Evidence of meeting #128 for Public Accounts in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was funding.
A video is available from Parliament.
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
Eric Melillo Conservative Kenora, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Wernick, I'd like to ask you about the census data the government is using for this.
The Auditor General's report noted that the data being used is from the census of 2001. It certainly doesn't make a lot of sense to most parliamentarians and Canadians across the country to use such outdated data for making decisions like this.
Can you explain why that could be the case? Is there any reasonable explanation as to why they could not use more recent data?
6:20 p.m.
Jarislowsky Chair in Public Sector Management, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
I have no line of sight to that. I'd just be speculating.
I would note for the committee that the 2021 census data will be released in July under the rubric of the indigenous peoples survey, and there will be a rich array of census data available to all Canadians and parliamentarians this summer.
6:25 p.m.
Conservative
Eric Melillo Conservative Kenora, ON
Thank you very much.
You've mentioned some specifics here, but you spoke right off the hop in response to Mr. Nater's original questions about deep structural reforms that are needed.
I know that you touched on it throughout the entirety of your comments. I'm wondering if there's anything that has been left out from that that you can speak to specifically.
6:25 p.m.
Jarislowsky Chair in Public Sector Management, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
I'm challenging you to think about how to get out of the Indian Act, for sure. I do think that, instead of flogging the model of a department pushing contribution agreements, it's worth considering in all of the elections.
You have an election next year. Any one of the five or six parties could put in their platform a commitment to redo the structures of government and create a first nations housing corporation working closely with communities and with an enormous amount of first nations leadership.
It would be a step towards the full devolution that the other member was talking about.
I would definitely recommend passing enforceable building codes and enforceable fire codes. That's really important.
There's legal ambiguity in the law right now about who owns the physical assets on reserves, which makes it very hard to get insurance. It would be possible to put some lawyers on this and amend the legislation to clarify that the first nations are the owners of the assets in their communities.
6:25 p.m.
Conservative
Eric Melillo Conservative Kenora, ON
Thank you very much.
I think I have about a minute and a half left. I'm going to offer that to my colleague from the NDP.
6:25 p.m.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Mr. Chair, as point of order, can I allow this minute and a half to be in addition to my regular time, with the consent of the Bloc?
6:25 p.m.
Conservative
6:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative John Williamson
Do you want to go now, or do you want to go on your turn?
I'm fine with it either way.
6:25 p.m.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Mr. Wernick, at least we agree on some things. We agree that there's a fundamental need to change the relationship between Canada and indigenous peoples—first nations, Métis and Inuit. I think we agree there.
I hope to have your indulgence in listening to what I'm saying. We've heard a lot from you in regard to your ideas about this utopian society that can exist by Canada's own parliamentary processes and law-making authorities that have been assumed in this place.
We agree that this fundamental difference must exist. This change is required. The issue you just pointed out a second ago is this need for.... Even the courts, for example, don't know whose land...or who owns what.
This has been a question of jurisdiction more recently. For example, the Daniels v. Canada case in 2016 finally answered the question as to who has the jurisdiction to legislate on behalf of Métis persons. This is a live conversation we're having on who has the assumptive title or supreme law-making authority in a colonial country like Canada. That question is still being debated, but you've largely assumed that it's been operational.
Wouldn't you agree that this question, in your mind, is answered? It's that Canada has the supreme law-making authorities. You mentioned that the abolition of the Indian Act should take place by Parliament and that it should be replaced by Parliament. There's a Crown corporation created by Parliament. Parliament, a place of non-indigenous people, should largely be responsible for the continued paternalism that has largely plagued first nations.
I want to give you an opportunity to speak about the question of who has assumed sovereignty in Canada.
6:25 p.m.
Jarislowsky Chair in Public Sector Management, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
I think one of the reasons we've had over 25 Supreme Court rulings since the creation of sections 25 and 35 is that Parliament has not been able to fill a lot of the issues with legislative solutions, so people have gone to the courts and the courts have filled the space.
There's ample opportunity for the Parliament of Canada to clarify all kinds of issues within the framework that's set by the Constitution.
My view, and it's just an opinion, is that the charter applies to all Canadians. The Constitution applies to all Canadians, and Parliament cannot abdicate its sovereignty over law-making on behalf of 41 million Canadians. All Canadians are—
6:25 p.m.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
Just stop there. That's enough.
That point right there is the point that we dispute, I believe, Mr. Wernick.
I do not believe that Canada, as you mentioned, has supreme law-making authority over all Canadians. You're going to assume that all indigenous people are Canadians. Sure, some will submit that they are, but not all will submit that's the truth, particularly in unceded territory.
Wouldn't you agree?
6:30 p.m.
Jarislowsky Chair in Public Sector Management, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
The law-making by first nations communities affects their neighbours and other Canadians. It has to be a nation-to-nation relationship, which is reciprocal.
This is the principle of non‑interference and non‑indifference.
6:30 p.m.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
They have an assumed title.
I think you've answered my question in your deflection and being unable to answer directly to the fact that it's your position that all indigenous people have been enfranchised.
That's your position, isn't it?
6:30 p.m.
Jarislowsky Chair in Public Sector Management, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
My view is that Parliament is the law-making authority for all Canadians.
6:30 p.m.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
That truth exists because you believe all indigenous people are enfranchised. Is that correct?
6:30 p.m.
Jarislowsky Chair in Public Sector Management, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
I don't know what you mean by enfranchised.
6:30 p.m.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
My God. You know, it's not even worth talking about this any longer, Mr. Wernick.
6:30 p.m.
Conservative
6:30 p.m.
NDP
Blake Desjarlais NDP Edmonton Griesbach, AB
It's been the perspective of the Indian agents for the last 150-odd years that indigenous people should be assimilated, enfranchised or conquered.
You've confirmed in many ways in this discussion today that it's your perspective as well. It's clear to me why the issues that placate indigenous society today are with us.
6:30 p.m.
Jarislowsky Chair in Public Sector Management, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
No. That is a gross misrepresentation. That is libellous. That is a misrepresentation of my views—
