Debates of Sept. 28th, 2022

National Council for Reconciliation Act

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for her intervention today, and I appreciate her encouraging all people to read those 94 calls to action.

I wonder if the member could provide a comment on how many of those 94 recommendations the government has acted on, how many are actually the responsibility of the federal government, how many are ongoing and how many are outstanding.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Madam Speaker, I think it is really important to focus on what Bill C-29 is here to do, and that is to respond to calls to action 53 through 56.

This national council has to be done properly, and it has to have the right representation at the table to ensure it meets and delivers what it is meant to do, which is for indigenous, by indigenous. If we do not have the right representation at the table, we will never go forward on our path to truth and reconciliation.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her statement of solidarity, especially in relation to September 30, which many members of the House are aware is the day when survivors in the past have taken the opportunity to talk about the pain and trauma, particularly related to residential schools.

My question is in relation to a comment the member made related to government being too big, and I hope that reference was not made in terms of the protection for indigenous people. As we all know, the right to prior, free and informed consent of indigenous nations to any resource project is a critical step and foundation to indigenous peoples' rights here on this land. Would the member agree that the right to prior, free and informed consent should stand, especially in the face of resource projects?

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is really important we have the advice and consultation needed by the people who are responsible. Looking at the government, I have seen time and time again that decisions are made without consulting the people who are affected by them most. If we do not have for indigenous, by indigenous consultation at the table, that representation to make decisions, we will never get a path forward to truth and reconciliation.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. I would like her thoughts.

In Quebec, a commission has already looked into similar issues. There could potentially be some overlap between the work of this council and the work that has already been done by the commission in Quebec.

Is my colleague suggesting that there would be no overlap and that the council would focus on federal issues potentially in Quebec?

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Madam Speaker, a little bit was cut out in translation. I am still working on my French, so forgive me.

We are open to having this discussion where the amendments are met, where the truth and reconciliation is met. I do not think there is anyone in this House who does not want a path toward this. I think there are opportunities to have those discussions on what works best and what is most efficient.

What we have seen from the government time and time again is a lack of efficiency, a lot of talk and no action. It is time now to move forward into action and have a plan.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Madam Speaker, the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations appointed the interim board, as the member mentioned, and the transitional committee. Now, with Bill C-29, he is responsible to select the directives of the national council. I hear all the time from indigenous communities in Saskatchewan that they do not want to be stakeholders. They want to be shareholders. A large percentage want to be involved in the oil and gas industry, more so than other Canadians.

I wonder how the member feels about that being something important to truth and reconciliation and their ability to succeed.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague made great points and she is bang on. Time and time again, we hear, “Trust us. We are capable. Give us a seat at the table. We are not stakeholders. We are shareholders. We want to have autonomy over the decisions that impact us.” Again, I will repeat it: for indigenous, by indigenous. A seat at the table is needed.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, as always, it is an honour to be able to rise in this place to address issues that are so pressing in the lives of Canadians.

If members would indulge me for a moment, before I get into my remarks specifically on Bill C-29, it is great to be able to acknowledge how important the upcoming acknowledgement, and hopefully learning experience for so many Canadians, of the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation this coming Friday is. I acknowledge how important it is to acknowledge past wrongs and to chart that path forward, especially as indigenous people and survivors of residential schools, to make sure that they have confidence and they are given the tools needed to succeed in our country, and to make sure that we acknowledge those past wrongs and acknowledge further the fact that those past wrongs have had generational impacts.

There is a need for generational solutions and it is important that we not only talk but that we act to make sure that opportunity is provided for Canada's indigenous peoples, to make sure that there are supports where supports are needed, to make sure that opportunity is provided where opportunity is needed and to ultimately empower those indigenous men and women, young and old, to ensure they have everything required to move forward. Today, I wanted to acknowledge the National Day for Truth and Reconciliation and acknowledge just how important that day is for all of us here in this place.

I want to take a moment as a member of Parliament from rural Alberta to talk a bit about how the indigenous way of life and indigenous history are truly a part of the Canadian identity. I could not help but think, as the time for debate on this bill came forward, of some of the locations that I grew up around and, in some cases, heard stories about. In other cases, I have more recently begun to understand stories like those of the Neutral Hills or why my own riding is called Battle River—Crowfoot. There is history associated with Chief Crowfoot and the Battle River and the Cree, Assiniboine and Blackfoot peoples' historical areas along the Battle River. Up until just a few years ago, I had never visited the Dry Island Buffalo Jump Provincial Park or recognized the importance it has on the history of the region that I now have the opportunity to represent.

