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.

Topics

line drawing of robot

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.

Statements by Members

Question Period

The Conservatives criticize the government's economic failures, highlighting soaring costs of living, high food inflation, and significant job losses in manufacturing. They condemn billions in EV subsidies benefiting the American auto sector, the Cúram IT fiasco affecting seniors, and the rise in extortion by criminals exploiting refugee claims. They also call for Jimmy Lai's release.
The Liberals emphasize Canada's resilient economy, significant job creation, and major infrastructure investments. They highlight measures to boost affordability through tax breaks and a grocery benefit. The party defends the OAS modernization project and their auto strategy, while also discussing solutions for extortion, investments in healthcare data, and gender equality funding.
The Bloc condemns the government's Cúram software fiasco, which has caused OAS benefit issues for 85,000 pensioners, incurring massive cost overruns. They also criticize Ottawa's inaction on Driver Inc. and Canada Post's contracts with non-compliant companies.
The NDP presses the government to act on the Inuit child first initiative to support Inuit children and address poverty.
The Greens advocate for procedural fairness in Question Period for members of unrecognized parties.

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.

Petitions

Adjournment Debates

Omnibus budget bill division Elizabeth May raises concerns about Bill C-15 allowing ministers to exempt entities from Canadian law, and finds the safeguards insufficient. Claude Guay responds that the exemptions are meant to support innovation, would be temporary, and would protect public health and the environment, with transparency and accountability measures in place.
Pipeline to the pacific Tamara Jansen criticizes the government's preconditions, particularly net-zero targets and carbon capture, delaying pipeline construction. Claude Guay says the government is committed to energy projects while respecting Indigenous rights, citing the Building Canada Act and partnerships with Indigenous communities. Jansen calls for a straightforward approach without "ideological add-ons".
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:10 p.m.

Bloc

Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC

Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague on her speech. She talked about something very important, something that I see as a hallmark of the Conservative Party, specifically, government accountability. That is what the Bloc Québécois wanted to pursue with our bill, and yet that is what the Conservatives rejected. Under our bill, the government would be required to table new trade agreements in the House before they are adopted so that members could review them in advance, which is not currently the case.

I would like my colleague to explain how she can talk to us today about accountability when her party rejected a bill introduced by the Bloc Québécois calling for exactly that. I would like her to explain that inconsistency that I see here.

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:10 p.m.

Conservative

Melissa Lantsman Conservative Thornhill, ON

Madam Speaker, I appreciate that the member might not realize that we are speaking to Bill C-10, but I will never apologize for demanding accountability from the government, from the House, from the officers of Parliament and from the bureaucracy, which have promised things in this country and have failed to deliver on outcomes. That is not something that Conservatives will ever apologize for.

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:10 p.m.

Liberal

John-Paul Danko Liberal Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON

Madam Speaker, I appreciate that the member opposite raised the need for Canada to engage in nation-to-nation consultation, or duty to consult with indigenous nations.

She spoke about pipelines and other projects. The Prime Minister and our government have been clear that we need consultation and a better relationship with indigenous nations. Her leader has stood in the House and said that the federal government should basically override indigenous rights. Would the member not agree that a stronger, closer relationship between indigenous rights holders and the federal government is necessary?

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:15 p.m.

Conservative

Melissa Lantsman Conservative Thornhill, ON

Madam Speaker, I would like to just put on the record that the government has been anything but clear regarding its plans on building a pipeline in this country or on getting a pipeline to tidewater. In fact, it is the House who has given the—

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:15 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès) Alexandra Mendes

We are out of time.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Kitchener Centre.

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:15 p.m.

Conservative

Kelly DeRidder Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-10, legislation that would create a new office of the commissioner for modern treaty implementation. This bill is presented by the government as a step toward accountability and reconciliation, but when we look closely at what it would actually do, or just as importantly, what it would not do, it becomes clear that Bill C-10 mistakes process for progress and bureaucracy for leadership.

I want to begin by stating clearly and without hesitation the principle that guides our position. The problem in Canada's modern treaty system is not lack of oversight; it is a lack of execution. It is not a shortage of watchdogs; it is a shortage of accountability. The solution is not another expensive federal office in Ottawa.

