John Duncan

[Bill C-3--Gender Equity in Indian Registration Act, April 27th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I just want to say how disappointed I am in terms of this motion.

The government has been very straightforward. The committee has been very straightforward. We have offered departmental officials to talk about this whole bill, the amendments and the possibilities. We have had very good witnesses. We have had people say that we really need to get on with Bill C-3. Anything that members might want to do in the way of amendments will have unintended consequences. I have had conversations with representatives from national aboriginal organizations. We have offered an exploratory process that would go beyond this bill, as a parallel process that would basically take very considerable time to accomplish.

We are not trying to disguise our behaviour or anything flowing from the McIvor case. The bill is a direct response to a Supreme Court of British Columbia decision, nothing more, nothing less. Everything else can be addressed through the exploratory process.

I would just like to put that on the record because we certainly have a different set of talking points suddenly coming from the opposition.

[April 21st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I fully comprehend the member's question. As I stated in my first response, the government is primarily concerned with current events, with current students in place, to ensure they get their academic year in. We have yet to receive a business plan going forward. It is difficult to make comments without a business plan.

We look at the recent events very positively, including the reinstatement of Mr. Westerlund.

[April 21st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments by the member for Nanaimo—Cowichan, my colleague on the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.

Our government remains committed to ensuring that first nations students continue to enjoy the same opportunities as other Canadians. Good education is the key to finding a good job, personal success and a prosperous future.

We did announce a cancellation of funding for the First Nations University of Canada on February 5 because of long-standing and systemic problems related to governance and financial management. The financial officer, who had been terminated by the previous administration and who had identified many of these problems at a time when it was essential, was restored to his office this week. We do have initiatives going forward.

To say that all the concerns have been addressed is political rhetoric, at this point a business plan is still required but has not been forthcoming. Some of the requests we are hearing are quite inappropriate at this moment.

It is a difficult situation for the students. We continue to work with our partners to provide these students with the support they need to complete this academic year ending in August. We are offering moneys, under the Indian studies support program, to an eligible post-secondary institution. At this point, it looks like the University of Regina, which is a signatory to the MOU.

We are continuing to assist first nations and Inuit students through the post-secondary student support program as well. About two-thirds of the students at the First Nations University receive this funding.

Our government recognizes the importance of education for first nations and for all Canadians. We are working with our partners, including the provinces and first nations, to improve outcomes for our post-secondary students.

[April 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, much has changed in the last 12 years. Much has changed in the last 6 years. We have many agreements and understandings at the community level. We have programming driven by the community level and funded by Health Canada. We have that available in more than 600 communities across the country. We have staffing that includes people involved in this field, one-third of whom are aboriginal. We have more than 400 aboriginal people involved. To say this is not community-driven or not sensitive to the needs of the aboriginal community is incorrect.

I think we will see a transition that will work very well, and the responsibilities are well recognized by the government.

[April 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the Aboriginal Healing Foundation is still operating. It began in 1998 with its program and, as of now, we still have 22 of its locations still operating. Where it is not operating, which has been in many parts of the country, even in that 12-year period, we have Health Canada-funded clinics, most often community driven, in first nations communities.

We continue to have a moral and legal responsibility to continue to address the needs of all residential school survivors and their families. Funding is continuing and no one will be turned away based on the qualification that the individual is a survivor or a member of the family.

The lessons we have learned from the Aboriginal Healing Foundation have been very valuable. They have been very valuable remedial actions and that will be built into the Health Canada programming as well as at the community level.

[Canadian Forces, April 13th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, Canadian Forces members put their lives on the line for our country, and for the rights and freedoms of people around the world.

Our Conservative government has a solid and unwavering record of support for the armed forces and their families.

Yesterday our government introduced the fairness for military families act. After years of Liberal governments ignoring this important issue, our Conservative government is making sure that serving their country does not prevent Canadian Forces members from full access to parental benefits and spending quality time with their child. This is in addition to budget 2010 commitments to facilitate EI sickness benefits for the family members of soldiers killed in the line of duty.

For a change, the opposition should stop disparaging our brave men and women. Do the right thing and support this bill.

[Aboriginal Healing Foundation, March 30th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, after five and half hours of debate at the end of a lengthened day, we have been witness to some high level debate and some debate that was not so high level. However, I think we have served a public interest.

At this time, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the speakers, the questioners, the interested members and the people who have continued to watch all or part of this debate. They have seen a clear demarcation of positions but good will all around.

With that, I will say thanks to all and let the member for Vancouver East handle that in the way she is so good at.

[Aboriginal Healing Foundation, March 30th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, before, during and after AHF we will continue to have programs and services available that are aboriginal led at the community level. Why does the member for St. Paul's continue to perpetuate that that is not the case?

We have explained this multiple times this evening. No one has refuted what we are saying. There has been just a complete absence of recognition that we have said something positive. I do not understand it at all.

[Aboriginal Healing Foundation, March 30th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Thunder Bay—Superior North talked about an adjacent riding, which is the Kenora riding. The member for Kenora sits on the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development. I know his background is nursing and that he has worked as a nurse in remote first nations and aboriginal communities, certainly on the British Columbia coast, northern Ontario, and likely other places as well that I am not immediately aware of. He is a tireless worker in representing his far-flung riding, in which there are approximately 60 first nations communities.

My comment is this. We cannot impugn other members and suggest in any way that they are not motivated to do the right thing in terms of this subject of healing.

[Aboriginal Healing Foundation, March 30th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I think you were distracted momentarily, but the member is making reference to members who are either present or not present in the House. It is most inappropriate to talk about members who are not present in the House. I would ask him to not do that, please.