Debates of June 3rd, 2019

First Nations, Inuit and Métis Children, Youth and Families Act

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have to say from the get-go what a privilege it is to sit with the member on the indigenous committee. I have a deep respect for her passion and she has a beautiful heart when it comes to indigenous issues. I just wanted to state that first.

The members knows my position on the bill. I find that the elegance of this bill is that it is a framework and a starting place, the ending place being that indigenous communities will establish their own legislation when it comes to child and family services. What I find the most powerful thing about this bill is that their own legislation will have paramountcy over federal and provincial governments. Would the member agree that this is a very powerful part of the bill itself?

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I also enjoy working with the member on the indigenous and northern affairs committee. I find him attentive and I appreciate that dedication.

This is a step in the right direction. I do not know if it goes as far as I would hope it would go. One thing that is important when we are discussing this legislation is the details. In one of the communities that I represent, the members made a decision many years ago that the community would come together, they would raise the funds and they would build in their community a church and a school. That meant they had to give up their culture. They had to give up a lot of their practices because they were inviting the church and the school right into their community. They had the last potlatch right before the church had the nuns and the priest come, and also the teachers in the school. They did their last potlatch, and they knew they were giving away their culture, but they did that so their children would stay in their care until grade six, and then they would go to residential school. It gave that community a few more years with its children.

When we look at that community and its development, figuring out how its culture is going to move forward is a challenge. The people in the community are having to relearn their culture because they gave it up for their children. When we look at building this legislation, that community needs the resources to do that part of the work, because if these people are going to build legislation that is going to allow them to do that, they need to go back. That costs money. It is resources. If we are going to do this right, if we are going to honour that process, if we are going to acknowledge that a decision was made in that community to give up its culture so it could have its children, we need to honour that with the resources to do the work.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for North Island—Powell River for, as always, an excellent and thoughtful speech.

When I listen to the debate, it appears to me that there are different first nations and indigenous places that are ready to take over the governance of the children, and there are places that are far from that.

There appears to be no funding and no plan. To introduce this legislation in the dying days of the government is sort of like virtue signalling, if the Liberals cannot really execute it.

I wonder if the member could comment on whether she believes that the legislation, as it is written, could actually be put in place.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Mr. Speaker, that is a really important question. I have to say that a lot of indigenous communities have come forward and are encouraging all of us in this place to make sure that this legislation moves quickly. They want to see that progress happen. They want to see the discussions happen.

I will be frank with the member. I respect her and I hope she does not take this the wrong way, but a lot of concern I have heard from communities, not only in my riding but across Canada, is that if the Conservatives get in, there will be a concern about it actually being negotiated. I think that is sad. It is something for all of us to address in this House at some point.

My concern, and I share it with the member, is how this is going to happen rapidly enough. We are going into an election. We need to see this happen. Indigenous children deserve the best, because for generations, they have been given the very least.

I will be working hard in whatever role I play in this country to make sure that this is done and that it is done well, because the children of this country deserve it. There are challenges with capacity, and we need to see that acknowledged. Again, whether we see it actually addressed meaningfully will depend on how the implementation of this bill happens.

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Winnipeg Centre.

I am pleased to rise today during third reading debate on Bill C-92, an act respecting first nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families.

Let me first recognize that we are gathered on the traditional and unceded territory of the Algonquin people.

Bill C-92 seeks to establish a framework for indigenous communities to exercise jurisdiction over child and family services. This is in keeping with the inherent right of self-government of indigenous peoples. The bill also sets out principles, applicable on a national level, for the provision of child and family services in relation to indigenous children and families. These principles intend to help ensure that indigenous children and their families will be treated with dignity and that their rights will be preserved.

To be specific, the bill before us provides clear affirmation of the inherent right of first nations, Inuit and the Métis to exercise jurisdiction in relation to child and family services. This would strengthen the mandate of indigenous governing bodies to administer prevention and protection programs and services for child and family services in a way that reflects their customs, practices and traditions. The bill would also empower them to enact laws in this area if they choose to do so.