For years now, indigenous treaty partners have raised serious and legitimate concerns about the pace and consistency of treaty implementation. Commitments are made, but deadlines are missed. Responsibilities are spread across multiple departments with no clear line of accountability. Files are passed from one desk to another, while communities wait for obligations that were promised, often many years ago, to finally be fulfilled.

Those frustrations are real and well documented, and they deserve a response that actually fixes the problem, but the government wants Canadians to believe that the solution is to create yet another layer of bureaucracy, a new multi-million dollar office whose primary function is to monitor and report on whether ministers and departments are actually doing their work.

The truth is far simpler. We already know the work is not being done. Indigenous partners know it, the Auditor General knows it, the courts know it and the government itself knows it. What we lack is not information; what we lack is leadership.

Bill C-10 is not accountability; it is political insulation. It would allow ministers to point to an independent office and say that the commissioner will study it or the commissioner will report on it, while the underlying failures continue. At a time when Canadians are struggling to afford groceries, housing and basic necessities, the idea that the federal government's response to failure is to expand bureaucracy rather than demand results is the exact opposite of responsible governance.

No one in the House disputes the importance of modern treaties. These agreements are not symbolic gestures. They are constitutionally protected, legally binding commitments. When they are not implemented properly, the damage is not theoretical. It affects housing, infrastructure, economic development and self-governance. It erodes trust and undermines reconciliation in very real ways.

Let us be honest about what this bill would actually do. Bill C-10 would create oversight without enforcement, audits without consequences and reports without requiring action. The proposed commissioner would have the authority to review, assess, comment and report, but they would not have the authority to compel departments to release funding, force ministers to meet deadlines, or enforce treaty rights. The power to act would remain exactly where it is today, with the same ministers and departments that have failed to deliver.

Therefore, we must ask ourselves what would actually change. The answer is, very little. We have seen this approach before, and it has failed. Canada does not suffer from a lack of reports; there are dozens of them. The Office of the Auditor General alone has produced audit after audit for nearly two decades. These audits are independent, thorough and clear in their conclusions, yet the pattern is always the same. The reports are tabled, the failures are acknowledged and then nothing happens.

A new office would not fix a culture of inaction. A new commissioner would not manufacture the political will the government has lacked for more than a decade. Oversight without enforcement is not accountability; it is theatre.

Conservatives believe in the responsible use of public funds. We also believe in not reinventing the wheel; we believe in fixing it. The Auditor General already provides Parliament with credible, authoritative oversight. The problem is not that the Auditor General lacks capacity. The problem is that the government has repeatedly ignored the findings. Instead of strengthening accountability within that existing framework, the government's answer is to create another body that would duplicate work and provide yet more reports that can be safely ignored.

Even more concerning is the way Bill C-10 would actually weaken parliamentary accountability. Under the legislation, Parliament itself cannot initiate audits. Only the commissioner, the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations or a treaty partner may do so. That means that elected representatives are further removed from oversight, not empowered by it.

The bill also cannot be viewed in isolation from the government's broader record. Between 2015 and 2017, the government created multiple offices, committees and frameworks designed to improve treaty implementation. Despite all of that additional bureaucracy, the government has not concluded one single modern treaty in over 10 years. That record matters.

By contrast, under the previous Conservative government, five modern treaties were successfully negotiated and implemented in just six years. Those agreements advanced self-governance, clarified land rights and created certainty for indigenous communities. They were achieved not through endless monitoring but through leadership, accountability and a willingness to deliver results.

Supporters of Bill C-10 point to indigenous organizations that have called for independent oversight. Their frustration is understandable. Communities have waited far too long for commitments to be honoured. However, it is also important to recognize what treaty partners are actually asking for. They are not asking for more studies. They are not asking for an Ottawa-based institution to observe their frustration from a distance. They are asking for certainty. They are asking for timelines that mean something. They are asking for a federal government that follows through on what it has already agreed to. They are asking for results.

