Debates of Feb. 14th, 2013

Opposition Motion—Missing Aboriginal Women

[Laurin Liu, NDP, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my Liberal Party colleagues for this small step forward. I hope that all members of the House will vote in favour of the motion. Nevertheless, we in the NDP believe that it does not go far enough.

We wish to ask our Liberal colleagues why they waited so long to act, why they waited until a Conservative government was in power. The motion even mentions the fact that this problem has gone on for 30 years.

Does my colleague think that this special committee will be any different than the committee set up by the Standing Committee on the Status of Women in 2012? I would remind my hon. colleague that that Conservative-dominated committee was responsible for holding hearings. The committee presented a report on violence against aboriginal women and girls, a report that was criticized by the Conservative majority for being too weak and watered down.

So how will this committee be any different?

[Ted Hsu, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, if I understood the question correctly, my hon. colleague is worried about the fact that seven of the 12 members on the special committee will be Conservative members.

Maybe the work of this committee will be restricted or limited.

We have to have confidence in the positive things that have been said today on the government side, because we have to move forward in a multi-party fashion. If we give up and say that the Conservatives are going to dilute whatever work comes out of the committee, that is being pessimistic. We should take every opportunity to move forward. That is what I would tell my colleague.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague, the hon. member for Yukon, is trying to change the subject today by talking about Bill S-2.

Is my colleague from Yukon aware that most major aboriginal organizations in Canada and many first nations groups have spoken out against Bill S-2? Does he know why? In fact, I have an answer that ties in with today's debate. First nations need to be consulted and involved in any processes that concern them.

Perhaps my colleague can tell us how this was done in the case of the motion before us today.

[Ted Hsu, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I understand that there has not been enough consultation with aboriginal groups on that particular bill. It is a complicated issue, and there is no silver bullet that is going to advance a solution to the problem at hand today, which is the unacceptably high rate of murdered and missing aboriginal women and girls.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to stand in my place today on behalf of the constituents of the great Kenora riding and to have the opportunity to speak to this motion brought forward by the hon. member for St. Paul's on the matter of missing and murdered aboriginal women.

This is a matter that should concern all members in the House. As the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development and a member of Parliament for the great Kenora riding, which includes over 40 first nations communities, many of which I have had the opportunity to work in as a nurse, and thereafter in my capacity as legal counsel specializing in areas such as health and wellness, I can say that this is an important issue. It is one that affects me, personally, and my constituents very deeply.

The government has been taking significant, concrete steps to ensure that women, children and families on reserve have access to the services they need to protect their safety and security since 2006. The Prime Minister also reiterated our commitment to addressing problems of violence against women and girls in the June 3, 2011 Speech from the Throne. More importantly, we introduced legislation for the fourth time, in 2011, to provide fairer treatment of marital property on reserve upon the dissolution of a marriage so that women living on reserve would have the same matrimonial property rights held by all other women living in Canada.

As Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, I would like to take this opportunity to talk about the steps we have taken to support aboriginal women, girls and families through the programs and services delivered through the department, such as the family violence prevention program at Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada, the first nation child and family services program, the first nation on-reserve housing program, economic security and prosperity, as well as education.

We know that many first nations communities continue to experience family violence that threatens the ability to safely raise a family.

Ensuring that shelter services and violence prevention programming are available to on-reserve communities is an important element of addressing these serious security concerns. That is why economic action plan 2012 invested significant funds to the ongoing delivery of these important services for aboriginal women and children.

We currently support a network of over 40 shelters serving aboriginal women and children living on reserve across Canada, including five new shelters in British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec. These shelters are funded through the family violence program. In addition to the 41 shelters, this program funds proposal-based family violence prevention projects, which I might add have had some measurable success in communities throughout the great Kenora riding. They include counselling, public awareness, education campaigns, workshops and community needs assessments. It also reimburses some provincial and territorial costs for services provided to women, children and families considered ordinarily resident on reserve, who are accessing shelters off reserve.

We believe that the best way to address the problem of violence for aboriginal women and children is through prevention. Prevention programs and services in first nation communities must be responsive to the specific needs of the first nation member at that time. We believe that our investments in these shelters and our prevention-based approach help contribute to the enhanced safety and security of on-reserve residents, particularly aboriginal women and children.

