Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was nations.

Last in Parliament November 2005, as Bloc MP for Louis-Saint-Laurent (Québec)

Lost his last election, in 2006, with 24% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Ukrainian Canadian Restitution Act March 24th, 2005

Madam Speaker, on February 7 this year, I had the pleasure of acknowledging in this House the third anniversary of the peace of the braves agreement, signed on February 7, 2002, between the Cree Nation and the Government of Quebec.

The goal of the agreement was to establish a new relationship between the Quebec and Cree nations that is based on cooperation, partnership and mutual respect. It implemented structures that allow the Cree to work with Quebeckers in a spirit of cooperation.

The peace of the braves is still the most progressive agreement to date between a government and an aboriginal nation.

This agreement precludes any legal proceedings, and the Cree, who were looking to enter into a similar agreement with Ottawa, are noticing that the federal negotiator is still without a mandate, which might derail the introduction of a new and more exciting social project with Quebecers.

What is the federal government waiting for to show its good will and give its negotiator a clear mandate? I hope that this time we will have some clear answers.

The Cree play a major role in Quebec and deserve encouragement.

The Budget March 8th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, a number of first nations political leaders have denounced the recent budget, the first under the current Prime Minister. He has been promising the sun and moon ever since he became Prime Minister, promising to eliminate what he called the shameful conditions they face.

Unanimously, loud and clear, the political leaders of first nations and Inuit groups have said that the budget, even after all those round table meetings, amounts to very little.

In the budget speech, the finance minister went so far as to say that for too long and in too many ways, Canada’s aboriginal people have been last in terms of opportunity in this country.

Phil Fontaine, National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, has pointed out that the Prime Minister's commitment to transformative change must be backed up by real investments by the government.

I will add that the first nations will never experience transformative change if they continue to manage their poverty and social stigma, and the government continues to impose its disrespect.

The royal commission on aboriginal peoples in Canada documented this state of affairs in its report, which was released in 1996. Jean Chrétien shot down the work of that commission. He sabotaged it on the cynical pretext that there was no money available, whereas, as we were to learn later, his Liberal cronies were engaged in the dishonourable act of pocketing public sponsorship funds. We will be finding out how this government was accumulating indecent surpluses, which were camouflaged in foundations well sheltered from Auditor General Sheila Fraser.

Where were the aboriginal Liberal MPs and senators? Were they also more interested in greasing the palms of certain members of the Liberal family than in supporting the royal commission in its recommendations for remedying the historical wrongs against the first peoples. Could it be that the party line imposed by Jean Chrétien was more seductive than their patriotic attachment to their aboriginal roots?

A year later, Jane Stewart, the Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs of the day, in an unexpected gesture of reconciliation, spoke out against a large part of what had been done to the Indians. She made it clear that Canada was anything but proud of this and regretted its past behaviour. Jean Chrétien again attacked this statement by demoting the minister to another portfolio.

After that, the commitments made in “Gathering Strength”, which was meant as a response to the recommendations of the royal commission, ended up in the wastebasket.

The budget has proven that there are resources that could be allocated to measures to remedy what the Prime Minister has described as the shameful conditions our aboriginal people have to deal with.

The Minister of Finance is boasting of a situation that is the envy of all the other members of the G-7. He ought not to be so boastful, because he is concealing from them the fact that Canada has not lived up to the commitments it inherited from the historical treaties of colonial times. What is more, the Dominion has not kept its own promises in its various numbered treaties. Canada has deceived the first nations by helping itself to their ancestral lands and resources without properly compensating them. Then it put them in minuscule reserves. The minister has also not told the G-7 about Canada's refusal to fulfill its fiduciary role, by depriving these people of the funding they require to develop properly.

The national chief of the AFN has postponed any concrete measures to improve the deplorable conditions of the first nations. According to Phil Fontaine, they had “brought our best ideas and our best experts to these roundtable sessions and participated in good faith with the goal of making progress.” That progress was not forthcoming.

I must point out that I had a whole lot more to say. We will get back to this later on, since some people are having fun dragging out the debate by asking questions that are not always pertinent.

Aboriginal Affairs February 23rd, 2005

Mr. Speaker, the Deputy Prime Minister is trying to defend the indefensible. Of the 1,200 applications for alternative dispute resolution since 2003, 27 have been settled so far.

Does the minister recognize that the survivors are getting older and that delay simply heightens the injustice these victims have already suffered?

Aboriginal Affairs February 23rd, 2005

Mr. Speaker, the program to compensate victims of Indian residential school abuse is a disgrace. We have learned that for every $35 the federal government invests in alternative dispute resolution under this program, only $1 goes to the victims.

Can the Deputy Prime Minister explain why so little money goes to the residential school victims?

Aboriginal Affairs February 22nd, 2005

Mr. Speaker, on November 17, the Assembly of First Nations presented the government with its report on the Canada's dispute resolution plan to compensate victims for abuses in Indian residential schools. Three months later, the federal government has yet to act.

Does the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development intend to take advantage of Phil Fontaine's appearance before the committee today to finally announce the implementation of recommendations by the Assembly of First Nations?

Aboriginal Affairs February 15th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, the federal government promised $5 million to the Native Women's Association of Canada for the Sisters in Spirit campaign. Now we learn that Ottawa has informed the organization that the announcement will be delayed.

Can the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development explain to the House why the announcement of the $5 million grant has been delayed and can he tell us if he still intends to give this amount to the Native Women's Association of Canada?

Aboriginal Affairs February 7th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary. Any delay could delay the implementation of certain parts of the agreement between Quebec and the Cree nation. Unless significant progress is made between now and March 31, the Cree could go back before the courts with their claims.

