House of Commons Hansard #12 of the 36th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was treaty.
Nisga'A Final Agreement ActGovernment Orders
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)
I am going to deal with one issue at a time.
First, I am not going to ask the member for Langley—Abbotsford to withdraw “lied” because it was not directed at any member or any ministry. It was a generalization. However without question the use of the word, in my estimation at this time in the way it was used I am not going to deem unparliamentary but it was certainly not gentlemanly.
Peter MacKay Progressive Conservative Pictou—Antigonish—Guysborough, NS
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I do not want to further aggravate the House with respect to this issue. It was very obvious and should have been obvious to everyone, including the House leader for the official opposition. When matters such as this debate were discussed, a blind man on a galloping horse could have seen that this issue was going to arise today.
For there to be any suggestion by members of the Reform Party that they did not realize that this debate was going to be extended, it was discussed openly at the House leaders meeting yesterday and this is just misleading the House.
Chuck Strahl Reform Fraser Valley, BC
Mr. Speaker, I will ask the man galloping blindly off into the distance who just spoke to remember that on the Thursday question last week which details the business for this week, not only was it not discussed at the House leaders meeting, but the government House leader said that we were not even going to debate Nisga'a today.
The member cannot say that this was openly discussed at the House leaders meeting. The government House leader unilaterally changed the schedule a couple of times. We have asked twice to extend the hours so we could plan an evening debate and have been denied twice by the government and the galloping horseman down there. They would not do it.
Nisga'A Final Agreement ActGovernment Orders
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)
This has been most enlightening to me and I am sure it has been most enlightening to everyone watching. I am sure that the next House leaders meeting will be really interesting. However, we have five minutes left for debate. I am asking if there are any members who would care to rise on debate.
Gary Lunn Reform Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Mr. Speaker, what we are seeing here is absolutely unacceptable. I will focus on what has happened here in the last few minutes.
A number of people in our caucus have been asking to debate this issue, including myself. I came here because I happened to be working late in my office. I had no intention of being here. I have been asking to speak on the Nisga'a agreement and I am slated about 20 speakers down the list. Most of our people have gone home. In order that we can have an opportunity to debate this later, we asked that we debate this late into the evening.
To focus on the Nisga'a agreement itself, I have spent considerable time reading it from cover to cover. I have spoken to some of the top legal authorities in this area. I talked with Mel Smith at length. He is a very respected man in the legal community and I would suggest he is probably one of the authorities on this matter, if not in Canada then in North America.
This agreement at the end of the day will polarize the native and non-native communities. We as a society and the previous governments over the last 30 to 40 years should be absolutely embarrassed by how the first nations people have been treated. Very few non-natives would trade places with native persons on any of the reserves in Canada. We have driven in wedges. We have not made life any better for them. We have taken away their dignity and self-worth.
All of a sudden we have come up with the famous Nisga'a treaty. We have created another fork in the road. We will only drive wedges between the native and non-native communities. We will polarize those people. We will only make matters worse. By no stretch of the imagination are we helping those people.
We have created another level of government. Where I live in British Columbia, in my own backyard, there are five levels of government. We are now creating another whole bureaucracy and system of government.
I suppose the most troubling aspect for me is that there is absolutely no provision in the Nisga'a agreement where a Nisga'a person living on the Nisga'a lands has the absolute right to title to the property they hold. Some people would suggest it is within the power of the band or the minister to decide if they want to have title to the property but they do not have the right to have title to the property.
Many Canadians have used the title to their property as collateral for bank loans, to launch business ventures, fund prospects, a whole host of things, as have I. One takes a lot of pride in one's property and in building up self-worth in what one does. People in the native community cannot do that. They live in horrific conditions.
I met with two chiefs last Saturday in my riding. We went over some of the problems on their reserves with respect to housing and other things on which they have to deal with government. They do not have much faith in the process. They say they are promised one thing by the government and then the door is shut on them.
The problems in the aboriginal community have been culminating over the last 30 to 40 years. They are massive and cannot be solved overnight.