Aboriginal Affairs also works with first nations, the National Aboriginal Circle Against Family Violence, the provinces and the territories, and other government departments, such as the Department of Justice and Status of Women Canada to coordinate family violence prevention programming. We will continue to support these programs and services because they make a real difference, a tangible difference, to the lives of aboriginal women and children who through unfortunate circumstances need them. We will continue to do this important work with our partners to ensure adequate support for the shelters and the workers providing these services.

Our government has also introduced a new, enhanced prevention-focused approach for the delivery of first nations child and family services. This new prevention-based approach will give more flexibility to the service providers to implement culturally appropriate prevention programs and protection services, such as kinship care, that are helping improve the safety and well-being of aboriginal children and their families.

These measures mean that government funding can now be used for kinship care, post-adoption subsidies and supports to better ensure permanent placements for children.

Not surprisingly, this new approach was immediately welcomed by child and family service providers, since it allows them to make programming choices for first nations children, youth and families living on reserve.

Through this approach, the Government of Canada works with ready and willing partners on a province-by-province basis. This approach is now being implemented to benefit first nations families and children on reserve across Canada.

Early indications from across the country show an increase in families accessing prevention-focused services. We have seen a rise in permanent placements of children and an increase in the use of kinship care. Clearly, these programs and investments are helping make life more safe and secure for women and children on reserve. We will continue to work in partnership with provinces to implement the enhanced prevention-focused approach to improve outcomes for first nation children and their families.

Finally, I cannot emphasize enough the importance of passing into law Bill S-2, the family homes on reserves and matrimonial interests or rights act, in order to protect the rights of women and children living on reserve. More than 25 years ago, the Supreme Court of Canada issued a landmark ruling on two cases: Derrickson v. Derrickson and Paul v. Paul. In both cases, the court ruled that the legal protections provided in provincial family law for the rights relating to real property and real property interests of spouses do not apply to people living on reserve. Since the Indian Act was silent on this issue and there were no comparable federal laws, the result is a legislative gap.

As a result, in the event of a relationship breakdown or in the death of a spouse or common-law partner, people living on reserve currently have no basic legal rights and protections when it comes to the possession of the family home or any other matrimonial real property interests or rights. Spouses do not have an equal entitlement to occupy the family home until such time as they cease to be spouses and they do not have the option of applying to the courts for emergency protection orders in situations of domestic violence.

While laws are in place to protect Canadians who live off reserve, there is no equivalent for most Canadians who live on reserves in this country. Women and children living on first nation reserve lands are already among the most vulnerable of Canadians. They have been directly affected by this legislative gap and will continue to be until a legal regime is put in place to protect them.

The Supreme Court of Canada's ruling sparked a dialogue and an increased effort to identify, develop and implement an effective solution. Over the years, a number of respected institutions, both in Canada and abroad, completed studies and analyses of relevant issues. The overwhelming conclusion of these reports was that legislation is the only effective course of action.

Bill S-2 would provide rights to matrimonial real property on reserve, the family home and, more important, would ensure that people living on the reserve have the same rights and protections as other Canadians. All Canadians should expect fairness, equity and protection of their rights under the law when it comes to matrimonial real property, regardless of where they live in Canada. The bill would finally eliminate a long-standing legislative gap that discriminates against a specific group of Canadians and has led to the suffering of many women, men and families who live on reserve.

Our government believes that this legislation is long overdue. For more than 25 years, women living on-reserve have been without access to the same basic legal rights or protections that are currently available to all other Canadian women.

This is the fourth time that we have introduced this bill since we came to government in 2006. Our government first introduced the proposed legislation in 2008, and then subsequently in 2009 and again in 2010.

However, in each case, the opposition opposed this legislation and the bill died on the order paper.

Each delay in its passage results in the continued denial of protections and rights for individuals living on-reserve, particularly for aboriginal women and children.

If the opposition truly takes the protection and safety of aboriginal women and children seriously, the very first thing they should do is support our legislation to protect the rights of women and children on-reserve. It is absolutely shameful that the opposition continues to oppose Bill S-2 on matrimonial property rights.