For many indigenous governments, the problem is not that Canada lacks insight into treaty implementation. The problem is that the responsibility is fragmented across multiple departments, with no single minister clearly accountable when things go wrong. When obligations fall between mandates, nothing moves. When timelines slip, no one answers for it. Bill C-10 does not resolve that fragmentation; it formalizes it.

That is why Conservatives believe that the focus must remain where the Constitution places it, on the Crown itself. The honour of the Crown cannot be delegated. It cannot be outsourced to an independent office. It rests with the ministers, who have the authority, the resources and the obligation to deliver. When that responsibility is diluted, reconciliation does not advance; it stalls. In fact, many indigenous leaders have previously argued that even if oversight needed to be strengthened, it should be done with existing institutions, particularly the Office of the Auditor General, rather than through a parallel bureaucracy.

True reconciliation respects indigenous governments and partners, not as stakeholders managed through an additional federal process. Indigenous nations are fully capable of participating directly in accountability and oversight without another Ottawa-based office inserted between them and the Crown.

The Conservatives do not come to the debate empty-handed. We come with a clear and credible alternative, one that focuses on execution, not expansion. We believe that treaty obligations must be embedded directly into departmental mandates so that responsibility is clear and unavoidable. Ministers must report directly to Parliament on their progress, not to a commissioner. Deadlines must matter. When commitments are missed, explanations must be given and consequences must follow. Accountability must reach the ministerial level, where it belongs. This is how accountability works in every other area of government. Treaty implementation should not be treated differently.

Reconciliation is not advanced by creating offices. It is advanced by meeting commitments. A commissioner will not build homes, accelerate negotiations or enforce treaty rights. Only leadership can do that. Indigenous people deserve more than symbolic structures and carefully worded reports. They deserve a government that keeps its promises. They deserve implementation, not excuses.

Bill C-10 offers the appearance of action without addressing the cause of failure. For those reasons, Conservatives oppose the bill and will continue to demand not more bureaucracy but real accountability and real results.

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:25 p.m.

Liberal

Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Madam Speaker, a commissioner is an independent officer of Parliament. We already have a number of different commissioners, such as the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and the Commissioner of Official Languages.

This bill would establish a commissioner for modern treaty implementation. This would be a permanent oversight and accountability mechanism specifically designed to hold the Government of Canada accountable to Parliament. A commissioner does not answer to ministers or to the government. A commissioner answers to Parliament. This mechanism would provide greater transparency and accountability to Parliament. Essentially, if there is a problem, people who feel that their rights have been violated can turn to the commissioner.

Why would my colleague deny the modern treaty partners, who worked with the government on the development of this bill, the opportunity to have a permanent oversight mechanism that will be accountable to Parliament?

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:25 p.m.

Conservative

Kelly DeRidder Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, the Auditor General also can produce independent reports that the minister would be accountable to answer to. Creating another level of bureaucracy is not going to implement actions that are required to meet modern treaty. We do not need another level of bureaucracy. We can already get the reports and the actions from the Auditor General, so let us just work on actioning instead of creating bureaucracy.

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:25 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Madam Speaker, in the spirit of reconciliation, the Bloc Québécois supported Bill C‑77 in the last Parliament and we will support Bill C‑10 as well.

From what I understand, my colleague is telling us that having more transparency in the implementation of treaties would create more awful bureaucracy. A few days ago, we voted on Bill C‑228, introduced by the Bloc Québécois, which called for free trade agreements to be debated in Parliament. That bill would not have created any new bureaucracy at all. The Conservatives always like to say that they do not mind working long days in Parliament. When it was time to vote on Bill C‑228, which did not create any new bureaucracy, my colleague voted against it.

When it comes down to it, is it possible the Conservatives just have a bit of an issue with transparency?

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:25 p.m.

Conservative

Kelly DeRidder Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, today we are speaking to Bill C-10, and we understand the frustrations of indigenous communities and partners that there have not been any modern treaties completed within the past decade. That understanding is true; it is valuable, and what we want to have from the government is action towards the modern treaty, not creating extra bureaucracy and extra levels where accountability can be mistaken for results based on reports that mean nothing, that are tabled and not actioned. We need action.

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:25 p.m.