What is the federal government waiting for to take Quebec's lead and sign a nation-to-nation agreement with the Cree?

Aboriginal Affairs February 7th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, February 7 is the third anniversary of the signing of the peace of the braves between Quebec and the Cree nation. This agreement precludes any legal proceedings, and the Cree, who were looking to enter into a similar agreement with Ottawa, are noticing that the federal negotiator is still without a mandate, which might derail the whole process.

What is the federal government waiting for to show its good will and give its negotiator a clear mandate?

Peace of the Braves February 7th, 2005

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to acknowledge in this House today the third anniversary of the peace of the braves agreement, signed on February 7, 2002, between the Cree Nation and the Government of Quebec.

The agreement established a new relationship between the Quebec and Cree nations that is based on cooperation, partnership and mutual respect. It implemented structures that allow the Cree to work with Quebeckers in a spirit of cooperation.

The peace of the braves is still the most progressive agreement to date between a government and an aboriginal nation. I hope that by this time next year another peace of the braves agreement will have been reached, this time between the federal government and the Cree Nation.

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

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin by saying just how proud I am to speak to the House today on a subject that I have heard debated for a number of years, and to realize what the Tlicho have accomplished.

It is therefore a pleasure to speak to the House and particularly to congratulate the political leaders of the Tlicho for their magnificent accomplishment. I would also like to congratulate the other parties. No negotiations are held in a vacuum. Other parties are always involved.

As far as comprehensive land claims or self-government are concerned, this social blueprint will mean an enormous advantage for the aboriginal people of the Northwest Territories.

I wish to assure the Tlicho people that the Bloc Québécois and I will continue to monitor the progress of implementing this agreement. I have seen too many clauses, unfortunately, included in agreements but not implemented as part of the social blueprint. I want the Tlicho to know that I will always be pleased to help ensure that what was in the agreement actually gets to their community.

I met with the Tlicho political leaders right after my election, to offer my support and that of my party. I wanted to find out what their vision of the situation was. Hon. members are no doubt aware of how open they are to discussion. They worked with us as they did with the others to ensure that everything turned out as planned.

They are making their dreams a reality. May those dreams be as wonderful as possible and may they bring the Tlicho everything they deserve, after all the years of discussion. I can understand their pride and their desire to get this settled. Anyone concerned with discussing a social blueprint for 15 or 20 or more years wants to see it realized.

They consulted with the entire population, both aboriginal and Canadian. They worked with the other nations to ensure each had its proper place. They were successful, in my opinion, at leaving other nations space, while gaining respect for themselves. They devoted over 10 years to realizing this social blueprint and they have informed everyone else about it in detail.

Thus, that is probably why there were so few opposing views expressed in committee; for the good and simple reason that the Tlicho had worked hard to provide information and convince people to give them a chance.

No aboriginal or Métis groups and no Canadian or governmental groups made any objection to the realization of this agreement during the committee's deliberations. Everyone worked together to make it possible for the Tlicho to celebrate their new vision of society this holiday season.

We have sensed a magnificent feeling of cooperation and understanding with the other people living in the same land. The wake-up call for governments came, we must remember, with the Calder case in 1973. That was when it was realized that recognition of aboriginal rights could affect the entire country. If the Calder case had accepted that definition of rights, it would have been an enormous social change. It was not for nothing that the federal government then began scrambling to invite the First Nations to sit down at the negotiating table and enter negotiations to settle these issues through agreements and not through the courts or any other avenues. Panic set in, and the trustee issued its first policy on land claims and rights for those nations where they had not been extinguished.

It is obvious that, for an aboriginal group, governance must follow its customs and its own issues. They must be adaptable. They need the other governments to understand that there may be certain things on which the Tlicho negotiators and the governments—because the others must take part, too—have negotiated together and reached an agreement. Thus, their pride is very understandable, because I, as a negotiator, would have liked to have negotiated such an agreement.

In 1982, during the repatriation of the Constitution, Mr. Trudeau decided to recognize aboriginal rights in section 35, which affirms the aboriginal and treaty rights of aboriginal peoples of Canada including those acquired through land claims.

Since that time, the Supreme Court of Canada has evolved. I do not understand why the attempt is being made to keep aboriginals from developing. It is clear that there is an enormous amount of catching up to do in terms of rights, without which, the aboriginals will continue to be penalized.

Since 1973, 17 land claims have been settled, including 14 in the northern territories. The north is a favourable place for trying to reach interesting agreements for aboriginals.

In 1921, Tlicho Chief Monfwi was one of signatories of Treaty 11, the last in the series of numbered treaties. In 1990, after having studied the entire matter thoroughly based on other studies—such as the Penner report—the royal commission found that even the historical treaties needed to be renegotiated.

Thus, the Tlicho did exactly what people in aboriginal groups want to do. They corrected what had been done quickly and superficially. The desire was for aboriginals to continue to be subject to this type of utterly outdated treaty.

I think it is important to Canadians for aboriginals to be happy, proud and active in society in the future. Furthermore, the royal commission stipulated that the Government of Canada has a duty to ensure this.

Once again, I want to congratulate the Tlicho people and their Grand Chief, because they got their rights recognized through negotiation. We must congratulate ourselves that it is possible in a country like ours to sign agreements that allow us to recognize all the rights of aboriginals.

I thank them for the example they have given us. You probably remember other agreements or negotiations in Quebec when there were all kinds of disputes between Quebeckers, aboriginals and the entire population. However, everything went smoothly with the Tlicho. They managed to agree on something valid that will help them to be happy and to believe in the future of Canada.