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

Results 1-8 of 8
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  That would be difficult to do without having the jurisdiction to be able to do so. According to the way this bill is set out, I don't see the tribunal having that kind of authority. It's a big unanswered question, absolutely.

March 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Peter Di Gangi

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  The issue of federal-provincial responsibility for claims has been a big problem through the years, as you know, particularly in areas of pre-Confederation, where the claims arose prior to Confederation in Quebec, the Atlantic, Ontario, and parts of B.C., in particular. We reali

March 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Peter Di Gangi

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  This is one area where I have to admit we'd like to have more opportunity to study the options for appeal. My understanding is that once a claim is accepted for submission, Indian Affairs and Northern Development Canada would have it for three years to be able to decide on whethe

March 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Peter Di Gangi

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  There are a couple of reasons why we thought it would be important to be a bit more precise and explicit in the legislation. One is that this is legislation, and once it is adopted it is very hard to turn the clock back or to amend it. It's probably a good idea to try to get it a

March 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Peter Di Gangi

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  I could make a quick response. Thank you. Again, it's a very technical issue relating to the factual situation in Quebec. As we know, the federal government has what it calls the comprehensive claims policy for dealing with ancestral rights or aboriginal rights, and then it has

March 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Peter Di Gangi

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  This is one of the questions we had, and that's why we sought the amendment. Our reading of the clause would be that if the crown makes a promise, what they call a unilateral undertaking, there can be a claim based on not honouring that, but it's based on the provision of reserve

March 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Peter Di Gangi

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Thank you. I cannot speak for the factual situation of each of the five first nations. I'm not familiar with all of their facts, but I know that promises have been made to the communities I've worked with, and they're much more recent than that.

March 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Peter Di Gangi

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Yes. Having taken a look at the bill, there are a number of aspects to it that of course would apply to Quebec. I think what we're trying to say in the brief is that inadvertently the drafters did not consider carefully enough the situation in Quebec to accommodate the uniqueness

March 10th, 2008Committee meeting

Peter Di Gangi