Mr. Speaker, I was listening intently to the member for St. Paul's and I just want to clarify something that she said.
She said the bill is very specific as to the conditions under which a minister may bring a first nation under the act without its consent. It states that the minister may do so if satisfied that a “protracted leadership dispute” has “significantly compromised governance” of that first nation.
The power under the Indian Act has only been exercised three times, as she mentioned, for the purpose of addressing a governance dispute. In each case, the minister exercised his power after reasonable efforts to reach a community-based solution had been exhausted.
Does the member not feel that the minister makes every opportunity available to the first nation to ensure that it has exhausted every option to try to resolve it from within before the minister gets involved?