Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 14th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mr. Schmale.

Go ahead, Madame Idlout.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik, Iksivautaq.

I find the reasoning that Gary just mentioned quite different from the actual text of the amendment. If the Conservatives really are concerned about addressing poverty, why wouldn't they suggest organizations addressing poverty specifically?

When they provided information about witnesses talking about economic reconciliation, I'm pretty sure if we looked back to the transcripts, we would see it was because they were responding to questions on economic reconciliation as questioned by the Conservatives. As of yet, I don't know what “economic reconciliation” means, so it's a strange concept, and I'm struggling to support this amendment as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Ms. Idlout.

Would anybody care to make a comment?

Go ahead, Mrs. Gill.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to comment on something I heard. A number of witnesses told us that they didn't want reconciliation to be divided into categories for a a variety of reasons. In particular, they didn't want the board to be bogged down with representatives from different sectors. Instead, they recommended creating subcommittees, and I imagine the idea was to make sure there was a quorum.

I also have a question. Is there an organization recognized by all indigenous communities that could represent their economic interests Canada-wide?

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mrs. Gill.

Mr. Vidal, do you wish to respond to that?

[Gary Vidal, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Absolutely.

First, as far as the idea of the organizations is concerned, we didn't want to get prescriptive by listing different organizations, but there are many organizations that could be included in this consideration. Many of them, such as the First Nations Financial Management Board or the different organizations that operate under the First Nations Fiscal Management Act would be examples. There would be organizations like NACCA or CCAB. The list would go on and on, and that's why we didn't get prescriptive.

Many of these organizations are doing very good work, and the work has a sole purpose and mandate of eradicating poverty by including good business practices, by including good procurement practices on behalf of the government. CCAB has been an advocate for procurement targets and many of these things. I guess it's our opinion that economic reconciliation or the concept of reconciliation in the context of addressing poverty is a very big factor in the context of reconciliation overall.

I would probably leave my comments there. I think that addresses both Ms. Idlout's and Madame Gill's comments, unless they want to come back to me to ask something further.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you.

Go ahead, Mr. Zimmer.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

One witness, as an example, was Ellis Ross, who spoke about economic reconciliation and said there was a dark past, but here was the way to a bright future. I think there was a contrast in time to deal with that very negative situation of what's happened to indigenous peoples in Canada, but again, it was to set the stage for a new reality for first nations where there's a prosperous future.

I think it's very fitting that it would be included. It was mentioned by many of our witnesses in speaking to Bill C-29. I was actually surprised there were that many. Witness after witness brought it up—that it needed to be part of reconciliation, that economic reconciliation needed to be a part of this piece of legislation.

I think the amendment is quite fitting. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mr. Zimmer.

Does anybody else wish to comment?

Go ahead, Ms. Atwin.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd just like to add that I can certainly see the merit in the arguments that are being made by our Conservative colleagues. I understand why they see this as important, but I'd just like to reiterate that it does kind of compartmentalize reconciliation.

It's too prescriptive. The council is going to have to be able to do its own work. There are going to be differences of opinion depending on territory as well, so I think we should just leave it as it is and not be too prescriptive, because it's really about them being at arm's length and independent.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Ms. Atwin.

Are there any other comments?

I see you have your hand up, Mrs. Gill, but I think it's from earlier.

Not seeing any further debate, I'm going to ask for a recorded vote on this one. Shall amendment CPC-9 carry?

(Amendment negatived: nays 6; yeas 5 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Thank you, Madam Clerk. I declare amendment CPC-9 defeated.

We'll now go to amendment LIB-3 and Mr. McLeod.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

Mr. Chair, I want to bring the amendment forward to add, after line 16 on page 5, the following:

(f) survivors of Canadian residential schools or their descendants.

It is important that we have people who have gone through the residential school system or their descendants as part of the discussion. A big part of reconciliation includes the residential schools.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mr. McLeod.

Is there a wish to debate this?

Not seeing any, I will go for a vote. Shall amendment LIB-3 carry?

(Amendment agreed to)

Amendment LIB-3 is carried.

That brings us to BQ‑5.

Go ahead, Mrs. Gill.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We just want to make sure the board of directors has equal representation of women and men. That's the purpose of BQ‑5.

Again, I'm open to changing the amendment given the representation issues we discussed at the beginning of the meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mrs. Gill.

Is there a wish to debate this amendment?

I see that Ms. Atwin has her hand up.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

There has been some discussion specifically just about the wording, and we would like to be sure that it's less about men and women and more about gender inclusiveness, so it's that gender parity piece rather than men and women specifically. We have circulated the wording, I believe, but we can check on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Very good.

Have we received the wording in writing?

You have a few options, Mrs. Gill. An upcoming amendment, LIB‑4, uses wording that is slightly different, so you can opt to support LIB‑4, if you wish. If you want to stick with BQ‑5, as it currently stands, Mrs. Atwin has the ability to move a subamendment.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Mr. Chair, I am in favour of ensuring parity between women and men and referring to gender inclusiveness. Keep in mind that the scientific literature in French distinguishes between a person's biological sex and gender, whereas, in English, the term “gender studies” covers it all.

Of course, I think both are important. It's fine to have the wording cover both gender and sex, so I encourage Mrs. Atwin to move a subamendment to BQ‑5.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mrs. Gill.

Ms. Atwin, you probably caught that. Are you wishing to propose a subamendment to BQ-5?

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Yes. I would like to propose a subamendment.

I'll need just one minute. I'm just looking for the correct language.

The subamendment would be as follows: “That the composition of the board of directors must also, to the extent possible, ensure and equitably reflect gender diversity”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you very much. We will have to translate that at this end before we resume.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

We are resuming.

I just need to make a point here.

Ms. Atwin, what you essentially read verbatim was LIB-4. That was your amendment. It was not quite what Madame Gill was prepared to look at as a subamendment to her amendment.

That said, the two amendments are receivable. We can vote separately on the two. They would both be, if adopted, in the legislation. I'm just leaving that with you for a second.

Go ahead, Mr. Battiste.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Mr. Chair, just for clarity, are you saying that if we vote in the affirmative for BQ-5, we can also vote for LIB-4?

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Yes, that's what I'm saying.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Okay.

I'm prepared to vote.