I want to acknowledge that there have been some other efforts to address the issues around matrimonial real property. For example, the First Nations Land Management Act requires first nations to develop laws related to matrimonial rights and interests as part of their land codes. However, while these solutions have helped those now fully operational under the first nations land management regime, Bill S-2 would ensure that all people living on first nation reserve lands have access to matrimonial real property rights on reserve.

In 2006, our government announced a national consultation process to find a solution to this legislative gap. It was conducted in collaboration with first nation partners and in total 103 consultation sessions were held at 76 different sites across Canada. Hundreds of people participated and expressed a wide range of opinions. To prepare a report and make recommendations for a legislative solution, the government also engaged a ministerial representative to report back to the minister. There was clear consensus emerging from these consultations on key elements of a legislative solution. These elements have been part of all of the legislation introduced in Parliament.

The following elements are in this two-part solution, which is both practical and sensible. First, the bill would provide first nations with the ability to develop and implement their own laws to protect the matrimonial real property rights and interests of members in their community. These laws could be based on the community's customs and traditions. The content of the laws are entirely up to the members and the first nation government, and must be approved by a community ratification process. There is no oversight role considered for the federal government.

Second, a provisional federal regime would apply once the bill was in force until such time as a first nation develops its own law. I want to emphasize the point that these provisional rules only apply to a first nation unless or until it enacts its own matrimonial real property laws under the legislation. This would ensure that laws exists to protect the rights and interests of all Canadians regardless of where they live in Canada.

Parliamentary committees have also reviewed this bill and have considered the testimony of a long list of witnesses and proposed a series of improvements—

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Order, please.

The hon. member for LaSalle—Émard on a point of order.

[Hélène LeBlanc, NDP, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I was listening carefully to the speech by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.

At the beginning of his speech, he was talking about the motion we are debating. However, in the past few minutes, he has been talking instead about a bill extraneous to the motion. Would it be possible for him to talk about the motion we are currently debating?

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

The hon. member has raised a question of relevance. It has been made clear from the Chair many times in the past that the Chair takes a broad view of relevance and that although members need to address the matter that is before the House, it is well within their right to refer to other matters they feel are related. As such, the member herself said that the member has spent a significant amount of time speaking directly to the motion. Therefore, I would encourage the hon. parliamentary secretary and all members to speak to the business that is before the House, but at the same time I would remind all hon. members that members have significant discretion in terms of how they wish to do so.

The hon. parliamentary secretary.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, thank you for that ruling.

These are foundational pieces that raise consciousness around a host of structural elements to address the broader issue that is being debated here today. As someone who has spent a professional lifetime dealing with these kinds of matters directly or indirectly, I take the position that this piece of legislation, to which I have devoted a couple of minutes, relates to this issue more directly than perhaps the member opposite feels.

However, I will continue by saying this.

Bill S-2 is informed by many years of study, consultation and debate. It is clear that this bill has been strengthened by consultation to facilitate the development of first nation laws in this area.

I believe it is our duty to adopt Bill S-2 and finally put in place a legislative solution that is long overdue. I urge the opposition parties to support us in expediting its passage.

When speaking to the committee during its review of Bill S-2, Betty Ann Lavallée, National Chief of the Congress of Aboriginal People, stated:

The bill is addressing the real human issue of an Aboriginal person, sometimes often taken for granted by other Canadians. A spouse within an Aboriginal relationship should not be denied or put out on the street alone and without any recourse because of a family or marital breakdown. That has been happening for far too long in Canada.

Given the legislative gap that exists, we do not want to be involved in a process that would make these particular folks we are discussing any more vulnerable than they may be. National Chief Lavallée recognized that Bill S-2 was ultimately about preventing abuse and discrimination, and violence against aboriginal women and children. Her words are informed by her knowledge and the often harsh realities of day-to-day life faced by some residents in first nation communities and across Canada.

I would like to highlight the testimony of two other witnesses at the Standing Committee on Human Rights, including Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond, a child advocate, who said:

—the bill is a promising step to protect victims of domestic violence on-reserve and permits some form of asset division when relationships break down.

