Status of Women Committee on April 23rd, 2013

[The Vice-Chair (Mrs. Tilly O'Neill Gordon), Conservative, Tilly O'Neill-Gordon]

You have only five seconds at the most.

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Listen, I will admit candidly that I am not in a position to answer that question because I'm newly appointed here. I do as best I can, so I undertake to answer the question in writing if that will satisfy you.

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

That would be very helpful. Thank you, Minister.

[The Vice-Chair (Mrs. Tilly O'Neill Gordon), Conservative, Tilly O'Neill-Gordon]

Thank you.

Ms. Ambler.

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Ministers, for being here today to talk about this very important bill.

We've been talking a lot about consultation today.

Frankly, I'd like further elaboration, Minister Valcourt, if you wouldn't mind, because I think Canadians need to know that there has been adequate consultation. Can you tell us about the consultation process and the way that Bill S-2 has been amended to respond to the information gathered in that consultation process?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

At the risk of repeating myself, this legislation responds to calls for action over the last 25 years from aboriginal women, from international organizations such as Amnesty International, and from parliamentary committees. Also, as I've indicated, a province, the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba, has urged us to pass this legislation.

Again, this has been going on, at least on our watch, since 2006. As Minister Ambrose has indicated, this is the fourth attempt at passing a bill that would fill this gap. Back in 2006, we initiated an extensive consultation process that included—and I repeat—over 100 meetings at 76 locations across Canada, which helped lead us to the legislation we have before us today.

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

That's great.

Could you elaborate on the amendments that were made as a result of those consultations?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Yes, and that's an important point you raise, because indeed the bill has been improved as a result of these consultations.

For example, some of you may remember the verification process that was contained in the original bill. This has been removed. The first nation council is now responsible for reporting the community approval outcome in writing to the minister if a first nation law is approved. Its removal eliminates confusion and misunderstanding about the role of the verification officer and addresses the concerns expressed by first nations and aboriginal groups that this process was paternalistic.

The other change is the ratification threshold, which has been lowered. There was a double majority required for the adoption of first nation laws, which meant that the majority of the eligible voters had to participate in the vote—50% plus one—and of those, a majority had to vote in favour. This has been lowered. The ratification threshold now requires a single majority vote with participation in the vote of at least 25% of the eligible voters.

The third change is a transition period that has been added. Before this change, upon royal assent this became law. A 12-month transition period was added before the federal provisional rules come into force. The government recognized that some first nations are well advanced in developing their own laws, and the transition period provides time to enact their laws under this legislation before the provisional federal rules take effect. First nations, as I said earlier, are not limited to the 12-month transition period to enact their community-specific laws, but they will start applying on the day that the federal rules will apply.

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

Thank you.

When you talked in your opening remarks about how incredulous you were that there is opposition to this—and Ms. Bateman referred to it as well—I have a feeling you were referring to some of the misinformation that's going around, the myths about what this legislation does or doesn't do. Could you clarify for us the involvement of the ministerial representative? Because some are saying those suggestions were not incorporated into the proposed legislation.

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

When I talk about my incredulity and consternation—

We have an expression in French. I don't know how our interpreters will decide to translate it, but it basically means that you are trying to dodge the issue.

You try to evade the issue or you try to sidestep the issue. I'm not saying that these other questions are not important.

[The Vice-Chair (Mrs. Tilly O'Neill Gordon), Conservative, Tilly O'Neill-Gordon]

The time is up, Mr. Minister. I'm sorry.

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

But this is fundamental.

[The Vice-Chair (Mrs. Tilly O'Neill Gordon), Conservative, Tilly O'Neill-Gordon]

Next is Ms. Day.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Actually, I'll be sharing my time with my colleague, Ms. Day.

I want to note that my province, Manitoba, has been referred to many times, and I wish that the first nations of Manitoba received the same kind of adoration and, certainly, commitment that the province is receiving today.

I want to read into the record the final paragraph of a speech by the Attorney General from Manitoba, in which he says:

So we have concerns about process. We've concerns about certain provisions, and we certainly have concerns about the supports to make Bill S-2 work. But we do want to fill a legislative void. Let's call for improvements to Bill S-2. Let's do that today, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you very much.

I've certainly had the chance to speak with colleagues who've noted support in principle but have expressed real concern about various provisions, including the kinds of supports that provinces would need to go forward, if this bill were to be implemented.

My question is—and again a yes or no answer would be preferable—was there a consultation done with every single one of the provinces?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

In answer to the question, I'd like to read something that was sent to the minister by my good friend, the Hon. Eric Robinson, the Minister of Aboriginal and Northern Affairs in Manitoba. It reads as follows:

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba urge the federal government to pass Bill S-2: Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act.

[...]

THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be sent by the Speaker to the federal Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.

There was no qualification in the call by the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba to pass Bill S-2.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

It was a private member's bill by the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party, so in fact the actual words of the resolution were the words of the Progressive Conservative Party in Manitoba.

But my question, which you didn't answer, is was there consultation with each of the 10 provinces?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Could you help me here, Karl?

This is Karl Jacques, an official with our department.

[Karl Jacques, Senior Counsel, Operations and Programs, Department of Justice]

Thank you.

The provinces have been consulted and did comment on the draft bill when it was in development.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Could we get a briefing on that?

[Karl Jacques]

I'll have to get back to you on this question.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Obviously it's seems pretty critical, given the impact of this legislation on the provinces. Has there been an analysis of the costs that will be incurred by provincial legal systems?

[Karl Jacques]

I'm not in a position to answer that question.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Is anybody else in a position?

[Rona Ambrose, Conservative, Edmonton—Spruce Grove, AB]

I could probably give you the cost of violence against women on first nations, which is one reason this needs to move forward.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Actually my question was about the legal costs.

Minister Ambrose, I certainly appreciate going back to the broken record, but the reality is that people—