There are some very good parts to the Nisga'a treaty which I fully support, but there are some fatal flaws which will make matters even worse and which will drive wedges between communities. I ask all members to really look at the treaty and the government propaganda and make a decision for themselves because it will not help matters on the reserves.
A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.
Gurmant Grewal Reform Surrey Central, BC
Mr. Speaker, during question period last Friday, I asked why the government was promoting the Nisga'a treaty that abolishes equal opportunity.
The Liberals have fixed it so that success in our country is now based on race. Hard work is no longer the factor that determines how successful one can be making a living in forestry, fishing or mining.
The government has quashed the principle of equality with the Nisga'a treaty. It is assigning democratic rights according to race not based on needs. Canadians find that offensive and an attack on the very foundation of our country. Equality is at the core of what it is to be Canadian.
Imagine my surprise when the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans jumped gleefully to his feet to address my question. Hansard shows that his carrying on required the Speaker to ask for calm. In his blathering, the fisheries minister attacked, with rhetoric and misinformation, the Sikhs willing to join the RCMP. What a peculiar notion. Where does he get this stuff from? As a Sikh, I find his remarks offensive. As a Sikh himself, the minister should apologize.
At the Reform Party convention in 1996, the Reform Party passed a resolution supporting a change in the dress code of our RCMP. The fisheries minister, like his government, is living in the past. He should be kept up to date. If he was up to date, he would know that he was wrong about the Reform Party policy.
Later the same day during question period, I rose again and asked point blank why the fisheries minister supported a treaty that segregates Canadians and creates inequality. I informed him that the Reform Party believed in the equality of all Canadians, and that was why, as a Sikh member of the party, I was living proof. The Reform Party of Canada has more members representing ethnic minorities than any other party in the House.
Finally, I challenged the minister to a debate on the Nisga'a treaty in Vancouver, B.C. If the Nisga'a agreement is so representative of the Liberals' position on equality, why does the minister not debate the issue with me? By the minister's refusal, it is obvious to me that he is uncomfortable with the government's bill on the Nisga'a agreement. The Liberal government's bill on the Nisga'a agreement creates inequality for aboriginal women and maintains band control over individual property rights, among other important issues.
After my second question, the Speaker of the House gave the minister an out by saying that the minister did not have to respond, and the minister chickened out again. He refused to answer my challenge. Instead, he attacked me personally based on my religion. He should apologize.
Is he refusing to debate me? I do not know. What is he afraid of? I have no clue. I again ask: Why is the government promoting the Nisga'a treaty that abolishes equal opportunity for all Canadians?
David Iftody LiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to be here tonight in the final closing hours of an exciting day to respond to the questions and concerns raised by the member from British Columbia.
I will just repeat a number of things that I think are important with respect to clarification on this matter and some of the concerns that he has raised in the House today and on other occasions.
First, it is very important to recognize that section 15 of the charter, the equality sections of the charter of rights and freedoms, apply here to all people. There is no distinction based on race or gender. Those sections are very clear.
Second, with respect to the Nisga'a legislation, section 28 of the charter provides even further clarification on those equalities. If that were not enough, in the 1983 amending conference on the charter of rights and freedoms, section 35(4) was put in the constitution to guarantee that wherever we have aboriginal rights in Canada they would not detract from men or women in any unequal way.
I commend my colleagues, the Liberal members from British Columbia, who have been working on the bill. We debated Bill C-9 in the House this afternoon and we will continue to debate it in the days to come. The opening section of the legislation states quite emphatically that the Nisga'a agreement is subject to the charter of rights and freedoms. This is not a distinction between people based on race and creating inequalities. This is an opportunity for Canadians and all of us to do the right thing, to embrace the Nisga'a people and to welcome them into Canada.
I would remind the hon. member of those first nations people in northern Quebec in 1995 when we had a referendum. They filed into the polls at 40-below to support Canada and Canadians because they wanted to be part of the country. I can tell the House with certainty that the Nisga'a people want to be part of the country as well.
Nisga'A Final Agreement ActAdjournment Proceedings
The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)
The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to be adopted. Accordingly, the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).
(The House adjourned at 6.37 p.m.)