Debates of May 15th, 2008

Komagata Maru Incident

[Nina Grewal, Conservative, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today on behalf of the constituents of Fleetwood--Port Kells to participate in the debate on Motion No. 469.

Although the member for Brampton—Springdale is now aggressively working to have her motion passed, during her first term she was part of a Liberal government that refused to apologize for the Komagata Maru tragedy. Now, along with a couple of other MPs, including one from the NDP, she seems to have suddenly woken up, and they are racing before one another to take credit after our Prime Minister had already announced in August 2006 that this government would consult with the community on redressing this issue.

The current Prime Minister is the first prime minister to acknowledge the Komagata Maru tragedy. For years, Liberal leaders have rejected our calls for justice and fair treatment.

The issue of a Komagata Maru apology was first brought to the floor of the House in October 1997 and many times after by then MP Gurmant Grewal. He also tabled a petition in 2002 asking for the government to apologize. The petition was signed by thousands at the Gadri Babiyian Da Mela and organized by Sahib Thind, president of the Professor Mohan Singh Memorial Foundation.

I commend the Conservative government and our Prime Minister, who has been working on redressing Komagata Maru since 2006. Last weekend in Surrey, B.C., the Secretary of State for Multiculturalism and Canadian Identity laid out the policy of our government when he said:

Our government is working toward an official apology for the Komagata Maru incident. [The apology] will flow directly from the Prime Minister's historic recognition of the tragic nature of the Komagata Maru incident, as well as the spirit of the Historical Recognition Programs, whose goal is to ensure that immigration restrictions are properly recognized and commemorated.

This government has already kept its promise and has apologized to the Chinese Canadian community for the discriminatory head tax.

Canada's history is filled with tales of racism. No one is proud of the expulsion of the Acadians, residential schools for aboriginal children, the wartime internment of Japanese Canadians, or the turning away of the Komagata Maru.

On May 23, 1914, the Komagata Maru arrived in Vancouver harbour with 376 passengers who were British subjects from India. They were not allowed to land on Canadian soil because they did not comply with the continuous journey requirement.

They were marooned on board the ship in the harbour for two months, in virtually a floating prison. The passengers were denied their legal rights and access to justice. They were denied basic necessities like food, water and medicines. This was inhuman treatment. Excessive force was finally used to evict them from Canadian waters.

Then, after the departure, Canadian authorities conspired with the British government of India. Twenty-six returning passengers were shot dead upon return to India. Twenty remained missing and the remaining were jailed and their properties confiscated.

The Komagata Maru incident is one of the most poignant moments in Canadian history and illustrates the extreme racism that once existed in Canada. Upon arriving in British Columbia, early East Indians encountered hate, ostracism and negative stereotyping that resulted in discriminatory immigration restrictions, social and economic deprivation, and political disenfranchisement.

Discrimination was legislated, legal and official. Injustices, humiliation, prejudice and exploitation were rampant. The Komagata Maru incident was not an error but rather an intended, deliberate action of the divisive, exclusionist and racist policies of the provincial and federal governments of the day.

These policies included: a head tax on Chinese immigrants; keeping families separated; and threats to expel legitimate Canadian Sikh immigrants to the British Honduras. As well, the requirement to possess unusually high amounts of cash as a precondition for the South Asians to arrive in Canada was nothing short of a head tax.

The normal fee for the European immigrants was $50, and they were offered free land and travel subsidies to immigrate to Canada, while south Asians were required to have $200. Denying the right to vote stopped south Asians from serving on juries, school boards or in the military. They were denied access to provincial and federal jobs including informal denial of access to public facilities, housing, education, and professional jobs such as law, pharmacy positions and medicine as well as other high-status employment.

In 1913, 36 British subjects who came from India in a Japanese ship, the Panama Maru, were refused admission by the immigration department. They challenged the two orders in council. The B.C. Supreme Court's Chief Justice Hunter accepted their contention and held both orders in council ultra vires of the Immigration Act. They won their case in court and their deportation was stopped.

The government, determined not to give in, redrafted the orders to get around the chief justice's opinion and yet another order in council was introduced which made it illegal for artisans or labourers to enter Canada. The total exclusion of Indians was achieved by passing a series of orders in council.