One size does not fit all. Indigenous peoples would be free to assume partial or full jurisdiction over child and family services at their own pace. This would enable indigenous people to tailor the exercise of their jurisdiction to their needs.

I want to emphasize that this bill is not about imposing solutions; rather, it is about opening the door and beginning a new era in which indigenous peoples can pursue their own solutions for their children and families.

In fact, this proposed legislation has been co-developed with the first nation, Inuit and Métis peoples whose child and family services it will affect. We introduced it only after careful engagement. We held over 65 different meetings and heard from nearly 2,000 people from across the country. However, just as the bill was co-developed with first nations, Inuit and Métis, so will be its implementation, and we will continue to engage with indigenous partners, provinces and territories throughout the implementation, should the bill receive royal assent.

All too often, past decisions affecting children and families have been made without putting the best interests of the child first. This bill changes that and has the best interests of the child as its central objective. Bill C-92 establishes principles that help to identify factors to be considered in determining the best interests of the child. These principles would have to be observed by provincial and territorial courts as well as by providers of child and family services.

Nothing would preclude provinces and territories or the indigenous governing bodies from offering more protection than that which is set out here. This bill represents the floor, not the ceiling, of the provisions to protect the best interests of an indigenous child. The end result would be to have the cultural, linguistic, religious and spiritual upbringing and heritage of the child given more priority in determining his or her best interests.

A number of amendments that strengthen the bill were adopted by the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs during the clause-by-clause consideration. One of these amendments would ensure that when determining the best interests of an indigenous child, primary consideration would be given to the child's physical, emotional and psychological safety, security, and well-being, as well as to preserving the child's connection to his or her family, community and culture.

Clause 10 was also amended to clarify that the best interests of the child are to be interpreted, to the extent it is possible, in a manner that is compatible with a provision of an indigenous law.

Another amendment deals with fiscal arrangements. It outlines the importance of fiscal arrangements to help ensure that the indigenous governing bodies can provide services that are sustainable, needs-based and consistent with the principle of substantive equality.

A third element was added to the bill, stating more clearly that it will align with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, to which the government declared unqualified support in 2016. Taken overall, the bill before us seeks to ensure that indigenous child and family services are aligned with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Bill C-92 is the product of broad engagement and the result of a codevelopment process with indigenous partners. It represents a historic opportunity to break from the past and protect indigenous children and their families for generations to come.

It was such a privilege to be on the committee that studied the bill and to hear the many witnesses who came before the committee to express their support for it. I feel the reason they expressed support for the bill is that, as mentioned earlier, it is a framework. It is a starting point for indigenous communities and peoples to take control of indigenous family and child services and put in place their own laws that they feel will benefit their communities, their families and, most importantly, their children.

As has been noted many times in debate, that is what this is all about. It is about children and their best interests. For too long, our country has not had the best interests of indigenous children in mind. I am so proud that Bill C-92 is going to change that and provide the opportunity for indigenous communities to enact their own laws that will be in the best interests of their communities and in the best interests of their children.

We heard from so many about the importance of the paramountcy of indigenous law over federal and provincial law. That is such an important component because it helps indigenous communities, once again, to have the certainty that they know what is best for their own children and what laws best reflect their communities, their culture and the best interests of their children.

I was very happy to see the collegial atmosphere that existed at committee with my NDP and Conservative colleagues and counterparts as we made sure that the bill moved through committee as quickly and efficiently as possible. One message rang true at committee. It was the overwhelming desire, from every person and witness who came to committee, to make the legislation a reality as quickly as possible so that indigenous communities can make the determination of what is in the best interests of their children.

I urge all hon. members to join me in supporting the bill to move it through the House as quickly as possible.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to acknowledge that, as the member for Hastings—Lennox and Addington said, there was goodwill on the committee in terms of moving forward. However, one thing did disturb me, and perhaps he could articulate better what he meant.

Amendments were put forward by the members for North Island—Powell River, Saanich—Gulf Islands and Markham—Stouffville. They reflected testimony. The member said he takes exception to the comment, which keeps coming up, that Cindy Blackstock defines and speaks for all indigenous communities.

