Evidence of meeting #34 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was children.
A video is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is my last turn to speak. I would like to yield the floor to Chief Wapass and Mr. Lafond, one at a time, and give them the opportunity to tell us what they would like us to emphasize at the end of their testimony.
Chief Wapass, you can go first.
Thunderchild First Nation
The intent behind my presentation here is.... This is what the courts are saying. This is what the United Nations is saying. Witnesses are saying this, and so on and so forth. The fact is that we need to pass this legislation. It makes sense. We need to go forward. Anything that needs to be dealt with could be dealt with down the road, but we don't need to hold this up.
It's important to recognize us and to go back to who we are as nehiyaw, Cree, from Thunderchild First Nation. Respect our authority coming from there. Otherwise, because of the discriminatory legislation that exists, the people in our own communities will discriminate against our people as well. For example, people say, “That's a Bill C-31 house.” Everybody discriminates against that family because the legislation talks about Bill C-31. We start tearing each other up.
That's what this current legislation does. Every time there's an introduction of new legislation that discriminates, it further affects the communal system and the governance within our community.
Bloc
Marilène Gill Bloc Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC
Meegwetch.
Mr. Lafond, you have the floor.
Lawyer, As an Individual
I think there needs to be a national conversation on the implementation of national minimum standards that should apply to the exercise of jurisdiction over citizenship by first nations, to address Jaime's previous point.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Terry Sheehan
Thank you very much.
I'm going to recognize Lori online.
You have a few minutes before we wrap up.
Liberal
Lori Idlout Liberal Nunavut, NU
Qujannamiik, Iksivautaq.
I have a question for Drew Lafond.
It's good to see you. It's been a couple of years since we last saw each other during the Indigenous Bar Association days.
We know Canada has a legal obligation called “duty to consult”. With these Senate amendments, it would be important to consult with the first nations that would be impacted. I'm wondering if there might be a risk of lowering the duty to consult standard if the Senate amendments were allowed to proceed without the government's having consulted on them.
Could you respond, please?
Lawyer, As an Individual
Thank you for the question.
This goes to the heart of what I believe and speculate may be the reason for delaying the implementation of Bill S-2: Minister Gull-Masty's making comments to the effect of her having a duty to consult. I would put that back to the members of the Senate. Is it the position of the government that there is a legal duty to consult when legislating, or does it take the position that there is a legal duty to consult that's triggered when legislating with respect to the rights of indigenous peoples?
Liberal
Lori Idlout Liberal Nunavut, NU
That's right. For example, one thing we're discussing is the Senate's adding the second generation cut-off in the amendments. We know there have been different impacts and different solutions, such as the first generation...that we've been hearing about from different witnesses. There have been different solutions offered to address the second generation cut-off.
In that regard, is it not more important to make sure there is more consultation, in order to ensure that we finally have legislation that ends the discrimination we're talking about?
Lawyer, As an Individual
It's heightened in circumstances of citizenship. The standard of free, prior and informed consent does not apply only to consultation in these situations; I think any legislated solution must respect FPIC. I certainly think it's something that's imperative in these circumstances, when something so central to first nations as the idea of belonging and citizenship is at stake. The consideration should be heightened, which is why I think a legislated off-ramp that gives first nations that ability to exercise exclusive jurisdiction over citizenship—that long-term lens to have that off-ramp—is the best legislated solution in these circumstances.
Liberal
Lori Idlout Liberal Nunavut, NU
Thank you.
Finally, if I have a bit more time, I want to ask you about your appearance at APPA and what was described as the opt-in framework for exclusive jurisdiction. I wonder if you could elaborate just a bit more on the benefits of such a system.
Lawyer, As an Individual
It creates a framework for Canada and first nations to confront the inevitable issue, the clash, that we are going to run into, which everybody sees on the horizon but nobody seems to be talking about. There will come a time when the list of status Indians and the list of citizens recognized by first nations are going to be different lists. There will be incongruity between the two lists. The important question is this: How are we going to respect the human rights of the people who are not recognized as first nations citizens or, conversely, who are not recognized as federal status Indians? From a funding standpoint and from a human rights standpoint, these are important conversations that we need to confront, and I think we need to set the stage and establish a forum for those discussions to happen.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Terry Sheehan
Thank you very much.
Chief, I see your hand up, but we're at the end. You can still submit things in writing—and that goes for both our witnesses. If you have further things on your mind today or tomorrow, you can send them in writing, and they'll be equally considered.
I want to thank both of our witnesses for their testimony today. It was very helpful.
That brings us to the end of our question and answer period. I would like to thank every member of the committee.
We're going to terminate. Thank you very much, and have a great day.