House of Commons photoLost his last election, in 2015, with 17% of the vote.
Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act April 17th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the minister can justify such action because, for 25 years, aboriginal families living on reserve have not had the protection afforded other Canadians. As my colleagues and I have said over and over, these families have been asking for protection for years.
A government has finally decided to take action. The government should have the support of the opposition parties in order for this legislation to go into effect as quickly as possible.
Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act April 17th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, currently, as the hon. member alludes to and it is a fact, aboriginal women cannot go to court to seek exclusive occupation of the family home or even apply for emergency protection orders when living in a family home on reserve, a right which every other woman in Canada has.
Bill S-2 extends this basic protection to individuals living on reserves.
In situations of family violence, a spouse would be able to apply for an emergency order to stay in the family home with the exclusion of the other spouse for a period of up to 90 days with the possibility of an extension.
These provisions would allow victimized spouses and common-law partners in abusive relationships to ask for exclusive occupation of the family home for a specified period of time, providing victims and their dependants with a place to stay. That in itself is a good reason--
Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act April 17th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, it is incredible. That is a complete fabrication.
They are saying that we should ignore this inequality for first nations women and children of families that live on reserve. This has been dragging on for 25 years, and they have the gall to stand in opposition to the government's attempt to finally restore a fair system for aboriginal families in Canada.
I would ask them to reconsider their position and support the government's effort to finally restore equality in this country.
Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act April 17th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I invite the member to review his files to avoid making such far-fetched statements in the House.
As I said earlier, improvements have been made to this bill since 2007, and it has been introduced a number of times.
The provinces and first nations across the country were consulted. Groups everywhere asked the government to take action to restore equality between aboriginal families living on and off reserve.
I am still wondering why anyone would want to oppose restoring this fundamental aspect of equality.
Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act April 17th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, the rhetoric of the hon. member aside, the fact remains that the department undertook an extensive two-year national consultation process. It included over 100 meetings in 76 sites across Canada, at a cost of more than $8 million.
More importantly, the legislation responds to calls for action over the past 25 years by first nations and groups such as Amnesty International, the United Nations, women's organizations, and parliamentary committees to Canada for the resolution of this long-standing inequity.
Since the family homes on reserves and matrimonial interests right act was first introduced in 2008, more than 39 hours have been dedicated to debate and study of the bill in Parliament. More than half of this time occurred during committee on study of the bill, with 60 appearances from first nation organizations, individuals, and federal and provincial representatives among others. Now, almost five years later, it is time for action.
Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act April 17th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre for her excellent question.
As the member said, under the proposed legislation, first nations can choose to enact their own laws on matrimonial real property rights and interests— legislation that would address their own specific needs and respect their customs—or to apply provisional federal rules.
By allowing first nations to enact their own laws, Bill S-2 respects their diversity. As a result, they could pass laws that are aligned with the needs of their communities, enabling them to take a different and effective approach to matrimonial real property rights issues on their respective reserves.
The bill also provides for an implementation period so that first nations have the information and time they need to enact their own laws on matrimonial real property rights.
That is why we made a commitment to create an independent centre of excellence for matrimonial real property that will help first nations either to enact their own laws or to apply provisional federal rules.
Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act April 17th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, let me repeat this. It is unacceptable that people living on reserve have for decades been deprived of the same rights and protections afforded Canadians living off reserve simply because of where they live. This is not the first time this has come before the House. This year our government is determined to see this legislation pass so the injustice that aboriginal women and families on reserves have suffered for 25 years will be finally corrected. That is why it is important that we act now.
Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act April 17th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, first, the member should know that aboriginal rights are protected under section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982.
What we are talking about here is a flaw in the Indian Act. Based on two Supreme Court decisions, it prevents aboriginal couples on reserves from enjoying the same matrimonial rights as other people in the province they live in.
Broad consultations were held for almost two years. There were some 100 gatherings in 76 locations across the country in order to consult with first nations on the issue. To answer his question, yes, there was ample consultation.
Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act April 17th, 2013
Mr. Speaker, matrimonial real property, or the family home, is without question the most valuable piece of property that a couple on a reserve owns. Upon the breakdown of a marriage or a common law relationship, the division of property affects all involved, both spouses, their children, their families and, by extension, the broader community.
In this case, time allocation is necessary to ensure that women and children living on reserve do not have to wait any longer to benefit from the same rights and protections that people living off reserve are afforded. They deserve and expect no less.
Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act April 17th, 2013
That is where it originated. Again, there were more hours at the committee level. I know those members like to speak for the sake of speaking, but there comes a point where we must take action.