Was he being dismissive of the great expertise and knowledge that she brings to the table and of her tremendous input regarding suggestions for the bill?

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's question gives me an opportunity to speak to that. It was not my intention, whatsoever, to cast aspersions upon Dr. Blackstock. Her representations at committee were invaluable. Her representations toward indigenous children have been invaluable for an exceptionally long time. I have tremendous respect for Dr. Blackstock. The reason I raised that was I felt that there were a lot of views expressed at committee in support of the bill.

Once again, the elegance of the bill is that it is a framework that indigenous communities will then define. It is for indigenous communities to define what is in the best interest of the child. Some of the comments that were made moved away from that. It is a difference of opinion, and I accept that. At the end of the day, the overwhelming strength of the bill is that it is a framework. However, I felt it was being defined more than it needed to be defined. That was not the purpose of the bill, to define everything to the nth degree.

If my comment was taken in the wrong light, I apologize to Dr. Blackstock. It certainly was not my intention to have it framed in that way. I thank the member for allowing me to clear that up.

[Christine Moore, NDP, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to know why the member does not agree with the idea that it takes money to implement a functional bill, as well as these measures. This bill is about providing child protection services in indigenous communities, which means people will need to work on that. That means there will have to be a budget for establishing this service.

Why did they not agree to include the funding associated with the bill in the bill itself?

How much money does he think the various communities will need to achieve the purpose of this bill?

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, one of the amendments that was made to the bill was around funding, that it needed to be sustainable and it needed to be needs based. Once again, we do not want to define everything that should be in the bill. In doing so, I feel we would do an injustice to the intent of the bill, which is to be a framework for indigenous communities to define. It is for indigenous communities to define what is sustainable and what is needs based. That definition will be different depending in what part of the country the community happens to be. There is no one size fits all when it comes to what is sustainable and what is needs based.

I was very happy we were able to bring forward that amendment to make funding sustainable and needs based.

[Robert-Falcon Ouellette, Liberal, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

[Member spoke in Cree]

Mr. Speaker, I am from Red Pheasant First Nation, which is a Cree community in Saskatchewan, and I am very proud of that.

I remember when I first rose in the House on December 8, 2015, for my maiden speech. I talked about child and family services because it was such an important issue to the people of Manitoba and especially the people of Winnipeg Centre. They were so upset with what was occurring in our province and in our city.

Imagine if 90,000 children in Quebec or 130,000 children in Ontario had been placed in foster care. There would have been an uprising and rioting in the streets. It would have been a huge deal if it had happened in other provinces.

This bill is perhaps one of the most important pieces of legislation that I believe we are going to pass, not only because it is about children and the best interests of children but also because it is about jurisdiction and giving indigenous communities control. It is important for a number of reasons. One is repairing our colonial past of residential schools, when we took away children and forcibly assimilated them into the Canadian body politic, and when we took away their languages.

I said in my maiden speech, “I think of our first prime minister, John A. Macdonald, God bless his soul, who imprisoned indigenous peoples, stole our children, and stole our languages.” I was talking about the history of this nation. That history of residential schools continued on into the 1960s, when instead of placing kids in large institutions around the country far from major urban centres, we placed them in adoption centres and sent them around the world. I meet young men and women my age who have come home to Canada who were adopted out into France or the United States. This was often called the sixties scoop.

We still have foster families today, and in Manitoba there are 11,000 kids in care, which is where the number of 90,000 comes from. If we had the same number of kids in care today as there are in Manitoba, per capita there would be 90,000 in Quebec and 130,000 in Ontario.

The child welfare system has a significant impact on real people. For example, let us look at Dwayne Gladu, who is from my riding, and his daughter Lisa.

Dwayne was placed in a foster family as a child. So was his daughter, but his daughter was placed in a foster family because her father had a mark in his file that said that he had been in foster care, which meant that he was not going to be a good parent. He was indigenous, so he was going to have problems, even though Dwayne is a man who follows what we call the “red road”. He is a good man, whom I have met many times on the powwow trail. While he may be poor, by nature he is a very good and kind person.

