Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Oct. 31st, 2022

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut]—

[The Clerk]

I'm so sorry to interrupt, Mr. Chair, but there's no Inuktitut interpretation this morning, unfortunately.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut]

[English]

I'll translate what I just said in Inuktitut.

First of all, welcome to all of you. I really appreciate what you've shared with us today. Your testimony is very important to this study, and I know it is going to be a momentous moment when we do finally have Bill C-29 passed in the House. The guiding work that this council will bring forward will give a lot of hope to indigenous peoples for generations.

I also mentioned in Inuktitut that I normally speak in Inuktitut but that today, because of our lack of interpretation, you have the unique honour of hearing me directly in English.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

I thank Rosemary for speaking in Inuktitut. I love our language, and it's wonderful to hear it from other people.

I want to very briefly ask a question about the work you did in preparation for Bill C-29. Were there discussions about whether indigenous rights should also be monitored and reported upon?

[Mitch Case]

I think that's why we see that very first bullet point about establishing a broad definition of reconciliation. There's reconciliation in terms of what we think of in our popular imagination of it, which stems from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and is more about relationships and those things, but the Supreme Court was talking about reconciliation 20 years before the TRC. That was about reconciling indigenous law and Canadian law as expressed through institutions like this.

I think when the council gets to a point of establishing that broad definition, it has to take into account legal reconciliation, which is the rights protection piece that I know matters to you—I've been watching the committee—and matters to me. That's what I do when I'm not hanging out with these guys. I understand where that question comes from, and I think it's addressed by that broad definition. What does economic reconciliation mean? What does reconciliation mean in terms of the residential school question? That's only one piece of it. The theft of land and all those other things are huge issues that were facilitated and made possible by residential schools but are separate issues.

When it says to develop a broad definition, I think they're talking about developing a dozen definitions: economic reconciliation, land-based reconciliation, culture-based reconciliation—all of those different things. I think that gets to the question.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

I am glad to hear that there have been discussions about ensuring that indigenous rights are protected, because I think as we all know, we are frequently deprived of our rights. Frequently we experience the violation of our indigenous rights, so I'm glad to hear that there has been a discussion and that there was at least some effort to make sure that in the preamble we have this council guided by UNDRIP. One of the amendments I will be suggesting is to make sure that it's also in the legislation so that there's a signal to the council that promoting and protecting indigenous people's rights must be a form of the work the council does, in addition to monitoring and reporting on policies and programs.

I have a couple of quick questions. These are more for guidance for legal drafters.

A couple of gaps exist in the bill: the lack of a definition for “elder” and the lack of a definition for “survivor”. I think we'll need to get a better sense of how to ensure we're reflecting important indigenous people's views, especially when it comes to identifying who elders might be and how to make sure we're identifying survivors who need to be heard by this council.

I wonder if you could provide some guidance as to what the legislative drafters will consider for elders and survivors.

[Michael DeGagné]

I've dealt with this question in the past in the establishment of other organizations. There is a desire for these organizations to establish how an elder is defined, how a survivor is defined and these sorts of things.

Where we wound up was that it's best to have communities define these terms. You're an elder if you're identified and defined by your own community as an elder. It would not be for this organization to establish for all sorts of cultural groups who their elders and survivors are.

I don't anticipate that there will be an attempt in the legislation to try to define that in advance. It may come out more in engagement later on down the line.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you very much, Ms. Idlout.

We'll now proceed with the second round of questions. We'll start with Mr. Schmale for five minutes.

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

Thank you very much.

Thank you, witnesses, for being here today. I appreciate your testimony.

I will open the floor to this question, and I have a very small amount of time. I would like to get your thoughts on the Prime Minister not being named in this legislation to respond to the progress of the government on an annual basis. Is that something you're okay with? At this point, the minister would be doing it rather than the Prime Minister.

[Edith Cloutier]

In the first report submitted by the interim board in 2018, we recommended that the Prime Minister be the person responsible for submitting the report to Parliament. We reiterated this recommendation in our work on the transitional committee. Changes were submitted and made, but we still believe that the Prime Minister should be the one mandated to submit the report to Parliament. In fact, this is also part of the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

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

I want to talk to you about measurable targets.

I'm getting severe feedback from my headset. I don't know if anyone else is.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

I think it's okay now. Whoever has their microphone unmuted, please mute it.

Go ahead, Mr. Schmale.

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

Regarding the measurables, a lot of legislation focuses on “efforts” to get things done. Should we be looking at some stronger wording in this legislation to ensure that proper benchmarks are there and that it's not just about efforts, but about getting things done and hitting targets?