Historical wrongs can never be undone, but they need to be acknowledged, confessed and corrected. There can never be enough compensation or compassion expressed and there is no way, now, that complete justice can be served.

The consensus in the south Asian community is that a sincere official apology is sufficient and it is not demanding any compensation.

Redressing a historical wrong is difficult and controversial, but it is important to do the right thing to heal the wounds, restore community pride, and console the descendants of the victims. It will help in serving as a caution and preventing such incidents, actions and behaviour from happening in the future.

It will help in the healing process and clear the air. The oppressed remain oppressed until redressed.

With redress, future generations and new Canadians will be able to raise their head in pride as their dignity is restored. They will salute their forefathers, provide loyalty, dedication and commitment, and contribute and move forward as equal and patriotic citizens of Canada.

The painful memory of the Komagata Maru inspires us all to continue to build on our nation's reputation as a land that embraces tolerance above intolerance, diversity above discrimination, and openness above exclusion.

The Komagata Maru tragedy is a reminder of just how far we have come as a society since that incident. We are a stronger and better country than we were 94 years ago. We are better and stronger precisely because of the contribution of all those who have crossed oceans to share this land.

Today, there are more than one million people of Indian descent living in Canada. They have worked hard and prospered, and Canada has prospered because of them. Our society is richer and more inclusive today because of the different waves of new immigrants.

Successive governments have failed to offer redress for the Komagata Maru for nearly a century. It is this Conservative government that has stood and addressed this issue. The Prime Minister has acknowledged the Komagata Maru incident. He announced that the government would consult with the community to re-address the issue, and he has kept his promise. Last month, at the Vaisakhi celebration hosted by me on Parliament Hill, the Prime Minister commended the contribution of the Sikhs to Canada. He said, “As Canadians we believe we learn from history, but we are not enslaved by it. We put old arguments behind us, in order to focus on the opportunities that lie before us and I especially know that Canadians of Sikh faith will always be leaders in moving our country forward unified, strong and free.

He was absolutely correct.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a special privilege for me to add my comments to the debate on Motion No. 469. The motion calls for Canada to formally apologize for the Komagata Maru incident which took place many years ago.

The proposed apology is of great importance to many of my constituents in Abbotsford. As you know, Mr. Speaker, Abbotsford is home to some 26,000 residents of Indian origin, the majority of them from the province of Punjab in India. Most of them are recent immigrants or are the children and grandchildren of immigrants from India. They are hard-working, creative and entrepreneurial, and place a high value on caring for their extended families.

Canada has a well deserved reputation as being one of the world's most inclusive societies. We value our multicultural fabric and vigorously defend our personal freedoms, democratic traditions, basic human rights and, of course, the rule of law. However, this was not always so.

Today, our government is called upon to acknowledge and apologize for a grievous wrong inflicted on a group of would be immigrants, whose only desire was to build a better life for themselves and their families. I speak, of course, of the Komagata Maru incident. That tragic event represents one of the few dark chapters in Canada's otherwise illustrious history.

The Komagata Maru was a Japanese steamship that, in 1914, sailed from Hong Kong to Vancouver carrying 376 passengers from the Punjab in India. When the ship arrived in Canada, only 24 of the passengers were allowed to disembark. The remainder, although they were all British subjects, were not allowed to land because of Canada's racist exclusion laws and rules intended to keep Asians from entering Canada.

Although the decision to turn away this group of immigrants may have been technically legal at the time, in hindsight, most of us would agree that the decision was discriminatory. It was common knowledge that these exclusion laws were only applied to Indian immigrants.

However, that is not the end of the story. The refusal by Canadian authorities to allow the passengers of that ship to land had tragic consequences for the passengers. In fact, 20 of the passengers were killed and 9 injured during a riot that followed the ship's return to India.

Despite this tragic affair, what is remarkable is that hundreds of thousands of people from the Indian subcontinent have continued to make Canada their adoptive home. Today, Canada's Indo-Canadian community has grown to about three-quarters of a million people. They have been instrumental in helping us build a vibrant economy and an immensely tolerant society. They have become an important part of the multicultural mosaic that we as Canadians are so proud of today.

