Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 30th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

I'm sorry. We're out of time.

I'll let you finish, but also, could you move the microphone up a bit and direct it?

[Martin Reiher]

Thank you.

We do that to ensure we are dealing with a rights-bearing collective.

The other thing I would add is the fact that the MNO, MNA and MN-S have been identified by Canada as a rights-bearing collective doesn't mean that there are no other rights-bearing collectives. It doesn't prevent any other group from pursuing their own achievement.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thank you.

We're going to move next to Mr. Vidal, who will have five minutes.

The floor is yours.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Minister. I'm going to call you “Minister”, but you can call me Gary, okay?

In your opening comments, you talked about rights, Minister. I'm sure you've been following the committee's work on this bill and much of the discussion around recognition of rights. I think we would all acknowledge that there's a lot riding on the outcome of this bill for a lot of stakeholders who are very interested in this.

A lot of the concerns people have are because of failed relationships in the past. There's a lack of trust. I would say that this bill has tested your government's ability when it comes to some of those relationships. A lot of that is due to communication, or the lack thereof, because that's what builds the trust, if that's a fair comment.

Minister, when we were considering UNDRIP, you were the lead on the government side, and it was the Conservatives who pushed for a definition of “free, prior and informed consent” so there would be clarity in the relationship going forward.

With no definition of consent, we have no clarity. Without clarity, we have a hard time building trust. Without trust, we have a hard time building relationships. I think that's one of the reasons this bill has become so contentious, in fairness. Frankly, Minister, this process has pitted one group of indigenous people against others, and that's frustrating for all of us, I think.

Can you reconcile for me...? In your comments or your answer to one of the other questions, you talked about how there was no need for a duty to consult. Can you clarify for me, maybe, the discrepancy between the need and the desire to consult and maybe how improved communication could have left us in a better place today?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Thank you, Gary.

Look, communication is always important, and I think my particular role requires an enormous amount of communication—particularly listening. I hear—and I think all of us at this table can appreciate—how much distrust there is. Anything that comes from government is from a perspective of distrust and not from a position of trust. I recognize and I acknowledge the concern that you put forward. There's no doubt.

Just to back up a little bit in terms of this particular legislation, this was co-developed by.... There are three distinct groups in Canada: first nations, Inuit and Métis. In this particular case, this was co-developed by Métis, the three Métis groups that represent Ontario, Saskatchewan and Alberta—

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

Minister, I don't want to be disrespectful, but my time is very limited. I know where you're going with this; we've had those conversations.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Unfortunately, it's hard to give you a 30-second answer, but—

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

I appreciate that. It's hard to ask a 30-second question too, but I do have just a short time.

I'm going to be honest with you. I promised the Métis Nation of Saskatchewan at the very first hearing that I would ask the minister why this took so long, so I want to frame it for you a little bit. If you think about this process, I get that they're going to tell me it started decades ago, but officially this process started in 2018, and there was a 2019 kind of draft agreement. We went on to some amendments and updates, and then in February 2023 there was a new updated agreement.

This legislation was promised to be tabled in April; then it was June; then it was Monday; then it was Wednesday, and finally it was Friday. There have been a substantial number of delays for reasons that nobody has been able to get answers to.

As the minister responsible for this piece of legislation, can you clarify for this committee why there have been all the delays and what took so long? What was going on at the time that left us at the point that this was tabled on the very last day before we rose for the summer?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Thank you, Gary.

I'm not going to speak to the past, because I don't have intricate details about that. All I can say is that there's been an enormous amount of work undertaken by Minister Miller and Minister Bennett on this. I personally met with President McCallum in Saskatchewan many, many times.

I recognize the delay and I recognize the frustrations. That being said, we're here. We're here completing the study, from what I understand, and the next step will be amendments.

Let's take the moment, capture the moment, and see how we can move this forward together.

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

Thank you, Minister.

I'm going to go back to communication for a second.

Reconciliation comes with good communication. Today we saw the example of how there has been a lack of consultation on the carbon tax, which is the subject of the judicial review that the Chiefs of Ontario are initiating. That's just another example.

Can you maybe speak again to the fact that we need to sit down and talk about these things and about how there's been a lack of that communication, and maybe acknowledge that?

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

I'm sorry, but we are at the end of the time. I'll give you time for a couple of brief sentences, and then we need to finish.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Look, of all the committees, I believe the INAN committee has been the most collaborative, and for the right reasons, because this is not about politics; it's about moving forward. I think in that spirit, Gary, it's important that consultation improve at every level. I would acknowledge that. I think as we move forward on this particular legislation, the collaboration around the table here is important.

