House of Commons Hansard #35 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was commissioner.
This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.
Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation Act Second reading of Bill C-10. The bill establishes an independent Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation to ensure federal accountability for treaty obligations. Liberals argue it is a vital, co-developed step for reconciliation, trust, and economic prosperity, urging quick passage. Conservatives oppose it as unnecessary bureaucracy, stating it duplicates the Auditor General's work, lacks enforcement power, and highlights the government's failure to sign new treaties. The Bloc supports the principle but seeks stronger enforcement powers. The Green Party urges swift, non-partisan passage, emphasizing Indigenous partners' long-standing advocacy. 56100 words, 7 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
The hon. member's time has expired. We will move on to questions and comments.
The member for Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay.
Helena Konanz Conservative Similkameen—South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC
Mr. Speaker, between 2013 and 2023, federal employment surged by 36%. By contrast, the private sector grew by 13%.
How big is this new bureaucracy, this new office, going to be? How many new public sector employees does the government plan to hire?
Abdelhaq Sari Liberal Bourassa, QC
Mr. Speaker, I think the issue is much more important than bureaucracy, but I would answer the question in the negative. It is an accountability mechanism. No, the position of commissioner will not create red tape. It will ensure that commitments are kept and that resources are used effectively and efficiently. That is what our government is aiming for.
Maxime Blanchette-Joncas Bloc Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Liberals keep saying that they want to advance reconciliation. However, four months ago, not four years ago, they passed Bill C‑5, which deals with nation-building projects, without consulting first nations. This was criticized by the Assembly of First Nations and by Inuit and Métis communities.
Today, the Liberals are proposing Bill C‑10. They would create the position of a commissioner for modern treaty implementation without giving the commissioner any real powers. The commissioner would have no teeth. They would be able to examine the situation and make recommendations, but their hands would be tied. They would not be able to make binding recommendations.
Are the Liberals afraid of actual accountability, which would force them to face up to their unfulfilled promises to first nations?
Abdelhaq Sari Liberal Bourassa, QC
Mr. Speaker, I will begin by answering the last part of my colleague's question. Are the Liberals scared? Obviously the answer is no.
Establishing this commissioner means establishing a mechanism for transparency and oversight. I hope that members across the way will vote in favour of establishing this commissioner. Contrary to what my colleague is saying, I think that by establishing this commissioner, the Liberals are taking their transparency responsibilities seriously and will thereby earn the trust of all Canadians, including indigenous peoples.
Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders
Winnipeg North Manitoba
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I think of Bill C-10 as definitely warranted. It is before us today because of a great deal of effort by indigenous community leaders in response to needing modernized treaties, which will ultimately build a stronger and healthier social and economic society. I see having an agent of Parliament that reports to Parliament as a positive thing.
I wonder if my colleague can provide his thoughts on how important it is that we recognize the true value of these agreements. They help us build a stronger Canada.
Abdelhaq Sari Liberal Bourassa, QC
Mr. Speaker, of course, it is very important to recognize the agreements. As I said, it is a matter of moving from agreement to action, but these are actionable variables that must be monitored and supervised. Ultimately, what we are putting in place is not simply an administrative measure. It is a renewed promise, that of a Canada where we do not just talk about reconciliation, but where we truly live it. We want to experience this reconciliation, with a strong economy and also with the oversight of a commissioner. I hope that the entire House will support implementing this process.
Tamara Kronis Conservative Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC
Mr. Speaker, why did the government choose not to place the new commissioner under the independent oversight of the Office of the Auditor General, where accountability and transparency are already well established? This would give first nations, Métis and Inuit partners greater confidence in the commissioner's impartiality.
Abdelhaq Sari Liberal Bourassa, QC
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her question, which is a very good one.
I would simply say that we want to give this commissioner the freedom to pursue intergovernmental relations and relations with the regions. My colleague's proposal would complicate the process, and that is what we want to avoid.
Aslam Rana Liberal Hamilton Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, kwe kwe, ulaakut, taanshi and hello. I would like to start by acknowledging that Canada's Parliament is located on the unceded, unsurrendered territory of the Anishinabe Algonquin people.