The reason I bring those things up is that these are not simply places one drives by. It is not simply the Neutral Hills in the distance where I grew up farming. It is the fact that indigenous history is very much a part of the Canadian story and to be proud of that is something that is so very important.

As we address the specifics here of Bill C-29, it is important to lay some of that framework as we talk about how important it is to take seriously the calls to action from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. I am, quite frankly, very proud that it was a Conservative government that initiated the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which gave us the tools required to find truth and to see the process of reconciliation started. The very words of the name of the commission are about finding the truth and seeing that there is reconciliation. It is so vital that we take as seriously today that general call as we do the calls to action in the final report.

I think back often to my attendance at one of the national events that the TRC put forward. I was a university student in the Lower Mainland and we were given the day off school. I cannot say how disappointed I was at how few students attended this national TRC event that happened to be at the PNE right in downtown Vancouver. My university provided busing so that we could attend, so my wife and I attended this event. It was an experience that I will never forget, and I have talked about that in this place before.

We see specifically that Bill C-29 would respond to the TRC calls to action 53 through 56.

I would like to share my support for the fact that we are taking action. I hope the action we take actually provides some results. That is absolutely key, but I do want to share and highlight a few concerns, which I hope will be valuable both in terms of the discussion we have in this place and also as this bill is sent to committee, where it can hopefully be refined to include input from all parties and stakeholders. I love the comment that was made by a questioner earlier to not just treat indigenous people as stakeholders, but to treat them as shareholders. It is a brilliant line. How important it is for there to be ownership in every aspect of what reconciliation is.

That brings me to my first concern, and that is the consultations referred to specifically in call to action 53. I know I have heard from indigenous peoples who have shared their concern that they are not always well represented at the table when it comes to the appointments process or to the policies that are brought forward regarding reconciliation or the host of other concerns, whether it be policing, resource development, issues in Canada's north or rural and remote concerns. There has to be that comprehensive consultation and not simply activism, which in some cases, and this is not to suggest that it is sometimes not well intentioned, can actually hold indigenous peoples back from that empowerment, that reconciliation and that ability to succeed.

I know time is always short when it comes to speeches in this place, so I hope to be able to get through all of the different aspects of it. Regarding call to action 54, there is a lack of clarity in the bill, and I hope when this bill goes to committee that we will find the exact clarity around what the financial provisions related to this bill are. I know there has been money budgeted in past budgets, some of which has gone toward interim processes. We are not exactly sure what the status of every dollar that has been allocated in the past is versus what will be allocated in the future. We need questions answered on that front.

Call to action 55 concerns the reporting mechanism, and this is absolutely key because not only should we be in this place talking about the fulfillment of the calls to action, but we need to make sure that there is a long-term mechanism so that we can see that there is progress being made. That is absolutely vital.

I would simply note, regarding call to action 56, how the calls to action specifically reference the Prime Minister. I am hopeful there will maybe be willingness to change the bill so that it is not simply the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations but the Prime Minister who is given the responsibility, when it comes to those reports.

The last thing indigenous people need is “Ottawa knows best”. We have seen the devastating consequences of that through our nation's history. We must engage with first nations at every step of the process. I was very excited to read that, in my home province of Alberta, there are, I believe, 11 first nations that are now shareholders in an energy project with Enbridge, and I know of others as well that are part of that reconciliation path forward. I know that is the case in some renewable projects and that is the case for other indigenous-owned businesses that I have the honour of being able to point to in my constituency.

It is important to make sure we do not allow high ideals to get in the way of making sure indigenous people are at the very core of both Bill C-29 and everything we do in this place regarding reconciliation.

As my time comes to a close, I would simply say this and repeat the words that my colleague shared earlier that speak to what should be in our hearts. It is to not just speak of indigenous peoples as stakeholders, to not simply seek their advice on paths forward, but to ensure they are truly shareholders in both the reconciliation process and in every aspect of what we are as a nation, both present and going forward.

When I look at indigenous peoples, I see so much potential, so much hope and so much promise. If Bill C-29 moves us in that direction, I am glad to be able to offer that support. However, let us make sure that this also entails the big picture so that indigenous peoples can prosper in this country.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons (Senate)]

Madam Speaker, I listened to the member's speech and I particularly took note of the fact that he took credit for the previous government's truth and reconciliation report. I would remind him that there were protests in the street demanding that the government do that, which finally forced the government to do that.

Nonetheless, I think what is more important is that, of those 94 recommendations, to date, it has only been the Liberal Party that has gone on record to say it would move to implement all of them.

