Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on April 13th, 2021

[Tania Monaghan]

Sure. Maybe I'll begin by noting that the ITK board of directors met recently and passed a resolution to unanimously support the passage of Bill C-15, noting, as President Obed remarked in his opening statement, the interest in seeking some improvements or strengthening the particular section of the bill in order to advance this commission's concept that's been a long-standing position of ITK. In the written brief that's been circulated in both languages to the committee for consideration, at page 4 there's a lengthy section of proposed amendments that really delve into the concept further.

The proposal to strike paragraph 6(2)(b) is really just in the interest of carving out a space where this would realistically fall within the current structure of the bill. There's an interest of course in acknowledging the establishment of the indigenous human rights commission as well as in laying out some interest in content regarding how the strategy could be approached to develop this further, including of course familiar language and other legislative mechanisms, associated time limits, advisory committees, and taking a distinctions-based approach similar to what we've seen in the Indigenous Languages Act, and considering the appointment of commissioners.

I'll end there. Thank you.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Obed and Ms. Monaghan.

I'd like to ask you very generally about your wishes. You have proposed a series of amendments. What are your priorities in terms of Bill C-15, apart from having it passed?

I'd also like to hear your thoughts about the action plan. Do you want the plan that will follow when the bill is passed to be prepared more quickly?

[Natan Obed]

It is incredibly important for Canada to recognize and affirm the UN declaration and to make its first attempt to harmonize Canadian law with the provisions within the UN declaration. It's a massive undertaking, and this legislation really just scratches the surface of that. If you look at it from an obligation perspective, the obligations in real terms are really the creation of the action plan and then the tabling of the action plan in the House of Commons.

Even though this is a tremendous undertaking, it really comes down to goodwill across a number of different priority areas. We would love to have that goodwill. That starts with the passage of the legislation and then it rolls through to the co-development of the action plan. We will get to the content pieces as they are presented to us, but, yes, this is a new relationship, if you will.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Gazan, please go ahead for six minutes.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.

My first question is for President Obed and Madam Monaghan.

What impact, if any, would Bill C-15 have on Inuit communities, some of whom have signed on to modern treaties?

[Natan Obed]

In many cases, Inuit are ahead of the curve when it comes to the signing and implementation of modern treaties. That said, there are still outstanding human rights violations that affect Inuit as well as first nations and Métis. I don't need to look much further than the national inquiry on murdered and missing indigenous women and girls, whose final report and calls for justice give examples of the human rights gap that exists between other Canadians and Inuit women in Inuit Nunangat and in Canada, who face challenges and rights violations.

Land claims didn't solve everything. They really focused on land transaction and security on both sides, but mostly, for the federal government, on land title and then a new relationship in the way of development and in governance. Land claims didn't really solve the challenges relating to health care, education or just broad human rights challenges that Inuit face relating to racism.

This piece of legislation and the the implementation of an action plan would truly fill in those gaps where we have strong foundations in our modern treaties, but we also have huge gaps, especially social gaps, that weren't covered in those treaties and are still outstanding today.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Maybe I'll give time to Madam Monaghan to respond quickly as well. Then I have one other question.

[Tania Monaghan]

Just quickly, I'll jump in on land claims implementation and some of the social inequities that President Obed referenced. Throughout the work of the Inuit-Crown partnership, there are 10 priority areas that have been identified. A recent one is, of course, what I referenced earlier, the legislative priority section dedicated towards looking at the implementation of the U.N. declaration and ultimately, hopefully, through this particular bill being passed into law. Through that process we do see the interest in advancing some of the areas where we've seen some delay, maybe some interest in having a different approach, identifying policy gaps, looking to implement policy and work in response to Inuit priorities identified through the land claim regions and through ITK in order to see the full implementation of the bill.

We utilize the Inuit-Crown partnership as a forum at the leadership and senior officials levels to ensure that there is transformative change and a whole-of-government approach in the way that the inequities and challenges facing the Inuit are addressed.

We see the opportunity here as a building block that's also inter-sectioned across all of the 10 priority areas through that particular forum. We're hopeful, of course. At the core of that is the struggle with some of the issues through land claims implementation and the ability for the bill and that particular process to right certain wrongs that have been at the top of the experience for Inuit lately.

Thank you.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I have one follow-up question. One of the suggestions we've heard at this committee time and time again by the Conservatives, as certainly repeated again by my colleague Mr. Viersen, is to incorporate a definition of FPIC into Bill C-15. I believe it would be somewhat dangerous to have one definition for all situations in Canada, given our very diverse political and legal contracts, modern treaties, treaties 1 to 11 and unceded territories.

