Status of Women Committee on April 25th, 2013

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

If we could get the information on what actual public events took place, these consultations you're referencing, since December 1, 2011, in this Parliament, that's really what we're looking for. If you could provide the committee with that information, that would be very helpful.

Going back to the previous round of meetings, we note that in the report of the ministerial representative, it was pointed out that:

The timelines were often viewed as too short, not allowing time to review and properly understand the complexities of the issue. Some participants felt that [Indian Affairs] should have gone directly to individual community members and that information should have been more readily available to everyone and not just disseminated via the internet.

I want to also pause on that piece. As somebody who represents 33 first nations in Manitoba—18 of them are isolated and many of them do not have the kind of Internet service, let alone other services, that we benefit from in urban centres—this poses some real problems. The fact that this was expressed and is in the report is an indication obviously of how many people felt about this consultation.

Just moving to the recommendations made by the ministerial representative, we hear about the 30 recommendations. What happened to the other three recommendations that were not brought forward?

[Andrew Beynon, Director General, Community Opportunities Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Perhaps I could just say this while my colleague is looking that up, Madam Chair. On the request for some details on the exact consultations, which the member asked for, we would be prepared to share with the committee a list that provides information on the consultation sessions held before the formulation of Bill S-2 and afterwards.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Thank you for that, and also working to have real timelines on that, on the before and after.... I mean, Bill S-2 is not Bill S-4. It's Bill S-2, right?

[Andrew Beynon]

Right.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

So we'd like to get that information, but I'm wondering.... Those three recommendations that weren't adhered to were very critical. If you're not able to answer, I'll just move on to my next question.

[Jo-Ann Greene]

In response to that, Madam Chair, of the 33 legislative initiatives and the recommendations that aren't directly related in the bill, one was the title, which I spoke to earlier. It was that the title we have now, which was referred to by the AFN recommendation, for the title that it does now have.... The other recommendation, inherent jurisdiction...feels that it wasn't addressed because there are provisions for negotiating a self-government agreement, and....

Sorry.

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

If I may, Madam Chair, the other recommendation was the inclusion of a provision of review of the bill after a certain period of time.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

How about the piece around the non-legislative measures? It's obviously a real concern around costs incurred to the bands, to the legal systems, and the fact that we're not dealing with.... There are about 40 women's shelters across the country on reserves, out of some 600 first nations, which is obviously completely inadequate. This bill has nothing to do with that.

We're very concerned, obviously, and a number of first nations and stakeholders raised real concerns about how Bill S-2 will simply not end violence against women when all of these other matters are not being dealt with, and when the investments aren't being made by the federal government. Why aren't the non-legislative measures, which are critical, being addressed at all?

[Andrew Beynon]

Maybe I would start the answer to that by saying that with regard to the centre of excellence that was referred to earlier, we will have to consider after, or if, the legislation is adopted by Parliament how the centre of excellence will be set up and exactly what the funding level will be.

I would just share with the committee that in the proposals that have been published so far, inviting aboriginal institutions or organizations to consider becoming the centre of excellence if the legislation is passed, the public documents identified a maximum potential funding of approximately $4.8 million over a period of five years. Now, that's subject to, again, the legislation being passed and subject to Treasury Board approval of the level of funding if the legislation is passed, but it gives a sense of the investment.

The other area that I would flag for the consideration of committee members is that in our implementation planning there is consideration of some funding for the RCMP and the Department of Public Safety to assist in advancing the legislation and interactions with the provinces.

I will say that I understand the point the member is making about the broad range of issues that really are at stake. There are housing issues, women's shelters issues, and improving schools issues. There are many issues. On that front, I can only say that these are some of the implementation investments. Those other issues, I think, are a point that the committee can consider and make recommendations on, but in the legislation, Bill S-2, we did not choose to put right in the provisions of it issues around implementation, such as funding of women's shelters.

[Niki Ashton, NDP, Churchill, MB]

Madam Chair, how long do I have?

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

Your time is up.

We'll move right along to Ms. Young.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

Thank you.

I'd like to thank you for being here today. I'm going to ask you a set of very quick questions, because I find that this is such a very important and critical issue and we are sort of lacking some fundamental grounding data on it. If you can supply that to me...and I think that within yourselves you'd know who should answer. After that, I'd like to ask some broader questions.

