work on together.
To me, those are some of the pieces that would be the next steps for implementation. I imagine that Sharon and Sheryl would have some very specific concrete ideas on that too.
Meegwetch.
Member, National Indigenous Economic Development Board
Thank you, Mr. Saganash.
As I understand it, the bill is not creating new laws but perhaps strengthening existing laws. With regard to the working group of ministers the Prime Minister has formed, headed up by the Minister of Justice, the work they will do will examine all of the federal implications, laws, policies and operational practices, and that will help the crown establish a proper framework moving forward.
It's important, in our view, that Bill C-262 get the support, be passed, and allow that working group to do its work. It's about time. We've had enough indigenous people going to courts all the time, and all we do is spend money. The lawyers, with all due respect to lawyers—I know you're one yourself, Mr. Saganash—just continue to get rich, and the first nations, Inuit, and Métis people just wait. I think the group has to do their work.
NDP
Romeo Saganash NDP Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC
Even after a positive affirmation by the courts, sometimes those confirmed rights are not respected anyway.
Sheryl.
Canada Research Chair in Global Indigenous Rights and Politics, University of British Columbia, As an Individual
The goal here is to get to a nation-to-nation relationship that is based in mutual respect and principles of justice and equality—essentially democracy. The bill itself sets out the next steps.
First again is a review of existing law and policy. That's already underway—check.
Second is making sure that future law and policy is consistent with the declaration. That needs to be a next step.
Third, a reporting mechanism is called for by the international system and this bill. That needs to come. With respect to the national action plan, we hear that it's under way, but I have no evidence of that personally, so I think we are behind the ball there.
I just need to mention that the constitutions of Ecuador and Bolivia, passed in 2008 and 2009 respectively, both adopted the declaration into national law, and Ecuador actually enshrined it into law completely at that time. I don't recommend this step. It creates an immediate implementation gap between law and practice, and as I understand it, this is not at all what this bill is doing. This bill merely sets out a framework, a set of directions for “must” steps for all future governments.
In terms of a national action plan, I also have to point out that Canada is behind. So far, Bolivia, Mexico, Paraguay, and Peru all have national action plans, and when I was at the United Nations last week, El Salvador announced that it had completed its draft of a national action plan.
How long can Canada afford to stay behind some of these other countries in moving towards implementation?
Liberal
Liberal
TJ Harvey Liberal Tobique—Mactaquac, NB
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I just have one question for all three, and if I have any remaining time, I'm going to turn it over to MP Amos.
I just want to build on some earlier comments by member Saganash. At the beginning of this, when you first spoke, you talked about it being a foundational building block to the future of the country, to a collective approach of how we move forward collaboratively, with a positive energy, for a general outcome that's beneficial to all Canadians.
Building on Ms. Bolduc's earlier remarks and recognizing Mr. Saganash's intention in bringing this bill forward, I'm wondering if each of the three of you could identify what you believe the three most important next achievable outcomes from this would be, while also recognizing what Ms. Bolduc said earlier about how we should look at things in a very simple manner and just focus on deliverables.
