John Finlay

[Housing, December 2nd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister responsible for the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.

In light of the social housing agreement which the federal government signed with the province of Ontario and our current problems associated with affordable housing and homelessness, could the minister comment on instructions given by Ontario's minister of municipal housing affairs to the Ontario Housing Corporation to reduce spending?

[Nisga'A Final Agreement Act, December 2nd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, my son is very supportive of some of the initiatives of the member for North Vancouver. He has written letters to him. I am quite aware of that. I also have a brother in Vancouver. I have known him for 68 years. He and I are at odds on many of these questions, the Musqueam leases being one and the Nisga'a agreement perhaps being another, although I have not discussed that with him fully.

The motions today are interesting. Most of them are frivolous; however, they do say that the bill will be changed to say “an act to implement” instead of “an act to give effect to”. I am not sure which is the more parliamentary term. I guess it does not matter very much since they both mean precisely the same thing in English.

When I first arrived here six years ago I did not know much about the Nisga'a or their land claims in the Nass Valley of British Columbia. I came to the House as the member representing Oxford County with a strong interest in the environment. I quickly had an opportunity to explore those interests as a member of the Standing Committee on the Environment and Sustainable Development.

As a member of that committee I had an opportunity to visit many of the northern regions of the country, places like Cambridge Bay, Rankin Inlet, Iqaluit, Resolute, Yellowknife and Whitehorse in Yukon. I spent some time in Vancouver and other parts of British Columbia, Kamloops, Okanagan, Shuswap and Vancouver Island, because, as the hon. member said, my oldest son and his family, my two grandsons, live there and I have a brother who lives there. I was able to learn a great deal about the incredible attachment of our native people to the land. Many of the northern environmental problems are also aboriginal problems.

As someone who cares about the environment, this was an attachment I was almost jealous of because I realized that no matter how much I learned, studied, travelled or used my training in the sciences I could never have the same spiritual connection to the land as native groups have across this great country of ours. I could, though, learn more about our first nations, work with them and for them to ensure their voices were heard. This would allow me to connect a little more deeply and a little more spiritually with our native people.

At this time I asked my party whip to move me to the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, a committee on which I continue to sit as the vice-chair. It is a committee I enjoy. I relish the opportunity to learn more about those who settled, survived and lived in this beautiful, rugged, and at times forbidding land before European settlers arrived.

Over the past year I have learned a great deal about the Nisga'a agreement. I have studied it. I have talked to the people who negotiated it and those personally affected by its provisions. I have come to the conclusion that the agreement deserves to receive the approval of parliament and of all Canadians.

The national chief of the Assembly of First Nations, Phil Fontaine, told our committee members just a week ago:

Notwithstanding the best attempts of reactionary forces, both in British Columbia, certain political parties and elsewhere, to describe the terms of the Treaty in inappropriate and misrepresentative terms, the truth is that its contents are fair, just and reasonable, not only because each and every part of the Treaty is defensible but because the very process of its negotiation was transparent, civil and comprehensive in a model of modern governance.

The Nisga'a treaty negotiations predate the British Columbia Treaty Commission process, which only began operation in 1993.

The federal government began negotiations with the Nisga'a in 1976. These negotiations were bilateral and progress on land related issues could not be achieved until 1990 when the provincial government formally joined the other two parties at the table.

From 1990 onward the negotiators conducted extensive consultations with the public and third parties. Advisory committees included the Kitimat-Skeena Regional Advisory Committee, made up of a broad range of community, local government, wildlife, fisheries, business, resource sector, and labour interests; the Nisga'a Fisheries Committee, made up of province-wide and local commercial fishing interests, processors, unions and Terrace sport fishing interests; the Nisga'a Forestry Advisory Committee, made up of the area's forestry companies and the Council of Forest Industries; the Nass Valley Residents Association, made up of the existing private property owners and residents of the Nass Valley, who told us personally that they were delighted with the Nisga'a agreement and supported it wholeheartedly; the Skeena Treaty Advisory Committee, made up of local government representatives from municipal governments and the two regional districts, Skeena-Queen Charlotte and Kitimat-Stikine; the Treaty Negotiation Advisory Committee and its sectoral committees, established in 1993 as a federal-provincial, ministerially appointed committee of 31 organizations which has sectoral committees for government, fisheries, lands, forest, wildlife and compensation; and the Certainty Working Group, which was established to review and discuss approaches to certainty.