Conservative

Ellis Ross Conservative Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Madam Speaker, back in my day, I was a treaty negotiator for my band. We did not sign a treaty, but I heard the same complaints for 20 years. Members of government and members of the Bloc talk about transparency, which has been alive and well in this place for the last 20 to 30 years. We have seen hundreds of reports go through this chamber on what the first nations are complaining about in terms of implementation. What we are talking about here is accountability. What is the use if the minister in charge will not make a decision or not interact with the first nation that signed one of the highest reconciliation agreements in Canada, which is protected by the Constitution?

Do we need more transparency, or do we need more accountability in terms of Bill C-10?

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:25 p.m.

Conservative

Kelly DeRidder Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, I absolutely agree that we need more accountability and we need more action. We do not need more research. We do not need more reports. We need to work with indigenous partners and complete the modern treaties of today. We need accountability to make sure it is actually done.

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:25 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Madam Speaker, my colleague says that, ultimately, a commissioner would just table reports that nobody reads. What about the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, among others?

Can my colleague tell us which other commissioners who report directly to Parliament are useless and why their work is useless?

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:30 p.m.

Conservative

Kelly DeRidder Conservative Kitchener Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, I just want to clarify. I did not say the reports would not be read. What has been happening is that the reports are read; they are tabled; the failures are acknowledged, and then nothing is done. Creating another level of bureaucracy is not going to change what is happening right now. We need to get things done. We need accountability, full stop.

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:30 p.m.

Conservative

Rhonda Kirkland Conservative Oshawa, ON

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise today, as always, on behalf of my neighbours and friends in Oshawa to speak about something that touches the honour of the Crown and the relationship that has shaped this country since long before Confederation. That relationship cannot be repaired with press releases, new titles or fresh layers of bureaucracy. It is rebuilt by keeping promises and by doing the work we have already agreed to do. Action, as the hon. member for Kitchener Centre said, is the key here.

For years, governments have talked about reconciliation, but talk without accountability leaves indigenous partners waiting. Bill C-10, the proposal to create a commissioner for modern treaty implementation, is being presented as a fix for decades of federal failures. In truth, it creates another office to point out the same shortcomings we have known about for years. The Auditor General has already flagged them. Indigenous leaders have already flagged them. Treaty partners have already flagged them. The problem is not a shortage of oversight; the problem is a shortage of execution.

Today I want to speak clearly about where treaty implementation stands in this country, what modern treaties actually are and why I do not believe another multi-million dollar bureaucracy will help move us closer to honouring the commitments that have already been made. Modern treaties are comprehensive land claims agreements that clarify land, resources and governance, as well as constitutional rights. Many include self-government provisions. Some stand alone as self-government agreements. They are enforceable and binding. Their purpose is to allow indigenous nations to move beyond the paternalism of the Indian Act and toward true self-determination.

Understanding this matters because implementation is not about creating new oversight offices. It is about ensuring departments respect the authority and commitments already set out in law. We saw this with the Whitecap Dakota self-government agreement that passed with Conservative support in 2023. It is a step forward but not a full modern treaty. There is still work to be done, and that work has nothing to do with the absence of a commissioner and everything to do with the departments not following through. How would a commissioner suddenly fix what ministers have failed to do for years? Ministers already have the ability to demand results, and departments already have responsibilities.

I believe what has been missing is leadership and consequences. We have historical proof. We know progress is possible. Under Prime Minister Harper, five modern treaties were completed in six years. Under the Liberal government, after more than a decade in power, not a single modern treaty has been completed. Currently, 70 indigenous groups are negotiating with the federal government and nothing has been finalized. That is not an oversight failure. That is a failure in leadership.

The government claims Bill C-10 is needed to identify gaps, but we already have decades of reports spelling out those gaps. The Auditor General has produced major audits on treaty implementation, land entitlements, governance barriers and negotiation processes. Many recommendations are still sitting untouched. If the government has ignored the Auditor General's findings for almost 20 years, why would a new commissioner suddenly change anything? Departments do not fail because no one is watching. They fail because there are no consequences when they do.