First of all, we know that there are some 600 first nation bands. How many of them have already enacted matrimonial property rights legislation? If they have done so, which of them have done it under the First Nations Land Management Act and which have done it through self-government agreements?

[Andrew Beynon]

We could provide very precise figures, but I'll give you just a quick sense of the answer now.

First nations that operate under self-government provisions have the authority to cover matrimonial real property. They're not subject to this. The First Nations Land Management Act provides for authority of first nations to adopt their own matrimonial real property laws.

The first nations land management regime is expanding. A lot of first nations are expressing an interest in opting in to that legislation. As I recall, the figure most recently was that 22 first nations have moved to the stage of having adopted matrimonial real property laws under FNLM. I know personally that there is a lot of work amongst other FNLM first nations to move to adopting their own matrimonial real property laws.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

In other words, this legislation is existing. It has happened in 22 first nations. So we are in fact dragging the other ones...or providing for women and children at risk, in violent situations, and bringing them into the 21st century. Is that correct?

[Andrew Beynon]

Yes. I would agree that there is experience, amongst FNLM first nations, for example, with matrimonial real property laws. I would fully expect that the centre of excellence, in going forward, would look at the provisional federal rules, examples of matrimonial real property laws, including those developed already by FNLM first nations.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

We talked a lot yesterday about violence against women and children in the home, and about why the emergency orders are such an important part of Bill S-2, but nobody has bandied about any figures in terms of how much violence there is.

I think the minister said something about 19%, which is three times the amount that other non-first nations situations have. That, I would think, is quite a bit—three times the amount of violence against women and children.

Obviously we know that emergency orders protect lives. Do we know how many deaths there have been in this area, and what we're anticipating in terms of saving lives once Bill S-2 is enacted?

[Jo-Ann Greene]

Perhaps I can provide a little bit of background to that.

There have been studies done. I don't have specific figures, but we do have available a summary of a report that provides some of the situations where emergency protection orders would have assisted those women—and men—who were in peril, or who were in situations of domestic violence, and would probably have de-escalated the situation.

An important part of the emergency protection orders is that it provides for up to 90 days, on an immediate basis, for exclusive occupation on application. In conversation with some Alberta managers of first nation shelters, one of the attendees was excited to hear about it and asked if it could be extended. In their community, their approach is holistic. They work with the offender and the family to try to rehabilitate the family. Sometimes it takes longer than the 90 days, so she was hoping that an extension could be sought.

So that is provided for as well. In the Senate, the amendment provided that now the extension, or the changing of the order beyond the 90 days, could be at the discretion of the judge. Originally in the bill, it was just an additional 90 days, for a total of 180 days; now a judge has the discretion to extend that.

That would probably address...in that community, if they made representation, they might be able to extend it beyond that.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

Beyond the safety aspects, which you've just given us—thank you so much—I used to sit on the YWCA board in Vancouver, and we actually built residential housing for these situations, for these women who had to be sheltered.

You've mentioned studies, obviously, and research, and we've heard the testimony that has been given regarding women who wanted to stay in their homes. Would you say it's a better model for women and children to stay in their homes as opposed to being sent off to shelters?

[Jo-Ann Greene]

From...well, also as a first nations person, it's important, I think, for children and women who have their support system in the community to be able to maintain that in their community and to maintain their connection to their culture.

A study done quite a few years ago found that it would be better to have emergency protection orders available in all provincial and territorial family law. They provide such important protection to help de-escalate family violence, in some instances, and they potentially also help avoid criminal charges, if they can be used in time to avoid escalation of the violence.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

Given the... Sorry, go ahead with a quick answer.

[Andrew Beynon]

A very quick answer. I think the point for the committee to consider, as I think you alluded earlier, is a question of a legislative gap. So if it were adopted, the legislation would not say women and children have to stay in the matrimonial home on reserve, it simply creates a different option. Some may want to go to emergency shelters in Vancouver or elsewhere, but right now the problem is that the option doesn't exist as something that the courts can enforce on reserve.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

That other women have. All other women have that.

[Andrew Beynon]

Other women in other communities have a different set of options.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

Exactly.

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

Your time's up.

We are moving right along to Ms. Bennett.