Special Committee on Violence Against Indigenous Women Committee on Nov. 21st, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Stella Ambler]

Welcome back to everyone, especially to Ms. Audette.

Hello, Michèle. I don't know where the camera is, but I'm waving at you. Welcome.

[Michèle Audette, President, Native Women's Association of Canada]

I see you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Stella Ambler]

Welcome once again to our expert witness, the Native Women's Association of Canada. We thank you for being here.

You are calling in to us from Sept-Îles, I believe, today.

[Michèle Audette]

Exactly. I'm calling from my first nation community, Uashat Mak Mani-Utenam.

[The Chair, Conservative, Stella Ambler]

That's fantastic. Welcome. We're here at La Promenade Building, and we are anxious to hear from you. As you know from your conversation with the clerk, we have combined the front-line assistance and preventing violence against aboriginal women sections. So we're anxious to hear from you today.

Please feel free to take as much time as you like, as we did the first time. If we have time for questions, we'll do that. If you'd like to take the entire time until 7 p.m., that's okay with the committee as well.

Maybe you could tell us who your helpers are today.

[Michèle Audette]

My helpers are my twins. They'll be well prepared to take over NWAC pretty soon. They're following me everywhere.

Thank you very much. I only see you, Madam Ambler, but I want to say hello to everybody. I am sure everybody is there; I hope so.

[The Chair, Conservative, Stella Ambler]

We're very happy to have you here. Thank you.

[Michèle Audette]

Thank you.

So I guess I shall start, madame la députée?

[The Chair, Conservative, Stella Ambler]

Absolutely, yes.

[Michèle Audette]

I have to say that I am really proud and happy to be in my own territory, the Innu territory, which is Uashat Mak Mani-Utenam.

Another nice thing to say is that the band office is giving me this space so that I can speak to you. It's coming from my heart, and also coming from the grassroots community, from where things are happening every day, which I witness, or I listen to women and they help me.

Of course, I have to say that I know that not long ago this committee was dissolved. Knowing that when a committee is dissolved we do not have to bring it back—that is my understanding—this time I see that you did bring back this special committee on violence against indigenous women.

But I have huge concerns. I had concerns before; our board members had concerns; our expertise at the office had concerns; women and families we met already had concerns about many aspects of this committee.

Instead of repeating and repeating what has been said over the years, the same thing, I would like to start this presentation with a question. Many recommendations, many statistics, much homework, many documents, position papers, etc., were given when the committee was put in place. Much testimony, from families, government people, etc., was presented to you with some probable solutions. I would like to hear from you: is all the work that was done when the committee was active something that stays alive or that will be fully, 100% accurate?

We never ended and put it back. I want to hear about that before I give my testimony.

[The Chair, Conservative, Stella Ambler]

Certainly. I don't mind answering that.

The motion in the House, Michèle, was to bring back the committee, including all of the testimony thus far. So it's as if there was no break, essentially, in the committee. All of the routine motions are the same and all of the testimony is back in for the analysts to use, for us to use, and as part of the public record.

So rest assured, while the committee had to shut down due to prorogation, just like every other parliamentary committee, this one was brought back, essentially, as if it was the next day, with no changes. So, please, rest assured that there's no change there.

Yes, all the documents, reports, briefing notes, submissions—all of that is part of what we have to work with.

Does anyone else have anything to add to that?

Please go ahead.

[Michèle Audette]

Okay, I'm glad to hear that. It's important that it's official and everybody is witnessing. I'm glad that it was also discussed, that it's going to stay there and it's going to be used for recommendations, etc.

The other question I have right now is why the Conservatives, this government, after.... I'm so surprised.

Madam Chair, from every province and territory, thirteen first ministers unanimously supported the Native Women’s Association of Canada’s call for the urgent establishment of a national inquiry into missing and murdered women and, of course, for a plan of action. These are Mr. Harper’s counterparts.

In addition, the entire international community and the United Nations, through its Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, point out first and foremost how important it is for Canada to act urgently, to establish an inquiry and to shed light—as I mentioned earlier—on the disappearances and the murders. Mr. Anaya says the same thing.

