Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Oct. 8th, 2025

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I understand. I didn't realize the meeting was to end at 5:30.

I notice, though, that we're losing another hour of discussion, and that's unfortunate. I'm not saying it's due to a lack of preparation or anything like that, but we're talking about a study on a serious matter that would require eight meetings. We might need to push some items back, because we're going to run out of time. We're talking about adding new studies to our agenda, but our inability to keep to the allotted meeting times means we won't be able to conduct as many studies as we would want.

I find our current study relevant and interesting, and I'd like to go deeper, especially with the first nations, but we've already lost the first week, the second and a large part of the third. We still managed to write a report and vote on it thanks to the exceptional work of our analysts ahead of time. This is our fourth week, but we had only one hour, because we had to attend a very relevant training session. I don't like how inefficient we are as a committee.

Moreover, I think adding an eight-meeting study would give a lot of time to the government at the expense of the opposition parties. In the current context, I question the motion, not its principle, but the time we have to move forward on other issues that concern first nations. The committee's agenda is already quite full of government bills, yet we would add a study. Meanwhile, over the last few days, we've lost almost enough time to complete a study.

I would support the motion's principle, but I have my doubts about the schedule, especially since we're dealing with a minority government. No one knows how long it'll stand. I find the subject interesting, but we need to consider the context.

Could we entertain the motion, but discuss the priorities and scheduling so that it's fair for everyone?

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

Go ahead, Jaime.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso—Antigonish, NS]

I agree with my colleague. I agree that we really need to figure out why we had only one hour of time on the policing study. I will take his frustrations back to the ministers and their departments. We fully expect them to understand that there's an important committee study going on and that we really needed to utilize this second hour.

But I did see, at the end of this hour, that we had the opportunity to talk about something that's of great concern for first nations communities in terms of their future and their children not being on status lists. This is something that we've talked about. I hope we will have some consensus moving forward that this is a study that we will take on eventually, as the Liberal study that we want to move forward.

I would also like to say two things. First, I'd like to have a yes or no on whether we're voting in favour of this study being acceptable to this committee.

Second, I know that we have some gaps in the witnesses. We don't have fully submitted witness lists. There are some areas we're not hearing from. That's part of the conversation that I think we're willing to have over the next 45 minutes, to ensure not only that we have our witness slots filled up and that gaps aren't there when we're looking at the work plan, but also that we make the most out of this very important study. It's important to a lot of community members across first nations communities and indigenous communities across Canada.

I would like to take care of the first order of business that's been put forward by the motion, and then possibly open it up, if there's a willingness to do so within the committee.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

MP Schmale, go ahead.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Yes, I think there's a willingness to continue discussing that. I think we all agree it's a topic we want to learn more about.

I just wanted to add my comments and echo what Sébastien was talking about.

We did have the next line of questioning, which was of the ISC officials. We have a lot of unanswered questions, and the time is short on a very important study. Are we confident the Minister of Public Safety is coming for sure?

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

I'll turn to the clerk on what the scheduling is and what transpired.

[The Clerk of the Committee, Malachie Azémar]

I proposed two dates to them—October 29 and November 3—and I'm waiting for their response.

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

Thank you, Chair.

That's good news. That being said, do we want to discuss now or later what the potential plan might be if the minister doesn't show up? I assume the officials will come regardless. Is that correct?

[The Clerk]

Yes.

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

Okay, that's good.

We do need the minister to show up, because he does have that institutional knowledge of both Crown-Indigenous Relations and Public Safety. He would have a great deal of information that might piece together a lot of what we're trying to achieve on this study, so I'd be pretty disappointed if he didn't show up. Maybe we can discuss later what we do after that, if he doesn't show up, but I'm glad to hear the officials are coming.

At this point, if there's no other discussion, do you just want to put Jaime's motion in the queue?

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

We'll put it in the queue, and then we'll do it the way you guys said: Taking turns, each party will bring forward a motion at the appropriate time.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

Very good.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I'd like to add something. A few meetings ago, I put forward a motion on the witnesses to invite. The committee decided to put that motion aside. I don't want to play politics, but I agreed to that, even though it could've been postponed. I understand that's not the committee's decision in this case.

Furthermore, we have a long list of witnesses. We could've spent the second hour with them. For example, the president of the Assembly of First Nations Quebec-Labrador was in town yesterday, as was the president of the Assembly of First Nations, the AFN. I was at a press conference with them on the Chalk River issue. We could've easily invited other witnesses.

This is my question: Since the minister won't be here for a month, can't we start the study with other witnesses? It's unfortunate, but we'll just have to relate the witnesses' remarks to the minister for his reaction. There are benefits for a minister to appear at the beginning of a study.

The committee must move forward. I don't want to lose any more meeting time. Our agenda needs to be clear with set schedules.

I'd like to get an email with the list of witnesses who have confirmed their participation and those who have yet to confirm. That way, we'll know where we stand, because we've already lost too many meetings.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

I'm going to turn it over to the clerk.

My understanding is that you're going down the list of submitted witnesses, but go ahead.

[The Clerk]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have sent invitations for October 20, 22 and 27. Some witnesses have already confirmed their participation. We should have witnesses for the next three meetings.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso—Antigonish, NS]

I know we had asked for an initial list of witnesses. I'm wondering if the clerk could give us an updated work plan by Friday that indicates what areas or what regions or what people we have gaps in. We would hate to have a study across Canada where we didn't hear from an entire province. If you could identify the gaps for us by Friday, that would give us the ability to see those gaps and then ensure we have an official list by the following Wednesday to ensure that we're using most efficiently the amount of time and that the people are coming.

I'll let the other parties know that I have every indication from Minister Anandasangaree that he is making this a priority. I've heard nothing to say that he's not coming, so I'm pretty sure we're going to hear from him. I want you to rest assured of that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Sheehan]

Okay, very good.

Is there any further discussion?

The meeting is adjourned.