I am honoured to be speaking here today about the critical role of the commissioner for modern treaty implementation would play so that Canada lives up to the promises we have made in modern treaties. By living up to our promises, we can help secure a better future for modern treaty partners and all Canadians.
Modern treaties are a distinct expression of reconciliation between indigenous peoples and the Crown. They create enduring intergovernmental relationships that improve the lives and livelihoods of indigenous people and advance national socio-economic objectives that benefit all people in Canada.
In the 50 years since the first modern treaty was signed, the number of modern treaties has continued to grow. Since 1975, the Government of Canada and indigenous partners have worked together to negotiate 27 modern treaties that have positive and long-lasting impacts on socio-economic outcomes for indigenous people and all people in Canada. Many more are being negotiated. I am talking about positive effects like economic and infrastructure development, sustainable land management and more control over the affairs of indigenous communities by indigenous governments.
The work overseen by the commissioner for modern treaty implementation would pave the way to help future generations achieve the successes that today's generations are working toward.
Modern treaties can drive greater economic development and encourage indigenous businesses ownership. For example, the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation Final Agreement made it possible for the first nation to acquire a significant stake in Air North, Yukon's airline. This investment provides economic sustainability for the first nation, jobs for its citizens and a transportation lifeline for the Vuntut Gwitchin people in Old Crow, which is Yukon's only fly-in community. This investment also benefits Air North's hundreds of employees and those who fly in and around the Yukon.
In Nunavut, a landmark achievement through the Nunavut Agreement has recognized Inuit rights, granting Inuit ownership of about 350,000 square kilometres of land. It provides for the establishment of Nunavut as a territory, which spans nearly two million square kilometres, one-fifth of Canada's total land mass. It has also granted mineral rights for over 35,000 square kilometres.
This empowers Inuit to participate in decision-making regarding land, water and wildlife management, ensuring sustainable resource use. More importantly, it provides Inuit with a means of participating in economic opportunities in these areas. These are examples of how modern treaties can strengthen the social, cultural and economic fabric of indigenous communities while providing benefits to surrounding communities.
We know that a strong economy, more jobs, improved infrastructure and support for clean energy can only be achieved through a full partnership with indigenous people. Economic prosperity will not come from participating in the process alone; it must include ownership and leadership. That is why we have doubled the indigenous loan guarantee program from $5 billion to $10 billion.
We recognize, however, that access to capital remains a challenge, especially for smaller and remote communities and those seeking to fund the initial stages of credit. That is why we are working to make equity pathways, procurement opportunities and direct investments in community-led projects more accessible and transparent.
Another example of a promising project is being led by the Nisga'a Nation. It is seeing booming economic development, including taking on the role as a proponent for major projects. For example, the Nisga'a Nation is codeveloping, along with its partners, the Ksi Lisims LNG project, which is a proposed floating liquefied natural gas export facility located on a site owned by the Nisga'a Nation near the community of Gingolx in British Columbia. The project will have a capacity of 12 million tonnes of LNG per year. The Nisga'a Nation is also codeveloping the Prince Rupert gas transmission pipeline. As a codeveloper of these projects, the Nisga'a Nation has meaningful input in all aspects of the project, reflecting the Nisga'a Nation's commitment to stewardship of their land and people.
Along with driving economic development, many modern treaty partners have implemented training and education programs tailored to their community needs. For instance, the Nisga'a Lisims Government has invested in vocational training programs, leading to higher employment rates and more skilled labour within the community. Its bilateral agreement with Canada—
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am rising on a point of order.
The interpretation is not working.
The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec
I am told that the interpretation is not working right now.
Interpretation is good now.
The hon. member for Hamilton Centre is welcome to restart his time. He has just under four minutes left.
Aslam Rana Liberal Hamilton Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, the Nisga'a Lisims Government's bilateral agreement with Canada for the delivery of the indigenous skills and employment training program for Nisga'a citizens has resulted in the opening of the Nisga'a employment, skills and training program, which helps Nisga'a citizens thrive and succeed in a rapidly developing economy by helping them find meaningful and demand-driven employment.
