Status of Women Committee on June 10th, 2010

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Can I continue, Madam Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Yes, go ahead.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

During the presentation the need for consultation was mentioned, the fact that there is a top-down, “we know best” attitude that we have to get past. There has to be a dialogue. The question has to be asked of how you, as a community, can expect the kinds of changes...and where do we fit in terms of helping or facilitating that.

It reminded me of the consultation that happened around matrimonial real property rights. Things have been very, very quiet in that regard. Does anybody know where that is, and was that consultation at all adequate?

[Ellen Gabriel]

I'll answer again, because I just presented this Monday on matrimonial real property, to the standing committee.

I've just been told that this $10 million of funding you're talking about on violence against aboriginal women is going to police agencies. If it's going to police agencies, then it's not going to go to the communities. I thank Carole for reminding me of that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Can you tell me, is this $10 million for the Sisters in Spirit funding, or did they specify?

[Ellen Gabriel]

They didn't specify. I think if we look at the details of the Speech from the Throne, it was $10 million to address the issue of violence against aboriginal women. It didn't specifically say it would go back to research.

I think NWAC did receive a funding renewal for another year or two for Sisters in Spirit. That's the last I heard, so it must have changed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

We know it's going to policing. I just wanted to clarify that.

Thank you.

[Ellen Gabriel]

I told the standing committee you cannot create legislation in a vacuum, considering there is Bill C-3. You have the repeal of section 67.

Oh, Mrs. Brown, I forgot to talk about fee simple. That just reminded me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Go ahead.

[Ellen Gabriel]

I was going to throw it in there. One of the challenges we face with regard to matrimonial real property is that there is a housing shortage in the community, so it's difficult to start a business. The other thing is that a judge will have to look at matrimonial real property and know the Indian Act. How many civil court judges know the Indian Act? If they don't know it, how is the community supposed to filter through this?

The other issue is that in remote communities, those women do not have access to legal aid, as we do closer to cities like Montreal or Quebec City. So there's a vacuum with regard to their access to justice. The bill does not address that particular section and that reality of aboriginal women.

There was a lack of adequate consultation. We had a month and a half to consult. I think most Canadians, if there are going to be legislative changes in Canada, are granted a year. There was a 500-page report from Wendy Grant-John, who was the minister's appointed representative. There were hardly any, if any, recommendations from that report: 500 pages and nothing in it talks about what the communities were saying.

I think the problem we have among ourselves is a lot of our communities don't even know what MRP is. They don't know the details involved in MRP. From what I've heard, they're asking for the rejection of this MRP bill, which we don't want to happen. We want the MRP bill to pass with amendments, just as we want Bill C-3 to pass with amendments, but the government is not listening. They're not accommodating our concerns.

Consultation...it's not just about our opinions. It's about accommodating our concerns. It's about a dialogue. It's about a partnership. That has not happened in any of the engagement sessions I have been involved in, nor the brief consultations there were on MRP.

For fee simple, yes, we have certificates of possession. Yes, we have these tiny pieces of land that are reserved for our benefit and use. I think what has not been discussed for our communities is that we want to be able to have the same kinds of economic opportunities that other people have. If we're to put up our land as collateral and we lose that land, it's taking what little we do have from our communities.

I know Mr. Jules is travelling right across Canada. For me, it's just another form of the white paper policy that was rejected in the 1970s. It's not adequate. You can't take what happens in the rest of Canada and put it in our communities. It doesn't work.

We want to have protection for our land, for future generations and for the present generation. Fee simple is not the best idea, I think, to help economic development. We need access to our land, to our resources. We need to sit down and dialogue with government. We should not have this “talk down” or “talking at”.

The government deals with the issues of aboriginal people in a very archaic, paternalistic way. It's 2010, for goodness' sake. We know all about your culture, but it's as if our culture is irrelevant: “It's going to be put in a museum, so you should be happy. That's how we're going to protect your culture.” It just doesn't work.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Ms. Simson.

