Sue Barnes

[Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government Act, December 6th, 2004]

--maybe not to your satisfaction but certainly to my satisfaction and to that of the three parties around the House, one territorial government and the Tlicho people of the north, who will be most directly affected by this.

I want to say that I am proud of my colleagues in the House who have taken the time to do their homework and support the bill. Tomorrow I am going to be prouder still to stand and give it my support because I understand that this is the way we move into the future.

We move into future together because we want economic, social and health benefits, all those good benefits that come with certainty. I know that when the premier gave testimony he said he thought it would be devastating if the bill did not get through. In the north, where they do not even have parties in their parliament and legislative house, 19 individual members of the legislative assembly made their own decision and unanimously ratified this agreement.

Those of us here have a chance to show that we can do something that will greatly affect the lives of generations for the positive. I am not concerned that some of the members opposite do not want to see that happen. I am disappointed, but I believe that for the majority of Canadians, if they understood the history, if they understood the story, if they understood our Constitution as I know some of them do, going forward they would be very proud of this work, as I am.

There are very difficult days in Parliament, but every once in a while we get to work on something that we are proud of. I am proud of this piece of work and I am proud of the people who have helped.

[Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government Act, December 6th, 2004]

Madam Speaker, I want to put this bill into context. My riding of London West is in southwestern Ontario. It is an urban riding. I do not have many first nations, Métis or Inuit in my riding but I am the parliamentary secretary of one of the most exciting portfolios that one could get in this government.

I am very proud to work with all the people who support the evolution of Canada because that is what we are seeing here. We are actually making history. The headlines are full of many things and yet this bill is making history. It is making history for the people in the Northwest Territories. Their territorial government has recognized what a magnificent piece of legislation this is, what it will do not only for the citizens who reside in the Northwest Territories but for the Tlicho people who have patiently and poignantly and with pride worked for over a decade on this agreement and before that on the other treaty agreement that gave rise to this agreement.

I point out to my constituents and all people of this country that it takes patience, knowledge, give and take, humanity, to put together an agreement of this magnitude, to make a modern treaty. The Tlicho are Canadians and they are also Tlicho citizens. They are very proud of their heritage and their culture. This agreement allows them to continue that in the manner that they see best.

This is a progressive grouping of first nations people in the north who have taken back, not their total territory from history, but 39,000 square kilometres which is originally 19% of the traditional territory of the Tlicho. There have been many boundaries around this 39,000 square kilometres which have had other first nations people in the north working together to come to an agreement so that we have certainty on boundaries. Each of the negotiations on the overlap boundary agreements has a history and is a story in itself.

What we have here is a people in Canada having a self-government agreement and a land claims agreement, not the first in Canada but certainly the first in the Northwest Territories. The first in Canada that I worked on with my colleague from Nunavut was the Nisga'a agreement. I chaired the committee at that time. My colleague who is the chair of this self-government agreement and has done a marvellous job in committee also worked on the Nisga'a agreement.

I have listened to the arguments in this chamber. It would be easy to spend my time at the end of this debate concentrating on the 12 points that have been raised time and again and which have been debunked time and again, not with my opinion but with the opinion of the lawyers. Those opinions have been from the Tlicho lawyers, from the justice department lawyers, from the territorial lawyers, from the ministers who have to say to the government when they bring the legislation to cabinet that it is charter proof. In fact every lawyer that testified said that this is compliant. The charter does apply. This is the law of our land that is accepted.

The negotiation has gone on for a long time but it is time to end it. It is time to end this step in the House today so we can stand and vote tomorrow. As we rise we can be very proud that we are not only acknowledging our small part in the history that is happening in this chamber, but to acknowledge the patience, the fortitude and the wisdom of the Tlicho people in the four communities and their ancestors. They have worked to make this an agreement that they are very prepared to live with in the context of a modern Canada.

I am sure that this agreement did not encapsulate everything that the negotiation started with. It is a give and take. People came with honour to make an agreement. This is a unique agreement because not only did the three signatories, the Government of Canada, the territorial government and the Tlicho people sign and initial it, but they actually went back and did a further six months of consultations.

They drew in all the other stakeholders, all those other people who may have concerns, all those other boards. We live in a complex world. There are water boards. There are environmental boards. There are neighbouring land claims. There are municipal governments. There is industry. There are businesses. They gave them a second chance. They said, “Let us go out there and consult one more time. Let us make sure”.

By having that extra patience, by doing that extra consultation--and there were over hundreds of consultations on this agreement--they came back before our committee of the House and were able to have their neighbours, their colleagues and other levels of government stand before us as witnesses and say, “We support this agreement”.

I am here to celebrate, Madam Speaker, because this is worth celebrating. It was a celebration when they signed in the Northwest Territories. Our former prime minister was there with them. A month later, I sort of sneaked into the community, very low key, and had someone local drive me. I met with some of the people and took a look around in the communities with some of the old names like Rae Edzo and some of the other areas.

Later on in that visit over a year and a quarter ago now, I also flew to Diavik diamond mine. What did I discover there? I found that the Tlicho people had a sophisticated human resource relationship with the progressive industry of the north and that they had learned how to facilitate, educate and set in motion new scholarship funds and programs so that their community could benefit from the resources of the future. Their community and their people would take the self-government to self-education and self-empowerment.