Does the Conservative Party support moving forward and accomplishing all 94 and working with the different jurisdictions to do that? If it does not, which of the 94 does it not support?

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, I find it interesting that, even in the Liberals' talking points on this bill, everything is post-2015. I attended, as I referenced in my speech, one of the national events while the Liberals were certainly not in power. With regard to the truth side of the TRC that led to the reconciliation report and the calls to action, I am proud it was a Conservative government that led that in this country and made sure there was engagement across our nation.

Specifically, to answer the member's question, I find it interesting how he asked me about all 94 but, just in the previous question to the member earlier, he specifically talked about how it was not his government's responsibility to implement all of them. I think he touches on the important aspect of how this is a comprehensive process that involves an all-of-government, different levels of government, approach to ensure that we achieve meaningful reconciliation.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

I never said that.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

If the hon. parliamentary secretary has something to add, he will have to rise and speak during questions and comments.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, on a point of order, the member is attributing comments to me that I simply did not make. He might be confusing me with another member. I never said that.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I believe that is part of debate, but I would ask the hon. member for Battle River—Crowfoot to maybe go back and look at the Hansard after the fact to see if that is what the hon. member actually said.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, I would simply refer to the remarks that the member made earlier and I believe that should settle the point of order.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

As I have indicated to the hon. member for Battle River—Crowfoot, he may want to go and look at what the hon. parliamentary secretary said, and I would say the same thing to the hon. parliamentary secretary.

The hon. member for Timmins—James Bay.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, Neskantaga First Nation is 27 years and counting without clean water. If we go to Neskantaga, they have a clean water plant that has been built. How is it possible, in a country as rich as Canada, that we can get a plant built, through a whole number of contractors who come in, leave and finish the job, but we cannot even get it signed off? That is the reality of what we are talking about.

Webequie First Nation has no fire truck, but had a bunch of terrible fires in the community. The question of reconciliation for people in Treaty No. 9 is the right to be able to make decisions about their territory and to have the funds to do it properly.

Indian Affairs is not broken. It was designed to be broken. It has broken the hopes in communities across our region for 150 years. If that money was transferred to Nishnawbe Aski Nation to look after mental health, to look after infrastructure and to look after education and health, we would see much better outcomes.

I would like to ask my hon. colleague what he thinks about transferring to the treaty territories, so that they can make decisions so that people can have clean water and fire trucks and safe housing.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is a shame that there are people in this country who do not have access to clean drinking water. It is further a shame that, in many cases, it is not due to lack of dollars being spent or even effort being expended. That is where meaningful reconciliation is the required path forward to make sure that we treat indigenous peoples as shareholders in every aspect of what reconciliation means and to make sure there is a path forward to ensure that the reserves referenced by the member from northern Ontario can get access to the skills and expertise needed to complete every step of the process required to get clean drinking water to the taps of those houses in that community.

We should all be working day and night to make sure that happens and that it is not a bureaucratic heavy process in Ottawa that is keeping those solutions from being accomplished.

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources and to the Minister of Northern Affairs]

Madam Speaker, first of all, I would like to acknowledge that Canada's Parliament is located on the unceded and traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people. We are debating a bill that is very relevant not just to those first nation groups but all first nations, Métis and Inuit in Canada.

Before I get into the context of my speech, I want to point out Bill C-29 would establish the national council for reconciliation. This is in response to the calls to action in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's report, in particular calls to action numbers 53 and 56. Basically, the national council for reconciliation would be a permanent, independent and indigenous-led organization that would monitor and support the progress of reconciliation in Canada, including the full implementation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action.

I want to take a few moments to explain how we arrived where we are, because there is some insinuation on the floor of the House that indigenous people did not lead this process and did not make the decisions around what the new legislation would look like and how it would evolve. Nothing could be further from the truth.

As a member of Parliament who represents a large population of survivors of residential schools and as the daughter of a mother who is a survivor of residential school, I do not need to tell anyone how important this piece of legislation is to my family, to my constituents and to many indigenous Canadians in this country. To say this would come to the House of Commons without their full support, their full participation and their co-leading and leading all sections of this piece of legislation would be accusations that are totally false and incorrect.

There are so many things I could talk about as it relates to the TRC. It is something I have been involved with for many years. It is important as well that I walk my colleagues through the work the government has done to get to where we are today. We worked really hard to renew our relationship with indigenous people. One only needs to go back to 2015, when we came into office, to see this. One of the first things we did was to immediately start implementing the calls to action. In fact, we were the only party, and to date I believe still the only party, in Canada that has said we are prepared to implement all 94 recommendations of the TRC.

