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.
NDP
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
I understand.
You are not moving it. Amendment NDP-6 has been withdrawn.
We are now going to go to CPC-12, which is next in order.
Go ahead, Mr. Vidal.
Conservative
Gary Vidal Conservative Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
Thank you.
It seems ironic that we're going to do this one in between all this other discussion.
CPC-12, identified as number 12005013, is simply going way back to where we were in the beginning to remove the words “efforts for” from paragraph 17(1)(b).
I have to identify, before I get into trouble, that in the French, there is a correction that needs to be made, as we talked about last week: “du” needs to become “au”, for clarity. That's a minor adjustment in the French translation of the amendment.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
Thank you, Mr. Vidal.
Is there any discussion before we vote on CPC-12?
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
We'll now go to CPC-13.
Go ahead, Mr. Vidal.
Conservative
Gary Vidal Conservative Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
Mr. Chair, I move CPC-13, identified as reference number 11960388. I really don't think this needs any further explanation. I think we can just move on.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
Thank you, Mr. Vidal.
Is there any wish to debate? I see unanimity.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
CPC-13 is carried. Therefore, G-3 cannot be moved.
Shall clause 17, as amended by CPC‑11, CPC‑12 and CPC‑13, carry?
(Clause 17 as amended agreed to)
(Clauses 18 to 20 inclusive agreed to)
(On the preamble)
We'll now go to the preamble.
With that, I will turn to Ms. Idlout to move NDP-7 and perhaps discuss what's behind the amendment.
NDP
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
Qujannamiik, Iksivautaq.
I move that reference number 12043323 be considered.
The purpose of this amendment to the preamble is just to put into a better context why reconciliation is so important and to state the fact that indigenous peoples thrived before colonialism, that they “managed and governed their Indigenous lands” and that “since the arrival of the settlers and colonization, Indigenous peoples have experienced assimilationist policies, which must be addressed through reconciliation”.
Qujannamiik.
Liberal
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I was wondering if it was possible to add a reference or allusion to the British Crown. The amendment refers to the arrival of settlers and colonization, but these are also policies that are state-based. So I would add a reference to the British Crown to that paragraph in the preamble.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
In that case, can you read the paragraph as you would like it amended?
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
Yes.
I couldn't write “since the arrival of the British Crown”. I'd have to figure out how to insert it where it says “the arrival of the settlers and colonization”, Mr. Chair.
In short, I would insert a reference to the British Crown somewhere in the text, before “Indigenous peoples have experienced assimilationist policies, which must be addressed through reconciliation”.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
Under normal circumstances, that would require a subamendment, but we'll see what people have to say.
Go ahead, Ms. Idlout.
NDP
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
As much as I appreciate the intent of the proposal, I would be inclined to reject it, because then we would also have to add all the other settler groups that had their colonial policies, like the Hudson's Bay corporation, the churches and all these other places that had quite negative impacts on indigenous people. I'd prefer that we focus on just “the arrival of settlers and colonization”.
Qujannamiik.
Liberal
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
I would like to add something, Mr. Chair, in response to Ms. Idlout.
I agree with her, in a way. Having said that, I find that the amendment refers to settlers individually. I know that, when it comes to colonization, we do have a collective responsibility to some extent. However, I was looking for a stronger term, rather than putting assimilation on the shoulders of the population, people who were not part of the Hudson's Bay Company or who were not aware that there was, for example, a policy that Inuit sled dogs be killed.
For me, assimilation was not just about individuals, but about institutions. It wasn't just religious colonization or whatever. I agree that, yes, the Church and the Hudson's Bay Company were part of it, but I was looking for another term.
I don't know if the members of the committee are open to a discussion to find a broader term than “the British Crown”. I fully agree with the principle of the amendment, but I would not want assimilation to be blamed only on individual settlers. After all, there are people among them who did not have this desire and did not participate in the implementation of such policies.
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
I guess, given that this is inserted into the preamble to provide a context of what happened in the past, I don't know that we need to try to define who the populations are or exclude other people.
I think that generally in the preamble—and maybe this is something that the team could respond to as well—I've been trying to make it so that it's a general acknowledgement of what happened in the past: that indigenous peoples did thrive before settlers and other groups arrived and forced colonial policies to be implemented.
I don't know that we can have a specific word to try to define it. Maybe this is something that the team can try to respond to.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Marc Garneau
Ms. Gill, if you want to move a subamendment, you're going to have to submit it in writing.
Is that the case?
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
I would propose a very simple term: “settler agents”. In the notion of agency, there is both a will and an action. I don't know if the committee would agree. It could be something else, too.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Manicouagan, QC
That is a good question. It could also replace another term.
Actually, I just want to say that the responsibility for assimilation does not lie with the settlers themselves. We could talk about colonization in general and remove “settlers”. That would satisfy me too. I don't want it to rest on individuals.