All people in this country pay taxes and they pay taxes. They will continue to pay taxes. In the House I have heard arguments that lead me to believe that some of the hon. members have not even read the agreement, but here we are today. We are very close. I must acknowledge the patience of people who have to listen to some of these arguments because it must be difficult.

I do not pretend to know everything about this agreement. I have read it. I have studied it. But I do know that three levels of government and three people of honour representing three different parties have come together after this amount of time with negotiators who have worked many years. In fact, some of the elders and some of the original people involved have already passed on and it is out of respect for them that these people come with patience and they come with a trust that we are going to do the right thing in the House.

I would like to commend the critics from the NDP and the Bloc for working with us on the bill. In a minority government, I think that has been something we can also celebrate, because on this legislation everybody has worked hard.

I will even acknowledge that for the most part the Conservative Party has not tried to unduly delay this piece of legislation. I will give them that. I hope that it will be tomorrow that we finally stand to get the bill voted on.

I have no objection if members find in their hearts that they cannot vote for the legislation, but I ask them to at least do it with factual legal issues that have been explained--

[Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government Act, December 6th, 2004]

Madam Speaker, this gives me an opportunity to correct some of the things that were said in the last few minutes.

By way of information to the member, a ways and means motion is required for any bill involving new taxes, an increase of an existing tax, or extension of a tax to a new class of taxpayers. Bills requiring such a motion must be introduced in the House of Commons under the Constitution Act, 1867, and Standing Order 80(1) of the rules of the House. The Nisga'a Final Agreement Act had a ways and means motion. In fact, in a prior debate on this bill in the House, I read that into the record so there would be no confusion. I had hoped we had put that argument to rest.

I will go now to matrimonial real property because this is a critically important issue on reserves which has not been solved. However, the Tlicho people live in public communities, not on reserves, and as a result they are subject to territorial law regarding matrimonial property in the same manner as any other NWT resident. Under the Tlicho agreement the Tlicho will not own lands in the communities and these lands will not be reserves. Instead, local community governments will own the fee simple lands, and territorial laws relating to matrimonial property will therefore continue to apply on those lands.

These are the basics that people will understand if they read the agreement. However, it is very difficult to combat these 12 issues. There have been 12 issues over the last number of weeks that the Conservative Party has put forward time and time again. Just because it is repeated, does not make it right.

We have a situation where the Tlicho agreement draws a distinction between land rights and non-land rights. Certainty is achieved both for land rights and non-land based rights, and finality is achieved for the land rights. This is a progressive modern treaty. It is all well and good to be against this piece of legislation. We have worked on this bill in committee and there has been a respect for the people who have worked hard on this agreement.

In fact, the members of the Conservative Party made a good point in committee. They said they were not trying to delay the implementation of this bill. I have sat here all afternoon and listened to the same points even when they were answered two hours previously. There is a time and a place, and there is a vote. We want to get to the vote.

I am going to say to the hon. member that we can agree to disagree. He is entitled to his differing opinion. Hopefully, it is an informed opinion, but at the end of the day, these people have waited longer in negotiating this agreement than many of the members in the House have terms in Parliament.

Is it the proposition of this hon. member that, like every parliamentarian who might come and go because of maybe losing an election or two, we re-ratify these agreements every time? It is very clear that every Parliament has a new crop of MPs. If we were to go with the suggestion that was laid on the table about the role of parliamentarians with respect to ratification, there would never be a ratification in the House.

[Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government Act, December 6th, 2004]

The answer is yes.

[Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government Act, December 6th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, when the three parties came together, all three parties had very knowledgeable negotiators. The three parties worked very hard and they all agreed. How would the hon. member separate the parties from their agreement?

When the member says that he supports the Tlicho people but not what was ratified in the agreement, that gives me cause for concern. I do not think I am the only one who does not understand this distinction. I think the Tlicho people would have a problem understanding why the member thinks the agreement they ratified so well is not be acceptable to them. They did not negotiate this agreement without knowledge or without an understanding of what they wanted. They signed on to the agreement and ratified it in very great numbers.

How does the member make that distinction?

[Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government Act, December 6th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I have listened with interest to this member's speech. I have listened to members of her party make various presentations on this bill over the last number of weeks. I know that concerns are generally felt in that party; they are all the same.

I would like to ask this member to explain what concerns she has with paramountcy of laws and jurisdictional conflict in this piece of legislation. I would like her to explain the constitutionally protected rights that she seems to have problems with.

The answers have been given on this side of the House. Three parties around the chamber all agree. All the legal opinions that have been put forward by witnesses agree with the opinions of the government, the Tlicho and the territorial government, the tripartite opinions. What is it that this member does not understand?

[Aboriginal Affairs, December 3rd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, under the provisions of Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, copies of the 2002-03 annual report of the Inuvialuit final agreement implementation coordinating committee, the 2002-03 annual report of the implementation committee on the Gwich'in comprehensive land claim agreement, and the 2002-03 annual report of the implementation committee on the Sahtu Dene and Métis comprehensive land claim agreement.