In addition, the women, the people associated with the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination and Violence against Women say the same thing. Not long ago, this fall, they came and said, right at the outset, that Canada absolutely had to take steps, as a matter of urgency, and establish a national public inquiry to shed light on the issue. That is the second group from the United Nations.

The Organization of American States, which also has women and commissioners working in the areas of human rights and women's rights, says the same thing. So this is no whim on the part of the Native Women’s Association of Canada; it is no whim of a few people saying to taxpayers that we are going to spend their money for nothing.

Canada’s first ministers, the international community, organizations working in parallel with the United Nations, like Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and KAIROS—I could name thousands of them—and thousands of Canadians who are not even indigenous by origin are signing the petition saying that this is an urgent need.

Why am I a little irritated? Because I am a human being and I have just come from a meeting in Winnipeg.

I'll switch to English.

I just came back from a meeting with the aboriginal affairs ministers from across Canada, and I was glad to see that the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, MonsieurValcourt, was there. For the past six years, we didn't have any federal ministers attending those meetings. It's either because there's an election coming soon or he does care. And I think he does care, because I heard him on other issues, and I felt like, “Jesus, why is he not like this when we talk about missing and murdered aboriginal women?” Why? I'll say this. I witnessed. I was there.

Four issues were discussed during those meetings: education, développement économique, housing, and disasters. On the issue of ending violence for aboriginal women and young girls, nyet, zéro, nothing. He didn't say a word on violence against women and young girls—nothing during his presentation. He didn't say a word about the special committee. He didn't say a word about why his government said no to a national public inquiry.

But he had a long piece of paper on what to answer if Michéle Audette asked him the question. And I did ask him the question. I said to the minister, “It's either a strategy for you or I hope you forgot it, but how come you didn't say a word about this important issue? I believe it's not an indigenous women's issue. It's not only a first nations, Métis or Innu issue. It's our issue, as Canadian people, Québecois people, and aboriginal people.”

His answer was so disappointing, but I have a feeling that it wasn't only from him. It was, I guess, coming from le bureau du premier ministre. I have a feeling. His answer was, “Why should we do this? It's too expensive.” I said, “Monsieur Valcourt, you lose a dollar? There is no price for that.” He said, “I gave $30 million. Our government believes in action.” I said, “Oh yeah? You believe in action? Tell me why, since we did the database, the research, across Canada—second-hand information, which was long and tough hard work, professional, and scientific. It went so well that we lost the funding.”

Okay fine, the program was ending. But we could have renewed it and become a real partner in showing that, my God, there's something wrong happening here and what can we do to change this?

They believe in action. We lose the money. Okay, fine. Then after that it will go for a national centre where the indigenous component is not there, so we will be diluted again. We're showing the international community that maybe we have fewer aboriginal missing and murdered women. “Look, the numbers are going down.” I hope I'm wrong, and I'll apologize if I'm wrong; I have no problem with that.

Coming back to that $30 million and action, I told him in front of everybody—premiers, ministers, national organizations, leaders, etc.—in my presentation, “Monsieur Valcourt, I have to say that the research we have done over the past 40 years shows that the numbers are increasing, mostly from 2003 until today.” We ended that research in 2010. I told him it is sad that we lose one or up to seven women every month, and it's getting worse.

There's another problem. Canada will send sympathies, which is okay and perfect when we talk about les crimes haineux, hate crimes, I guess, in English. I'm sorry if I've mixed it up, but it's coming from here. When a woman in India is raped by six men, Canada will send its regrets. We'll support and do something, which is great. We need to be proactive with the international community. But at the same time, we had a woman in Thunder Bay in her thirties, a mother, who was raped and beaten so badly that the two Canadians thought she was dead. They dumped the body. It was minus 30 and between Christmas and New Year's Eve. She walked five hours to her house and called 911, but she never received a letter from your government to say “Je suis désolée. I am so sorry.”

We have another loss, a young Canadian girl from New Brunswick. It was so sad. She was bullied through Facebook. She didn't deserve that at all. But look what happened. She was a young white Canadian girl. Harper met with the father, met with the family, sent his regrets, and moved all his government to say, “We will find a way to stop the bullying through cyber attacks or the Internet.” You have the premier from that province saying “I will bring in legislation on this.” That, for me, is action. I commend Nouveau-Brunswick and I commend Prime Minister Harper for standing up and saying, let's see what we can do to change policy and laws.