[Michelle Simson, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Thank you.

In your opening remarks, Ms. Gabriel and Ms. Vaugrante, you both mentioned something similar, saying that what is required in the long term is a national plan of action. You both used the same expression.

I just wonder how you envision that rolling out, or how we can get to that point. I ask because part of what this committee is doing is looking at a lot of similarities in this country among aboriginals on various reserves, but there are also so many differences that we are travelling across the country to get a feel both for the differences and similarities.

To refer to Ms. Mathyssen's point, a national plan of action can't be top down. We can't sit at the federal level and try to figure it out by ourselves. As part of it, I think we would have to include the provincial legislators to make it work, because there are differences provincially in how they address aboriginal issues.

I'm just trying to get a feel for this. If you had a magic wand and could bring about this national plan of action, what would the infrastructure be to get this under way? How do you see it? How do we develop it?

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Do we have a taker for that?

Ms. Vaugrante, Madame Gabriel, Ms. Gentelet?

[Béatrice Vaugrante]

I wanted to give the honour of speaking to Ellen, but I believe she's preparing a good answer for you.

We've been asking for this since 2004, and nothing has happened since that time. We have to start by sitting down together and having the desire to solve the problem of violence against women. We haven't perceived that desire to date, except in the Speech from the Throne, which contained the only interesting news in some time.

There has to—

[Michelle Simson, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Oui, thank you, but can I just interrupt you for one second to pick up on what you said?

You mentioned a willingness to sit down together. So who would you envision the stakeholders being in order to develop this national action plan? Would they be the band leaders, the provincial government, and the federal government, so it would almost be like a giant summit, as it were?

[Béatrice Vaugrante]

There absolutely has to be participation by provincial authorities. As I've often mentioned, discrimination in the case of many cultural and socio-economic issues depends on the provinces.

We clearly need the cooperation of the various departments. Moreover, rapporteurs often handle aboriginal issues within the Government of Quebec. There has to be representation of the departments, aboriginal representation and the representation of aboriginal women as well; that's clear, especially at the federal level.

They'll have to agree on the urgent short-term and long-term needs, which will require other approaches and other consultations. However, the short-term, among other things, is everything that concerns the police and the safe houses. That depends on the provincial level. The police report to the municipal, provincial and sometimes federal levels with regard to security.

Together with the aboriginal groups, we must define the short-term action plans and then address the long-term, economic self-sufficiency, employment access, land consultation. These are much more complex, much more difficult subjects. One day or another, we'll have to establish a round table, a consultation table.

In addition, some things are incredible. Canada's image is tarnished because the country is being told what's happening in the country through UN bodies, through Amnesty International and through aboriginal groups. There has to be a federal government initiative through the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs. In particular, our Prime Minister has to show some political will. They have to say they want to do it, that they are inviting you to consultations and say that they are going to invite people to sit around the table. First there has to be a reading of the issues.

I don't believe we necessarily always have the same reading of the issues. Amnesty International and I are afraid of one thing. In the action plan that contained that $10 million amount that was put on the table, the reading was reduced to the criminal analysis of matters. We're going to solve the problem of women who have disappeared and the problems association with assassinated women. This is very far from being a uniquely criminal issue. Together we have to agree on the scope of the problem. It will take work just to do that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Ms. Robertson.

[France Robertson]

I simply want to add something on the issue of the federal and provincial governments.

When we live in a province, in Quebec, for example, and you come from an aboriginal community, you often wind up stuck in this opposition between the federal and provincial governments. It's every day; it's constant.

With regard to consultations, who's in the best position? We, the aboriginal peoples, know our history, our situation and what our needs are. It's important to take the time to consult. Often there's very little consultation of the aboriginal populations about their situation. I believe they know it very well.

At the time, we had a health system, a political system and a way of doing things. Today they think we are unable to take care of our people. And yet, as regards existing aboriginal resources, as I told you a little earlier, there are only 12 safe houses, but there are 58 communities, if you count the Inuit communities.