Along with supporting training and skills development, modern treaties can also lead to more infrastructure development, which is critical to communities. Modern treaties also emphasize the importance of environment management and stewardship, which can lead to greater stability and control over resources.
One example of this is the Gwich'in Renewable Resources Board. This board promotes the sustainable use of land and resources while preserving traditional practices, and it plays a leadership role in ensuring that the fish, forests and wildlife of the Gwich'in area remain healthy and sustainable. Its mandate is to work in the public interest, representing all parties to their modern treaty: the Gwich'in, the people of the Northwest Territories and all Canadians. This is an example of how modern treaties can support communities in finding new ways to protect, conserve and manage renewable resources.
The benefits of modern treaties in Canada are evident in improved social outcomes, building infrastructure and economic development for indigenous peoples. It is clear that these arrangements are making a real difference in people's lives. However, while significant progress has been made, there is still more to be done in implementing the commitments made in modern treaties. These successes are the good-news stories that show us what we can accomplish when we work together, but they occur against the backdrop of a persistent and crucial issue. There is an ongoing lack of awareness, understanding and action in the federal public service around modern treaty objectives, obligations and relationships. Sometimes, we still get it wrong.
When I say “costs”, I do not just mean the significant financial expenses. The biggest cost is losing chances to work together, because when implementation fails, it leads to conflict instead of partnership. When this happens, opportunities to achieve the kind of successes I spoke about earlier pass us by. This is why we need the commissioner, to give us a chance to take action today for a stronger, more resilient and more prosperous Canada tomorrow.
The proposed commissioner for modern treaty implementation would hold the federal government and future governments accountable for the implementation of modern treaties so that modern treaty partners and all Canadians are not made to bear the costs of opportunities missed because we did not live up to our promises. By living up to our promises, we can help secure a better future for modern treaty partners and all people in Canada. Modern treaties are already delivering results and making a difference; that is clear, but there is room to do even better, and the commissioner will help us do that.
Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB
Mr. Speaker, I just want to ask the hon. member about responsible and accountable government. Does he feel that this piece of legislation is trying to mask the issue that the Liberals, over the last decade, have failed to secure any modern treaties across this country and have failed to live up to the modern treaties that have been signed over the last number of years? When Stephen Harper was prime minister, we signed five modern treaties, and we worked very hard to enable the relationship between Canada and first nations.
Would the member not agree that this bill is an admission of failure on the part of the Liberal government?
Aslam Rana Liberal Hamilton Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, I disagree with the member. The commissioner's main job would just be to check if the federal government is fulfilling its promises under modern treaties, working in good faith with indigenous partners and upholding the honour of the Crown. The commissioner would not settle disputes or give legal advice. Instead, they would do reviews, audits and briefings to see how government programs are working and share what they find with ministers, indigenous partners and the department.
Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois supports the principle of the bill. However, we see that nowhere does it provide for authority to compel the government to do anything. The commissioner will have no power.
We worry that it will be a bit like the Commissioner of Official Languages, whose office was established 50 years ago. For 50 years now, French has been in decline and francophone assimilation has been going up. Year after year, the commissioner has expressed concern about violations of the Official Languages Act. Recently, in the latest iteration of that legislation, the commissioner was given some enforcement powers.
If the commissioner position is established, does my colleague agree that the commissioner should have the authority to compel the government to implement new treaties?
Aslam Rana Liberal Hamilton Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, with 27 modern treaties covering over 40% of Canada's land mass, major development and infrastructure projects depend on partnership with indigenous modern treaty partners and compliance with modern treaty obligations.
Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders
Winnipeg North Manitoba
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, I respect what the member is saying and wanted to amplify that having a commissioner to deal with modern treaties is something that has been desired for a number of years now. We have the legislation before us. It would have a very positive impact to have an agent of Parliament who reports to Parliament in terms of the modern treaties and how modern treaties benefit Canadian society. I see it as a win-win-win.
I wonder if my friend can just comment on why he believes it is important for us as parliamentarians, on no matter what side of the House, to recognize the value of legislation and at least support the legislation going to committee and beyond.
