House of Commons Hansard #82 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was commissioner.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Financial Administration Act Second reading of Bill C-230. The bill C-230 proposes amending the Financial Administration Act to establish a public registry for federal debts of $1 million or more that are waived, written off, or forgiven for corporations, trusts, and partnerships. Proponents highlight the need for transparency and fairness, especially concerning large corporate entities. While Liberals commend the effort, they raise concerns about privacy, commercial sensitivities, and administrative burden, suggesting further review in committee. 7400 words, 1 hour.
Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation Act Second reading of Bill C-10. The bill seeks to establish a new, independent Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation to oversee the federal government's adherence to modern treaties with Indigenous nations. While the Liberal and Bloc parties support this, arguing it enhances accountability and transparency, the Conservative party opposes it, contending it creates unnecessary bureaucracy and duplicates existing oversight by the Auditor General without ensuring ministerial accountability or tangible results. 25800 words, 3 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.
Old Age Security Act First reading of Bill C-261. The bill amends the Old Age Security Act to increase the full pension amount, aiming to provide a dignified retirement for seniors starting at age 65, correcting what the Bloc MP calls an injustice. 200 words.
Ellis Ross Conservative Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Mr. Speaker, I rise to present a petition on behalf of Skeena-Bulkley Valley.
The petition calls for the government to scrap the reckless expansion of MAID to those suffering with a mental illness as a sole underlying medical condition. They also state in this petition that this is wrong since the government has already failed to meet its promises to expand mental health supports.
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today on behalf of constituents in Saanich—Gulf Islands who are concerned with irresponsible practices from industry and large multinational corporations that have led to the destruction and denigration of much of Canada's waterways and wetlands. They are also concerned for the sustainability of our groundwater.
They are calling on the House of Commons to update Canada's water laws and ensure that no industry or corporation's profit line can take priority over the health of our waterways. They want to ensure that there are specialists and experts guiding the Parliament of Canada to protect our water.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to table yet another petition in regard to many of the constituents I represent and beyond, in particular in the city of Winnipeg. They have been advocating for the need to see more direct flights from the city of Winnipeg going into India or at the very least Europe. This is because of the growing size of the community and the demand to be able to travel to countries like India. They are calling upon Parliament to encourage the Winnipeg Airports Authority and other organizations to get on board so that we can see more flights.
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I would ask that all questions be allowed to stand at this time, please.
Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings
Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings
The Assistant Deputy Speaker John Nater
[For text of questions and responses, see Written Questions website]
The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-10, An Act respecting the Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Speaker, let me start by acknowledging that Canada's Parliament is located on the unceded, unsurrendered territory of the Anishinabe Algonquin people, whose presence here reaches back to time immemorial.
I am honoured to rise in the House today to speak in support of Bill C-10, an act respecting the commissioner for modern treaty implementation. This legislation represents a vital step forward, one that would strengthen accountability, enhance transparency and build trust with modern treaty partners across the country. It would also reinforce our shared commitment to reconciliation and to ensuring that Canada keeps its promises.
For too long, there has been a gap between the commitments made in modern treaties and the reality of their implementation. This bill would take a significant step toward closing that gap. By establishing an independent agent of Parliament, the commissioner for modern treaty implementation, Canada would ensure that progress on modern treaty obligations is transparent, measurable and accountable. This is not a symbolic gesture. It is a concrete, practical reform that would support real progress in implementing the rights and relationships enshrined in modern treaties.
Our government has made significant policy changes that enable us to conclude treaty negotiations faster and more effectively. As a result, Liberal governments over the past decade have signed or initialled five modern treaties, including, most recently, with the Manitoba Métis Federation in 2024. Right now, Canada's new government is nearing the initialling of six new modern treaties, and we will continue to advance this important work alongside indigenous partners. This bill and the commissioner it would create would build trust, enhance transparency and deliver the results that modern treaty partners have been advocating for. When it comes to modern treaties, we intend to listen to indigenous partners.
