Susan Truppe

[Persons Case Awards, October 30th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, this week the Governor General presented the 2013 Persons Case Awards to five outstanding individuals who had advanced equality for women in our country.

This year's recipients are Constance Backhouse and Julie Lalonde from Ottawa, Nahanni Fontaine from Winnipeg, Susan Shiner from St. John's, and Cherry Smiley from Vancouver.

These women's scholarly work has contributed to ending violence against aboriginal women, ending sexual assault and harassment and supporting safety for women and girls in Canada.

I join with all Canadians to congratulate this year's Persons Case Award winners and I thank all of those who, like them, work in their own community to support equality for women across our great country.

[Interparliamentary Delegations, October 23rd, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1), I have the honour to present to the House, in both official languages, the report of the Canadian section of the ParlAmericas respecting its participation at the Annual Gathering of the Group of Women Parliamentarians, Paramaribo, Suriname, May 16-17, 2013.

[First Nations Elections Act, June 14th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the Indian Act election system contains several weaknesses that contribute significantly to unstable first nations governments. Among these principal weaknesses is the two-year term of office. The short period of time simply does not allow first nations to plan and implement important long-term projects for the benefit of their members. In many cases, when an election is held and the leadership changes, progress can be set back. This instability does not make first nations attractive for long-term investment.

I would like to ask my hon. colleague why it is so necessary for Bill S-6 to go through right now.

[Points of Order, June 13th, 2013]

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

I am not sure if I heard correctly or not, so I wonder if I could have a point of clarification from the member for Timmins—James Bay.

Did he say in his statement that the female RCMP officer who puts her life on the line every single day was a meter maid? If so, I think he should apologize.

[First Nations Elections Act, June 11th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Nanaimo—Cowichan is suggesting that the minister's power to order a first nation under Bill S-6 should be removed. We all agree that the Indian Act contains many paternalistic provisions, but by doing what the opposition suggests, first nations would be left with only the paternalistic Indian Act to address the damaging governance disputes.

When governance has broken down in a community to a damaging extent or when there are repeated challenges on who the legitimate leaders are in a community, what would the member suggest should be done?

[Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act, June 10th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, Bill S-2 is not only about matrimonial rights; it is also about protection orders for men, women, and children.

The member opposite mentioned that aboriginal women had been ignored for years. Does the member opposite want to ignore them for another 25 years?

[Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act, June 4th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, Bill S-2 is, first and foremost, about protecting women, men and children who live on reserve. Providing them with basic protections for matrimonial real property interests and rights is something that needs to be done now.

They can spin this any way they want, but the fact is that women on reserve need to have the same rights that he has, that his colleagues have and that I have. It is shameful that the members of the opposition would vote against rights to protect women and children in situations of family violence.

Why does the member think that aboriginal women should have less protection than his colleagues and we on this side of the House have?

[Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act, June 4th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, it has been 25 long years that on-reserve residents, particularly aboriginal women, have been deprived of basic rights and protections simply because of where they live. This is unacceptable.

The aboriginal women, international associations and even the Manitoba NDP agree that the current situation must change and change now.

Bill S-2, the family homes on reserves and matrimonial interests or rights act, is currently the fourth iteration of this bill to come before Parliament. The bill has appeared both in the House and the Senate in a number of different forms and has been the focus of extensive consultations. It addresses the issues that were raised with its predecessors, while providing aboriginal women on reserve with the same rights that other women in Canada have.

Would my colleague provide the House with information regarding the extensive consultation process that was undertaken for this bill?

[Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act, June 4th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, I heard two members opposite say that maybe it is a bad bill. I find it interesting that they would say maybe it is a bad bill, when it would help women on reserve with emergency protection orders and also give them the same rights that I have standing here.

Critics of Bill S-2 have said that allowing courts to address interests and rights to the matrimonial home on reserve is just too complicated for judges and places too much of a burden on the individual, but these critics want to deny aboriginal women the same rights and protections that many of them take for granted themselves. The fact is that Bill S-2 would simplify the process involved in the breakdown of a marriage or common-law relationship. It would provide individuals living on reserves with access to the legal tools and protections they need.

Could the minister please explain how this bill would aid judges in enforcing matrimonial real property laws on reserves and how it would ease the so-called burden on individuals?

[Family Homes on Reserves and Matrimonial Interests or Rights Act, May 27th, 2013]

Mr. Speaker, some of the funding would be put in place through the centre of excellence. It is approximately $4.8 million, which we discussed at committee when the member opposite was there.

This is about helping women and children. Matrimonial real property, or the family home, is the most valuable piece of property a couple on a reserve owns. Upon the breakdown of a marriage, the division of the property affects all involved: both spouses, their children, their families and, by extension, the broader community.

Bill S-2 proposes to eliminate a longstanding legislative gap that creates inequality and leaves aboriginal women vulnerable. Women, children and families living on reserve have been waiting more than 25 years for this legislation. There has been extensive consultation and a clear demand for it. If passed by Parliament, Bill S-2 would do much to protect some of the most vulnerable people in Canadian society, specifically women and children living in first nation communities.

Our government believes that family violence, wherever it occurs, should not be tolerated and that the rights of individuals and families to an equal division of the property value of the home must be protected. We know that aboriginal women and children cannot wait any longer for access to the same rights and protections that we have on this side of the House and they have on their side of the House.