Lisa, Dwayne's daughter, also had a birth alert against her, and when she gave birth only a few years ago, her child was seized immediately, without giving her the opportunity of proving that she would be a good parent. She fell into despair. She no longer had access to her child. She had to prove that she would be a good parent and take parenting classes when no one else had to do that. Her only crime was having been in a foster family herself.

In her despair, she became depressed. She fell in with the wrong crowd because she was poor and living in downtown Winnipeg. She started using drugs, and eventually she died from an overdose on the streets of Winnipeg.

Dwayne still goes to visit his grandson at every opportunity. Every week he is there with his grandson, enjoying their time together. He is trying to be a good grandfather and pass along his culture.

I think about Lisa because today is also when the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls released its report.

I am wearing a jacket that was given to me by the women of Winnipeg Centre. I am not sure if the cameras can come closer for a close-up of this jacket, but two women have been beaded onto the lapel. It was given to me to remind me why I am here. It is to remind me of Lisa, to never forget her name, to never forget her hopes and dreams and her desire to hold her child in her arms every day when she wakes up and to put that child to sleep. She never had that opportunity. It was taken from her by this system. That is what this legislation is supposed to change. That is what this legislation is about. That is why it is so important.

When I gave my maiden speech in this House, over 300,000 people viewed that speech by a backbencher on Facebook. That says that people were hungry for something different.

I am very proud of the work everyone on that committee did, whether it was the Conservatives, the NDP, or even the Green Party and the independents. They came together on the committee to study this legislation, because it will make a significant difference in the future. We will be able to look back at this moment in 30 or 40 years and say that this was perhaps the finest piece of legislation in this chamber. Even though it is coming at the end of this session, it does not reduce its importance or its significance.

There is also the question of jurisdiction. The Indian Act from 1876 granulated indigenous peoples and their nations into small component parts. It took what were large groupings of people from Treaty 1 territory, Treaty 3 territory and Treaty 7 territory, where hundreds of indigenous groups, tribes and nations were living in a communal way and coming together at certain times of the year, and granulated them down into these small communities that were isolated from each other. They had no agency in their lives. This is about allowing those indigenous nations to reform themselves and in one area have full supremacy. Their laws would take precedence over federal or provincial law. That is significant.

The member for Saint Boniface—Saint Vital is applauding right now, because he knows how important this is in Manitoba.

I recently spoke, in a few of the questions and comments periods, about how governments cannot legislate love. Governments can never legislate love. A government cannot love people. Sir John A. Macdonald and his ghost will never be able to love our children. People, Canadians, have to do that.

Another member in this debate said that our children are a resource. Unfortunately, yes, they are a resource in the sense that we receive funds to look after them. It is easier to pay someone else to look after the children than to help a family become successful and ensure that the children remain with their parents, where they have a connection to the culture and who they are and a connection to family members and those who love them most dearly. Maybe they are going to have an imperfect love, but it will be a strong love nonetheless.

I am very proud of the work that each and every one of us has done. I see the House leader. I do not mean to mention that she is here, but I hope that when we pass this legislation and it receives royal assent, it will be done in a way that includes a ceremony with the Governor General and that indigenous people will be included. Even though Parliament is supreme in its matters, its decisions and how it legislates, we can also decide to include others. It is very important to include the indigenous world view in this legislation and to make sure that the indigenous world view is paramount.

I am now ready for questions. I would like to thank each and every member. I am so proud of all the work we have done. I will be able to look my children in the eyes and look at myself in the mirror when I go to bed at night. No matter the outcome of this election, no matter who will be in office, members can rest assured that indigenous people and all Canadians will fight for proper financing, the administration of child welfare and allowing indigenous people to do it on their own without others telling them what to do.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Before I go to questions and comments, I want to remind hon. members that we cannot do indirectly what we should not do directly, like referring to someone's presence in the chamber. I just thought I would point that out in case someone has forgotten the rules.

Questions and comments.

[John Nater, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Winnipeg Centre for his words tonight and his heartfelt comments on this matter. He referenced the final report of the missing and murdered indigenous women's commission being tabled today. It is a historic day.

