Status of Women Committee on May 1st, 2013

[Joan Jack]

Yes, I felt that.

Of course, who would not agree that the women and children should have the house? That's not the issue. The issue is that women and children—it's my opinion—who are suffering from alcoholism and addiction, which is the major cause of domestic violence, want to heal and want their family strengthened. If somebody had come and asked me what I would want to do, I would want to protect grandparents' rights to raise the children and have the house, because often three or four generations are living in the same house we're talking about, mould aside. It's really the parents, both of them, who should go and heal, sober up, and the grandparents should get the kids and the house while they're fixing their stuff, and then come home and raise their kids.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

I don't know if you've had a chance to see all the wrinkles in this bill—and it's fine if you haven't—but one of them is that if there is somebody else, like a grandparent or someone in the house for whom they are providing care, they will also have the protection under this law to be able to stay in the house.

To some degree, it might have addressed a little bit of what you're getting at.

[Joan Jack]

For sure. I did a fast look-through, but really my point about section 35 remains.

When they did all that work, Wendy said “concurrent jurisdiction”, and I don't think she meant to implement it under 91(24). I think she meant what Chief Baird was able to do in British Columbia, where there is a model of concurrent jurisdiction, which her people are satisfied with, not this more fancy Indian Act stuff.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Yes.

Maybe I'll just move over to you, Chief Baird. It sounds like you've done some really innovative things in Tsawwassen, and I appreciate the fact that you came forward to tell us about them.

You also mentioned that your approach is pretty controversial. I wonder if you think it would be an approach on which you could get consensus from all 631 bands in the country.

[Kim Baird]

I call consensus the “c” word. It's very hard to get in any one community, let alone across the country.

But to your point, perhaps there will be some first nations women who now have legal rights, who will be able to take advantage of them in certain circumstances. For those individuals, I think that will be an improvement in this particular bill. But I don't think it's going to have the reach to resolve in places that are more remote, and those kinds of things.

Again, while I appreciate the intent and the intention behind it, I just think it's a square peg in a round hole, and it's fraught with difficulties because of the myriad of interjurisdictional issues that need to be sorted out. In our case, we negotiated our way through those to have a system that would actually work, not for marital property, but for other things, including enforcing treaty laws in the provincial court system.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

May I then just ask you about the centre of excellence, because there has been $4.8 million set aside for a centre of excellence so that bands can actually take over and decide how they want these issues handled? Do you see that as having any potential for bands to actually utilize that? Is that a way of their actually taking responsibility and authority on this issue?

[Kim Baird]

Any resources that first nations can take advantage of would be helpful. It depends.

I have run a first nation with a small population. With the 300 competing priorities we have on law development, something that is obscure to the members of my community would be very challenging to put on the front burner, or even to ever get off the back burner. That's just the reality.

To build that capacity, to engage the community, and to make it their priority is going to be very, very challenging for many first nations.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Okay.

Maybe if I can—

[The Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

I have to interrupt you.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Okay.

Thank you both very much.

[The Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

We'll now give the floor to Ms. Bennett.

You have seven minutes.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Merci.

Thank you both for coming, because it's a tough issue. I think what you're hearing from the other side, and I quote, is, “We believe it will help.”

I think what we're hearing from you is that you're not so sure it's going to help in the same way that Wendy Grant-John said that a legislative tool on its own won't work, unless there are the non-legislative supports in place.

This government is saying it has consulted broadly. Could you tell the difference between consultation and an information session, in terms of listening?

[Kim Baird]

Our treaty consultation is a very formal process that's set out; it isn't just listening one way. It's taking concerns into account and modifying the approach to show that those concerns have been listened to. It's following through on why some concerns weren't followed through. It's a set process with timelines, with adequate information and adequate capacity to review the information.

Consultation with a capital “C” is a defined legal term in our treaty.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

So for Bill S-2 as a product...what we're hearing is that it doesn't reflect what was heard, in that there have been a lot of concerns like yours expressed. I think the issue Councillor Jack put forward, the issue of what it is actually like in a remote community without access to a court, with maybe a protection order, where women still have to flee because they're not feeling safe or they don't have access to counselling...that this is not the way forward. Is that it?

[Joan Jack]

Yes. As I said, I sat in the courtroom in Berens for four months. I watched our young men being hauled out of the community because of the process, because of the justice system, or the lack thereof.

This will just be another item that will cause the men to be taken out of Berens River, when really, as I said, the families need to be supported. That's a collective approach—not the best interests of the child and that whole regime of...that's the wrong solution, the wrong approach.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Could you just explain again what concurrent jurisdiction means? Will Bill S-2 apply at Tsawwassen First Nation?

[Kim Baird]

No, it won't. That's the short answer.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Because you already have—

[Kim Baird]

Because our treaty has set out all our jurisdictions. The inherent right is set out, our law-making powers, and the treaty sets out which laws apply if the laws conflict—

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

You already have that laid out, but in many—

[Kim Baird]

And that's protected in the Constitution.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Of your...?

[Kim Baird]

The Canadian Constitution.

[Joan Jack]

It's through section 35.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Through section 35?