Madam Speaker, I am proud to be taking part in this debate, which is a very important one for the Nisga'a and the Government of Canada.
I think it is important for all members to understand how the Nisga'a final agreement was negotiated within the Canadian legal context.
The Nisga'a final agreement was negotiated with an eye to the rights and interests of all Canadians and, as recommended by the courts in recent cases such as Delgamuukw, is intended to reconcile the rights of the Nisga'a with the title and sovereignty of the crown.
Although all components of the Nisga'a final agreement fully reflect the Canadian legal context, it must be linked to the Canadian constitution, Canadian laws and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
First, let us look at how the Nisga'a final agreement relates to the Canadian constitution. In fact, the Nisga'a final agreement recognizes the constitution as the supreme law of Canada. No amendment to the constitution is therefore necessary to give effect to the Nisga'a final agreement, and the agreement does not alter the Canadian constitution.
Although this agreement includes self-government provisions, the legislative authority of the Nisga'a will be exercised simultaneously with existing authority.
The following are a few examples of how the Nisga'a final agreement was negotiated with a view to the Canadian constitutional framework.
The Nisga'a final agreement states clearly that it does not alter the constitution. The intention of the parties was for the Nisga'a final agreement to be interpreted in a manner consistent with the constitution.
The preamble to the Nisga'a Final Agreement Act states that the constitution is the supreme law of Canada and reaffirms that the Nisga'a final agreement does not alter the constitution. The courts may refer to this preamble when interpreting the Nisga'a final agreement act.
Reform Party members have proposed that we delete from the bill the clear and unequivocal statement by all parties that “the Nisga'a Final Agreement states that the Agreement does not alter the Constitution of Canada”.
What problems do they want to create? What confusion are they stirring up with this amendment? What is more, they are also proposing an amendment to the wording of the preamble as it relates to application of the constitution. It is certain that Reform Party members cannot have it both ways.
The proposed preamble makes the intentions of the parties clear and will assist the courts in their interpretation of the Nisga'a final agreement.
Let us touch on the charter of rights and freedoms as it applies to the Nisga'a final agreement. I want to point out that one of the general provisions of the final agreement calls for the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to apply to the Nisga'a government in respect of all matters within its authority, bearing in mind the free and democratic character of the Nisga'a government as set out in the agreement.
It is therefore clear that the charter will apply to all activities of the Nisga'a government. Consequently, the charter will apply not only to legislation enacted by the Nisga'a government but also to other activities, such as the decision to hire someone or to issue licences. The charter will protect all individuals who might be affected by the decisions of the Nisga'a government, not just the Nisga'a people.
The last part of this article—“bearing in mind the free and democratic nature of Nisga'a Government”—is similar to the terms used in section 1 of the charter, which indicate clearly that the rights conferred by the charter are not absolute.
Governments, including the Nisga'a government, must justify any limits to be imposed on the rights guaranteed under the charter. This expression shows therefore that the Nisga'a final agreement provides for the establishment of a government of a free and democratic nature. A Nisga'a government established in accordance with these provisions could invoke section 1 of the charter like any other government in Canada.
The Nisga'a have supported the application of the charter since the conclusion of the agreement in principle in 1996. The language of the final agreement, as I have said, follows the wording of the charter to facilitate its application.
In closing, the Reform Party has proposed an amendment under which the Nisga'a government would be treated differently from other governments in Canada. Does that make sense? Does this further the integration of the Nisga'a into Canadian society which we are all seeking?
The Reform amendments run contrary to the desire of all of us here to see the Nisga'a government integrated with the other governments in Canada. Is that really what they want?