Yet, the official opposition rails day after day that consultations among the people of B.C. and the Nass Valley were inadequate. I ask them now, which group was under-represented? Which voice was refused a hearing since 1990 with one of these groups? There have been more than 450 meetings before and since the agreement in principle was signed in March 1996. That is a meeting about every two days.

Between November 14 and November 19 I had the opportunity to go to British Columbia with the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, which held hearings on the Nisga'a agreement. While there we met with representatives of both sides of the debate. We also had to deal with a roomful of protesters who were asked by Reform members to disrupt the meetings. It was a difficult process, but I came away from those meetings even more convinced that adopting the Nisga'a treaty in this parliament is the right thing to do.

Reform members disagree with me, and that is their right. However, I ask them whether the Reform member of parliament for Skeena, which riding includes Nisga'a lands, has effectively represented the views of his constituents, the Nisga'a. Perhaps we should take the time to ask him how many times he visited and met with the Nisga'a tribal council, and how many times he held town hall meetings with the Nisga'a people. When we are finished asking him these important questions we may want to ask ourselves if this is effective representation. In my mind it is not.

How many of us have ignored over 5,000 people in our constituencies? It would be political suicide for most of us to do so, let alone shirking our duty as members of parliament for all of our constituents, whether they voted for us or not.

According to what the chief of the Nisga'a tribal council, Dr. Joseph Gosnell, told me and many others present at a breakfast meeting at the National Press Club, the member for Skeena met with the tribal council only once since his election in 1993, and I think it was in 1994. He could tell us that. That is one very short visit in six years. The visit was 30 minutes in length and he did not stay for lunch.

I am in favour of the Nisga'a treaty. I believe it is the right thing to do.

Day after day we hear members of the official opposition talk about how our native people want to be treated like other Canadians, how we are practising race based politics by making agreements with them. My answer is this. As a nation we must adhere to the principles for which we stand. It is fine to say that we must all be treated equally, but what if one portion of our society had their land taken, either by force or guile, had their children taken and placed in residential schools, had treaties signed and then forgotten? What of these people whom we have ghettoized to the point where their unemployment rate, suicide rate, drug abuse rate and infant mortality rate are far above the national average? Are we to say “Sorry. We will treat you just like any other Canadian now. There will be no assistance and you can enjoy the same rights and privileges as everyone else”? Or do we stand up, admit our mistakes, apologize for them and seek to assist our first nations in developing their communities, their infrastructure, their spirituality, their culture and their land to the point where they can become full partners in the Canadian dream? This is what Nisga'a does. I am proud of this agreement and I will wholeheartedly defend it in the House of Commons or anywhere else in the country.

[Nisga'A Final Agreement Act, December 2nd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order to suggest to the hon. member opposite that I stood to say I was withholding unanimous consent. Unfortunately the member was not able to see me because I was blocked from his view by the clerk. He saw this gentleman. That is fine. I stood and said that I disagreed—

[Nisga'A Final Agreement Act, November 1st, 1999]

Madam Speaker, I would like to speak about one of the most important features of the Nisga'a final agreement, one that goes to the very fabric of democracy and justice.

We have heard a lot of talk in recent years and recent days about the need for governments to be accountable. It is one of those things which distinguishes a democratic system from other political systems and it is one of the central features of the Nisga'a government as proposed in this treaty.

Political, legal and financial accountability is expected of governments in Canada. Accordingly they must answer to the Canadian public with regard to the decisions they make, the funds they receive and the money they spend. If governments are not perceived as being sufficiently accountable, they are replaced at election time. That is the bottom line.

We ensure accountable governments by demanding transparent and fair mechanisms, for example, clear and open processes of lawmaking such as we practise in this House. Decision making must be established, as well as procedures for appeal or review of those laws or decisions. The Nisga'a final agreement does exactly that. Accountability is one of the central themes of the treaty chapters on Nisga'a government, fiscal relations, the Nisga'a constitution and the fiscal financing agreement.

