Evidence of meeting #39 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 recording is available from Parliament.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
5:15 p.m.
Bloc
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
If I may, I know that “settlers” is also an academic term that is generally used and it's not meant to focus only on settlers who were individuals, but again I remind you that this is a part of the preamble to provide context as to what the realities were, that there were indeed settlers and people—agents—both of whom were having negative impacts on the lives of indigenous peoples.
I think encompassing it as “the arrival of settlers and colonization” provides that context to show why reconciliation is so important.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Jaime Battiste Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
I think the framing “Whereas, since the arrival of settlers and colonization, Indigenous peoples have experienced assimilationist policies, which must be addressed through reconciliation” is very accurate. I don't think it needs to be amended to be softened or to be more specific, so if there is any amendment coming that talks about agents of colonization—I don't know what those are—we wouldn't be supporting that.
We think what's there is okay with us. We're going to go with the original wording.
5:15 p.m.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
I just have a comment before we wrap up the discussion, Mr. Chair. I don't at all want to go to war over this.
In my view, the words “settlers” and “colonization” have two meanings, even if they are used in academic or historical literature. One is, of course, pejorative, and the other is ameliorative, so I was hoping the wording would take that into account. Not everything is black and white; it's all about the shades of grey.
That's why my preference is to refer to the beginning of colonization, itself, without tying it to individuals. As I understand it, the point, here, is to highlight a historical date, and that date is the beginning of colonization—hence the idea to remove the word “settlers”.
Of course, if the committee wishes to keep the word, I don't think it softens the language. I absolutely agree on the impact of colonization, but my preference is to refer to the overall movement, so to speak, rather than the individuals.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
I want to make sure I understand what you mean, Ms. Gill. Do you still wish to move a subamendment?
5:15 p.m.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
I'm quite amenable. I would say yes to wording along the lines of “since colonization” or “since the beginning of colonization”, but if the committee doesn't agree, I'm fine with that. I just wanted to bring it up.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
Very good.
With that said, I'm going to ask whether amendment NDP-7 shall carry.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Jaime Battiste Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
On a point of order, is that with that amendment or without?
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
No, it's without that amendment. It's just NDP-7.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We'll now go to amendment G-4.
Mr. Battiste, go ahead.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Jaime Battiste Liberal Sydney—Victoria, NS
This is a recognition of the importance of indigenous language. Adding that to the preamble, I think, is important.
I'm not going to go too far into it, because we have 10 minutes.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
Shall amendment G-4 carry?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
We'll now go to amendment NDP-8.
Ms. Idlout, would you like to move NDP-8 and discuss it?
5:20 p.m.
NDP
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
Yes. I move that reference number 12026958, also known as NDP-8, be considered.
The purpose of this amendment is to add to the preamble “the progress being made towards reconciliation, including in relation to respect for and the protection and promotion of the rights of Indigenous peoples”.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
Is there any debate?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We now go to CPC-14.
Go ahead, Mr. Vidal.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Gary Vidal Conservative Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I would move that CPC-14, identified by reference number 11957466, be considered by the committee at this time.
The purpose of this amendment is simply to get rid of the language that says “including, as appropriate, through the provision of information relevant to its purpose”. That's the part that's being removed.
The purpose was just to strengthen the language around making sure that information identified in call to action 55 is going to be provided. It was simply strengthening the language that I thought was softer than it had to be.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
Thank you, Mr. Vidal.
Is there any debate on this amendment?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Given everything we have just discussed, shall the preamble as amended carry?
5:20 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
5:20 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.