It has been said that those who ignore the lessons of history are bound to repeat them. Let this not be the experience of our great country. It is for that reason that I am pleased to say that our government is taking action to address this stain upon our national history. Last week, the hon. Jason Kenney, Secretary of State for Multiculturalism and Canadian Identity--

[The Acting Speaker, Royal Galipeau]

Order. The hon. member for Abbotsford, as gentle as he is, should not refer to other members of the House by name, except by their titles.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for that correction.

The Secretary of State for Multiculturalism and Canadian Identity announced that our government would issue a formal apology to at long last address a regrettable act that happened nearly 100 years ago.

This notice to deliver a formal apology represents the product of an ongoing process of dialogue with the Indo-Canadian community. In 2006 at the Gadri Babiyian Da Mela festival in Surrey, B.C. the Prime Minister acknowledged the lasting contribution that Indo-Canadians have made to our national prosperity and cultural diversity.

In that speech the Prime Minister acknowledged the Komagata Maru incident. He announced that our Conservative government would consult with the Indo-Canadian community on the best way to commemorate the sad chapter in our history. Shortly thereafter my colleague, the member Kootenay—Columbia, led public and private consultations on the infamous Komagata Maru incident.

These consultations included a total of 41 meetings with community leaders and organizations representing a broad cross-section of the Indo-Canadian community: professionals, community and business leaders, journalists and academics. Even descendants of passengers from the Komagata Maru were involved in the discussions.

The result was a strong call for the recognition of the hardships associated with the Komagata Maru incident. There was also a healthy discussion on the subject of what an appropriate official statement from the government might include. Most importantly, this process of dialogue led to one thing that has been lacking for almost 100 years: action to right a historical wrong.

At this point I need to ask a hard question: why did it take so long for us to get to where we are today?

The previous Liberal government had 13 long years to provide a meaningful response to the Komagata Maru incident, yet did absolutely nothing but raise false hopes and expectations, and disappoint the Indo-Canadian community. The hard truth is that on this vital issue of historical injustice the former Liberal government had the chance to do the right thing and simply did not get the job done.

I know that this could be said about many issues on which the previous government dithered, delayed and did nothing, yet on an issue of historical injustice, one would expect an expedited response. None was forthcoming from previous Liberal governments.

[The Acting Speaker, Royal Galipeau]

Order. It is with regret that I must interrupt the hon. member for Abbotsford. The hon. member for Hull--Aylmer is rising on a point of order.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I would like you to pay particular attention to the comments made by the member opposite and verify their relevance in a debate that should not be politicized in such a crass manner, as in the case of the comments I believe I heard.

[The Acting Speaker, Royal Galipeau]

The hon. member for Abbotsford has three minutes left and I am sure he will get back to the point. I hope he will be accorded the same courtesy that other members were accorded, and who were not interrupted while they were speaking. The hon. member for Abbotsford has the floor.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this was certainly on the point. We are talking about a historical wrong and we are talking about Canada's historical record in not acting on this injustice.

The previous Liberal government did absolutely nothing to address this wrong. Our Conservative government is actually getting it done and the member on the Liberal side knows that. I would appreciate him refraining from interfering in the comments that I am making.

The Chinese Canadian community knows what it is like to watch the issue of a head tax fester while Liberal governments promised action and delivered absolutely nothing. In fact, previous Liberal governments even made the outrageous claim that they could not issue formal apologies for fear of the federal government attracting possible legal liability. What a cop-out.

Let me just briefly read one quote. This is from the current Liberal member of Parliament for Richmond, British Columbia, who was the secretary of state at the time. This is a quote from the National Post: “He says an apology and compensation are never going to happen, at least as long as the Liberals are in power”. Shame on them.

It was a Conservative government that finally provided meaningful redress to Japanese Canadians and to the Chinese on the Chinese head tax. It was a Conservative member of Parliament who pushed for a bill on behalf of Ukrainian Canadians to recognize the holodomor genocide, and it is our Conservative government that has taken the bull by the horns and is doing what should have been done many years ago. We are delivering a formal apology to the Indo-Canadian community for Canada's actions in turning away the Indian passengers of the Komagata Maru. I am proud to be part of such a government.

