Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Dec. 7th, 2023

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Good afternoon, colleagues. Let's get started. I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 88 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs. We recognize that we're meeting on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe peoples.

Pursuant to the House order of reference adopted on June 21 and the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, October 26, the committee is meeting to proceed with clause-by-clause of Bill C-53, an act respecting the recognition of certain Métis governments in Alberta, Ontario and Saskatchewan.

We're going to get right into it. We had a start on Tuesday, so we're going to pick up right where we left off. We're on new clause 2.1, with MP Schmale's subamendment to CPC-1.1.

We are on the subamendment, and the floor is with Mr. Viersen.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We were just discussing the word “individuals” and “Métis individuals”, and whether we should have clarified in this bill whether they should have the ability to choose to be represented in Alberta by the MNA or by no organization at all.

A number of people have contacted me since the last meeting as well. I'm pointing this out. You may be a Métis person who wants to exercise Métis rights, but you may not want to be represented by any of the three organizations that are referenced in the schedule. That was where our discussion left off in the last meeting.

My colleague Jamie Schmale put forward an amendment to amend it from “Métis peoples”, because, as Ms. Idlout and the officials as well pointed out, “Métis peoples” is meant as more of a collective. That was not actually what I was trying to achieve with this amendment.

We are now at the point where we need to have a discussion around what the term “individuals” means. How would that fit into this bill?

I also managed to find, on the MNA website, the 2018 agreement. It did confirm that was indeed the case. It said folks who are part of the Métis Settlements of Alberta may become members of the MNA. However, that still doesn't clarify if individuals not living on the Métis settlements, not part of the Métis settlements, who don't want to become members of the MNA can exercise their rights as Métis people or Métis individuals across the province or across the country. That's what my amendment would do—it would ensure that. That's different from what Jamie was talking about with NDP-4, which is coming.

I hope, Mr. Chair, that we will be able to pass the subamendment and then my amendment to ensure that Métis individuals, regardless of where they live in the country, are able to exercise their rights as Métis people, regardless of who is representing them.

Those are my comments.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thank you.

I have Mr. Vidal next on my list, but I don't see him.

I'm ready to call the question. Do you want a recorded vote?

[An hon. member]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

(Subamendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Amendment negatived: nays 7; yeas 4 [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(On clause 3)

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

We'll now move to clause 3.

Under clause 3, I have CPC-1.2. I'm going to share a ruling from the chair.

Does anyone want to move CPC-1.2?

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

Chair, I'd like to move another issue that we have. I believe we can do that now. That's my understanding.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Are you on a point of order, or are you moving CPC-1.2? I've asked for it.

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

I guess I'm on a point of order to raise the motion that we tabled on Friday.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

You can't raise a motion on a point of order. That's why I'm asking if anybody wants to—

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

That's why my original answer was no, because I said that when I had the floor between clauses. It was before you got to that.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

No, I had already called CPC-1.2 and asked if somebody wanted to move it.

If somebody wants to move CPC-1.2, you'll then have the floor.

Is that yours, Arnold?

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Mr. Chair, I'll move CPC-1.2.

This is an amendment that, as we heard from a number of witnesses along the way, would put clarity into this bill, ensuring that any treaty does not deal with any matter relating to land. This was something that we heard over and over again.

We also heard from the minister assuring us that the bill did not deal with any land. For the clarity of all involved, we should ensure that we put that in the bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thank you.

Now I'm going to provide a ruling from the chair, based on advice from our expert team here.

Bill C-53 provides a framework for the implementation of treaties between Canada and the Métis governments listed in the schedule. The amendment seeks to identify an element that cannot be contained in a future treaty. As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition states on page 770, “An amendment to a bill that was referred to a committee after second reading is out of order if it is beyond the scope and principle of the bill.” In the opinion of the chair, the amendment introduces a new concept that is beyond the scope of the bill. Therefore, I rule this amendment inadmissible.

Mr. Viersen.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Could I challenge that ruling?

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Yes, you can challenge the chair's ruling.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Yes, I'd like to do that.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Okay. We'll vote as to whether to sustain the chair's ruling or not.

I'm ruling that it's out of order, so a sustain vote means that the ruling of making it inadmissible stands. A vote against—to not sustain the chair's ruling—means that it would stay.

(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 7; nays 4)

The decision is sustained, so CPC-1.2 is not allowed.

I move to clause 3.

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

Chair, before—

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

I've already called—

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

I think you're doing that on purpose.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

I'm calling clause 3.

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

I think you're doing that on purpose, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

We have legislation to get through.

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

That's fine. The government could also have brought it in April when you had a chance.