The commissioner would provide independent oversight of federal activities related to modern treaty implementation, ensuring that progress is visible and its shortcomings are addressed transparently. Through regular reporting and public accountability, Canadians and modern treaty partners alike would have a clear picture of how Canada is meeting its obligations. Accountability is at the heart of this legislation.
The commissioner would join a distinguished group of agents of Parliament, officers who safeguard the principles of our democracy, like the Auditor General, who ensures public funds are used effectively; the Privacy Commissioner, who protects Canadians' personal information; the Information Commissioner, who upholds the right to know; and the Commissioner of Official Languages, who defends linguistic rights across federal institutions. Each plays a vital role in strengthening public trust, yet until now, there has been no independent oversight to ensure that Canada fulfills its constitutional obligations under modern treaties. That is the gap this legislation would fill.
The commissioner would have full and direct access to the information required to evaluate federal performance, a level of independence on par with other oversight officers such as the Auditor General and Privacy Commissioner. This is the benchmark of openness and accountability, essential to maintaining public confidence and ensuring credible, evidence-based oversight. Transparency is not about blame. It is about clarity, openness and shared progress.
When modern treaty partners, Parliament and Canadians can see how modern treaty implementation is progressing, trust grows. Imagine a future where all Canadians can access clear information on where treaty commitments are being fulfilled and where more work is needed. That is what this bill would deliver.
Transparency empowers communities, strengthens governance and builds the foundation for a better relationship between Canada and indigenous peoples. Transparency and trust make good governance stronger. They turn promises into measurable progress and ensure that reconciliation is grounded in evidence and results.
Reconciliation takes shape through the everyday work of implementing commitments, resolving gaps and fostering trust. This legislation would move reconciliation from aspiration to administration, ensuring that the work of partnership is measured and maintained. Modern treaties are at the core of this journey. They affirm indigenous rights and outline shared responsibilities for the future.
However, treaties are only as strong as their implementation. The bill would ensure that implementation will be guided by independent oversight, clear reporting and mutual accountability. By embedding transparency and accountability into our systems, we are advancing reconciliation not just with words but with action.
The commissioner's work would complement Canada's commitments under the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act. These frameworks remind us that oversight and accountability are not obstacles to reconciliation; they are its foundation.
What is great about the legislation is that it was co-developed with modern treaty partners. Over 130 indigenous governments and organizations were engaged in shaping this proposal, ensuring the design reflects their experience and priorities. That process has already built trust, and that trust will continue once the commissioner begins their work.
As the Tli?cho Government stated, “The Commissioner for Modern Treaty has been decades in the making. This is an exciting moment that our hard work together has paid off, and this important mechanism for accountability and oversight will be established.”
Through ongoing engagement and dialogue, the commissioner would ensure that the perspectives of modern treaty partners are reflected in the reviews and recommendations. This is how partnership becomes policy and how reconciliation becomes reality.
Modern treaties are much more than legal instruments. They are blueprints for opportunity. They provide a framework for governance, education, infrastructure and economic development. When implemented effectively, they enable indigenous governments to plan long-term, attract investment and create jobs. By improving implementation and accountability, the bill would strengthen those outcomes, not only for indigenous peoples but for all Canadians.
Modern treaties contribute to stronger local economies, better infrastructure and sustainable growth. When indigenous communities thrive, Canada thrives. As an agent of Parliament, the commissioner would report directly to Parliament, ensuring independence from political influence. These reports would highlight successes, identify challenges and recommend systemic improvements to ensure better outcomes. This accountability mechanism would serve both Parliament and modern treaty partners, providing transparent information and supporting continuous progress.
Accountability is not about perfection. It is about persistence, learning and the courage to adapt. It shows modern treaty partners that Canada is prepared to hold itself to the same standard of responsibility it asks of others.
The bill is about accountability, trust and reconciliation in action. It ensures that Canada fulfills not only the letter of its modern treaty obligations but also the spirit, grounded in partnership, respect and shared responsibility. The commissioner for modern treaty implementation would bring independent oversight, greater transparency and meaningful accountability. This is not a cost but a tool that would prevent disputes, strengthen relationships and deliver lasting results.