To summarize, I believe our Conservative government has shown true leadership in bringing this issue to a conclusion when previous governments were unable or unwilling to do so. It is my hope that the Komagata Maru tragedy will remain a reminder to Canadians of the fragile and tenuous nature of the rights and freedoms we enjoy, and so often take for granted. May we as a country be ever so vigilant to defend those values no matter what the cost.

[The Acting Speaker, Royal Galipeau]

Resuming debate. There being no one rising, I will now cede the floor to the mover of the motion, the hon. member for Brampton--Springdale, for her right of reply.

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the Indo-Canadian community, on behalf of immigrants and so many Canadians, who are seeking justice for a dark chapter in our nation's history.

Our great nation, Canada, is a symbol of hope for so many nations throughout the world. We are a nation which champions equality, opportunity, acceptance and respect. These are our hallmarks.

However, the journey for this success has not been easy. It is for this reason that I stand before the House today to once again ask for the government to apologize to the Indo-Canadian community and others impacted by the 1914 Komagata Maru injustice.

The Komagata Maru tragedy occurred at a time when our nation had immigration policies that were exclusionary, discriminatory and racist, policies that served to divide our nation and played on our nation's fears.

It is these policies that resulted in the Chinese having a head tax imposed, 900 Jewish people being denied entry into Canada and the internment of over 700 men from the Italian community in the second world war. It is these injustices that will forever serve as a reminder of the struggle and the challenges that so many immigrants have encountered in their hope for a better future in Canada.

We fast forward to 2008 and realize that it is many of these Canadians from immigrant communities who have succeeded, who have achieved and who have prospered and contributed to building a better Canada.

Some people, including many MPs in the Conservative government, have actually questioned the need for an apology, 94 years after the Komagata Maru injustice. For them I say, an apology will never erase the mistakes of the past, neither will it remove the memories, the scars and the pain of those who have suffered. However, it is an opportunity for us as a nation, for Canadians to correct a wrong, to reflect and to learn from our mistakes.

An apology is not about scoring political points. It is about closing a dark chapter in our nation's history and marking a new era for our nation.

An apology will be an opportunity to educate the young children of our nation of the sacrifices, the struggles and the challenges in our journey to being a symbol of hope for so many others.

An apology will send a message to every child, to every man, to every woman and to every senior in our country that it does not matter if they are rich or if they are poor, if they are black or white, Italian, Indian or Chinese, but if they have a dream in our nation and they work hard, they too can make it a reality.

This is one of those issues that is above partisanship. Six weeks ago when I brought forward the motion, the government was opposed to the motion. Today, I hope, regardless of our political stripe, that as parliamentarians we will do the right thing when the motion comes to a vote, that we will unite and we will do the right thing for the children and for Canadians, that we will ensure that the government actually apologizes.

It is an issues of justice, of fairness, of equality, of compassion and of understanding. We, as a nation, have been built on the hard work, the vision and the passion of immigrants. Giving an apology takes reflection, it takes courage and it takes strength. We as a nation have that in us to do the right thing.

An apology will send a very strong message that we will never go back to the politics of discrimination, of racism and of exclusion, but that we will work together as all Canadians to have the faith, to have the belief and the confidence that we will continue to build a country which is a symbol of hope.

It is time to put closure for this dark chapter. It is time to begin the process of healing with three simple words: We are sorry.

[The Acting Speaker, Royal Galipeau]

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Acting Speaker, Royal Galipeau]

(Motion agreed to)

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I request that we see the clock as 6:30 p.m.

[The Acting Speaker, Royal Galipeau]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to take part in this adjournment debate following a question that I asked on February 4 about the development of the Saint-Hubert airport. This was an important project for the South Shore, one that would create many high-level jobs.

The plan, as of April 2007, was to redevelop the current landing strip in order to allow Pratt & Whitney to continue its flight testing with a new higher-performance engine and therefore new heavier planes.

Last year Pratt & Whitney Canada was at a crossroads: either the company would move its flight testing to Plattsburgh, where all the airport facilities already existed to accommodate its activities—runway length, hangar, etc.; or it would concentrate its flight testing in Saint-Hubert, where it would be nonetheless essential to proceed with major improvements—restoration, widening and lengthening of the main runway, upgrading the tarmac and building a hangar and terminal.