Aslam Rana Liberal Hamilton Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, these treaties strengthen and reinforce self-determination by ensuring that indigenous people lead decisions that affect them in areas like land stewardship, cultural protection, resource development and participation in land management decisions, but they are only as strong as their implementation.
Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for answering my last question about accountable government and acknowledging that the commissioner is indeed needed because the Liberals have failed to live up to all of their hype and rhetoric. Once again, will the member answer a simple yes or no question? Will he admit that this bill is merely an admission of failure on the Liberal government's part?
Aslam Rana Liberal Hamilton Centre, ON
Mr. Speaker, not at all. This is not a failure; this is even progress that we have been making for the last 10 years in the Liberal government. Even before that, it was being done in the Harper government, so this is a continuity of that. There is not a failure happening in government.
Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB
Mr. Speaker, it is great to be up here today to talk about accountable government and speak to Bill C-10. The government has put forward this piece of legislation, and I think it is a total admission of the Liberals' failure to keep first nations included in the Canadian economy and ensure first nations are part of the Canadian conversation. Therefore, one of the trinkets they are putting forward is the commissioner position, to acknowledge that they have been a failure over the last 10 years.
I want to talk about accountable government more broadly. People back home always say, “Arnold, you are part of the government,” but I say no, I am part of the opposition. The government is generally considered to be the front bench on the government side of the House. That is the government that lives inside of our legislative chamber. Unlike in the United States, where the administration lives outside of the legislative process, in Canada, in a parliamentary system, the government lives in the front bench, and that is the Prime Minister and his cabinet.
They direct the administration of our country, and they answer directly to the legislature. They are right here, and one of the key functions of this place is to hold the government to account, principally through question period. That is probably what people see the most. That is the Government of Canada. It then branches out from there to all the ministries, the ministry offices across the country, and the folks who work for those ministries would also be part of the government. Very soon, I hope to be part of the governing party of Canada, if not part of the government, Lord willing.
I also want to inform the House that I will be splitting my time.
When we talk about accountable government, this is an important part of Canadian history. This is something that this particular place fought vehemently for at the founding of Canada in response to being a colony of Great Britain, asking and pushing for our own responsible government. I would also point out that the responsible, accountable government that was fought for at that time was immediately put to the test in the riot reparations act that the brand new Canadian Parliament passed. It then ran out to ask the Governor General to not sign it into law, because the government had suddenly realized the ramifications of the riot reparations act. The Governor General at the time asked if we wanted a responsible, accountable government or not. He signed that into law, and the negative implications of it came to fruition. Parliament then reversed itself on that particular bill.
I tell that story just to point out that the things that happen in this place have an impact on Canadian society. I hope that is the case, and I know that to be the case. The point is that the Liberal government is the government of this country, and it has duties it has to implement. The Liberal government is classic in terms of causing a problem or failing to address a problem and then, rather than fixing the problem, coming back here for another piece of legislation and saying that this is the one that will fix the particular problem. In reality, it generally has the tools and ability to fix the particular problem or manage the particular issue or maintain the relationship around the world that it currently has.
We hear from the Liberals often that a particular UN document is demanding that they do something. Maintaining the relationship with first nations across this country, ensuring they are full participants in our economy and living up to the treaty obligations this country has signed onto are just basic functions of the government. We do not need a UN document or a UN declaration to tell us to do these things. The Government of Canada should be doing these things because we are upholding the honour of the Crown and we are upholding the things that make us this country.
In the case of the current government, it is the Government of Canada, and it should live up to its obligations. This means treaty obligations, keeping the peace in this country, working on maintaining our borders and reducing the crime. On all of these things, many times, we see total mismanagement, and then the Liberals come in here and say, “If we only had this piece of legislation.” We see this in front of us over and over again, with bills such as Bill C-2, Bill C-8 and Bill C-11, where the government is trying to solve problems it could already solve and is the cause of.
With Bill C-10, we see a classic case of Liberal mismanagement. We failed to sign new treaties across the country and failed to manage the relationship. We have seen the resource industry stalling out because of our inability to build major projects across this country, and now the Liberals are bringing this forward.