We have made progress, but we know there is more to do. Let us seize upon this opportunity to make reconciliation real, not only with words but with measurable results. The bill strengthens the institutions that uphold reconciliation, not by rewriting the past but by ensuring accountability for the future. By supporting the act, we affirm that transparency and trust are the cornerstones of our shared journey forward. Meegwetch. Qujannamiik. Marsi.
Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford, BC
Mr. Speaker, what can Parliament not do that is contained in Bill C-10? My concern with the bill is that it is simply an admonishment that Parliament has not been doing its job holding the executive accountable already.
What is to stop the existing standing committee from issuing a report or conducting an audit? Parliament already has these powers. Why do we need another officer of Parliament to do the job of parliamentarians?
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Speaker, while it is true that existing committees can undertake studies of this kind, many committees do a lot of work on many different things.
What is important about this approach is that it is a focus mechanism that is deeply integrated in our relationship with indigenous people and would allow this new agent of Parliament to focus very directly, on an ongoing basis, on matters that are of concern to indigenous partners.
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Mr. Speaker, my colleague's intervention on modern treaties was heartfelt and sincere.
This commissioner will indeed play a role vital to us as parliamentarians. We will be able to take responsibility and ask the right questions. In short, we support this bill. I had the opportunity to speak at first reading.
Here is my question. After my speech, I received a lot of feedback, especially from the Land Claims Agreements Coalition. Incidentally, it will be holding an event on Parliament Hill tomorrow, and I encourage all parliamentarians to attend.
If there is one person who is especially important to this coalition, it is Jim Aldridge. I would like to propose that this bill be named after him in committee. It would be known as Jim Aldridge's bill. I think this would mean a lot to everyone who has had a hand in modern coalition issues over the past few decades. I would like my colleague to comment on this idea.
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's support for the bill.
In terms of what we call it, that is really up to the legislation. I have no objection to his suggestion, but I would suggest that once it, hopefully, passes second reading, this is something that could be addressed in committee.
John-Paul Danko Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON
Mr. Speaker, my colleague made a key point here: that this legislation was co-developed with treaty partners and indigenous rights holders in order to ensure accountability, oversight and transparency and to build trust.
I wonder if the member could elaborate on what the input was from rights holders and how it was included in the legislation that is before us.
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Speaker, I have a list here of dozens of indigenous partners that were consulted. In my speech, I mentioned there were 130 organizations and indigenous governments that were consulted.
This position of an independent agent of Parliament has been requested by indigenous partners and peoples for at least 20 years. It is critical in being able to focus on the deficiencies in the processes and to make sure that we achieve effective progress going forward.
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
Uqaqtittiji, I completely agree that this is such an important act of reconciliation. I wonder if the member agrees that reconciliation not only happens through government but has to be an effort by everyone who can help ensure that indigenous peoples have a better sense of well-being.
I wonder if the member agrees that with the Conservatives being opposed to this bill, it also shows they are not supporting reconciliation with the modern treaty partners.
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Speaker, I certainly agree with my hon. colleague about how important this bill is for all of us, each and every person in this country who benefits from a long-time establishment on former indigenous lands, unceded and unreconciled. We all have a stake in the outcome, and we all have something to offer going forward.
Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford, BC
Mr. Speaker, in reference to the debate that just took place, I do not believe the Liberal government has passed very many treaties in the last decade. It is almost as though the Liberals are slapping themselves on the wrist for not doing their job.
Today, I rise to oppose Bill C-10, an act respecting the commissioner for modern treaty implementation. The stated aim of the bill is better accountability in modern treaty implementation. It sounds attractive, but what this bill would really do is create another officer of Parliament and another office, expanding oversight without enforcement, duplication without delivery and bureaucracy without results.