But that was for one death, one woman. For us, it's up to seven women every month, and nobody stands up to say, “Okay, Canada, let's change.”

I was really polite with you, I was really patient with you, and I was really nice. But my God, let's stop being hypocritical. Let's move on this time for real, with really concrete changes to legislation, changing the way the RCMP do things with the communities, with the women, with people across Canada, through new programs, new curricula, etc. I'm sure we can do so much, instead of just meeting once a week and saying, we'll see what's the cheapest and put that in our report.

It was something like this that came also from my heart to the minister, and I wasn't surprised by his answer. It shows that this government does so much, but how come numbers are increasing? How come we have 633 first nations communities and we only have 40 shelters to protect women and children—40 shelters here in Canada? We have nyet, zero second housing houses to which women can go afterwards. A shelter is just to protect you; there is no real healing process there or empowerment for the women.

I was doing an interview today with four women. Three were non-native Canadian women. It was a live interview. The people were asking, “How come you are five times more at risk of dying from a violent crime, you first nations women, aboriginal women, Métis, Inuk? How come? We live in the same country.”

Then another one asked, “How come there are so many problems in your community?” I said, “Do you know how many ministry people work for my people? It is very few, while you have three levels of government. You have the federal, with many departments, many ministries; you have the provincial or the territorial; and then you have the municipalities. We have Indian Affairs—INAC or Aboriginal Affairs—and provinces with their aboriginal affairs.” I said, “My God, we don't have much in the way of programs and services in our communities, so where do we turn? Where do we go?”

I would like to become involved with this committee. I made sure that I spoke with the executive of NWAC. I said, that's it; this is enough. If I don't see a black and white commitment from this committee saying what the role of NWAC is and what the role of the committee is and how we're going to work together.... If I don't see it in the next 10 days, we're going to pull out. We are going to pull out.

It's official. The Conservatives don't want a national public inquiry. Fine. You want action; so do we. So we'll go back with the families, because we're the only national organization. And I hope it will be well understood that since 1974 we have been working non-stop for the families and the children—non-stop: elders, youth, you name it. We went everywhere at the international level to say this is what's happening, and yes, we know the root cause.

Your colleague, Bernard Valcourt, thinks the inquiry will only bring out the root cause. Come on. We know the root cause and we know.... My God, we live with the effects every day, so of course we know. But we know also what kind of solution could change things. But it seems that it doesn't work.

I don't have the authority to put in new legislation. I don't. Maybe I should run in the next federal election. Why not?

I don't have the authority. You do. Use that opportunity. Use that power you have. Make major change. Mark the history—you have time. I'm talking to every party right there in Ottawa.

We're also the only ones who, on a daily basis and also every year, maybe twice a year, bring families together. Some will say, “Pah, my God, listening to families...what more can they say that we haven't heard before?” Did you know that talking, for aboriginal people, is a way of healing? I'm sure it is for Canadian people also. Some are making a lot of money just by listening to people.

I am thinking about psychologists, psychiatrists, and so on.

But for first nations people, because I'm first nation and I don't want to.... Maybe for the Métis it's the same, and for the Inuit: talking, sharing, and listening, it's a way of healing. It's a way of knowing that I'm not alone in going through that grief. Then I become stronger and stronger, so I can help other people. Because I don't have enough services, maybe I can be creative and make networks with family and support. We're the only ones who do that.

But if Canada really believes in action, and I mean this government, Monsieur Valcourt and Prime Minister Harper, if they really believe in action.... Every Speech from the Throne, every one, all the time, talks about victims, the rights of victims, protection, safety, public security, etc. We're against violence, of course, but at the same time, the Canadian people were cutting the funding for the native women of Canada. They were cutting. There was no more funding. Because they seem to complain too much, maybe?

No. As a real partner—a real partner—you have an opportunity, members of this committee. If in 10 days I get a letter, a contract or something that says, “This is what we agree, you and I”, and it's in black and white and we will do it for real this time.... The last time, we had meetings, we had private meetings, and we lobbied non-stop, but what happened? Not much. Not much—let's be frank.

