Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on April 22nd, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Members of the committee, as we have quorum, I call this meeting to order, acknowledging first of all that in Ottawa we meet on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin people, and all of us in our own territories will have other acknowledgements. In my case it would be Akwesasne, Haudenosaunee and Chonnonton first nations' traditional territories.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108 (2) and the motion adopted by the committee on October 27, 2020, the committee is resuming its clause-by-clause study of Bill C-15.

It's going to be an interesting day. I just want to thank everyone, first of all, for the way that these meetings have been conducted with regard to Bill C-15. There's some controversy, there are some differences of opinion, but I think all of our remarks, our debates and our considerations were in the best interests of the people for whom we are working, the first nations of Canada. I appreciate that. I would anticipate that today's meeting will be conducted in the same manner.

Having looked over all of the matters that are coming before us in conjunction and in consultation with the legislative clerks, I may be making some rulings as the chair. I want to assure everybody that none of the rulings will be on a partisan basis. They all have to do with the legislative functions, protocols and precedents and so on that are found in that giant green book that only the clerks seem to have a good handle on.

I'm working my way through it. I know that our clerk has reached page 250; I'm still somewhere in the preface. We'll do our best with regard to the rules of Parliament as we move forward.

With us today we have the witnesses from the Department of Justice: Laurie Sargent, assistant deputy minister, aboriginal affairs portfolio; Sandra Leduc, director and general counsel, Aboriginal Law Centre, aboriginal affairs portfolio; and Koren Marriott, senior counsel, Aboriginal Law Centre, aboriginal affairs portfolio.

In clause-by-clause consideration, the one thing I will ask us not to do is rush things through. We want to make sure that when we're done our work today, it is in a form presentable to Parliament. We'll therefore begin slowly.

Pursuant to Standing Order 75 (1), consideration of the preamble and of clause 1, the short title, was postponed, as per the precedents and order of work that we do. I will now call clause 2.

(On clause 2)

Clause 2 of Bill C-15 provides that the Government of Canada must “take all measures necessary to ensure that the laws of Canada are consistent with” the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and “must...prepare and implement an action plan to achieve the objectives of the Declaration.”

[Jacques Maziade, Legislative Clerk]

Mr. Chair, may I interject?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Yes.

[Jacques Maziade]

Maybe you could give the floor to the mover of the amendment. She will present it, and after that, if you have something to say, you can do so once she has presented her amendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

You're absolutely right.

Once again, the legislative clerks and our clerks will be stepping in from time to ensure that we're moving along in a proper manner. In this case, moving along in a proper manner provides that our guest today, Ms. Atwin, present her amendment.

Ms. Atwin, please do that, and then I'll discuss it as I had already begun to do.

Please go ahead.

[Jenica Atwin, Green, Fredericton, NB]

Sure. This is PV-0.1. I'm just making sure.... Okay, great.

Thanks you very much, everyone, for letting me join today. I'm really appreciative. Happy Earth Day as well.

I'm coming from the unceded territory of the Wolastoqiyik, the beautiful and bountiful river here in Fredericton, New Brunswick, where I am privileged to work, learn and live.

The amendment I would like to propose is in clause 2, by adding after line 11 on page 4 the following: “Government of Canada has the meaning assigned by the definition government institution in section 3 of the Access to Information Act.”

What this expands upon is:

(a) any department or ministry of state of the Government of Canada, or any body or office, listed in Schedule 1, and

(b) any parent Crown corporation, and any wholly-owned subsidiary of such a corporation, within the meaning of section 83 of the Financial Administration Act;

By means of explaining and defending this amendment, it actually came forward through proposed amendments from the Assembly of First Nations. The objective of this amendment is to enshrine a clear and positive statement that the legislation binds the Crown and all institutions of the government. Bill C-15 does not expressly affirm that it binds Her Majesty The Queen in Right of Canada and all of its institutions. It may be implied, but I'm certainly here just to strengthen the legislation as much as possible.

