Debates of Feb. 13th, 1998

Louis Riel Day

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

We have two other hon. members who have indicated interest in speaking. The first to advise me was the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry and the second was the hon. member for Cypress Hills—Grasslands.

[Walt Lastewka, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, in co-operation, as this House has seen many times, I will shorten my speech to give the hon. member a chance to also speak.

I rise today to speak to Motion No. 108 to revoke Louis Riel's conviction of August 1, 1885 and to declare a day in his honour.

In discussing the merits of this motion, there is definitely one thing on which we can all agree. That is the important contribution of Louis Riel to the building of this country. In tribute to this contribution this House on March 9, 1992 overwhelmingly adopted a motion to recognize Louis Riel as a founder of Manitoba and a contributor in the development of Confederation. At that time the House was reminded of Riel's many accomplishments and of his stature within the Metis community.

There have been other tributes in the recent past to honour Riel and other Metis leaders in recognition of their contribution to Canada and the Metis movement. As this House is well aware, Thelma J. Chalifoux, a Metis woman from Alberta, was recently summoned to the Senate. Ms. Chalifoux is both the first Metis person and the first aboriginal woman to sit in the Senate. Her appointment was in large part due to her unwavering dedication to Metis issues. Judging from the welcome remarks of her fellow senators, she is expected to represent well this cause and the spirit of Riel.

Louis Riel had a vision for this country over 100 years ago. That vision is alive and well today as articulated by the thousands of Metis who promote Metis culture and revere his memory.

Riel was a man of action, a man who looked forward and into the future. Given my understanding of Riel, I believe that if he were here today he would counsel this House to look forward, not backward, in finding ways to recognize and honour his accomplishments and those of other Metis leaders who contributed greatly to the development of Canada.

He would be urging us to focus our energies on finding solutions to our present day problems and building for the future. He would insist that Metis have an opportunity to participate in the development of these solutions. With that in mind I will spend a few minutes talking about what the federal government is doing today to advance the interests of Metis and off reserve aboriginal people.

As many are aware, the Minister of Natural Resources has been assigned by the Prime Minister to fulfil the role of federal interlocutor for the Metis and off reserve aboriginal peoples. In that role, the minister acts as a point of first contact and where necessary as a facilitator between the Metis and off reserve aboriginal peoples and the appropriate federal ministers and departments.

In addition to that role he oversees the federal government's participation in the tripartite self-government process which is the forum being used to negotiate self-government with Metis and off reserve aboriginal groups.

On August 10, 1995 the federal government announced its approach to the implementation of the inherent right and the negotiations of self-government for aboriginal people including Metis and off reserve aboriginal people.

The federal approach contemplates various practical ways of implementing self-government for Metis and off reserve aboriginal people, including the development of self-government institutions to provide services, the devolution of programs and services and forms of public government.

For the past several years the federal government has participated in bilateral processes with both the Metis National Council and the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples. The bilateral process provides a forum for the congress and the council to discuss issues of utmost importance.

On January 7, 1997 the interlocutor and the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development unveiled “Gathering Strength: Canada's Aboriginal Action Plan”. It is an action plan to renew our relationship with the aboriginal people who are both on and off reserve.

Under the theme of healing and reconciliation in “Gathering strength”, the federal government is seeking appropriate ways to affirm the contributions of the Metis people and to reflect Louis Riel's proper place in Canada's history. The work is under way. It is founded squarely on consultations with the Metis, not arbitrary partisan actions.

In closing I return to my initial comments. Louis Riel was a builder. He was working to build a society where his people could make the important decisions that confront us all in building a better future. He was not a separatist. He wanted in, not out. With the spirit of partnership embodied in “Gathering Strength” we will find appropriate ways to reflect his proper place in our history as a builder.

[Lee Morrison, Reform, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Speaker, human history is nothing but a litany of injustices. In fact, I would venture to say that if there were no injustices there would be no history. This is what gets written down, usually by the winners if there is a contest. It is recorded. This is how we know about things which happen.