This first project died on the order paper, as we say here, due to a lack of financial help from the federal Conservative government. Pratt & Whitney Canada therefore decided to move some of their activities to Mirabel, depriving the South Shore of a project that would have created hundreds of high-level and very high-quality jobs.

Is Pratt & Whitney Canada to blame? Certainly not. Is DASH-L, the Saint-Hubert airport development agency and a non-profit organization, to blame? Certainly not. The Conservatives are to blame for this mess. The Conservative federal government is at fault.

The Minister of Labour and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec is mostly to blame. He does not have the power to defend his budgets and he is incapable of standing up for good projects. He has not yet understood—there are many things he does not understand—that he must adapt his programs and budgets based on the projects submitted to him and not the other way around, that is, expect the projects to fit into his budgets. He asked that a major project such as the Saint-Hubert airport be scaled back to fit a budget of only $30 million, as is the case presently.

Does the minister intend to publicly announce his plans as soon as possible and stop his schemes to minimize the scope of the project, which was initially quite extensive?

The role of the Minister of Labour and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec is to help diversify regional economic activity. He has an annual budget of some $200 million. It is true that, initially, funding of $70 million had been requested; however, the revised amount is $30 million, which is within his budget.

Nevertheless, we clearly see the Conservatives' inability to increase the budget for Quebec. This same minister lost $100 million along the way in his budgets. In my opinion, he does not have the power at the cabinet table to defend his budgets and promote his projects. He is unable and powerless to do anything, like almost all federal MPs elected in Quebec, who are sent to Ottawa to be integrated into a big group, in this case the Conservative Party, which draws its support from Alberta. Hence, Quebec projects are the least of the Conservatives' concerns.

When ministers are weak, we have situations such as the Saint-Hubert airport. It does not work. The minister even sent his political staffer—

[The Acting Speaker, Royal Galipeau]

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec]

Mr. Speaker, in the absence of my colleague, the Minister of Labour and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec, I would like to give a more detailed answer to the question recently raised by the member for Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert.

In the past, the member has expressed concerns about Economic Development Canada helping pay for the costs of developing the airport area in Saint-Hubert, and in particular the restoration of the primary runway at the Saint-Hubert airport. It is public knowledge that the total cost of this project as it stands now, which I understand is not final, is $86 million.

The Minister of Labour and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec already made it clear that since his department has a budget of around $200 million, the project costs estimated by airport authorities are well beyond the means of our agency.

Of course, as a responsible government that takes a role in economic development, we believe in intervening when there is a specific problem in a region or community.

The agency believes that the development of the Saint-Hubert airport area is still an asset to regional economic development. It demonstrated this in the past by funding three projects: a business plan for the construction and use of a terminal, a master development plan for the airport area and a set of specifications for the management and development of the airport, for a total amount in the area of $300,000.

That is also why, considering the importance of the issue, Canada Economic Development agreed to act as a facilitator for the key players in this file. It is a matter of looking at the various options available to us. This role does not exclude financial contributions from Canada Economic Development, along with other partners. The agency encourages the local authorities in their requests to the Government of Quebec and the Department of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, through the airports capital assistance program and the building Canada fund.

As a final point, it must be noted that any other requests will have to be thoroughly analyzed by Canada Economic Development.

I also want to take this opportunity to respond to the allegations the member made. She incorrectly stated that projects have to fit the budget and programs of Canada Economic Development. My colleague, the minister responsible for the agency, set up advisory committees all across Quebec to advise him about regional economic development initiatives and support measures for small business.

After holding consultations, the minister developed a strategic plan that includes a number of measures, which the agency has begun to make public.

With regard to the issue that concerns the member, Canada Economic Development can be part of the solution, but it cannot be the whole solution. The mission of Canada Economic Development focuses on regional economic development and support for small business. We cannot put all our eggs in one basket. Other regions of Quebec have major problems as well and need assistance from Canada Economic Development.

We are confident that there will be positive developments in the weeks to come.

[Carole Lavallée, Bloc, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member who just spoke is behind the times. The latest version of what DASH-L is asking the government for is roughly $30 million. They have indeed applied to other governments and other bodies.

We are not putting all our eggs in one basket. It is up to this federal government to take its responsibilities in its jurisdictions. The current application is for $30 million.