The following excerpt is from the testimony of Rolanda Manitowabi, a first nation woman living on reserve:

If this bill were in place, I think there would have been an option. If you are in a situation where there is domestic violence or abusive behaviour, you have no choices. When I was thrown out of my home, I had no place to go. That was my home. To this day, I continue to pay for that home. If this bill were in place, it would have given me an option or some place to go.

For more than 25 years, residents of most first nation communities have had to live with this legislative gap. For most Canadians, provincial laws exist to protect matrimonial real property rights and interests. Residents of most first nation communities, however, have no such protections. The family of an abusive spouse has no legal recourse if forced out of their family home. I believe Bill S-2 provides a solution.

That is a fundamental part of this debate and the actions that we will be taking in moving forward. We will continue to support and develop effective and appropriate solutions to end violence against aboriginal women and children. If the parties opposite also want to support aboriginal women and children, I hope they will stand with us and support measures like Bill S-2 so we can take those important steps against violence against aboriginal women.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, the member has focused a lot of attention on Bill S-2. Here I think it is important to recognize that the minister's own representative noted a very important issue:

The viability and effectiveness of any legislative framework will also depend on necessary financial resources being made available for implementation of non-legislative measures.... Without these kinds of supports from the federal government, matrimonial real property protections will simply not be accessible to the vast majority of First Nation people.

The government has not provided any additional resources to help first nation governments to build the capacity needed to address the underlying issues and to meet the new obligations under the bill, including allowing their citizens to have access to the legal system and to develop new community-specific laws regarding matrimonial real property.

Given that the member wants to debate Bill S-2, would he comment on this particular issue?

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, Bill S-2 is just one part of the actions the government has taken.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada takes the issue of violence against aboriginal women very seriously. We will continue to work in partnership with provincial and territorial governments and first nation people, their leaders and other stakeholders to develop effective and appropriate solutions. We continue to work to renew the family violence prevention program and policy authorities for April 1, 2013, and we consider minimizing the disruption to shelter services a key priority, as an example.

[John Rafferty, NDP, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as my neighbour in an adjacent riding, I know the member is genuinely concerned about the plight of aboriginal people in Canada. In his speech he talked about foundational items for dealing with the issue at hand today. As he knows, one of the main foundational items is the Indian Act. I wonder if he would stand and let us know a couple of things: how he feels about the Indian Act, what he thinks should be done and, in particular, its relevance to the issue we are talking about today. How would changes to the Indian Act look going forward?

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my “neighbour's” question, if I could speak in nomenclature of neighbourhoods and the great northwest Ontario. I appreciate as well my colleague commitment to these kinds of issues in the first nation communities he has in his own riding right next door.

With respect to the Indian Act, Bill S-2 would address an issue that the Indian Act is silent on. We know that we will be debating, probably in the not too distant future, some important first steps to deal with the provisions in the Indian Act, for example, removing any reference to the Indian residential school, a dark legacy of our country that we have taken great strides to move forward from.

As well, for the purposes of this debate, the emphasis or priority ought to be on the welfare of first nation women and children living on reserve. Oftentimes they are already identified as being more vulnerable than the average Canadian. Therefore, we want to focus on the communities and certainly the towns and cities close to first nation communities, or important places where they might go for one reason or another. Enhanced preventative approaches will lead to increased flexibility, including for service providers to implement culturally appropriate and sensitive programs and protection services, which would help improve outcomes for children, youth and their families.

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Mr. Speaker, could the Paliamentary Secretary further expound on Bill S-2 and the importance of giving an opportunity to women on reserve to have property rights, because that seems to be an impetus for moving forward on this? I would like him to explain that a little further.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, perhaps this will give me a moment to respond to any sense across the way that Bill S-2 is a part of this debate. There will be a number of speeches by members on this throughout the day. Indeed, there have already been some. We need to talk about the fundamental elements that are involved in the protection of aboriginal women and children and the steps that we need to take as members of Parliament to end violence against them. I mentioned earlier that as a nurse, I had a ringside seat to some very unfortunate situations on reserve in particular.

With respect to Bill S-2, it is unacceptable as a starting point for this debate that people living on reserve are deprived of their rights and protections because of where they live. Shelters, while another essential element of the issue and one on which I could deliver a whole speech on how they fit into this debate, are only a temporary solution.