So for me, I'm open. I would say that you have in front of you a passionate mother. See? I brought my kids. For me, I'm willing, like I said. All your colleagues.... And it doesn't matter which political party it is or if it's Canadian society—everywhere I go, if I can make a small moccasin step every day. I don't have to be here, but I believe in what I do because beautiful women are with me and surrounding me—kids, families, etc.—and I see them. It's so beautiful what they do at the community level. They push for change.

If you were walking with us, with NWAC—they're small steps, but we are adding up all those moccasin steps—can you imagine the major step, the major shift, we could do here in Canada?

The ball is now in your court.

Are there any questions?

[Voices]

Bravo!

[Michèle Audette]

[Applause]

[The Chair, Conservative, Stella Ambler]

Thank you for that, Michèle.

It's a shame you can't hear the applause because there were shouts of “bravo”.

Before I open it up for discussion for 20 minutes, let me say that we all agree that this is one of the greatest tragedies in Canadian history. That's why we're here. All 12 of us are here because we care, because we've expressed an interest in being here—every single member of Parliament who is here in this room. We're here because there was a Liberal motion put on the floor earlier this year and every party voted for it, unanimously, which wouldn't have happened if we didn't want this to happen. It was a Liberal motion that suggested this committee be constituted, and the rest of us agreed that this was a good idea.

Therefore, I would say to you that we are here to make change. When we reached out at the beginning, it was in response to your request to be a part of this. I've now sat on three other committees and I've never seen a recurring witness and an expert witness done in this way.

For that reason, I think NWAC is special. You are a real partner. I'd like to continue the dialogue in conversation as well, and we can certainly have offline discussions if you like. We should have a little bit of back and forth here. I'm happy to take instruction. We can do it in our usual way, or we can ask if you have any questions for us. I think we should have a format similar to what we usually do: have the committee members ask you some questions and then you can tell us what you think.

Those are the comments I wanted to make before we started the discussion period.

I'll start a speakers' list, if any other members would like to have—

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Let’s go with a normal routine, Madam Chair.

Romeo will start off for us.

[The Chair, Conservative, Stella Ambler]

Is that the will of the committee?

Okay.

First on my list is Mr. Saganash.

[Romeo Saganash, NDP, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

[The member speaks in his native language]

Michèle, you are very lucky to be able to be at home, unlike me. I was not expecting to hear what you have just told us, but I thank you for it. I very much appreciate your very commendable passion for the issue. Your remarks were so convincing that you could have ended by saying:

“I rest my case.”

I hear your passionate cry loud and clear. You mentioned the next federal election and said that you were perhaps thinking of running. On our side at least, we welcome you with open arms.

I want to go back to the letter you mentioned at the end. You are quite right to emphasize that more or less the entire world, the entire universe, wants an independent, national public inquiry. On our side, at least, we agree with you completely. I use the words “independent” and “national” because, at times, this kind of committee is found wanting in that respect. So could you tell us about the current process and what we can do as we wait?

You also spoke about recent developments. Recently, you had discussions with Mr. Valcourt. Could you give us more insight into them? As to the letter you mentioned, as you understand things and as a result of the discussions you have had up to now, what should that letter contain?

I also completely agree with you about the reconciliation you mentioned. Healing also comes from talking. As a survivor of the residential schools myself, I can totally understand you. What we went through in the residential school system was literally cultural, linguistic and political imprisonment. It was cultural because we were taken away from our homes. It was linguistic because we were prevented from speaking our own languages. It was political because it was done solely because we were aboriginal. Yes, it is high time for that to change. We have had the apology; now let's have some action. I completely agree with you.

But let us go back to the letter. What should that letter contain, as you understand things up to now?

[Michèle Audette]

[The witness speaks in her native language]

Thank you very much, Romeo.

My dear committee members, our friend Romeo Saganash has just said something very important. I am not criticizing those of you around that table, I am criticizing a system, a structure. Members of all committees have their hands tied by their political parties. In the knowledge that, officially, the Conservatives currently have no intention to hold a national public inquiry, it is going to be difficult for the other parties to negotiate for such an inquiry to be mentioned in any recommendations. At that point, I am already afraid.