This is not the first time the Liberals have tried to fix failure by creating more bureaucracy. Between 2015 and 2017, they opened the modern treaty implementation office, the assessment of modern treaty implications office, the modern treaty management environment, the deputy ministers' oversight committee, the reconciliation secretariat and a performance framework. There are six separate entities and not a single modern treaty has been completed. Now they want a seventh office, one with no enforcement power and no ability to hold ministers accountable.

Meanwhile, communities continue to face real challenges. Housing shortages remain severe, water systems remain unsafe and policing is still not recognized as an essential service despite years of promises. Economic development is slowed by federal bottlenecks. Climate impacts disproportionately affect indigenous communities that have been calling for action for years. All these issues are rooted in operational failures, not oversight failures. No commissioner will build a home, repair a water plant or hire police officers. What is missing is political will and departmental discipline.

We cannot overlook the federal failures in procurement and contracting that have hurt indigenous communities. We have seen firms falsely claim indigenous identity in order to win contracts. We have seen millions wasted on programs that produce very little. Do members remember ArriveCAN? It alone is a reminder of how mismanagement can drain not only public trust but also public resources. A commissioner cannot stop fraud or fix broken procurement. Only proper internal controls, transparency, consequences and accountability can do that.

Across the country, indigenous leaders are asking for reliable partnerships and predictable implementation, not more Ottawa-centric offices. They want fiscal arrangements that are clear, timely and fair. They want departments to stop shuffling responsibilities among each other, leaving treaty partners caught in the middle. They want the authority in their agreements respected, not second-guessed.

This is why accountability must be political, not symbolic. If a department ignores a treaty commitment, its minister should answer for it. If a treaty obligation is delayed, the officials responsible should be held accountable. A commissioner cannot do that. Only leadership can. Indigenous partners should have a direct role in holding departments accountable instead of waiting for another report confirming what they already know.

Conservatives support modern treaties. We support indigenous self-government. We support moving beyond the Indian Act and strengthening nation-to-nation relationships. However, we do not support the idea that accountability can be outsourced to yet another office. Reconciliation is not achieved by hiring more bureaucrats. It is achieved by honouring the commitments we have already made, enforcing obligations and delivering measurable results.

Bill C-10 offers the appearance of accountability but not the substance of it, and that seems to be a recurring theme in the 45th Parliament. We have the appearance of accountability but not the substance of it. We have the appearance of action but not the substance of it. We have the appearance of deals, but these are just MOUs. It is a recurring theme, and this legislation continues with that theme.

The honour of the Crown is not restored by expanding government. It is restored by fulfilling promises that already exist in law. The bill would not make departments work harder. It would not increase ministerial responsibility. It would not enforce treaty obligations. What Canada needs is leadership, execution and real partnership with indigenous governments, not another office monitoring the inaction of others.

Let us do the work of implementing the treaties we already have instead of inventing new bureaucracies to explain why the work has not been done. We need promises kept, not paperwork created. That is what reconciliation requires.

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Liberal

Bienvenu-Olivier Ntumba Liberal Mont-Saint-Bruno—L’Acadie, QC

Madam Speaker, I heard my colleague listing the treaties earlier. However, she forgot to mention that we are the first government to establish a national day of remembrance for first nations. That is a powerful gesture that we made to start reconciliation off on the right foot. We wanted to establish a day on which to think about how we can move forward together.

What does she think about this day that we established as a government?

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Conservative

Rhonda Kirkland Conservative Oshawa, ON

Madam Speaker, I am not sure I completely understand the question. I believe it was implied that the Liberal government is the first to speak with first nations, which does not make much sense to me. Perhaps I did not understand the question.

I will reiterate that we either keep our promises or do not. There are promises and commitments that we have made. Adding another layer of bureaucracy will simply add paperwork rather than keep promises, as we are meant to do.

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Bloc

Jean-Denis Garon Bloc Mirabel, QC

Madam Speaker, let us suppose that what my colleague is saying is true, that the government lacks leadership, that it has not implemented or signed enough treaties and that it has not made enough progress. That may be true.

That said, I am having a hard time following the logic of the member's argument because the government is saying that it wants to have oversight. It wants to have a commissioner with clear standards. It wants to implement the United Nations declaration, to have road maps and to improve relationships.