We need to look at the platform from which a strong and principled policy can and will evolve for a host of essential elements with respect to ending violence against aboriginal women, their children and families.

[Hélène LeBlanc, NDP, LaSalle—Émard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs. As my colleague mentioned, I know that he has worked in the community for many years and he continues to do so as the member for his riding.

I already pointed out that much of his speech was about a bill. But if this bill is a priority for the government, why is it coming from the Senate and not from the government itself? From what I understand, this bill is very important to him and his colleagues. That was my preamble.

Today, we are also talking about the high number of missing and murdered women in Canada. Does he feel this is an urgent public safety issue? If not, can he tell me why not?

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Mr. Speaker, while I appreciate the hon. member's preamble and her question, I think it is important at this point to turn to the language of the motion we are debating today.

This issue has been, by the acknowledgement of the Liberal member who brought it forward, a rather unfortunate part, statistic-wise, of Canada for 30 years, and maybe longer. However, the issue for the government of the day is to demonstrate that it is taking appropriate steps both on reserve and off reserve with respect to this issue and in providing the kind of support services that first nation women need at the time and could benefit from going forward.

I have been involved in my own community with program support for the de-escalation of violence. It is something that citizens of the great city of Kenora were involved in, including first nations, and raised consciousness and awareness.

To the extent that we are having this debate today, we are taking another step forward in raising the prominence of this issue by way of the motion, which says that the issue has been around for 30 years. I would agree with that and say that it is very unfortunate.

When it comes to Bill S-2, obviously we want to look comprehensively at all the instruments available and not just in law, but also in terms of policy measures and the steps that we need to take to get there to address and end violence against aboriginal women.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I too am very pleased to rise today to speak to this. I acknowledge the previous speaker, who clearly understands the issues and whose heart is in the right place. He is determined to see that this committee gets established. As he is someone who has a clear understanding of these kinds of pressures, I hope that he would also be in that group and bring his expertise to bear, and that we truly can find some answers to these unfortunate and horrific issues that have been going on for such a long time.

A few weeks ago, I also stood on the front steps of Parliament in solidarity with hundreds of men and women who were calling on the government to take action on more than 600 cases involving missing or murdered aboriginal women and girls. Today, I want those people I met outside to know that my support and commitment that day continue on this issue and have only strengthened since we last met. I believe Sisters in Spirit is holding a rally again today to keep this issue going forward and hoping and praying that somehow we can actually get to the bottom of this and do the true investigation that is required. Possibly the success of this motion today, with the help of the government members and the official opposition, would ensure that it is a start and that it would eventually evolve, with the reason that we need a truly independent inquiry to find out exactly what has happened. Everything has to get started somewhere and if today's motion is the beginning, then let that be it.

I am here to add my voice to that of my colleague who has done an enormous amount of work on this issue, the Liberal member for St. Paul's who has sponsored this opposition day motion today for the Liberals.

We know that more than 600 native women have been murdered or have disappeared in the past few years and little has been done to solve these cases. That has to be of huge interest and concern to all of us. This number represents 10% of all homicides in Canada, despite the fact that the native population, native women in particular, accounts for just 3% of the Canadian population. Let us look at it another way. I hate to say this, but when we look at the background over the 30 years that this has been ongoing, we see that if this had been happening to non-native Canadian women at the same rate, more than 20,000 women would have been murdered by now. As parliamentarians, would we stand back and say it is unfortunate, too bad, but we cannot do anything about it? No, we would not. We would all be in an outrage, every one of us in here demanding action and more thorough investigations to get the answers to this. We would not just be asking for an inquiry. We would be doing far more.

This qualifies in my mind as an epidemic, and the response from the government, up until today, has been nothing short of shameful, which is why it is hopeful to hear such positive comments coming from the government in response to our motion today. The victims and families deserve better than to be forgotten. Most of us have met, in some of the rallies here on the Hill, the families of some of these victims. They have daughters just as we do, and they want answers. They cannot bring their daughters back, but they want to at least know that justice is done.