I am surprised at the idea of an advisory committee. In Saint-Hubert, we saw the Conservative candidate for the riding of Longueuil—Pierre-Boucher, who was still a political staffer at the time for the Minister of Labour and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec. He boasted about how he would resolve the problem in a snap. He organized an event to which he charged $1,000 a head and invited regional leaders. Two weeks later, the same Conservative candidate organized a meeting—

[The Acting Speaker, Royal Galipeau]

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour and Minister of the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec with his reply.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lotbinière—Chutes-de-la-Chaudière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert has often expressed her concern about Economic Development Canada's participation in financing costs associated with the development of the Saint-Hubert airport area, particularly with repairs to the main runway of the Saint-Hubert airport.

The project is expected to cost about $86 million. The Economic Development Agency of Canada has a budget of about $200 million, and the minister believes that the amount requested by the airport authority is very high.

Economic Development Canada has agreed to facilitate negotiations among the principal parties. This does not rule out the financial participation of Economic Development Canada or other federal department partners.

As with any other request, this one will be subject to thorough analysis according to the Economic Development Agency of Canada's eligibility criteria.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, February 6, I rose in the House to ask a question about the process around the apology for residential schools. Today there was an announcement that there will be an apology on June 11. However, there are still a number of unanswered questions about the process for this apology.

Just to remind people who may be listening, the residential schools have a long and sorry history in this country. In fact, the first boarding school was actually opened in 1620 and closed in 1680. Then a series of schools opened. In 1979 there were still 15 residential schools open. This has been a long history in this country.

With regard to the apology, there is the case in Australia where the Australian government made a very heartfelt apology to Australia's indigenous peoples. The government talked about it being a time to come together to reconcile and together build a new future for that nation. That was for indigenous and non-indigenous peoples. In that apology the prime minister said, “This new partnership on closing the gap will set concrete targets for the future: within a decade to halve the widening gap in literacy, numeracy and employment outcomes and opportunities for indigenous Australians, within a decade to halve the appalling gap in infant mortality rates between indigenous and non-indigenous children and, within a generation, to close the equally appalling 17 year life gap between indigenous and non-indigenous in overall life expectancy”. I do not have time to read the whole apology, but there was a great deal of substance in it.

The Indian Residential School Survivors Society of British Columbia wrote a letter on February 5, 2008 to the Prime Minister outlining some details it thought were important to include in an apology. It talked about how this was grounded. It said:

In 2005 and 2006, IRSSS undertook a series of focus group meetings designed to elicit Survivor input into a possible settlement process.

From the input that it gathered from the survivors, it talked about the need for a formal apology from the Prime Minister of Canada and stated:

...this need has been echoed many times over since that time by survivors and their families in every community we visit. While we recognize that the House of Commons has unanimously apologized on its own behalf, this was not an official apology from the Government of Canada.

The residential school survivors of B.C. have some specific things they would like to see in that apology from the Prime Minister. One is that the apology should not only be in the House of Commons, but it should include some form of ceremony. They felt that the apology has to be seen as beyond the everyday political process. They think it should include all parties involved in residential schooling. There are a number of other things including it being made in the House of Commons which I believe the government has announced it will do.

I ask the parliamentary secretary, will some of the elements outlined in the request by the survivors be included in the apology? Will the Assembly of First Nations be included in drafting the apology that will come forward on June 11? Will this be a stand-alone apology in the House and not included with apologies to other groups? There has been some suggestion that there are a number of other apologies coming out for other groups.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the questions brought forward by the member for Nanaimo—Cowichan.

This week we have been very busy on a number of fronts dealing with important issues that face aboriginal people in this country. It has been a very busy week and I know that the member has taken part in much of the debate.

Today during question period I was very pleased to announce that the Prime Minister of Canada will issue a statement of apology on June 11, 2008 in the House of Commons. As I stated at that time, this will be a new chapter for Canada that all Canadians can be proud of.

Thousands of former students have been calling for a formal apology for a number of years. Our government shares the view that the apology is a crucial step in the journey toward healing and reconciliation.

In the 2007 Speech from the Throne, the government committed to making a statement of apology. On June 11, 2008, the Prime Minister will deliver on this commitment. We know that this apology will contribute to the reconciliation and renewed relationships with aboriginal people across Canada.