[Millennium Scholarship Excellence Award, December 3rd, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to six individuals in my riding of London West: Julia Baratta, Justine Féron, Elizabeth Goodale, Lauren Killip, Jennifer Pearce and Melissa Rossoni.

Those students were all awarded the Canadian Millennium Scholarship Excellence Award.

This excellence award is one of Canada's most prestigious national scholarship initiatives. The program plays a crucial role in the recognition of excellence in the classroom and beyond in our communities.

The millennium excellence awards were chosen in a nationwide competition on the basis of outstanding achievement in four areas: academics, community service, leadership and innovation.

I hope all hon. members will join me in congratulating these young people for a well deserved award and recognition.

[Committees of the House, December 2nd, 2004]

Madam Speaker, I have the honour to present, in both official languages, the first report of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development. The committee has considered its order of reference of Tuesday, November 2, 2004, Bill C-14, an act to give effect to a land claims and self-government agreement among the Tlicho, the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Government of Canada.

The committee has considered Bill C-14 and has agreed to report it without amendment.

[First Nations Fiscal and Statistical Management Act, November 19th, 2004]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak in support of the first nations fiscal and statistical management act.

The Prime Minister has talked about a new and strengthened relationship with the aboriginal peoples and a new approach in resolving lingering and unacceptable disparity in the quality of life of first nations, Métis, Inuit and other Canadians.

The Prime Minister has stated that the challenges faced by the first nations are the biggest challenge facing Canada, and that first nations should participate fully in all that Canada has to offer, and enjoy greater financial autonomy and an increasingly better quality of life.

This bill has to do with meeting our commitment towards first nations. It deals with the work we have to undertake as partners in order to break down barriers to growth, with whatever needs to be done so the first nations have the tools they need for their economic growth and prosperity, with the respect for the diversity of first nations and their ability to find their own solutions and implement them in an appropriate way in their communities.

The proposed legislation would offer to first nations many of the valuable and practical tools that are fundamental to self-reliance and economic growth. If our larger objective is to close the socio-economic gap, it makes sense to see that first nation peoples have the same potential to capture economic opportunities as other Canadians.

This gap is quite real and widens each and every day as economic benefits and opportunities are foregone.

The bill is part of a new approach which holds that first nations must be able to plan and direct their own economies for there to be real economic opportunity and lasting prosperity.

The bill would set up four institutions to help the governments of participating first nations improve the socio-economic conditions of their communities.

The first nations financial management board would give first nations the same access to capital non-aboriginal communities have through the bond market.

The second institution, the first nations financial management board, would certify the credit worthiness of communities interested in gaining access to the borrowing pool.

The third institution is the first nations tax commission. Under the proposed act, this body would perform a role which is expanded from that currently performed by the Indian Taxation Advisory Board. The tax commission would approve the real property tax laws made by the participating first nations.

Under the more transparent property tax system proposed by the bill and with the assistance of the tax commission, participating first nations would be able to strengthen the generation of this local source of revenue and inspire greater confidence in investors and others contemplating the establishment of businesses on reserve.

Finally, the fourth institution is the first nations statistical institute. It would not only help improve the quality and relevancy of information available to deal with first nation issues, but also make sure first nation policy makers can access this information.

The four institutions established by the bill would offer first nations the fiscal tools needed to attract investment, to build infrastructure, to create jobs and to address social issues.

However, I want to stress two extremely important points. First, first nations would be accomplishing these goals on their own terms. As owners of the process, first nations would be able to develop partnerships with other governments and industry in order to strengthen their economies and improve quality of life.

Second, this process is in keeping with the right of the individual first nations to choose these tools if they want to. Even the first nations who support the bill recognize that the real property taxation and borrowing opportunities found in the First Nations Fiscal and Statistical Management Act are not necessarily appropriate for all first nations. Moreover, those who opposed the bill indicated that they did not want to prevent interested first nations from taking advantage of the possibilities this bill offers.

In the same fashion, I want to point out that while the proposed legislation would create institutions of benefit to many first nations, participation in them is completely optional. No one would force any first nation to take part in something that, for whatever reason, it might not choose to do.

First nations have diverse goals and aspirations and the government will continue to respect that diversity.

The Prime Minister and the Government of Canada said that the conditions faced by many first nations communities are one of the most pressing issues in Canada.

The Prime Minister, through the April 19 round table and subsequent meetings, reaffirmed the government's commitment to addressing these issues.

This bill will allow us to fulfill our responsibilities, to respect diversity and choice and to work together by taking specific action to facilitate the achievement of common objectives and the goodwill of all the stakeholders at the table.

I think that this bill will allow us to close the gap that exists between the quality of life in the first nations communities and elsewhere in Canada. It also improves the economic opportunities, there again in view of closing this gap.

We have a long road ahead but we are confident that we are on the right path. We are mindful of the mistakes of the past but full of hope of goodwill and a determination to arrive at a new destination and a better future for all.

I am very encouraged that members in the House will work together to see that these goals are delivered to the first nations. I thank and respect the members for their cooperation herein.