If we want to talk about injustice, some of my ancestors were Highland Scots. They suffered injustices and brutality equal in every way to those suffered by the Metis people and for more or less the same reasons. However, I do not lay awake at night bringing down fire and brimstone on the heads of the wicked English. It is over. It is done. There is no need to go back to it.

I have very great problems with people who want to sugar coat history, who want to rewrite history. What happened, happened. It will not help Louis Riel or his descendants for this Parliament to come up with some sort of vacuous proclamation saying that we really did not mean it. The man was hung. He did not, when he had the opportunity, grovel. He did not ask for mercy. He could have taken a plea of insanity and he would have escaped, but he was a man of principle. He walked to the gallows quite firmly and strongly. He was not dragged kicking and screaming. He did not make any particular effort to avoid capture at the end of the rebellion. He would not have even had to go to trial. He could have gone to the United States with Dumont and been scot free, but he chose not to do so.

At this date, if we come forward and say Louis, it was a terrible thing, we are so sorry, that cheapens the man's memory. He was a tough man. He was not a cry baby. I do not think we should, even though I know we have it in our power, say we pardon him.

Actually, he did not have totally clean hands. He set in motion a rebellion which cost lives. Because he was not a very good general he unnecessarily cost the lives of many of his own people. If he had listened to Gabriel Dumont, the results of the rebellion might have been far different.

The man, let us face it, had a big ego. He wanted to be in charge. He did what he chose to do. He refused to stop Middleton before he got to the Saskatchewan River. He could have done so with Dumont's strategies.

I do not think that at this late stage it makes any sense at all for us even to be debating this in the House. We have more important things to do than to debate gestures. Let us face it, this would just be a gesture.

My advice to this House is to get on with it. We have some very real problems in this country which affect not only Metis people but all of us. Those problems are what we should be dealing with. We should not be debating what happened 113 years ago.

[Suzanne Tremblay, Bloc, Rimouski—Mitis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, under Standing Order 95(2) I am entitled to conclude, and I would like to take the remaining few minutes in this debate to say that we have heard some things—

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but under Standing Order 95 the time has expired.

[Lee Morrison, Reform, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I seek unanimous consent to allow the member another three or four minutes to do her wrap up.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

Is it agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

The Chair needs to make the point that in Private Members' Business, if time remains, it is customary that the mover of the motion has five minutes to wrap up in the absence of any other member rising to speak.

Therefore, if we are to go beyond that time, we have to ask for unanimous consent, which the member from Grasslands has so generously requested and the House is quite happy to oblige. Those are the rules.

[Suzanne Tremblay, Bloc, Rimouski—Mitis, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that we have taken this hour of debate to place the matter in proper perspective.

I have listened most attentively to the speeches made by my various colleagues. I acknowledge that the motion merits improvement. I trust that the Liberal Party, which is in the process of drafting a bill to settle this problem to everyone's satisfaction, will be able to take the texts that have been used today, analyze them thoroughly and try to see how this difficulty of having such ambiguity still surrounding one of the founders of this country, Louis Riel, can be truly resolved.

I was somewhat surprised to see that my colleague knew Louis Riel so intimately as to be able to tell what his feelings were at the time of his trial, but the fact is that among those who asked that Riel be tried in Saskatchewan instead of Manitoba and who wrote Minister Campbell and the Prime Minister at the time, Mr. Macdonald, was the person who presided the appeal court to which Louis Riel appealed his sentence. Riel was a very strong and very fair-minded man who realized he had been treated unfairly. He appealed in spite of the fact that this person was judge and jury.

I suggest my colleagues read this month's issue of Canadian Lawyer . They will realize that the government was wrong, that Louis Riel was wronged. The historical context must be taken int account of course, but something can and should be done. Unlike my hon. colleague and his people, the Métis are no longer recognized as a people and they have lost a large part of their culture. What they are asking us is to restore their right to their own way of life and I wish the House would act on this as soon as possible.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

The time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business has now expired and this item is dropped from the Order Paper .

It being 2.33 p.m., the House stands adjourned until Monday next at 11 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 2.33 p.m.)