Earlier today, the parliamentary secretary took offence at the opposition MP saying that government had done nothing to respond to the crisis. She went on to say that the government has built a new database, launched school pilot projects and created a website to help us deal with this, and that is very positive. However, that is not dealing with the 600 women who have never had an answer and never had justice. Creating a website is not enough. Creating a database is for the future. We still need to do an inquiry or at least establish a committee today to see that we look into exactly what was happening. If it helps, there is a website, which is a start, but I do hope it goes further and that we move forward on these issues.

This is not a partisan issue. It is an issue that has been talked about for the 13-plus years that I have been in the House. It is an issue I believe we all care about, but no one seems to take any action to really look into the fact that 600 aboriginal women are missing or murdered, and little has been done to bring justice to them or to find out exactly what has happened.

It is not about politics. It is about mobilizing all of us to come together and to work with the appropriate authorities to do a thorough investigation so that we can provide justice and healing for all of these families and put an end to an epidemic, because it has not stopped. It continues along the Highway of Tears.

For the sake of clarity today, the Liberals are asking that a special committee be struck to look into the issue of missing and murdered aboriginal women and girls. We have asked for an inquiry many times. We have committed that, if we were the government, we would strike one. Nothing has happened. There has been no action from the government. We are hoping today that the striking of a special committee of all parties will actually start moving that whole issue forward.

We are simply looking for ways that the federal government can act to address the root cause of this intolerable violence, something that the Conservatives, including the Prime Minister and the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, have said is a priority for the government. Let us practise what we preach and let us have the government start to move forward in that direction.

I fear most people in Canada do not fully appreciate the seriousness of the crimes, of 600 documented cases of missing and murdered aboriginal women and girls. I will give the breakdown: 67% of those 600 cases are clearly murder cases; 20% of the cases are of missing women and girls; the nature of 9% of the cases is unknown, and that is to say it is unclear whether the woman was murdered, is missing or died under suspicious circumstances; 55% of those cases involve women and girls under the age of 31, with 17% of the women and girls under the age of 18.

Many of these young women were 14 and 15 years old. Most of them disappeared in or around the Highway of Tears that was referred to earlier. It is a sad thing to have in any province a highway that is referred to as the Highway of Tears. It is a constant reminder of these missing aboriginal women and girls.

The national clearance rate for homicides in Canada is 84%, which means that there is an answer to 84% of those cases, so at least we know what happened. Yet almost half of the homicides that involve aboriginal women and girls remain unsolved. They are missing, presumed murdered. Nobody knows how, nobody knows at whose hands and how it happened. That is an unacceptable rate for our country. We have to be embarrassed about that.

The 84% rate for the national clearance should be the same rate for the aboriginals. It clearly shows a lack of respect and concern for many of the individual women and girls out there. It makes us wonder if anybody really cares, other than the parents, about these young women.

If hundreds of women and girls went missing or were murdered in our communities and our ridings, there would be outrage, and immediate action would be demanded. It is just completely unacceptable for anyone in this House to accept that this kind of inaction continues.

The time for real action is now, because this collective tragedy has already impacted on many of our communities. It has impacted on Canada's reputation. The United Nations has created a committee of its own to look into the issue of the missing aboriginal women and girls. It is pretty significant when the United Nations, not Canada, has to create a committee to look into something that our own country refuses to look into for our own citizens' sake.

Let us remember that Highway 16 is a very long and winding road that runs through dozens of small communities in western Canada. For example, the communities in and around Prince George on Highway 16 and Williams Lake on Highway 97 have all lost daughters in the past 20 years. I would expect that the Conservative member for Prince George—Peace River, as the MP representing these areas, would have a deep and personal interest in seeing action.

I am quite confident that member will be very supportive of this motion today, to start seeing some sort of action and bring closure for the families, but most importantly, to identify the people responsible for this so that the families can have closure and justice can be seen to be done. I would also hope to lead the charge to ensure that a committee is created and that the police have the resources required to finally resolve the cases.

We continue to hear from people in many small, isolated communities, which rely on the RCMP and others, that they require additional support because they do not have enough support to do things in these communities that are spread out over huge geographic areas that are difficult to patrol. They have tremendous difficulty doing that.

If that is the issue, then let us find ways to solve it. Those are the kinds of recommendations that would come out of an independent inquiry or parliamentary committee. Necessary recommendations would be made so that this issue can move forward and further cases can be prevented from emerging. This will continue until somebody stops it and it is not going to stop until we fully understand how 600 aboriginal women and girls could disappear or be murdered with no one knowing what happened to them. It is pretty insulting in a country like ours that brags so much about its crime agenda. Let us pay a little more attention to the victims.

