Madam Speaker, on behalf of aboriginal women on two reserves in my riding of Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound, I want to voice my support for Bill C-8, the family homes on reserves and matrimonial interests or rights act.
The bill offers a practical effective solution to the long list of legal and technical issues related to on-reserve matrimonial real property. These issues have been the focus of much study, consultation and discussion in recent years. A review of the many published reports reveals several common themes and recommendations for action. These ideas helped shape the legislation now before us and, taken in their entirety, are a compelling, even overwhelming, argument for voting in favour of Bill C-8.
While other hon. members addressing the legislation have focused primarily on technical issues, I will adopt a different approach. I propose to outline the key findings of recent matrimonial real property research and consultation and link them to Bill C-8. This approach will demonstrate the considerable value of the legislation now before us.
I will begin with the findings of several United Nations committees. Canada is an active participant not only in the United Nations itself but also in several UN conventions and organizations. A report published in November 2005 by the United Nations Human Rights Committee touches on the issue of matrimonial real property. Among the report's recommendations is one which suggests that Canada:
--should, in consultation with Aboriginal peoples, adopt measures ending discrimination actually suffered by Aboriginal women in matters of reserve membership and matrimonial property, and consider this issue as a high priority.
A second body, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, issued a similar call to action. This group called on Canada to develop a solution in consultation with the communities concerned.
Of course, there is also a long history of calls for reform from within Canada. In 1988, for example, the province of Manitoba launched an inquiry into the justice system's treatment of aboriginal peoples. The inquiry's final report identified a host of issues, including the lack of an effective regime dealing with on-reserve MRP.
The 1996 report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples also examined the issue of matrimonial rights. The report recommended that:
Aboriginal nations or organizations consult with federal, provincial and territorial governments on areas of family law with a view to
(a) making possible legislative amendments to resolve anomalies in the application of family law to Aboriginal people and to fill current gaps...
While all of these reports included calls for a legislative solution to the issue of matrimonial property rights, there was, however, no clear consensus on how such legislation should be structured. Various options, such as amendments to the Indian Act, stand-alone legislation and the application of provincial and territorial laws have all been advanced.
Three parliamentary committees considered the challenges associated with potential legislative approaches to on-reserve matrimonial property rights.
The Senate Standing Committee on Human Rights, for example, staged a series of hearings and published an interim report in 2003. The report, titled, “A Hard Bed to Lie In: Matrimonial Real Property on Reserve”, included a number of pertinent recommendations, including legislation that would validate matrimonial laws developed and implemented by first nations. The report also called on government to transfer money to aboriginal women's groups for the purpose of conducting thorough consultations on the issue.
Three years later, the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development launched another study and considered the testimony of more than 30 witnesses. The committee's report, “Walking Arm-in-Arm to Resolve the Issue of On-Reserve Matrimonial Real Property”, determined that, to be effective, MRP legislation must be developed in consultation and collaboration with first nations. The committee also stated that any legislation must balance individual equality rights and collective first nations rights.
Recommendations for consultation and legislative change were echoed in the report of the Standing Committee on the Status of Women in June 2006.
The guidance provided by parliamentarians expressed in the studies that I have cited forms the core of this government's strategy on matrimonial property rights. This government did in fact provide over $8 million to the Native Women's Association of Canada and the Assembly of First Nations to carry out a consultation process. A ministerial representative was contracted to work with these two national aboriginal organizations, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, and additional stakeholders to help identify and analyze legislative options.
These consultations, along with the findings of the ministerial representative received in 2007, and further discussions, have all informed and provided a firm foundation for Bill C-8.
The solution before the House includes a mechanism for first nations to establish their own community specific matrimonial reserve property laws. This is particularly significant because it marks the first time that Parliament would recognize first nation laws in the area of matrimonial real property without qualification. There would be no ministerial powers on reserve and no opportunity for the minister to overturn first nation MRP laws.
Bill C-8 also honours calls to ensure that all first nations members have adequate input into the development of their communities' MRP laws.
Under the terms of the proposed legislation, a majority of eligible voters must vote on and endorse proposed MRP laws. This approach would also help to align each MRP law with community values and traditions.
The federal regime established by Bill C-8 would apply to those first nations that have not already established MRP laws through negotiated self-government agreements that deal with the administration of reserve lands or through the First Nations Land Management Act.
The federal regime would empower judges to order specific remedies, such as exclusive occupation orders. Under the legislation, first nations may make representations to the courts about the cultural, social and legal context relevant to most orders.
In accordance with what was heard during consultation sessions, the option of simply incorporating provincial or territorial laws regarding MRP to apply on reserves, which had been the subject of a private member's bill in an earlier Parliament, was discarded. Furthermore, non-members of a first nation would not be able to use the provisions of the proposed legislation to gain ownership of reserve lands.
Finally, Bill C-8 respects an opinion expressed repeatedly during the consultation sessions and featured prominently in the ministerial representative's final report, that the legislation must balance individual rights and the collective rights of first nation communities.
Bill C-8 proposes to fill an intolerable legislative gap that has existed for far too long. The solution contained in the legislation is both comprehensive and workable. It is the product of much research and consultation, and it responds to concerns and recommendations identified by the people likely to be most affected.
The proposed legislation offers a long overdue fix to an intolerable problem, and grants first nations the unprecedented power to develop their own laws in this area.
For these reasons, I will be voting in favour of Bill C-8. I urge all my hon. colleagues to join me in supporting this important legislation that would certainly benefit native women in my riding and many ridings across the country.