The Nisga'a government will be a democratic government that is accountable to its citizens. The Nisga'a constitution will be one of the key elements ensuring accountability of the Nisga'a government. This treaty requires that elections be held at least every five years. The Nisga'a constitution sets out a system of financial administration and conflict of interest rules that are comparable to standards generally accepted for governments in Canada. All adult Nisga'a can vote and hold office.

The final agreement requires that the Nisga'a constitution set out procedures to enact laws and a means to challenge the validity of those laws. In addition, the treaty provides for a strong majority in order to amend the Nisga'a constitution. Initially there is a requirement that an amendment be approved by at least 70% of Nisga'a citizens voting in a referendum. This is a high threshold but fittingly so.

The Nisga'a people themselves recognize the importance of accountability. Indeed their constitution requires each office holder to take an oath of office to provide good effective and accountable government for the Nisga'a nation as a whole.

That is not all. The final agreement stipulates a requirement for appropriate procedures to appeal or review administrative decisions of Nisga'a public institutions, to ensure the coming into force and publication of Nisga'a laws, and for the establishment of a public registry of laws.

Nisga'a citizens who are not residents of Nisga'a lands as outlined in the agreement, and there are some 200, can vote for the Nisga'a lisims government and can participate in the three urban locals: Vancouver, Terrace and Prince Rupert. Each of these locals is represented by a seat in the central Nisga'a government.

The Nisga'a government also has an obligation to consult with residents of Nisga'a lands who are not Nisga'a citizens about decisions that directly affect them. The final agreement specifies that the Nisga'a government must give full and fair consideration to the views expressed during that consultation. The Supreme Court of British Columbia has authority for appeals and challenges to administrative decisions of Nisga'a government brought by anyone whether or not they are Nisga'a citizens.

Residents of Nisga'a lands who are not Nisga'a citizens can also vote and run for election in public institutions that have elected members, such as school boards and health boards, and when the activities of those institutions significantly and directly affect them.

The approach taken in the Nisga'a final agreement also ensures that the Nisga'a government is financially accountable to its members and to the governments from whom some of their funding is derived. Under the fiscal financing agreement the Nisga'a government is required to prepare and provide audited accounts and financial statements for the Government of Canada and for the Government of British Columbia. Those accounts and statements must meet generally accepted accounting standards in Canada. Where funding is provided by the federal government, the reports can be reviewed by the auditor general.

Through the provisions contained in the final agreement, the accountability of the Nisga'a government at the local level will improve the current situation existing under the Indian Act. The Nisga'a treaty will establish a direct relationship between the Nisga'a government and its citizens. This is as it should be.

Under the Nisga'a treaty there is no lack of clarity. The Nisga'a government is clearly responsible for the decisions it makes and the lines of accountability are set out in the treaty for all to see and know.

This is democracy at its best. The Nisga'a government will be responsible for the well-being of all Nisga'a citizens and all those who reside on Nisga'a lands. Accordingly it will be accountable to them and to the government that provides some of the funding.

Let us not forget that the charter of rights and freedoms will apply to Nisga'a government and to all laws on Nisga'a lands. That means that all laws and decisions the Nisga'a government makes will be subject to review to ensure they are consistent with the charter.

Under section 24 of the Nisga'a final agreement, anyone who feels his or her rights and freedoms as guaranteed by the charter have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of law to obtain a just remedy.

For many years the Nisga'a people have been coming together every year to scrutinize the actions and decisions of their leaders. At these annual meetings the Nisga'a people have discussed matters that are important to them and have made resolutions to provide direction to their leaders. They have held leadership elections regularly. They have been negotiating with the Government of Canada for 20 years.

Over those years the Nisga'a leaders have earned the respect of their people. That is not to say that like other governments they did not have those within their membership who opposed them; however, the Nisga'a electors know that their leaders are accountable and that they have a regular opportunity to elect a new government if the current one does not live up to their expectations.