[Michael DeGagné]

Efforts are probably as far as you can take this. I don't know that reconciliation is the type of thing where you can have clear and measurable outcomes. As you know, reconciliation is being adopted by more organizations, whether or not it has become a part of the social discourse and whether or not corporations, individuals and governments are developing plans and these sorts of things.

I think you'll have a lot of proxy measures based on the other activities people are undertaking, but as for the idea to, for example, move from efforts at reconciliation to—I think it was mentioned before—ensuring reconciliation, ensuring is very, very difficult. You'd need an organization that has the teeth to police it and make sure that commitments are put in place. I don't think you can get much farther than the efforts that can be made around achieving reconciliation.

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

Regarding the measurables, would you be concerned that using just effort is not giving the government the full incentive to get this done? We've seen it in a number of reports. We've seen it in departmental plans. We've even seen shortfalls in the department meeting its set targets.

If we're just using the language of “effort”, my fear is that it just becomes a repeat of history, and we just keep pushing the line down the road. We'll get to it, we're hitting targets and we're making best efforts, but we're not actually achieving anything.

[Michael DeGagné]

I think it's fair to have organizations, individuals and all of our engagements directed towards defining what a reconciled Canada would look like, and I think that will take a long time. We have to have some sense not of when we're done reconciling, but of what a reconciled Canada would look like. I think it's fair to define that.

On measurable targets, maybe financial targets and investments in reconciliation would be reasonable to put in place, but otherwise, I think it's going to be about the objectives in the plans and how individuals, organizations and governments are achieving those objectives. I don't think measurables lend themselves easily to reconciliation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mr. Schmale.

We'll go to Mr. Weiler for five minutes.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I thank the witnesses for joining us today. I also thank them for all the work they are doing on the transitional committee.

My first question relates to something Madame Cloutier mentioned earlier. She said that the transitional committee heard from experts from all different walks of life, including law, data access and information sharing.

I think a really critical point of this legislation is ensuring that the council has access to information that will allow them to do their work. I'm curious about that. I hope you can tell the committee what you heard from those experts on data and information sharing. Are you're confident that with the way the legislation is written right now, it will ensure the council has access to the information it will need to effectively carry out its mandate?

[Michael DeGagné]

Could you just give me a quick précis of that? I'm sorry if I'm wasting your time.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

That's quite all right.

Clause 16 talks about a “protocol” being developed by the minister “in collaboration with the Council”. My question to the witnesses here is this: Are you confident this language will ensure that the protocol that is developed will be sufficient to give the council the information it needs to do its work?

[Michael DeGagné]

I don't think any of these requests for information are seamless. I think it's positive that we set out right from the outset that we want to work with the people who are providing the information so that it can be used in a form that's understandable to Canadians and other people this organization would report to.

This is a harvesting operation. All of the departments are doing reconciliation in some form or another, and all of that stuff will be brought to the centre. There has to be some efforts on the other end to make sure that it's all something we can digest and share with others.

I think this is enough. Obviously this is negotiated and discussed at some length, and I think it is a good place to start.

[Mitch Case]

Very briefly, I think this goes about as far as we can expect it to, and it's not necessarily the federal government I'm concerned about with regard to the data-sharing agreement.

Call to action 55 lists some of the proposed types of data that would go into the national council when doing its assessment. When you look at that, you see that a lot of it is provincial jurisdiction because of Canada's constitutional framework. My concern is more that they won't get information from the provinces on key indicators and on whether or not we're actually moving things forward. I'm less concerned about the federal government, as there's no ability or power here, unless someone has a new section of the Canadian Constitution that I don't know about, to mandate the provinces to hand over that information. It's going to be very much based on goodwill with other levels of government outside the federal government.

[Edith Cloutier]

I would like to quickly add that there are other groups gathering data and information. I am thinking in particular of working groups related to missing and murdered indigenous women and girls, such as the one Ms. Cooper is involved with.

In my opinion, collaboration and information sharing at these various levels should be encouraged. That could be part of these protocols.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you very much for that.

I have a last question here, because I know my time is running out.

A key part of reconciliation is working with indigenous groups on self-determination and advancing it right across the country. There are, I think, 634 different indigenous groups across the country, so this is a major challenge, as they all have different governance systems.

I'm wondering what role the witnesses see for the council in helping to advance some of the discussions on treaty negotiations for some nations where there are still no treaties—many of which are in my province—and treaty implementation across the country?