While arguments can be made that Bill C-15 would implicitly or necessarily bind the Crown, because its purpose would be frustrated and contrary to the spirit of the act if the Crown or all Government of Canada institutions were not bound, the courts on this point are by no means clear or consistent in their interpretation. Federal legislation is likewise inconsistent. In light of this inconsistency and ambiguity, clear and unequivocal expression of legislation intent is required.

Again, I'm taking the lead here from some of the discussion that the Assembly of First Nations has put forward, and I ask for your consideration.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Thanks very much, Ms. Atwin. I appreciate your intervention.

I'll go back once again to the review of the matter, which was that Bill C-15 is providing that the Government of Canada must “take all measures necessary to ensure that the laws of Canada are consistent with” the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People and must “prepare and implement an action plan to achieve the objectives of the Declaration.”

The amendment seeks to give the term “Government of Canada” the meaning of “government institution” as it is defined in section 3 of the Access to Information Act. Thus, the term “Government of Canada” would have a broader meaning.

House of Commons Procedure and Practice, that giant book I referred to, third edition, states the following on page 770:

An amendment to a bill that was referred to committee after second reading is out of order if it is beyond the scope and principle of the bill.

In the opinion of the chair, based on consultation with the legislative group, this new definition of “Government of Canada” is beyond the scope of the bill, and so I would rule that this amendment is inadmissible.

On that matter, unless there's further discussion, Ms. Atwin, I will leave the ruling as such, that your proposed amendment is inadmissible.

[Jenica Atwin, Green, Fredericton, NB]

There's no further discussion from me. Thank you very much, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Ms. Atwin, thank you for that.

We're moving along. I apologize. I think, like most people in the room, I have scads of paper all over the place, and it's sometimes hard to put my finger on the exact thing we need to refer to.

We go now to BQ-1.

Let me fish that one out and put that one away, and ask you if BQ-1 shall carry. All in favour of BQ-1?

[Jacques Maziade]

Mr. Chair, maybe Madam Gill will want to move the amendment and speak to it a little bit.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Ms. Gill, please go ahead with your presentation.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's simple. In fact, the idea of replacing “Canadian law” with “federal law” reflects Parliament's intent, which is that it should apply only to federal statutes and not provincial ones. The term “Canadian law” suggests that the provinces and Quebec are included.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Thank you, Ms. Gill.

Shall BQ-1 carry?

The amendment is negatived.

On NDP-1, can I ask Ms. Gazan to present that?

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you so much, Chair.

To let everybody know, I'm having technical issues that I'm trying to resolve. I have a whole bunch of blank pages.

Are you speaking about reference 11236767?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Yes, that's it.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

This is our proposed amendment that Bill C-15, in clause 2, be amended by adding after line 25 on page 4 the following:

For greater certainty, the rights of Indigenous peoples, including treaty rights, are capable of growth and evolution, and a frozen rights theory is incompatible with section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.

The importance of a clear definition of the living tree doctrine has been brought up by elected and unelected leadership throughout the country, and my amendment reflects that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Thanks, Ms. Gazan.

I apologize. There are technical issues all over the place. My printer didn't work this morning, but I finally got it fixed. We'll probably be a little sluggish as we get things rolling here. I apologize for that.

On the amendment, Mr. Anandasangaree, you have your hand up.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

I believe Mr. Schmale was ahead of me, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Sorry about that. Please go ahead.

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

Thanks, Gary. I appreciate that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Go ahead.

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

I have a quick question in regard to the last motion, the Bloc motion.

It failed. Was it the Liberals and the NDP who voted against it? My Hollywood Squares display here didn't show anything, so I didn't see who voted and who didn't.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Let me ask the clerk about the most efficacious way that we could handle the matter.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Mr. Naaman Sugrue]

If the amendment is not either carried or carried on division, then the most appropriate way to deal with it would be a recorded vote. The options for decisions on amendments are consensus agreement, agreement on division and recorded vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

I thought we had consensus, but I'm open to any other suggestions.

We'll have Mr. Anandasangaree and then Ms. Gill.