Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 1-7 of 7
Sort by relevance | Sorted by date: newest first / oldest first

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Thank you. This is a little bit of a different forum for me, so I'm just getting used to it. I'm calling in from Calgary, Alberta. My name is Drew Lafond. I am a member of the Indigenous Bar Association. The Indigenous Bar Association in Canada is a not-for-profit organization

June 6th, 2017Committee meeting

Drew Lafond

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Okay, excellent. Put simply, the proposed paragraph 6(1)(a) “all-the-way” approach is certainly attractive. We think that it could beneficial. Unfortunately, we didn't have the opportunity to contribute to the drafting of that section, and when we did ultimately see Bill S-3 app

June 6th, 2017Committee meeting

Drew Lafond

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  What's responsible is subjective assessment. In our view, what problems would arise in connection with the 6(1)(a) “all-the-way” approach.... You'll recall that during our previous submissions to the Senate in May—and this was identified in our written submissions as well—we iden

June 6th, 2017Committee meeting

Drew Lafond

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Are you referring to the provisions in paragraph 6(1)(c.01) all the way to paragraph 6(1)(c.4)?

June 6th, 2017Committee meeting

Drew Lafond

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  The draft amendments that we proposed and circulated to the members of the Senate committee simply provided that if you had been born post-1951 but prior to 1985, you would be entitled to paragraph 6(1)(a) status. That essentially left the door open for anyone who was born prior

June 6th, 2017Committee meeting

Drew Lafond

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  During the prior round of amendments before Senator McPhedran's amendment, we had been dealing with a response to the decision in Descheneaux, and the idea had been to identify instances of sex discrimination that had arisen post-1951 as a result of the 1951 legislation. We were

June 6th, 2017Committee meeting

Drew Lafond

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Following the dialogue on the clause-by-clause reading, what we hadn't realized is that the vast majority of the senators were actually in favour of going back to that previous era, prior to 1951, which in our view, we have to admit—I mean, we'll submit that—we thought was unatta

June 6th, 2017Committee meeting

Drew Lafond