At the heart of this debate is a constitutional first principle. Signing and enacting treaties is the duty of the Crown, of the executive, and not of Parliament. Our core functions in the House are to debate, scrutinize and approve spending, as well as to hold the executive to account. Creating an officer of Parliament to hover over executive treaty work veers away from our legislative remit and blurs lines of responsibility.
The bill's machinery of appointment, mandate, review, audit and tabling would recast a fundamentally executive obligation as a parliamentary oversight project, which is a category error. Parliament should enforce accountability through votes, questions, committee scrutiny and the public accounts process, not by inventing new officers to monitor what ministers should already execute. The honour of the Crown is upheld by action, not by multiplying overseers.
Modern treaties are not obscure documents. They are transparent, publicly accountable instruments that reconcile aboriginal rights and title with Crown title and give certainty to all parties. They are accessible. Nothing is redacted and they acknowledge one country, one set of laws and management plans designed to benefit everyone.
My colleague, the MP for Skeena—Bulkley Valley, has noted that modern treaties provide the most transparent and accountable form of reconciliation. Nobody is put at a disadvantage and the final agreements can be accessed and read by anyone. The member from the Haisla Nation would know better than most people in this chamber.
The bill would hand the commissioner discretion to set priorities, conduct reviews and performance audits, issue findings and recommendations, and table final reports in Parliament. It would require coordination with the Auditor General to avoid duplication and provide access to information and immunity provisions, yet nowhere does the bill compel ministers or departments to act when they fail to meet treaty obligations. It would be monitoring without muscle.
For years, the Auditor General has produced reports detailing implementation delays and fragmented responsibilities. The problem has never been insufficient reporting. The problem has been a lack of ministerial responsibility and follow-through. Adding a new office and more reports would not build a single home, deliver clean water or move one project to completion. Accountability requires consequences, not another commissioner.
If we want real progress, we must return to fundamental ministerial responsibility. We should mandate clarity and require the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations to embed modern treaty implementation milestones in departmental mandates and Treasury Board frameworks, so obligations would not be optional, but operational. We should have routine reporting to Parliament. The minister could proactively report to Parliament during Routine Proceedings, tabling quarterly treaty implementation statements, including what has been met, what has been delayed and how each delay would be fixed, with specific dates and supporting documents. This is how Parliament is supposed to exercise its core function of scrutinizing performance and spending in public.
We can act on audits. When the Auditor General flags failures, the minister should table an action plan, perhaps in 60 days, and committees should hold accountability hearings until commitments are met. There should be consequences for non-performance, tying senior official performance pay to treaty milestones and, where chronic delays persist, changing leadership. Accountability must be felt inside departments, not outsourced to a new office.
My colleague from the Haisla Nation emphasized that overlap issues among first nations should be worked out between the affected nations and not left to the courts or government to impose solutions. This is real partnership that respects indigenous leadership to resolve boundaries through negotiation rather than litigation.
He notes that we need to call out the current government for not living up to its obligations to treaty bands that negotiated in good faith and sets out two practical Conservative solutions. Number one is that the government needs to do its job to respect and implement treaties. Number two is that, if a treaty band has an issue with government, it should go to MPs to help its representatives amplify its voice. It should come to Ottawa to hold us accountable for what we are here to do.
These principles align with a ministerial responsibility model. They empower the parties to solve overlaps, require the minister to remove federal roadblocks, and ensure Parliament has the performance lens to see whether the minister has, in fact, delivered.
Members can consider the bill's architecture. The commissioner's appointment and tenure mandate is framed around assessing consistency with Crown honour and broad objectives, discretion over reviews and audits, reports tabled by Speakers and referred to committees, annual and special reports, parliamentary reviews within 10 years, independent reviews every five to seven years and consequential amendments adding the office to key statutes. All of this is oversight machinery, but there are no enforcement levers to compel execution of obligations already within our laws.
We are proliferating process instead of guaranteeing performance. We are not fixing diffusion over responsibility across departments; we are adding a new layer above it. By making an officer of Parliament central to executive treaty functions, we would be subtly shifting accountability away from ministers and towards an umpire whose principal tool would be a report. That is not how we deliver reconciliation.