I was wondering if you could comment on that.

[Natan Obed]

Thanks.

The UN declaration is more than just one particular paragraph. Free, prior and informed consent is really a small part of a much larger picture of the recognition of indigenous peoples' human rights.

It's unfortunate that some political parties or some individual Canadians have decided to fight indigenous peoples' human rights and the assertion and implementation of our rights through this particular mechanism. I find that it has no merit. I also do not agree that we should take any one provision of the declaration and define it within a Canadian domestic construct within a legislation that is meaning to do something very different. So that's—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

We're at time.

To get the next round of questions in completely, we'll need to extend the meeting, and I need a motion for that.

Ms. Gazan, would you move that we extend the meeting?

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I move for an extension.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

All in favour?

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

(Motion agreed to)

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Thank you very much.

We will go now to our five-minute round. I have Mr. Vidal, Ms. Zann, Ms. Gill, Ms. Gazan, Mr. Schmale and one other.

Gary Vidal, please go ahead for five minutes.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Actually, Chair, I'm going to take Gary's spot.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Go ahead.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, witnesses.

I want to continue with the conversation we were just having that Ms. Gazan brought up.

We, as legislators, have to examine every piece of legislation—not every piece of legislation is perfect—and we have to vote yes or no on the words of the legislation.

We have seen many organizations come forward that are concerned about the lack of a definition of FPIC.

Mr. Obed, I want to clarify—and I appreciate your comments—whether the ITK is satisfied that if Bill C-15 were to pass, it would meet the UNDRIP requirement found in article 19?

[Natan Obed]

I'm sorry. Is that under UNDRIP article 19 or a particular piece of domestic legislation?

Could you clarify the question, please?

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Under article 19 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, it says that “States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with... indigenous peoples” and “to obtain their free, prior and informed consent before adopting and implementing [laws] that may affect them.”

I guess what I'm asking is whether it is possible that Bill C-15 can move forward without doing that consultation ahead of the passage of the bill.

[Natan Obed]

There was a co-development phase of the legislation, which included the Assembly of First Nations, the Métis National Council and the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami. We, on our part, have worked through our Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami board of directors. Those four presidents who sit as our voting members are presidents of the four Inuit land claim agreement regions and are elected by each of their constituencies. They have the confidence of their particular people, and then in turn direct Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami to have national positions.

Tania Monaghan referenced the passage of a resolution last week supporting Bill C-15. There are also, on a concurrent path, consultation sessions that the Government of Canada had with Inuit in relation to this bill.

It is for each of the indigenous peoples of this country to answer that question for their respective peoples. For Inuit, we have a democratic process that has led to the support of this bill.

There has been a federal consultative process, which happens in every single piece of legislation. That is not exhaustive to every Canadian, but it attempts to understand and adhere and incorporate the views of individual Canadians, as well as the positions of representatives of Canadians.

I believe, for Inuit, this has been met and the legislation should proceed, but I cannot speak for first nations or Métis.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Okay.

Would it be fair to say that all Inuit communities have been consulted?

[Natan Obed]

No, I don't think that's a fair statement. The consultation process by the federal government is not exhaustive for any piece of legislation at any time, just like the positions of individual Inuks will never be unanimous on any one issue.

I think it's interesting that we are still at a place in this country where Canadians choose whether or not to believe indigenous peoples have self-determination based on whether or not it suits their interests.

I have just outlined a democratic process. I've also outlined the Canadian government's democratic process to pass legislation. By the terms that you're presenting, I don't think that any piece of legislation would ever pass in this country.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

That's exactly why we're trying to get a definition of “free, prior and informed consent”. I think if we have to do our work here in the committee process, in the legislative process, and if we don't do that, it would leave a lot of unanswered questions and, potentially, for the courts to decide on that definition if we aren't doing everything we can in this forum in the legislative branch.

We have put forward many arguments from indigenous communities that have raised concerns about this process and the fact that there isn't a definition, and it isn't clear, and the lack of certainty.

We've heard from organizations that are saying this could hamper development going forward. It can significantly increase the risk factor for major projects. This is why it's so important.

Look, we support the spirit of the legislation. We just want to ensure that we do our work here so that there is certainty going forward and so that the courts aren't determining this five, 10, or 15 years from now, continuing to hold up this process.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

We're at the time.

Perhaps a response can come in the next rounds of questioners.

We go now for a five-minute question period with Ms. Zann.