Status of Women Committee on April 25th, 2013

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

To our three guests today, welcome back.

One of my colleagues touched on how many first nations had already enacted matrimonial property rights legislation. I believe you said—I wrote it down—22, through the First Nations Land Management Act, but I didn't actually hear if there was any outcome of that type of legislation, and whether there have been any positive effects from that legislation for the 22 that have already enacted their own matrimonial property rights legislation.

I'm just wondering if you can touch on whether you have any statistics, any positive feedback, or anything we could note that would point to how important this type of legislation actually is.

Thank you.

[Jo-Ann Greene]

We don't necessarily have any statistics.

The First Nations Land Management Act does not require that a copy of the matrimonial real property law be provided to the minister. But in conversations with the First Nations Land Management Resource Centre, we have been assured that, for the most part, the matrimonial real property laws have been working well within the communities, because they are community-designed and community-driven.

My understanding is that there haven't been very many appeals to the provisions they developed. There may have been the odd exception. I'm sorry, I don't have the statistics on that, nor do I know what they are. But my understanding is that they seem to be working quite well.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you very much.

I just want to ask you a question. I know it's come up in discussions, whether in the House or outside, just with friends or family, or whatever else.

Is it possible, through this legislation, for non-members to actually obtain and have property transferred to them permanently? I just want to get a clear answer on that. I'm pretty sure I know the answer, but again, I've heard some things out there that would imply, for example, that someone like me could end up owning property. However, I don't think that's the case. Could you clarify that, please?

[Karl Jacques]

No, there's no transfer possible if a person is a non-member.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

But if they're a non-member and they're in a situation where they've had to have emergency protection orders, do they have a right, at that particular moment, to remain in the property with their child or whatever else? Could you please explain that and for what period of time that might be?

[Karl Jacques]

If they do have an emergency protection order, they would have the period of time for the emergency that the judge would have attributed, and they can also apply for exclusive occupation if there's a breakdown of the marriage. At that period, it would be because the relationship is terminated, and then they could apply to stay in the home for a definitive period determined by the judge, with the children, or whatever the judge or circumstances would call for. The act sets out the circumstances that the judge might take into account to provide for the period of time and whether or not occupancy should be given.

One aspect that was amended, actually, in the Senate was to take into account the relationship of the person to the community. So if it's a perfect stranger, that would obviously play in the balance as to what period of time the person would be allocated to stay in the house.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

But under no circumstance would someone like me be able to have property transferred into my name and I would have the sole title—

[Karl Jacques]

No, the act sets out that this transfer is possible only between members.

[Roxanne James, Conservative, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you. I just wanted to clarify that.

Now, there has been some criticism of this particular legislation that it has not taken into account first nations' culture or traditions. What do you say to people who come up with that type of argument?

[Jo-Ann Greene]

I believe there is a complex issue related to balancing the collective interests and providing basic rights and protections to individuals on reserve. We have been very careful, as one of the recommendations by the ministerial representative, to try to balance that in the legislation. Even the 90-day portion for their immediate protection through emergency protection orders is one of those balances. Should a revoking or an extension be sought, the first nations community, the band council, can make a representation on their cultures and laws and has the ability to make a representation as part of that, and on other applications as well, so that they can be heard if they want to have input or help sort out the application.

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

Thank you. Your time is up.

Ms. Ashton.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I want to pick up on the last question raised by my colleague, Ms. Crowder. I realize that you look at it based on the legislative side, but of course, we have to be honest. We constantly hear from the minister about ending violence against aboriginal women, etc. Yet on so many other points, whether it's calling a national inquiry, investing in shelters, investing in housing—as was pointed out—we haven't seen any action.

Now, with respect to the emergency protection orders, in an ideal world, I think we can all agree, there's no question. This measure is extremely important. But I'll bring the case of one of the communities I represent, Garden Hill First Nation. It's an isolated community on the east side of Lake Manitoba. About 2,500 people live there. The RCMP lives on an island away from the main community. During the freeze-up or breakup of the lake, they cannot get there very easily. In fact, one of the only ways they can get there is by helicopter.

This band is in third-party management. The third-party manager has cut funding to the band constables, and this program is currently in limbo—as in, people aren't getting paid. So there's no community-based policing. Right now it's breakup season. The RCMP cannot access the community very easily.

