Evidence of meeting #129 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was idlout.
A video is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
We'll do a recorded vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 9; yeas 2 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
The next amendment is NDP-19.
I'm providing the floor to Ms. Idlout.
NDP
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]
Thank you.
I think it's clear enough. I've been talking about it recently, not just now. It's telling the government to do consultations with first nations and for first nations laws to be applied.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you very much, Ms. Idlout.
Let's go to a recorded vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 9; yeas 2 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
(Clause 8 agreed to on division)
(On clause 9)
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
The first amendment we have is NDP-20.
I'll provide the floor to Ms. Idlout if she'd like to move NDP-20.
NDP
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]
Thank you.
Regarding NDP-20, it was given to me by the Nishnawbe Aski Nation.
I want to remind you that it's been brought by the NDP, and it's been requested by the first nations peoples. It's supposed to add to clause 9 that, if a first nation law was to be amended, there should be a starting point.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you very much, Ms. Idlout.
NDP-20 has been moved. Is there any debate on NDP-20?
Mr. Shields.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
Thank you.
This is for our experts today. When I read this, we have laws made by different levels of government. They can't be in conflict with each other, but ruling over them.... I think this particular amendment could be a conflict.
What is your opinion?
Senior Counsel, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs, Department of Indigenous Services
First nations laws are intended to apply on first nations lands, and first nations can make their own laws. Having the force of law is not needed. Basically, the force of law is intended to clothe first nations laws with the strength of federal laws. Because this applies on first nations lands, in clause 6, Parliament is saying first nations have an “inherent right” to make laws.
It would seem a bit contradictory to say that in order for those laws to actually have force, you need the force of federal law. They should be able to apply on their own force on first nations lands. This provision would seem to be inconsistent with paragraph 6(1)(b) and the recognition of inherent right.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
You believe this currently says that, if they passed a law on their land, it wouldn't have the force of law outside of their lands and could be enforced by any other enforcement agency.
Senior Counsel, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs, Department of Indigenous Services
The law would not have the force of law outside first nation lands, but a first nation could enter into agreements with provinces, for example, to seek assistance in implementing its laws on first nations lands.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
I understand that clearly, but this would suggest that you couldn't have a first nation law that can be enforced off their particular land by whomever, whether it's them or a contracted agency.
Senior Counsel, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs, Department of Indigenous Services
Yes, that's right.
The law is supposed to apply on first nations lands. It has its own inherent force on first nation lands, but because the bill is focused on first nations lands, that is the limit of the jurisdiction of the first nations law.
Conservative
Martin Shields Conservative Bow River, AB
If a municipality, let's say the City of Calgary, decided to have a law within the city of Calgary, it wouldn't have to have any reference to federal law. Why do we need it here?
Senior Counsel, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs, Department of Indigenous Services
That's right. You don't need a reference to the force of federal law here. The first nations law would have its own inherent force on first nations lands.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you, Mr. Shields.
Next, I have Mr. Schmale on the speaking list.
Conservative
Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON
Actually, Mr. Shields asked all the questions I was going to ask.
In this case, I don't know if it is clear or not, and I apologize if this question has been answered before. You three might not know the answer. I might have to ask Ms. Idlout.
When she's talking about the first nations law and where it applies to first nations land, is it meant for their traditional land or the reserve land and the boundaries proper?
Senior Counsel, Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs, Department of Indigenous Services
It is the reserve land.
Conservative
Conservative
Eric Melillo Conservative Kenora, ON
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I'd like to ask if I understood something correctly.
I thought Ms. Idlout mentioned that this is something that was advocated for by first nations. I'm wondering if she can speak to any more specifics about that.
NDP
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]
It was the Nishnawbe Aski Nation that wrote to us. There's a summary on page 8. They tried giving us.... They asked, when people have a right, for example, to fresh water, will Bill C-61 have a foundation? They want this affirmation. They said they're concerned because Bill C-61 is not clearly defined. For example, they want the federal government to.... The Nishnawbe Aski Nation is trying to make this more visible or to put this out more clearly. When provinces have their own laws, will they be applied to first nations laws? This is trying to strengthen.
When first nations create laws, they want their laws to have more effect—not just be written down. Here in the federal government, laws can change. For that reason, if first nations laws were to change, they should be written down and have the same level as federal laws.
Is this understandable?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you, Ms. Idlout.
I hope, Mr. Melillo, that this answers your question.