In terms of what's happening, there are a number of things happening that are outside of our control, and I think we can have that discussion on another day.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thank you.

Next we're going to Ms. Gainey, who is online.

Ms. Gainey, when you're ready, the floor is yours for five minutes.

[Anna Gainey, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister.

Thank you to the officials.

It's a pleasure to have you with us today for this very important bill.

Minister, we've heard from witnesses—and some of these concerns have been reiterated just now by some of my colleagues in the room—about the impact on the rights of other indigenous peoples. Could you elaborate in a way that would perhaps reassure on the specific steps that would be completed before a self-government treaty with each of the Métis governments could be put into effect through this proposed legislation?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Yes. Thank you for the question.

I'm going to start, and then maybe I'll ask Martin to add to that.

Bill C-53 will essentially recognize the three Métis governments in question—Ontario, Saskatchewan and Alberta. Once the recognition is complete, other discussions will be undertaken at another table regarding a possible treaty, which again will be limited to issues around membership and governance and matters internal to the organization.

At that time, there will be a process whereby there will be consultations. I think in this particular case—and Martin could maybe add to this—once the consultations are complete, if there are things outside of what was contemplated in the agreement—new concerns that come forward—then there will be the process to amend and rework the treaty. Once it's reworked, then there will be a process of ratification. Once it's ratified, it will come to government for an order in council recognition of the treaty.

I think Martin could maybe add something about the processing, because he's done this many, many times.

[Martin Reiher]

Thank you, Minister.

Actually, the minister presented this very well. As a next step, there would be a negotiation of a treaty with the same subject matter already included in the current agreement. Other things would have to be done before a treaty would come into force. Constitutions would have to be adopted by each of the groups. Two of them already have one; MNO is working on one now. Some Métis government laws would be adopted, and a registry would be developed so that the laws would be made available. There would be an implementation plan developed. On the fiscal relationship as well, there is an agreement that will be developed.

All these steps will take place before a treaty would be approved. Obviously, there would be a consultation on any potentially affected groups before the treaty comes into force, and there would be ratification. I think the minister described that.

[Anna Gainey, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Thank you.

I'm new to this job and this process, so I'm curious. In that process that you've just described, does any of that consultation come back to this committee, or is it the case that once we proceed, the committee's work is complete on this legislation, and for the treaties, the advanced work and the next steps take place outside of this process here?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

This is the legislative process that enshrines Bill C-53 into law. It provides a framework for what the next step looks like, which is the treaty process, and ratification of the treaty is contemplated by an order in council. It's unlikely for it to come back to committee, but of course the committee is the master of its own domain, and at any point it can request updates from governments on these processes.

[Anna Gainey, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Okay.

Mr. Chair, I don't have the timer going in front of me, and I haven't seen your card—

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

You have 40 seconds left.

[Anna Gainey, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Okay.

The other thing that came up a few times is the Powley decision from 2003. Are there any insights you'd like to share with respect to Bill C-53 and how it acknowledges or builds upon the significance of that decision? I know 30 seconds is probably not a lot of time for that, but I'll give you a chance.

Thank you.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Maybe what I'll add to what I've already said is that this bill didn't come about very easily. It came after an enormous amount of work by the three nations in Ontario, Saskatchewan and Alberta. It reflects the will that they have presented to us.

Maybe I'll stop there.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Sure. Somebody may want to pick that up in a further round of questions.

We're going to go now to Madame Gill. If you're ready, Madame Gill, you have two minutes and 30 seconds.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, I'd like to continue in the same vein as earlier. You mentioned the issue of trust, and I'm very pleased about that. It's true that trust must be earned with indigenous, Métis and Inuit peoples.

A chief in my riding, Jean-Charles Piétacho, says—and this is also what we saw at the committee—that it's been centuries, some 500 years, since these peoples have had a voice. Clearly, they are now going to have their say. That's what several witnesses said about reconciliation. They said they agreed that nations should have rights.

They talk about reconciliation, but they'd also like to talk about truth. We also have to agree on truth. I think truth—as my colleague Mr. Vidal also mentioned earlier—is part of the process of gaining trust.

I'd like to come back to my previous question, because I didn't get a clear answer. The Kebaowek community and others maintain that Bill C‑53 currently opens up a possibility, not an eventuality as you say, but really a possibility.

I'm not just talking about the present. I'm talking about the future, too. If we project into the future without any time limit, once Bill C-53 is in effect, is there any possibility that there will be any impact on the rights and titles of Kebaowek, for example, or other Métis or first nations communities?

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

I'm going to ask Martin to answer this.