House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was reform.

Last in Parliament September 2008, as Liberal MP for Kitchener—Waterloo (Ontario)

Lost his last election, in 2011, with 38% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Nisga'A Final Agreement Act November 1st, 1999

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to speak on Bill C-9, the Nisga'a final agreement.

I spent the first five years in this country from 1957 to 1962 in the province of British Columbia. I continue to this day to visit twice a year and make it a point to consult with members of the first nations to gain understanding of issues of concern to them.

Their frustration at the snail's pace of the treaty process is one of their greatest concerns. So when members of the Reform Party call for more time for consultation, they are being disingenuous. They want to kill the bill. They do not believe in justice for our first nations.

Since my time is limited, the focus of my presentation will be the earlier part of the Nisga'a people's struggle for the social justice the agreement represents.

The passage of the bill will bring closure to unfinished business of the 19th and 20th centuries. The bill will lay the foundation of a relationship between Nisga'a people of British Columbia and our government.

The bill will address some our longest outstanding social justice issues in Canada and thus set the stage for the next millennium. We have an opportunity here today to restore trust and good faith and to truly begin the reconciliation process.

The Nisga'a agreement is not just a treaty that has been negotiated in this past decade that we are asked to ratify here today. The Nisga'a treaty is a symbol and its historical timeline is one we must acknowledge here today and we must understand in order for all of us to move forward.

British Columbia was the last part of Canada to be colonized. One hundred and fifty years ago the Hudson's Bay Company established a proprietorial colony on Vancouver Island. In exchange for all natural resources of that territory, it had to establish a simple infrastructure and governance system.

When the gold rush began, the colony of British Columbia was formed in 1858 with Governor James Douglas at the helm. It was then that a small attempt to sign treaties began. The areas where the Hudson's Bay Company did business were where the small colonial treaties were signed: at Fort Victoria, at the coal mines in Nanaimo and Fort Rupert, and the Fort Langley trading post. Fourteen small treaties in all, for a few blankets I might add.

Unfortunately the old colonial documents show a disagreement of who should pay for the cost of making treaties, and by the 1860s treaty-making was halted. If only Governor Douglas was to know how long the debate of who was to pay what would continue.

Rather than speak to the Nisga'a final agreement in Canada's historical treaty-making and policy development context, I want to speak to the Nisga'a people's living memory of this experience.

When B.C. joined confederation in 1871, article 13 of the Terms of Union stated that the federal government would assume responsibility for Indians and lands reserved for Indians. British Columbia agreed to provide lands for reserves and the Government of B.C. considered the land question to be resolved.

However, the Nisga'a did not, nor did they know that their lands and rights had been dispersed by a third party.

When the first surveyor entered the Nass Valley in the 1870s to gazette today's Nisga'a reserves, he was met by the grandfather of Frank Calder. The surveyor O'Reily was told to leave and that this was not his territory.

Within a decade of that encounter, the first of many delegations of hereditary chiefs travelled to Victoria to demand of the premier settlement of this land question. They demanded recognition of their title and affirmed the ownership of their territory since before the time of the flood. They journeyed home unsuccessful; the government of the day considered the land question resolved. The chiefs who had a direct link to each of their territories since time immemorial thought the land question had just begun.

In 1890, the first land committee was formed with its first members: the grandfather, great-grandfather and great-great-grandfathers of today's Nisga'a negotiating team.

Shortly after the turn of the 19th century, the land committee of the Nisga'a petitioned the privy council in England seeking to resolve the land question. Again their efforts were not successful.

All the time the communities of the Nisga'a raised money, penny by penny, to send representatives to the various governments, to hire lawyers to argue their cause. Over a century and a quarter of bake sales, raffles and donations have brought Bill C-9 to the Chamber today.

By 1884, the central organizing unit of aboriginal people in Canada was outlawed. The potlatch ordered the governance, religion and economy of the peoples for thousands of years and with the stroke of a pen the covenant between the Nisga'a and the creator was made illegal. As well as the loss of their land, the very social, governance and religious structures of the Nisga'a feast houses were legislated away by our government not to be repealed until 1951.

The original land committee saw the death of many of its members over the next century only to be replaced by their chieftain heirs, their sons and their nephews. The Nisga'a final agreement has been a cost to the Nisga'a people of generations of negotiators who dedicated their entire lives to their struggle.