The comparison is always made with the non-aboriginal population. There are approximately 90 safe houses for the Quebec people, whereas there are only 12 aboriginal safe houses. When you know that there is three times as much violence in our communities, that's not right.

In the case of these aboriginal resources, the caseworkers are aboriginal, and they speak the language. They say that, to be a caseworker, you have to speak the language, but it takes more than that. It's the approach you use.

In the non-aboriginal safe houses, they talk a lot about feminist approaches, and women are encouraged to find a certain self-sufficiency when they are victims of violence. They are encouraged to take care of themselves. They often talk about being self-sufficient and taking care of themselves. However, we don't talk like that to aboriginal women. These women don't want to leave their husbands. They want to unite the family. In their minds, when you're married, you're married for life.

That's why the resources, including the safe houses that assist women, aren't the choice. You also have to help the man and the family. That's why we have to provide truly appropriate assistance. We must no longer see this break between the federal and the provincial levels.

With regard to funding, the safe houses are a good example. Since 2000, Quebec Native Women Inc., or QNW, has exercised a lot of pressure for increased funding for safe houses. I'd like to provide an update of that information.

We've been exercising pressure since 2000. Yes, funding has increased, but, at the same time, at the time when we were making demands, the gap between the provincial funding received by the aboriginal safe houses and that received by Quebec safe houses was $100,000. The more the gap increased, the more we demanded that it be corrected. At one point, the gap was $300,000.

The federal government announced an increase in funding for safe houses and basic funding was increased in 2008. So we've come back to the original gap of $100,000. That's currently the gap that exists between safe houses governed by the provincial government and those regulated by the federal level. That's a flagrant example.

And yet, those houses assist people in crisis, who are trying to commit suicide, substance abusers and the families of disappeared women. It isn't just a matter of awareness and assistance for women victims of violence.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Who wants to add something?

Ms. Gabriel.

[Ellen Gabriel]

We looked at all levels of contributing factors—and this comes from the National Clearinghouse on Family Violence—including individual factors, family factors, community factors, and culture and society. You have to involve every single member of society for a national action plan to be successful. That means you have to get governments sensitized to these issues. You have to get the police, judges, lawyers, and social workers, and then you have to get the communities themselves to come on board.

What we see all the time is that we're in a crisis situation and the attitude is, let's try to put out the fires. But we also need to have prevention. That's what I was talking about before when I mentioned education.

So a national action plan is something that reflects not just the immediate needs, but also the needs and experiences we have as aboriginal people, which can help foster a healthier community to stop this violence.

If we look at the globalization of culture, we see that violence and sex are what sell in the media and the entertainment industry. It's not just about government legislation; it's about what our children are watching, it's about what our youth are watching. I think it's a really sad state we find ourselves in. Everybody likes to be entertained, but we're forgetting that the media has an extremely powerful role in whether or not society wants to end violence.

[The Chair, Liberal, Hedy Fry]

Thank you.

Luc.

[Luc Desnoyers, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My first question is for Ms. Gabriel. You mentioned a report on aboriginal women and justice, which has been finalized by Quebec's department of justice. When was that report produced? When was it completed?

I think it would be interesting to get a copy of that document.

[Ellen Gabriel]

It was in 2003. That report concerned aboriginal women and non-aboriginal women. I believe there are a lot of recommendations. It's available at the website of Quebec's department of justice. We could always send you a copy.

[Luc Desnoyers, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

We'd really like to get a copy to see the recommendations.

When that report was submitted, did your association submit a brief? If so, would it be possible to get a copy of that brief?

A little earlier, Ms. Simson mentioned the national action plan, but if we could see what is being done in Quebec, perhaps we could important to the national level things that are being done in Quebec. We'd very much like to get a copy of your report or of the reports of the various organizations.

[Ellen Gabriel]

In recent years, we've submitted reports to Quebec's National Assembly about commitments on this violence issue, as well as to the federal government.