When we took on the task of designing this legislation, first of all we started engagement with indigenous leaders and communities. We knew they were going to be integral to this process. Every step along the way, they have been engaged, included and leading what has happened here. The process was led by the indigenous leadership of the national council for reconciliation's interim board.

I will explain a bit about the interim board and about the transitional committee that came after that, but both of these were independent bodies. They were made up of first nations, Inuit and Métis members, who all came to the table providing their very best advice and experiences and took into account a very wide range of diverse voices and perspectives from all across Canada.

I also want to acknowledge the monumental work that has been done by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which has really been the foundation for this bill and where we are today in bringing it to the House of Commons.

As many in this chamber will recall, the commission has set forward a pathway of reconciliation to begin the healing necessary in relation to the intergenerational traumas and ongoing impacts caused by the residential school system.

The extensive and historic work of the TRC was pivotal in laying out the groundwork for this legislation, as I said earlier, and the national council for reconciliation was laid out in calls to action numbers 53 and 56. They were two of the 94 that we are on the path of implementing.

In developing the final report, the council took a very inclusive, very indigenous-led approach. It listened to the voices of indigenous people. It heard from survivors of these institutions, as well as from their families and from their communities.

Our government has strived to honour that approach by fully implementing the calls to action and a national council for reconciliation, and by inviting and supporting indigenous leadership throughout the whole process, with its culmination being the development of this proposed legislation.

This process has been led by the truth and reconciliation commissioners, residential school survivors, indigenous people who participated in the TRC process, and everyone who envisioned that an independent, indigenous-led, national oversight body was the way forward.

The commissioners envisioned a national council that would prepare an annual report on the state of reconciliation in which the Government of Canada would respond publicly, outlining its plans to advance reconciliation.

In developing this bill, our government has listened to these diverse voices. Indigenous leaders and community members had the courage to step forward to tell the country about their experiences, how it affected them and how it affected their families throughout their whole lives. Let us not forget that despite the personal and tragic impact this had on them, it is their voices that are guiding us in the right way to help communities, to help future generations of indigenous people, and to help us toward a journey of healing in Canada for all indigenous people. That is remarkable. It is remarkable that those who suffered the most are leading the process of healing today.

After the Truth and Reconciliation Commission fulfilled its mandate, the federal government responded to its calls and established a national council for reconciliation. In doing so, we created an interim board that helped transition to the next steps. It made recommendations on the scope and the mandate of what that council should look like. That was the first step.

Then the federal government appointed the interim board of directors in 2018. That board was comprised of six indigenous leaders who were chosen to represent first nations, Inuit and Métis, including a former truth and reconciliation commissioner, Dr. Wilton Littlechild, who is no stranger to indigenous people in Canada.

This independent board was responsible for providing advice to the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations on establishing the national council for reconciliation. They were all indigenous voices at that table.

The interim board held its engagement process shortly after that, in April 2018, meeting with various indigenous organizations and non-indigenous stakeholders across the country. As part of the council's mandate, members looked at the legislation, at the scope of the council, and, more broadly, at long-term reconciliation.

The interim board carefully considered all it had heard from its engagements with various indigenous and non-indigenous peoples and organizations, as well as at an engagement event in Ottawa, and it developed a final report. This process included, again, a very diverse group of people, with community members, academics, businesses, arts and health professionals, and other interested parties. Each member of the interim board reached out to additional individuals to ask for their views as well on the establishment of the national council for reconciliation.

The government, in addition to including all these people of indigenous background in various capacities across the country, also reached out to non-indigenous Canadians for their thoughts about creating a council. An online platform was created to capture the views of Canadians on the subject, where people could share their thoughts on the mandate of the future national council for reconciliation and what its first steps should be. I can honestly tell members that the input on that was very positive.

The other step forward was the engagement that took place. That happened directly with the national indigenous organizations. The interim board, which is an indigenous board, reached out to the Assembly of First Nations, the ITK and the Métis National Council to seek their input on the mandate for the council. Including this step in the process meant that indigenous community members, as well as political leaders, had the opportunity to express their perspectives about creating the council. When I say political leaders, I mean indigenous political leaders.

At every step of the way, establishing an indigenous-led approach was valuable, necessary and the practice for this entire process. It was only after the interim board had heard a wide spectrum of indigenous voices that it prepared its final report and incorporated what it had heard in that report.

It presented the report in June 2018, containing recommendations relating to the vision, mission, mandate, structure, membership, funding, reporting and legislation for the national council for reconciliation. It also said that it would be independent, permanent and a non-political body. It would also be a catalyst for innovative thought, dialogue and action.