No other time in Canada's history can we trace the lineage of active participants in a cause to direct lines for 130 years. This is not a modern treaty. This is a modern solution to a very old outstanding debt. The Nisga'a continued to lead the young province's aboriginal leaders, and in the early part of the 20th century were part of the allied tribes. The allied tribes united the diverse cultural tribes and nations of British Columbia into one goal, the land question. Chiefs from more than 50 languages assembled in an unprecedented way to peacefully question the legality of the land and its ownership. People of warring tribes, different cultures and customs joined peacefully in one overwhelming cause, the land question.

How did we as Canadians respond? We amended the Indian Act to make it illegal for Indians to raise money to advance land claims. We also made it illegal for lawyers to be hired by Indians for that purpose.

The legislation stayed on the books until 1951. Did that stop the Nisga'a? No, it did not. The Nisga'a land committee went underground and worked through other organizations, including the Native Brotherhood to advance their cause. Whenever a federal government official tried to attend any meetings that discussed land questions, most groups would launch into hymns in order to cover up their illegal activity. To this day, Onward Christian Soldiers is the battle hymn of the Native Brotherhood of British Columbia, North America's oldest Indian organization.

When the legislation was repealed, the Nisga'a land committee resumed in public. In 1968, Chief Frank Calder led the Nisga'a tribal council on the land question to court. The council's lawyer was young Thomas Berger. Mr. Berger articled with Thomas Herley, underground legal counsel for the Native Brotherhood of British Columbia.

The delegation of people who stood on the steps of the Supreme Court of Canada to represent their people in the final stage were the third and fourth generation of those who posed before legislatures and courts to have their photos taken to record momentous occasions. Many of those who stood on the steps of the Supreme Court of Canada and later in Prime Minister Trudeau's office have since passed over and have been replaced by younger generations.

The Nisga'a chief negotiator, Chief Joe Gosnell's late father, Elijah and late brother, Chief James Gosnell, were both on those steps.

After a lengthy deliberation, the supreme court was evenly split on the decision for the Calder case, with one judge voting on a technicality of whether or not the Nisga'a could actually sue the government. Even though the decision was not a clear victory, aboriginal title was recognized and Prime Minister Trudeau reversed his policy on the land question. In 1973 he announced the comprehensive land claims policy.

Three years later, in 1976, Canada entered into a bilateral negotiation with the Nisga'a tribal council. British Columbia continued to deny that any aboriginal title still existed there, insisting that colonial legislation had dealt with it. However, on the heels of the Delgamuukw case and under the conditions of staying the Meares Island case, the provincial government re-examined its stand on the land question.

In July 1991, the task force to review aboriginal claims in British Columbia released its report. It contained 19 recommendations on how to negotiate the settlement of the land question in B.C.

On August 4, 1998, a canoe with Chief Frank Calder in it, grandson of Arthur Calder who met the first surveyor, was carried into the great feast hall. This canoe symbolized the many journeys the Nisga'a people made from the 1870s to the 1990s to peacefully assert their title to a land they had held since time immemorial. The journey was not just physical for the Nisga'a, it was spiritual and, at times when it buried the generations that had travelled in that symbolic canoe, it was transforming.

On November 9, 1998, members of the Nisga'a Nation ratified the final agreement through a ratification vote and on April 22, 1999, British Columbia passed the legislation it introduced to ratify the agreement. The British Columbia legislation was given royal assent on April 16, 1999. The final agreement was signed by the Nisga'a and the Government of British Columbia on April 27, 1999 and by the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development on May 4, 1999.

Treaty-making is a quintessential part of the relationship between Canada and the first nations in the country. Negotiation and reconciliation are two pillars of the Canadian way. With the Nisga'a treaty, we reconcile the past with the present. We find a way to live together with mutual respect and understanding, a way to look forward with anticipation to the developments of the next century. The treaty is consistent with the federal policies on comprehensive land claims to self-government.

I respectfully urge all members of the House to support Bill C-9, the bill to ratify the Nisga'a final agreement. Justice must be done.

Nisga'A Final Agreement Act November 1st, 1999

It is true.

Nisga'A Final Agreement Act November 1st, 1999

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

The member has no right standing up in the House and saying “racist policy of the government”. If there is racism in the Chamber, it is over there.