How is it a bad thing to have a commissioner who will accomplish those tasks? Incidentally, it is somewhat distasteful to compare a commissioner to ArriveCan. That is going a bit far. I get the impression that all passing the bill will do is ensure constant government oversight.

I do not understand how the government is failing to show leadership by having a commissioner with a clearly defined role and mandate. I would like someone to explain that to me.

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Conservative

Rhonda Kirkland Conservative Oshawa, ON

Madam Speaker, I understand the member's point of view. I guess the Liberals are admitting that they cannot do the job unless a commissioner tells them what they are doing wrong or right. They clearly have trouble implementing and making commitments, and following through on ones we have already made. As I said before, promises were made. Let us keep those promises.

Clearly, the legislation is an admission of guilt. The government cannot keep promises unless an outside body forces it to.

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Conservative

Ellis Ross Conservative Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Madam Speaker, I am listening to the debate. The government and our colleagues down the way want more oversight. Speaking as an aboriginal leader, especially regarding the Indian Act, I think there is already a ton of oversight. There are countless committees.

The insult here is that first nations have signed the highest agreement in the Canadian Constitution, yet they are being afforded a different type of disrespect. They are not getting the full partnership the treaty promised. What is outlined in every one of the chapters and provisions is what should be implemented as a partnership. Now we are talking about adding another oversight committee.

Can my colleague talk about what it really means when we say, “Let us hold the minister responsible for implementing a treaty”?

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Conservative

Rhonda Kirkland Conservative Oshawa, ON

Madam Speaker, I think it is just that: We have to hold the minister responsible for implementing a treaty. We already have the commitments and agreements. Another body having to make sure it happens is redundant if the ministers responsible are doing their jobs.

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:40 p.m.

Liberal

Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Madam Speaker, listening to my colleague, one would think that the positions of the various independent officers and commissioners of Parliament were useless. The fact is, they provide important oversight that strengthens accountability and promotes transparency.

There are several commissioners, including the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, the Privacy Commissioner, the Commissioner of Official Languages and so on. Does she consider all these commissioners and their roles to be useless and purely bureaucratic? I would like her to elaborate on that because I see them as important offices that help us carry out our functions as members of Parliament and help ensure government accountability.

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

Conservative

Rhonda Kirkland Conservative Oshawa, ON

Madam Speaker, I am pretty sure we only have one Privacy Commissioner. We have one oversight for that and one oversight for the others.

Let us remember that, between 2015 and 2017, the Liberal government opened six oversight bodies: the modern treaty implementation office, the assessment of modern treaty implications office, the modern treaty management environment, and on and on it—

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Alexandra Mendès) Alexandra Mendes

Now we have to go to another speaker.

Resuming debate, the hon. Minister of Indigenous Services.

Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders

12:45 p.m.

Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou Québec

Liberal

Mandy Gull-Masty LiberalMinister of Indigenous Services

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to be here today.

[Member spoke in Cree and provided the following translation:]

Before I begin, I would like to acknowledge that Canada's Parliament is located on the unceded and unsurrendered territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

I rise today to speak to Bill C-10, which creates a new independent officer of Parliament, specifically the commissioner for modern treaty implementation.

Modern treaties are not symbolic documents; they are legally binding agreements that affirm indigenous rights, support self-government and provide frameworks for economic development, environmental stewardship and cultural revitalization. Modern treaties often take time, in some places generations, to negotiate. They are among the most complex agreements our government undertakes, reflecting the rights, priorities and aspirations of indigenous peoples and Canadians alike. By their very nature, modern treaties and their implementation are non-partisan. Upholding these constitutional commitments is a shared responsibility across all parties and is one that transcends political cycles in governments.

For far too long, the implementation of modern treaties in our country has been challenging. Modern treaty partners have repeatedly raised concerns about delays, challenges in coordination, and insufficient oversight by federal departments and agencies with respect to living up to their legal duties and obligations.

The bill has come at the request of the nations themselves, which wish to work closely with Parliament and to be able to report to it. While federal departments and ministers are there to honour the relationship and work with them, we want to ensure that modern treaties are treated with the respect and the approach that are clearly outlined in the documents themselves.