Before I answer Mr. Saganash, I am going to digress a little and talk about the bigger picture that really allows us to understand the role of the committee. I am well aware that there are limits. I cannot go into Parliament every day and say that this or that must be done. You have expertise, but you do not have the expertise that is most important, the expertise of the indigenous women, the families, and the others affected by the issue, or the expertise of our organization that has been dealing with this issue since 1974.

First, I want you to accept, as Ms. Ambler has done, that we are recognized as experts. But I do not just want to be an expert who comes to see you now and again. We have people in the office who can sit down with your people to prepare meetings, to begin discussions and to try to focus on what is feasible in the short, medium and long terms. We have to work together and say “let’s go; that works”. We have to have discussions. You have already done it with one indigenous woman who was on a committee. Why can it not be done for years into the future with the Native Women’s Association of Canada?

You recognize our expertise, but you also must know that we are working for our people, our families. But those families are not even invited. Is there not one full day when you can take off your hats of people who are used to operating in a certain way and speak with your hearts? I often hear that people say that they are concerned, that this touches them. So come and meet us. Why not meet with families who could suggest solutions better than I can, or the people in our office can? I want to feel, I want to see, what you are going to do to make your concern into a priority.

In those meetings, it is important—

[The Chair, Conservative, Stella Ambler]

Michèle, our next speaker has something to say on that particular point.

Since Mr. Saganash's seven minutes are up, I'm going to call on Mr. Dechert now.

[Bob Dechert, Conservative, Mississauga—Erindale, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ms. Audette, good evening. We haven't met before. My name is Bob Dechert. I'm a member of Parliament from Mississauga. It's very nice to meet you.

I'm a new member of this committee, so I'm starting fresh. I hope you'll forgive me if I missed some of the things you said previously, but I did have an opportunity to read your testimony from the last time you appeared before the committee. I appreciated that.

I am here representing the Minister of Justice, in addition to myself.

I appreciate your comment on the things our government has prioritized: justice issues, standing up for victims, making our communities safe and clean, and making our first nations and aboriginal communities safe. I appreciate that and I would like to mention that in a moment.

You mentioned the families. I just want you to know that just before you began to speak tonight, all members of the committee agreed that we will be hearing from the families on the 9th of December. We're going to invite a number of them from across Canada to be here. We want them to tell us their stories.

I can tell you that from my personal perspective, I see them all as victims. We really do want to listen to victims and hear what victims need from our justice system. My view is that we'll find there's a lot of commonality in the needs of first nations and aboriginal victims and the families of missing and murdered aboriginal women and those of other victims in terms of information they have a right to receive from the investigating authorities and others.

I hope you'll appreciate that opportunity we're providing to families. We really want to hear from them. Perhaps you can suggest to us some names of some families you think it would be good for us to hear from. Perhaps you yourself will have an opportunity to attend on that occasion. We want to do it in a respectful way, in a traditional way, if we can, given the buildings we exist in here on Parliament Hill. We want to make it as unthreatening to these victims and their families as possible, because we want to hear from them. You mentioned that talking is a way of healing. I think it's the same in all communities. We want to hear the stories and we want to share the grief and hopefully participate in the healing with you and the victims.

You mentioned that you wanted to see a letter or a contract from the government. I'd be interested in hearing—maybe you can put something to us that we can take a look at.

The other thing I wanted to say to you is that this committee is here to receive recommendations. I know that your organization has provided some recommendations previously, and I assume more recommendations will be coming. We're hoping to collect recommendations from other witnesses we hear from, including the families. Then our report at the end of our work, which will be sometime in the spring, will reflect those recommendations and include some recommendations to the Government of Canada.

I've heard one recommendation that you have set out—and I think we've heard that recommendation before—but presumably there are other recommendations you'd like to share with us as well. I think it would be a shame if we were to cut off this committee now before it has an opportunity to list all the recommendations. I don't think it's the intention of anyone here to prohibit or forgo any recommendation, but we want to hear all recommendations. Presumably, some of the recommendations will not be simply to do some more study but will involve some concrete things we can all move forward together on.

You may have heard that our government has brought in a number of initiatives to address specifically the issue of violence against women. You may have noticed that there have been a number of private members' bills on human trafficking that have been passed by all parties in the House.