Immigration October 15th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, let me thank the assistant critic for the Reform Party on immigration for the question.

Let me further say to to the member that our values as a government in dealing with the very serious problem of people smuggling are not the same as the Reform Party's values. We believe in the charter of rights and freedoms. It does not.

Immigration October 15th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, let us be very clear for the Reform Party. This government is acting expeditiously. In a speech in the House a few minutes ago before question period a Reform member said that if the Reform Party were the government it would deal with the issue in days or a matter of weeks. We know that we cannot have justice in a day or a matter of weeks unless we have adjudicators of a commandant form and we are not going to have them.

Immigration October 15th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, let us be very clear on this question. The government has acted and is acting to expedite the process. Let me further inform the member. He knows that the issue we are dealing with is an international one which involves the smuggling of human beings. The member knows that this country is one of the leaders in the fight internationally. The member knows that but he is trying to exploit it.

Speech From The Throne October 15th, 1999

Mr. Speaker let me say to the deputy citizenship critic for the Reform Party that as usual he has it wrong.

Look at Canada and the success that we have had. As a matter of fact Canada has been named the best country in the world for the last six years and it is because of the people we have in this country. The people in this country were immigrants or refugees at one point in time.

When the member says he wants to make a determination on refugee cases in a matter of days or weeks, he is wrong. We cannot have a judicial system or any system that has any kind of justice that can make a determination on somebody's life in a day or a week. This is the problem the Reform Party brings to this House. The Reform Party has simplistic solutions that are not viable. I do not want a commandant deciding in a day if somebody gets due process. It takes some time. Our government is acting responsibly to combat international smuggling of human beings.

The opposition parties, particularly the Reform Party on this issue, are like ambulance chasers. They run around looking for a problem and they point fingers. We are working. It is succeeding. Members opposite can blow and shout but the reality is we have a system which we are continuously working on to improve. It is a very good and a very fair system, one which will be even better.

Immigration June 11th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, let me categorically say that there is no head tax in the country.

For the member to stand and trivialize a very tragic time in the history of the country when Chinese Canadians suffered is despicable. I understand that the Reform Party has an identity crisis. It does not know if it is coming or going. However this party is for refugees and this party is for immigration, unlike the Reform Party.

Immigration June 11th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, let me say that the member is wrong again. He seems to be a rather slow learner. We went through the same process in the House last night.

If we take the question of the refugees, particularly the ones from Kosovo right now, let me inform the member that the government has no fees for any of the refugees coming in. As a matter a fact the government has put forward $100 million to take care of these refugees.

For the member to stand in the House to try to create an issue where there is none does a disservice to the generosity of Canadians.

United Nations Human Rights Committee June 10th, 1999

Mr. Speaker, let me start by telling the member opposite that there is no head tax in the country. For him to stand in his place and try to trivialize a tragic time in the country's history is despicable. I think the member should be ashamed of himself.

I will get back to the other issues he was speaking about. I will enlighten him by pointing out that both governments are working to protect the borders because movement occurs in both directions. This is not a one way street. I will also take this opportunity to mention a handful of collaborative initiatives between Canada and the U.S.

First, both governments have taken concrete steps to systematically and regularly share information on known or suspected terrorists to ensure their early detection. Second, a new information sharing tool to support daily immigration enforcement efforts is near completion. Third, exchanges of information on visa issuance resulting in illegal immigration are now formalized and systematic.

Last but not least, let me remind the member opposite in the Reform Party that it is this government which announced the shared border accord with the United States in 1995. It is this government that took that accord one step further and solidified its commitment on the immigration front by establishing several joint working groups in order to build a comprehensive Canada-U.S. strategy for the future. This initiative is called Border Vision. The concrete examples I described earlier are a direct product of this initiative.

Suffice it to say, we have more vision that my Reform colleague who obviously is not aware of the testimony of all witnesses who appeared before the U.S. judiciary committee's immigration and claims subcommittee. If the member were, he would know that the vast majority of witnesses spoke of the close co-operation between the U.S. and Canada to combat the trafficking of drugs and illegal immigration.

Let me conclude by saying that members of the Reform Party talk about immigration and refugee policies. They cannot get past their noses. They keep talking about criminality, criminality, criminality. The member is wrong, wrong, wrong.