Inasmuch as this debate is about creating a special committee to look into the issue of missing and murdered aboriginal women and girls, it is also about so much more. Eradicating the problem of violence against aboriginal women and girls involves addressing the root causes of the violence, notably sexism, racism and poverty, causes that are very predominant in many communities. Aboriginal women and girls are far more likely than any other Canadian women or girls to experience violence and die as a result. This has to be addressed once and for all. It cannot continue on and on, with nobody asking what has happened.

The status of women committee did some fabulous work on a report looking into this prior to the 2011 election. It came up with some concrete recommendations based on the work it was able to do. It went out to various areas and interviewed many women and young girls about the kinds of challenges they were experiencing and what needed to be done. Unfortunately, after the election, that study did not continue because there was a different agenda at play for the committee.

In 2005 the Liberal government of the day invested $10 million through the Native Women's Association of Canada to identify those root causes. Things like trends and circumstances of violence that led to the disappearance and death of aboriginal women and girls were to be explored. That was the whole intent of that $10 million investment by the Liberals in 2005. As members here will know, part of that funding went to Sisters in Spirit, the organization that is conducting the rally on the Hill today, whose research initiative was responsible for tracking and collecting the names of over 600 missing and murdered women and girls. Without the work of Sisters in Spirit, we might not even know the full gravity of the number of young women and girls who went missing.

As members will also know, in 2010 the current government cut that funding and mandated that any future funding for the Native Women's Association could not be used for the Sisters in Spirit initiative. It was very shortsighted, but that was the decision made by the government and we have to deal with the percussions of that decision. All of this was despite the fact that the Oppal commission on missing women and Human Rights Watch make it very clear that there are serious shortcomings in our policing and justice systems, which too often have failed to protect native women and girls.

A report was released yesterday by Human Rights Watch. It is very concerning to read the recommendations in that report about the activity that appears to go on in British Columbia, with no one caring a whole lot and with women being raped and being too intimidated to file a report, too frightened to put their name forward because they are afraid of the repercussions.

These women talk about what has happened to people who have complained about how they have been treated when they have reached out and have asked for help. They continue to raise the kinds of issues that Parliament and the RCMP need to deal with, similar to what the Status of Women is doing.

Why is there so little interest? Despite knowing that there is a serious problem impacting hundreds of young women, why has the government dug in and until today refused to act proactively?

The global community is asking the same questions. Canada has been criticized by bodies like Amnesty International and even by the United Nations. As I mentioned earlier, in 2011 the United Nations established its own committee to look into this. Now we have the United Nations looking into an issue that is on our plate. It is expected for us to be dealing with it.

The United Nations is looking at why we have failed to investigate and address the violence against indigenous women and girls. It is pretty insulting for a country as proud as Canada.

Unfortunately, it took the tragic loss of Nicole Hoar in 2002 to finally bring the Highway of Tears debate to the national stage. How many other women are going to have to be murdered or go missing before we actually provide the resources needed to turn this issue around?

Nicole was a non-native who disappeared after setting out from Prince George. Her disappearance caused a huge media and public uproar and it finally drew a line in the sand. Why did all the other women who went missing and who were native not get any of that attention, not in Parliament nor the media?

People have to understand that when we talk about racism, it is still very much alive and present. I wish it had not taken her disappearance to prompt action, but today we have a chance to help ensure that others in the area do not meet the same fate.

Conservatives claim that they stand up for the victims of crime. Today they have an opportunity to show that. We are asking the Conservatives to join with us and to stand up for missing and murdered women. These people are our mothers, daughters, grandmothers, aunts and cousins and are the families that loved and cherished them and are looking for justice.

We owe it to all of them to honour their memory and to support the motion before us today.

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, a few years ago two girls, Maisy and Shannon, disappeared from the community of Kitigan Zibi, in my riding. The government has not delivered justice for these two girls.

I would also like to point out that in response to the high number of missing aboriginal women, aboriginal communities organized the Highway of Tears Symposium. They made several recommendations and identified poverty as a key contributing factor. The UN report also includes many recommendations, which I think is good.