The interim board also made recommendations about how the government should implement those particular priorities, saying that the government should create a transitional committee to support the next steps. It also said the government should draft the legislation, and that it should be co-drafted with the advice and leadership of the transitional committee members. I heard members mention that today. They did not look kindly on that process, but if they had read the recommendations from the interim report of indigenous people, they would have seen that that was the recommendation to government, to set up the transitional committee.

The interim board also recommended that there be more outreach and engagement, so we went from building on the work of the interim board to the Department of Justice preparing a draft legislative framework that could be used for consultation purposes. I think it is important to make special note of that fact.

We can really see that indigenous communities are at the heart of this proposed legislation. The next step after the interim board was, as it recommended, a transitional committee. That was established in December 2021. The members were appointed by the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations, and the committee reviewed the draft legislative framework and considered ways it could improve it to ensure there was a strong and effective council.

The interim board's engagement activities went on from 2018 into the transitional committee, and it then went on to carry out even more engagement with indigenous communities and indigenous peoples. The committee members met with indigenous and non-indigenous experts, including lawyers, data specialists, and financial and reconciliation experts. They gathered feedback and advice in areas such as reconciliation, law, data, organizational finances, information sharing, governance and accountability, and then used it to form their recommendations.

Basically, it was the work that was done all through this process over the last four years that has gotten us to the legislation we see here today. The transitional committee made recommendations on how to strengthen and draft the legislative framework while maintaining the vision, the purpose and the mandate that the council had expressed in the vision that it brought forward.

Today, in the House of Commons, the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations has introduced Bill C-29, which is now being debated with the full inclusion and input of indigenous peoples and communities and experts right across Canada. It is being done after extensive engagement with indigenous peoples and organizations, after leaders have been involved in co-developing the legislative process and ensuring that the legislation that is before us here today is at the heart of what indigenous people have been asking for in this country.

Every step of the way, and I cannot say this enough, this has been an indigenous-led process, starting with the TRC recommendations to the bill that members see before them in the House of Commons today. I am confident that this has led to strong legislation that, if passed, will serve indigenous peoples and Canadians across the country very well in the years to come.

I know that the survivors of residential schools are so impacted by the legacy of what has happened in this country. I know that each and every day they look at ways they can build stronger partnerships with each other, with governments and with Canadians. I also know that they are leading a path of healing, and that is a long journey. We can help on the journey, and what we are doing today is helping. We are responding to what they are asking for. We have allowed them to lead the process, co-develop the legislation and be a part of where this goes into the future.

Before I say meegwetch, nakurmiik, marsi, I would like to move a motion. Pursuant to Standing Order 26(1), I move:

That the House continue to sit beyond the ordinary hour of daily adjournment for the purpose of considering Bill C-29, An Act to provide for the establishment of a national council for reconciliation.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The question is on the motion. Will members who object to the motion please rise?

And five or more members having risen:

Given that more than five members have risen, the motion is deemed to have been withdrawn.

(Motion withdrawn)

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Yorkton—Melville.

[Cathay Wagantall, Conservative, Yorkton—Melville, SK]

Madam Speaker, I appreciated listening to what the member had to say, and I understand that the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations appointed the interim board of directors, the transitional committee and now, in Bill C-29, he would be responsible to select the directors of the national council.

I wonder if the member could clarify this for me. In a past bill, as it was being discussed in the House and debated, we found out that the environmental council that was being created had already been established. Could she tell me whether or not individuals have already been appointed prior to the debate on the bill finishing in the House, and how many if that is the case?

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Madam Speaker, first of all, all of the appointments that are done by the minister and council are done in consultation with indigenous groups and leadership in Canada. That is the process we have, and that is the mantra we follow as a government. In terms of the transitional piece, it was the same process that occurred, and as we move into the new reconciliation board, there is ample opportunity for people to be considered even at this stage.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Uqaqtittiji, I would like to thank the member for mentioning frequently that indigenous peoples have been engaged in this whole process. Indigenous peoples have frequently experienced being deprived of their rights and their rights being infringed.

The 94 calls to action frequently talk about the importance of implementing UNDRIP. I wonder if the member could explain why Bill C-29 does not have any mention of implementing UNDRIP.

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Nunavut for all the work she has done in pushing for, supporting and advocating for the implementation of both UNDRIP and all recommendations in the TRC report.

This particular process falls within the purview of what we are doing with UNDRIP. As members know, UNDRIP is very important to us. We have accepted it. We are leading a process with indigenous governments and groups across Canada and will ensure that everything we do as a government will fall under the purview of what is expected under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.