I wonder if the member might agree with the opposition that we could further make history and pass this bill with unanimous consent, here tonight, and adjourn for the night having accomplished something today.

Would the member agree that we should pass this bill tonight and adjourn the House with that agreement?

[Robert-Falcon Ouellette, Liberal, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, that is an incredible offer. Obviously, I would love to see that happen. It is time to move this forward and on to the Senate, so that it has time to finish this work. Time is running short. It is time to give indigenous peoples the opportunity to make their own decisions.

[Marjolaine Boutin-Sweet, NDP, Hochelaga, QC]

Mr. Speaker, that was interesting to hear.

I have another question for my colleague. Since the negotiations surrounding child and family services will be conducted on an individual basis with each community, the outcomes will be different and the services will also be different from one community to the next.

How can we fix the inequality that already exists in terms of access to services? What can we do to ensure that there will be no inequality in the services available in different communities?

[Robert-Falcon Ouellette, Liberal, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I think “equality” and “equity” are two very important words. Every indigenous community will be doing things a little differently. Every one will have specific needs. People who live up north have different needs from those who live near urban centres.

Equity is a very important ideal. It is one where we ensure that people have the full potential to be successful in life. How to achieve that is a very good question. We have a number of cases that have gone before tribunals, which have established that indigenous child welfare should be funded at an equitable and equal level with all Canadians, that they should receive equal funding no matter where they are. How that is administered is a different thing. It is based on culture and needs within local communities.

If a government decides not to fund this legislation in the future, I suspect it will end up before the courts. I suspect that government will lose again and again. I am sure that no government wants to be on the wrong side of history, fighting children, fighting against children. It is certainly nothing that people on any side in this House want to be doing.

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the member for Winnipeg Centre for standing in this House and raising a point of privilege to ensure that when it came to indigenous languages, they would be able to be interpreted and heard in this House. When the government took action, he was the first member to stand and share a speech. I was pleased to be able to hear the interpretation and understand what he was saying. I commend the member for knowing the language of his roots and of his foundation.

When it comes to Bill C-91 and Bill C-92, this is legislation that I have had to give notice of time allocation on. When it came to this piece of legislation tonight, it is the first time that I will not have to move time allocation, because the opposition has finally realized it is the right thing to do.

I would like to hear directly from the member what this legislation means to him, and for his roots and for future generations, and why he is pleased that we are moving ahead.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, before the government House leader sat down, I was going to call attention to the fact that she can discuss her issues with her caucus at any point in time. There are questions and comments that some of the rest of us would like to ask the member as well.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

I believe it is called questions or comments. It is open, and we are making a rotation. I will take that under advisement, but I thought I would point out the procedure.

[Robert-Falcon Ouellette, Liberal, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I hope we always remain on good terms with each other as we end this debate, hopefully very soon.

I talked a little bit about love in a previous comment that I made. Love is extremely important.

My mother was extremely poor and my father was a residential school survivor and an alcoholic. He was not one of the most stellar individuals.

I was homeless as a child as well. We called it camping, but we used to live on the streets in a little pop-up tent from Canadian Tire. My mother would keep her feet against the tent door as we were sleeping at night. I think about that and about when most kids are taken. My mother never stopped loving my brother and me. That is perhaps the most important thing.

We just had Mother's Day, and Father's Day is coming up. I think about my mother and the role she played, being both a mother and a father. Even though she is not here with us, she is in the spirit world and she is in my heart because she always showed me love. That is the most important thing we have, because if we do not have love, it is very hard to be a successful human being.

I hope that this legislation will go a long way toward allowing our children—all Canadian children, whether they are indigenous or non-indigenous—to feel that love from someone, no matter who they are.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Mr. Speaker, before I start my comments, I hope that you will find unanimous consent for the following. I move:

That, notwithstanding any Standing or Special Order or usual practices of the House, at the conclusion of the speeches of the members for Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo and Abitibi—Témiscamingue, Bill C-92, an act respecting first nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families, be deemed read a third time and passed; and that the House proceed to adjournment proceedings.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Does the hon. member have the unanimous consent of the House to move the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

The House has heard the terms of the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

(Motion agreed to)