Clearly the Nisga'a people are well accustomed to having accountable leaders. The treaty confirms this fact and places the responsibility for governing the Nisga'a people in their own hands, a responsibility they are more than ready to take on. It is time that they did just that.

For too long now a minister of the federal crown has been responsible and accountable for every aspect of the lives of the Nisga'a people. It is time to move forward. The Nisga'a people have clearly identified their wish to do so by virtue of their support for the treaty. The Nisga'a people and their leaders have never lost sight of their goals. They have always attempted to fulfil them for the benefit of future Nisga'a generations.

Here they are today on the brink of achieving this longstanding vision. Let us not stand in their way now. Let us ratify the treaty which will return to the Nisga'a the responsibility and accountability for looking after their own affairs. It is the right thing to do.

[Supply, October 28th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, my question is similar to the minister's in that my understanding is that we have not decided to change anything yet.

I am sure the hon. member does not want us sitting in this place simply reading old laws and saying that they will do. We will be changing the law in the Nass Valley for the Nisga'a people who have made an agreement after 20 years. If we stay with the Indian Act we will not be making that change. We will have to do that. We will have to do the same thing with the airline industry.

Is my hon. friend saying that there is not a problem with one of our national carriers?

[County Of Oxford Integrated Network, October 20th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, on Monday evening I attended industry's seventh annual salute to excellence in the management of information and technology in the public sector.

I was there to support representatives of the County of Oxford Integrated Network, known as COIN, which was nominated for an award.

To my great delight, COIN was awarded the gold medal in the building partnerships and alliances category. This award recognizes COIN's efforts on behalf of its partners within Oxford County to provide services to our citizens through technological advances.

In winning, COIN was selected over nominees from the RCMP, HRDC, the National Research Council and other federal departments. I congratulate all of those involved in COIN, especially Oxford County Warden Mark Harrison, County Librarian Sam Coghlan, COIN Manager John Moore, and Oxford's HRDC Manager Ed St. Gelais I applaud them all on a job well done.

[Global Population, October 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, this past week the world welcomed its sixth billionth citizen. By year 2050 the world's population will be 8.9 billion. Our global ecosystems and economies cannot continue to support this growing population forever.

My question is for the Minister of International Cooperation. What is the government doing to help alleviate problems associated with global population?

[Livingston Centre, June 10th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, Tillsonburg's Livingston Centre has received a certificate of excellence from the Public Sector Quality Council of Ontario and the National Quality Institute.

The Livingston Centre is a partnership of service and education providers serving the tri-county area of Oxford, Elgin and Norfolk. The centre houses the Tillsonburg and District Multi-Service Centre, the Tillsonburg and District Association for Community Living, the local office for HRDC, the Thames Valley District School Board and Fanshawe College.

In addition, the Livingston Centre has been asked to be one of only 30 exhibitors at the Public Sector Quality Fair '99 taking place in Toronto June 15 and 16. The quality fair will increase awareness of quality principles and practices in the public sector within Ontario and showcase achievements of public sector quality teams.

I am very proud to see the Livingston Centre's tremendous success is now being recognized across the province.

[World Population Day, June 1st, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, July 11 is World Population Day, a day for us to reflect on the issues that challenge us globally.

A key issue of population and development is access to education for the 1.06 billion people, almost 20% of the world's population between the ages of 15 and 24. This is the largest generation of young people ever in history.

These young people have enormous potential to effect the development of their countries and we must support efforts that encourage their positive involvement in building strong societies. It has been demonstrated that in emerging nations, access to education results in slower population growth, better hygiene and improved economic circumstances.

I therefore encourage the Government of Canada and the Canadian International Development Agency to support initiatives to ensure that young people, especially in developing countries and in our native communities, receive adequate primary education.

[Publishing Industry, May 28th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

This week the minister used Canadian Bride as an example of a magazine that calls itself Canadian but contains very little Canadian content. The National Post , the Financial Post and the Ottawa Citizen all attacked the minister, saying there is no such magazine. This proves how little the minister knows about Canadian magazines.

Who is right, the people at Conrad Black's newspapers or the minister?