Calls from indigenous partners have been echoed in reports from the Office of the Auditor General of Canada, the Land Claims Agreements Coalition and the Standing Senate Committee on Indigenous Peoples. Creating the position of commissioner for modern treaty implementation responds directly to these calls.

The bill before Parliament reflects decades of advocacy by indigenous partners regarding modern treaties and collaborative efforts.

At its core, Bill C-10 would establish an independent commissioner for modern treaty implementation. The commissioner would answer to Parliament, the table that the partners have asked to report to and work with. Not even the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations, a cabinet minister or the Prime Minister could intervene. This structure is one that my very own nation has used successfully. As the former leader of my nation, I believe it is way beyond the scope of the structure of the government today.

Without the creation of a commissioner, we would be unable to ensure that we could rightfully uphold the relationship at the true level of Parliament at which it should be addressed. The commissioner would be independent: free from political interference and pressures. Their mandate would be enshrined in law, and their reports would be tabled in Parliament for transparency, as well as for enhanced public scrutiny.

The commissioner's role would also be pivotal and fundamental in ensuring culture-specific auditing processes that would supplement the structures that exist at this moment. The commissioner would be empowered to conduct reviews and performance audits of federal departments and agencies to assess how effectively they are meeting modern treaty agreements. This would be a supplemental process that does not exist today.

The recognition of culture and ensuring that we are looking at the entirety, a holistic approach to what the community and the nation are as partners, is a critical step in respecting modern land claims.

The commissioner will be appointed for a seven-year term with the possibility of being reappointed for one additional term. Such a long but limited cycle ensures both independence and continuity, and will allow the commissioner to exercise the oversight role free from political influence.

The position would be filled by someone who has deep expertise and knowledge of modern treaties. It would be a unique construct to make sure the commissioner has the credibility and understanding to provide consistent, expert and independent oversight over successive governments. That person would be selected in close consultation and partnership with modern treaty partners.

This does not duplicate the Auditor General's work. The commissioner's role is complementary but distinct, based on an approach that respects the culture and identity of the nation and the partner.

While the Auditor General provides broad oversight of government spending, the commissioner's mandate would be exclusive to federal modern treaty implementation activities. The commissioner would bring specialized expertise, cultural understanding and a sustained focus on Canada's constitutional commitments to indigenous partners.

The commissioner would have the flexibility to conduct audits and systemic reviews that are tools designed to identify recurring issues and improve how departments work together to enhance implementation of modern treaties. They would also focus on systemic barriers and on long-term solutions that would make the commissioner's role unique in Canada's oversight landscape, with the approach of being based in culture and the understanding of the identity of the partner. This is not reflected in today's government structure.

I wish to respectfully address my colleagues who spoke earlier today who see this as an additional duplication or layer of process. It is not; it is one that would shine the light on the importance of culture and identity for claims holders. For credibility, the commissioner would have to have expert knowledge in modern land claims and would be required to consult and engage directly with treaty partners throughout the review processes. Partners would have the opportunity to comment on preliminary findings, and their written views would be included in reports tabled to Parliament so both federal responses and indigenous perspectives would be heard. This is a critical step.

As the former leader of a modern land claim nation, I must urge my colleagues across all parties to ensure the consideration of the importance of the commissioner's role. Creating space so decisions, reflections and the verification of implementation are taken within the context of culture, language and identity is something that is needed. It is not only in the spirit of reconciliation and the approach to partnership; it is something that has been requested from us by our partners.

If we are to truly respect our commitment to modern land claims and treaties, we must undertake this pivotal next step.

Bill C‑10 creates the position of a commissioner for modern treaty implementation. It will also give indigenous partners a role in the negotiation process for new modern treaties and the assurance that the government's commitments will be honoured.

They will know that the commissioner would be looking to ensure that the Government of Canada not only meets its commitments but also enhances working relationships with the understanding and respect of the cultural context.

I want to ensure that rights and the rights of the future children and grandchildren of the land claims are respected and are supported in future negotiations. True partnership is when we ensure that we invite the partner to work directly with government and report to Parliament. Anything less is not honouring the commitment of what we have signed with them.