Canadians are facing real affordability pressures. The answers cannot be to grow administrative overhead while frontline outcomes stall. Dollars should flow to delivery, not duplication. If we need transparency, we can use existing parliamentary tools such as committee mandates, Order Paper questions, supply votes, public accounts and Auditor General follow-ups, so performance and spending are scrutinized where they belong.
The preamble to Bill C-10 invokes UNDRIP, modern treaties as living documents and the honour of the Crown. Those are important aspirations, but they are realized only when governments do what they have promised, on time and in full, not when we create a new office to monitor yet another delay.
Modern treaties do deliver certainty for indigenous governments, neighbouring communities, investors and private property owners who need predictable rules. This is reconciliation by results, grounded in the rule of law.
Conservatives, of course, support modern treaties and indigenous communities seeking to move beyond the paternalistic Indian Act. We will oppose Bill C-10 because it confuses monitoring for delivery. Conservatives will insist on ministerial responsibility, acting on audits and the respect of a practical approach, one that leads to real results.
The honour of the Crown is not measured by the number of commissioners we appoint; it is measured by promises kept. Modern treaties deserve execution, not another report. For these reasons, I will vote against this bill.
Ron McKinnon Liberal Coquitlam—Port Coquitlam, BC
Mr. Speaker, the member mentioned that Parliament's remit is not only legislation but also holding government to account. He mentioned many times the Auditor General. I would remind the member that the role of this new commissioner is exactly in parallel with that of the Auditor General. Its job is to inform Parliament, to make Parliament more able to hold ministers to account and to hold government to account.
Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford, BC
Mr. Speaker, I will note, as I did in my speech, that there are many reports from the Auditor General outlining the issues we have had with implementing treaty rights for indigenous peoples of Canada. They have never been followed through on.
The argument I was making throughout my speech is that we do not actually enforce the mandate of the executive of the Crown to fulfill treaty obligations. I do not believe another officer of Parliament would lead us to better objectives.
Alexis Deschênes Bloc Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech and his explanations. The Bloc Québécois supports this bill and believes that it gives parliamentarians a tool to put pressure on the executive branch in the event that it fails to meet its obligations.
I understand what my colleague is saying. We should be able to expect the government to do its job and we, as MPs, could apply pressure. However, let us consider the example of the Auditor General of Canada. She is the one who informed us last October that when people were calling the Canada Revenue Agency, they were getting accurate answers only 17% of the time.
Why does my colleague not think it would be beneficial to have another tool that could keep us more informed as parliamentarians?
Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford, BC
Mr. Speaker, what lies behind my opposition to this is that we, as individual members of Parliament, have so much more power than I think almost any of us even attempt to exercise. If this bill is successful, all the powers outlined in Bill C-10 for the actions of the commissioner, the officer of Parliament, would be for what we as members of Parliament already can do.
If we care about seeing treaties operationalize, and in the context of British Columbia this is so important right now, first and foremost we have to devote ourselves as MPS to holding the minister accountable. We can do that through the tools we have already. It is up to us, the elected people. We should not dismiss our responsibilities.
William Stevenson Conservative Yellowhead, AB
Mr. Speaker, I can feel the hon. member's frustration with regard to what has gone on. Does he see a pattern over the last 10 years? This is just an extenuation of what has gone on with things not being accounted for when it comes to the Liberals dealing with certain things, specifically things in the Indian Act. How is this going to make anything better?
Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford, BC
Mr. Speaker, I wish I were standing here today and the Minister of Indigenous Services was before Parliament saying that they had signed multiple treaties that were going to empower young indigenous Canadians to start businesses, have access to their resources and have better certainty for home ownership. However, we are not there, and we have not seen any of that in the last decade. That is unfortunate.
I do not believe in establishing another officer of Parliament because it will lead to more red tape. Again, in the last 10 years, there have been no treaties signed. Why not? Where has the minister been? The minister has not done their job.
Doug Shipley Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
Mr. Speaker, why does the member oppose this commissioner?