Evidence of meeting #134 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 amendment.
A video is available from Parliament.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you very much, Mrs. Atwin.
Not seeing any further hands up for debate, let's move to a vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 10; yeas 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
That takes us to CPC-12.
I'll turn the floor over to Mr. Melillo.
Conservative
Eric Melillo Conservative Kenora, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I will move CPC-12. If adopted, subclause 39(1) would read as follows:
The Minister must consult and cooperate with First Nation governing bodies in respect of the development of terms of reference for the establishment of a corporation under the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act that is to be led by First Nations and must co-develop the terms of reference with those bodies.
I don't want to speak more than I have to. This is pretty straightforward. It's looking to add co-development. Once again, this is something we've been aiming to do throughout this legislation to ensure that first nation voices are being represented.
I will end my remarks there.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you very much, Mr. Melillo.
I want to note that the vote on CPC-12 applies to CPC-13 because they are consequential. CPC-13 refers to something mentioned in CPC-12. I want to draw members' attention to that.
With that, we'll open it up to debate.
Mr. Battiste, go ahead.
Liberal
Jaime Battiste Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
Can officials tell us if we have ever tried to co-develop something with a non-profit corporation? I can understand the need for co-development with first nations communities. Can you talk to us a little bit about the difference in how it would apply to a first nations water commission? If we accepted what Mr. Melillo has put forward, what would be the implications of that?
Director General, Community Infrastructure Branch, Department of Indigenous Services
I'm not aware of a co-development precedent. It's analogous to conversations we've had in the past at this committee on clarity of terms used in previous bills. I'm not aware of that context, nor am I aware of a co-development process with a proposed non-profit organization, if that's what this amendment is interpreted to do.
Liberal
Jaime Battiste Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
At the end of the day, we're talking about terms of reference that are worked on between the first nations governing body and the minister. It leads me to believe that.... Aren't the terms of reference seen, in a way, as a more direct thing that people can agree to? It's not a contract. It's not an agreement. It's terms of reference. To me, the terms of reference are on the precipice of what they're going to do to work together to put something in place.
I just don't know if it's needed. Is it needed?
Director General, Community Infrastructure Branch, Department of Indigenous Services
As written, subclause 39(1) speaks to consultation and co-operation in order to develop terms of reference that would bring life to a non-profit organization that is called “first nations water commission”. I guess the thread is to bring people together to agree on how an organization would be created. The end result is the terms of reference. How that's achieved can be a variety of things, but, as written, first the minister must consult and co-operate to bring into force a non-profit organization.
Liberal
Jaime Battiste Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
Whether it's co-develop or consult and co-operate, the result is still the terms of reference. Is that correct?
Director General, Community Infrastructure Branch, Department of Indigenous Services
As written, the intention is to develop terms of reference.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you very much, Mr. Battiste.
Are there any other interventions?
Not seeing any, let's go to a vote.
(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
For clarification, as a result of the vote on CPC-12, CPC-13 cannot be moved.
So that brings us to BQ‑32.
I recognize Mr. Lemire.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Amendment BQ‑32 proposes that Bill C‑61, in clause 39, be amended by adding after line 17 on page 18 the following:
(a.1) that the corporation must provide its services in both official languages; and
The intention is for services to be provided in indigenous languages when necessary. However, the reason we're specifying that they must be provided in both official languages is because indigenous communities are not exclusively anglophone, and we shouldn't have to tell you that. In many cases, they also use French as a language of reference. That's the case in Manitoba, New Brunswick and Quebec. Indigenous communities are associated with English as a colonial language, but French is useful in many cases. So documents need to be translated into both official languages.
I can't speak for the other territories, but I think it could be English elsewhere. It might even be useful for documents to be in English in certain francophone communities in Quebec or elsewhere, to make it easier for some anglophone members to understand.
We're often overlooked. However, we're very progressive, and people are depriving themselves of what francophone communities can contribute. The Assembly of First Nations learned that the hard way. However, the federal government is just as guilty of the malaise surrounding consultations on funding for first nations children. Nobody bothered to translate the offer that was given to the chiefs to do their consultations. We talked about it last summer. The department did not provide its offer of $47 billion in both official languages. That would warrant a complaint to the Commissioner of Official Languages. We actually received this information in French in September, when the agreement had been signed in July. This is an aberration that's worth pointing out here in committee, and it should never happen again anywhere else.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you very much, Mr. Lemire.
BQ-32 has been moved. At this point, we'll open it up to debate.
I have Mrs. Atwin.
Liberal
Jenica Atwin Liberal Fredericton, NB
Just generally, I want to put on the record that I believe indigenous communities also believe in the importance of French and English, but also, there are other languages of consideration, and they would be the best to determine the provision of languages for the first nations water commission once it's created.
Having said that, I see the merit of the amendment as well. Maybe I'll just leave it at that for further discussion.
Liberal
NDP
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
Thank you.
I think it would have been great to see that the spirit of indigenous languages is not just verbally shared with us, but that it's actually in the amendment. Given that indigenous peoples, first nations, are still forced to speak either English or French, indigenous languages are still being lost. We're still losing too much of first nations languages, be it Cree, Ojibwa or other languages. As such, I can't support this amendment.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you very much, Ms. Idlout.
I'm not seeing any other hands up. Let's go to the vote.
Shall BQ-32 carry?
(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5)
Liberal
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Amendment BQ‑33 proposes that Bill C‑61, in clause 39, be amended by adding after line 23 on page 18 the following:
(c) that the corporation may, at any time, make a special report to Parliament referring to and commenting on any matter within the scope of the powers and functions of the corporation where, in the opinion of the corporation, the matter is of such urgency or importance that a report on it should not be deferred until the time provided for transmission of the next annual report of the corporation; and
(d) that the corporation must publish on its website, in both official languages as well as in any Indigenous language of its choice, every report it provides to the Minister within 10 days after it is tabled in both Houses of Parliament.
As we saw in the previous amendment we just voted on, this one specifies that it must be done in both official languages and in any indigenous language the organization chooses. That said, we're giving the commission the right to inform us of any important or urgent situation that cannot wait for the next annual report. That's to ensure transparency and good cooperation with first nations.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you very much, Mr. Lemire.
Amendment BQ‑33 has therefore been moved and I will now open the floor to debate that amendment.
Let's start with Ms. Idlout.
NDP
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
Qujannamiik, Iksivautaq.
I'm definitely more supportive of this amendment. I don't think it should be “of its choice”. I think it needs to be strengthened. In (d), where it says “of its choice”, I think that should be replaced with “in as many indigenous languages as possible”.
I wonder if the Bloc would be open to that subamendment.
Thank you.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you, Ms. Idlout.
I just want to confirm something. You mentioned that it would be amended by saying “as many indigenous languages as possible”. I want to note that the subamendment you had circulated by email says “every indigenous language possible”. I am hoping you can confirm which of the two you would like to advance through the subamendment.
NDP
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
It is the one that I just read out loud: “in as many indigenous languages as possible”.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Patrick Weiler
Thank you very much, Ms. Idlout.
It is a slight change, but just to make sure we have the correct translation into French, we are going to briefly suspend to make sure that's accurate.