The other thing I find very interesting is that, although I say it is the tired old Liberal government, this is a “new” government, but we have yet to see any major new pieces of legislation. This is not a new piece of legislation from a new government. It is something that is long sought-after. The Liberal government has introduced this idea over and over again. This is not something new.
We are looking forward to the removal of Liberal bail. That would be a new piece of legislation. The reversal of Liberal bail in this country would be an impressive thing in order to get crime under control. That would be new, but this is not a new idea. This is something the Liberals have talked about for a long time, and now, because their legislative agenda is kind of empty, suddenly they are going to put it forward.
I am going to turn my attention to the Bloc. I always find it interesting when I agree somewhat with the Bloc. Bloc members are saying that this commissioner would not achieve anything, that it would not do anything, which is also kind of our position on this. It would not do anything and is just spending money for the sake of spending money, which, I acknowledge, is generally the Liberal test of success: Success is how much money it spends on a particular thing.
I point to the border. When we say the Liberals are failing to maintain our border and are allowing people to run across our border and things like that, their response is not that they are doing a good job managing the border; it is that they are spending more money managing the border than the Conservatives did and are therefore being successful. They are not. The problem is that the border is porous and unmanaged by the Liberals. If we could spend zero dollars to manage the border, I would be in favour of that as well. The amount of money the Liberals spend to manage the border is irrelevant if we are not getting the results we are looking for. Fundamental to an accountable government is who is responsible.
This commissioner is a distraction from the responsibilities of the government. The government is responsible for maintaining these relationships and cannot outsource it to a commissioner. It cannot outsource it. I guess the same goes for the Parliamentary Budget Officer, for example. Does his advice get followed by the Liberal government? No, not at all. Will this commissioner's advice be followed by the Liberal government? Maybe, or maybe not. The fundamental issue is the results the government has caused.
We see it over and again, whether it is with the Liberals' bail system, which they totally made a hatchet job of, border security or cybersecurity. Over and over again, the Liberals fail to be responsible for the issues the government is supposed to be responsible for in this country. We see a failure, and then suddenly the Liberals will say we need a particular piece of legislation in order to fix it. When we then look at that piece of legislation, it generally does something other than what they say it will do, or it fails to change anything.
I just want to put on the record that, in some weird way, we agree with the Bloc on this, that the commissioner would not do anything. I also want to close by stating that the bill is an admission by the Liberal government that its inabilities over the last number of years have led to failure.
Juanita Nathan Liberal Pickering—Brooklin, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is important to note that some Conservative members in the past have delayed indigenous legislation.
Seeing that there are certain modern treaty partners in Conservative ridings, like the Manitoulin Island first nations, the Tsawwassen First Nation and the Whitecap Dakota Nation, can the member opposite confirm that the relevant members have talked to or will talk to the modern treaty partners? What assurance will he provide that his party will work to pass the bill quickly, without any unnecessary delays, to help modern treaty partners in their respective ridings?
Arnold Viersen Conservative Peace River—Westlock, AB
Mr. Speaker, I do not think the member listened to my speech; however, I would remind her that the previous Conservative government signed five modern treaties over the course of the Conservative tenure of governing this country. Our relationship with first nations was managed. Our relationship to get major energy projects built in this country was a success. We look forward to the day when a Conservative government rules this country once again.
Bill C-10 Commissioner for Modern Treaty Implementation ActGovernment Orders
Winnipeg North Manitoba
Liberal
Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
Mr. Speaker, throughout the day, we have heard a lot of misrepresentation of reality, if I can put it that way.
The Conservatives say that Harper signed five treaties. Well, he was elected prime minister in 2006, and one of the treaties was signed in 2006. He does get the credit; technically, he did sign it. Then the Conservatives say that the Liberals have not done any. That is not true. We have signed treaties. The Conservatives just have not done their homework, or they are intentionally trying to mislead the House. I suspect they have not done their homework.
My question to the member is this: Would he not agree that having an independent agent of Parliament who is supported by indigenous community leaders is something that all members should be supporting? It appears that just the Conservatives in the House are opposing it.