So what good is a protection order if there is no funding in policing, if there is no women's shelter, because there isn't, if there is no transition home, because there isn't, if it does take a $500 ticket to go to Winnipeg, which is the closest place somebody can go to get that kind of shelter? Those gaps aren't just gaps. We're talking about lives being on the line because that basic access simply does not exist.

We can talk in theoretical terms or we can talk in practical terms. I can tell you that the practical terms mean that emergency protection orders mean nothing when you don't have people to apply them, to police the situation, and of course, the services available for victims when the crime happens.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts. Unfortunately, we don't have the political representatives to ask about that end of things, but I'd be keen to hear where you stand.

[Andrew Beynon]

Try it.

[Jo-Ann Greene]

I do know there are some areas in programming that help to address those situations. As you've mentioned, there is funding for emergency protection orders, and there is the family violence prevention program. There's an initiative that helps in instances of divorce and there is other programming that is helping to address some of those situations in the north.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Just to clarify, what kind of figures are we talking about? In the Churchill constituency there are 22 isolated communities, and 18 of them are first nations. This is just in northern Manitoba.

We keep hearing about the centre of excellence. I'm not sure that it would be in Garden Hill. So what kind of figures are we talking about? We're talking about 663 first nations. Many of them are isolated, remote. Could we have a breakdown on those figures? How much of that money will be allocated to remote first nations?

[Andrew Beynon]

If I may offer to the committee, you're raising a lot of points in respect of funding for housing and for police services, women's shelters, and so on. Perhaps we could get back to the committee with some information about the funding levels in respect of those programs specifically.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Sure, I would very much appreciate that background, but I also want to make sure that when we're talking about emergency protection orders saving lives, we are clear about the lives people lead in many of these communities. I can say for a fact that a piece of paper without anybody to implement and support the situation is certainly not going to save lives.

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

Is that it?

Okay, now we have Ms. Ambler.

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would argue that having a piece of paper is better than not having a piece of paper because then at least you have a place to start.

Speaking of enforcement and emergency protection orders, I'm wondering what, if any, role the centre of excellence will play in that, and in particular in remote first nation communities. Will provisions be made, as in the example that Ms. Ashton gave, for communities that are particularly remote, or under third-party management, or that might have some difficulties enforcing it? Is the centre of excellence there to help or would there be some other branch that might be able to help?

[Andrew Beynon]

I would answer by saying that the idea for the centre of excellence is to house it within an existing aboriginal institutional organization that already has experience dealing with more urban communities, more prosperous communities, and remote and isolated and very challenged communities. They have the skill to be able to consider very much what is the right service, what is the right type of matrimonial property law in a remote community, and what kind of provisions you should provide for. Yes, the centre of excellence should be able to provide advice, for example, on how to handle emergency protection orders where there is not a local RCMP detachment and so on.

I would come back to an earlier answer that in the implementation plan going forward our department is connected to Public Safety and to the RCMP, so how we can try to make sure the legislation is more than just paper but is actually implemented in a way that responds is on the radar screen.

I'm not going to deny the point that the committee member made. Some communities are isolated and have many challenges in terms of policing issues, far beyond just matrimonial real property.

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

Sure. What I also hear you saying is that the process, especially in the centre of excellence, is going to be flexible depending on who they are dealing with. They're not going to say, here is Bill S-2 and you have to apply it this way, using this language, and implement it this way. Would that be correct?

[Andrew Beynon]

They are going to be arm's length. I respect those institutions. I know them, and they are very sophisticated at dealing with the great differences in circumstances of first nations across the country. It's not that one size fits all. It's not one size fits all under this legislation. It's not one size fits all under FNLM. Depending upon where they are located, FNLM first nations have different matrimonial real property laws.

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

That's very good to know.

Can you tell me a bit about the ratification process that's required in the bill, because I think there have been some misconceptions around that piece as well?

[Jo-Ann Greene]

Certainly. I'll speak to that, Madam Chair.

One of the things I know my colleague has mentioned, but I want to reiterate, is that the bill is to address a gap in protections and rights for women, children, and families living on reserve. It only applies to those first nations that have a reserve community, and it is a first step in trying to address some of these problems that arise.

It's not meant to be comprehensive and address them all. It's for a specific purpose, and to that end the ratification part was one of the ways that, during consultations, women said they wanted some form of having input or knowing about the community's laws. So that is part of one of the...from the original it was included, but it has been changed and Bill S-2 actually has been lowered to set participation rate—

[Stella Ambler, Conservative, Mississauga South, ON]

Thresholds for—