When you spoke to the committee previously, on May 30 of this year, you mentioned that human trafficking was a big issue for aboriginal women and that you think many of them are the targets and the victims of human trafficking.

I hope some of that human trafficking legislation, which has been supported by all of us as parliamentarians—I think virtually all of these bills have been unanimously supported—will be of value to the people you represent, and you see that we're making an honest effort to try to reduce the occurrence of human trafficking in Canada and bring it to an end.

As I mentioned earlier, you've probably heard that our government has been consulting with people across Canada for a number of months now on a victims bill of rights. As a lawyer myself and as a member of Parliament, it seems to me I hear from the people I represent all the time that they have lost faith in our justice system. They don't think it serves the law-abiding people or the victims, and there needs to be a rebalancing of our justice system between victims and offenders. When people lose faith in our justice system, they take the law into their own hands, they just don't cooperate with authorities, and the problem gets worse.

It seems to me, and maybe you can tell me where I'm wrong, that the victims we're talking about in this case, the aboriginal women and girls, are victims that our justice system has failed somehow; that we're not paying attention to their needs; that they have lost faith, and the aboriginal community in general has perhaps lost faith, in the Canadian justice system, because it has failed to serve those law-abiding people it is supposed to serve.

So we very much would value your input, the input of the people you represent, the families, on how we can address these issues and add things to our victims bill of rights that address their concerns and the problems they've identified over many years, and we can help restore the faith of all Canadians in our justice system.

I'd appreciate hearing your views on those things.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Stella Ambler]

Thank you for your comments, Mr. Dechert.

Over to you, Ms. Sgro.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Ms. Audette, every time I meet with you and hear you, you always leave me in tears and frustration over how we can possibly try to reconcile the loss of so many—so many murdered women, without question.

By the way, this evening I'm replacing Dr. Bennett, who's out of the country.

I have met you many times at the rallies. I'm sorry we're here; I wish we were having that inquiry that we very much wanted, but I have to say that we are where we are. I appreciate the fact that the government supported the motion and that we have something before us. But I hear so much frustration in your voice. Over the many years I've been here, I've been hearing this plea for justice to be done for the lost women. I've seen the studies and I've seen the briefs, and we still are where we are.

By the way, I do support your initiative; I think it would be more helpful to the committee if you were sitting here with us as this process goes on. But at the end of the day, what will give you the satisfaction that this committee will move forward? Right now it's the only vehicle that's on the table. I would encourage you to use it and move forward on it.

At the end of the day, when March comes and a report is put together by the committee, what do you want to see in that report that would make it worth the time and the effort that you will be putting in, hopefully over the next few months?

[Michèle Audette]

Just as a response to the previous speaker from Mississauga, le député de Mississauga, I'm touched. I can feel that you are sincere, really sincere, and I'm glad, but I'll stick and stay with my position that if NWAC doesn't see something so that we feel we're a real partner, and that will go for you, Madame la députée libérale, Madame Sgro....

We're burnt out. Let's be frank. I know that it's the only vehicle right now, but I've been in politics for the past 20 years for Quebec native women and now for NWAC, and it's not the first time—and I know it's not going to be the last time—that we're sitting here hoping we will bring back some recommendations. But most of the time—and I agree with Minister Valcourt on this—and I'm not afraid to say this, this ends on a shelf with dust.

There are two things I really want to see. We can have a discussion after, your people with our people, and build that contract or that paper that will say, “This is who we are and this is what we're hoping to achieve together as real partners.” That's one thing.

There's another thing if we see this. Of course we believe in you, each person sitting there. You're a human being also. You believe in your political party and your line, of course, and this is the beauty of democracy, and I commend you for this. The other thing is that if for one time, this time, you would really fight, and fight for the rights of aboriginal women and the young girls, knowing that there's a bill for the rights of victims, that could be another good discussion we could have, where maybe—maybe—there's a great solution.

But I'm not going to share right now what I've been thinking, because I don't want what happened the other time. We shared and shared, and then, poof, we never heard from the committee—ever. I don't want this to happen again. Et voilà.

[The Chair, Conservative, Stella Ambler]

You have two minutes left.