We have good recommendations, and they are important. Why is the government not taking action?

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I do not speak for the government so I do not know why it has been so inactive.

The whole issue of poverty is at the base of a huge amount of problems. Eradicating poverty is very difficult. It does not matter who is in government. I think we all want to eradicate poverty.

If we are going to look at the whole issue of tying in poverty, violence and a lot of the issues that all of us in the House care about, it means we have to get serious about ensuring that from the time children are born, they have the kind support network, from proper nutrition, to advice, to help with parenting, whatever else may be needed, so they get to grow up to be successful and contributing adults in our country.

I would hope with the committee getting established we can start to put more focus on pushing some of those recommendations. I am quite happy to work with the hon. member on pushing those recommendations forward.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Mr. Speaker, I will be pleased to stand in the House and support the motion when that time comes.

Could the member comment on some of the work that I know is happening in Yukon territory with the “Sharing Common Ground” police report that came out and the progress of that report? I am encouraged to see the progress report demonstrating that women's organizations have been getting together to ensure they are able to meet some of the needs of the “Sharing Common Ground” recommendations, including coalition member organizations like the Women's Transition Home Society, Victoria Faulkner Women's Centre, Whitehorse Aboriginal Women's Circle, Yukon Aboriginal Women's Council, the Liard Aboriginal Women's Society, Les EssentiElles and Yukon Status of Women Council. These are a few examples of the groups that are getting together to meet the needs of that report. The Government of Canada has had a significant role in that. It is a good news story and a good news model in the territory that is being followed.

Could my hon. colleague comment on some of those things?

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, work is being done in those areas by many committed volunteers who are working hard to try to make a difference throughout our country and especially in that area.

If we move forward, are we supposed to forget about the 600 missing aboriginal women and girls? Are we supposed to forget about the fact that they had lives just like everyone else?

We need to adopt the motion today and at least get the committee going. However, what we really need is an independent inquiry to see exactly what happened, how 600 young women and girls could be murdered or disappear and no one was able to resolve those crimes. Fifteen of them have now been worked on and declared murdered. What happened to all of the rest? We cannot allow citizens of our country to disappear or go missing as if nothing ever happened.

A lot of good work is being done today to move these issues forward, but we cannot forget about those 600 women. Their parents deserve an answer. We as a country have an obligation to find out exactly what happened to those women and to move forward with recommendations so this does not happen again.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the fact that the government recognizes the value of the motion the Liberals have put forward today. I look forward to that committee being set up and hopefully we will hear relatively quickly who will be sitting on it.

Could the member provide some comment with respect to the importance of the committee and the importance of its decisions being made on a consensus basis as opposed to whatever party has the most members sitting on it? The three parties in the House should take the unanimous support that seems to be here to see the motion pass and carry that support over to committee so there is a sense that all three political parties are prepared to work on solutions at that stage.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are all being very positive and that is terrific. It is about time we did a few things in a more positive nature around here. However, this issue is far too important to have the committee stacked one way or the other. The right people need to be appointed and there needs to be timelines. They have to agree to move forward on a consensus. It cannot be one party against another. This is not a political issue and it should not be made a political issue by anybody because it is far too important. We welcome an opportunity to sit down and discuss this issue. The community will be very grateful.

However, I am still calling for an independent inquiry. I do have concerns that at the end of the process, unless we put a timeline on this, it will be just more recommendations that go nowhere. That would be a real insult.

I am taking everything the government is saying in good faith. I hope the committee has enough people on it who understand that it has to work in a consensus fashion on behalf of all Canadians.

[Djaouida Sellah, NDP, Saint-Bruno—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened closely to my Liberal colleague's speech. This may be a baby step forward, but the problem has been around for 30 years, and everyone knows that the Liberals and the Conservatives have not done anything to solve it.

Everyone has produced reports on the problem, from the royal commission to Amnesty International, from the United Nations to Human Rights Watch. Even so, nobody has ever implemented measures to try to put an end to the violence even though the problem persists.

Given that this latest special committee will include a majority of Conservative members and is supposed to hold hearings, how will its approach differ from that of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women in 2011?