44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 12, 2024 11:00AM
Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague from Nunavut blows me away every day in this place.
She mentioned the SCC ruling on Bill C-92. In terms of self-determination, there are concerns I have had lately about child welfare matters impacting our kids. At committee, I pushed an amendment forward to an adoptive care bill, an EI bill, to include kinship and customary care to ensure that the bill was consistent with Bill C-15, meaning that all future legislation has to be compatible with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The Winnipeg North member said the other day that they are in the process of trying to throw out those amendments, which, once again, with the SCC ruling, affirm the need for amendments to the current EI bill.
I was wondering what my colleague's thoughts were about the government's continual fight to not allow us to bring our kids home.
157 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/12/24 4:51:43 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, on a point of order, the member for Winnipeg North is referring to me, and I will take the time to respond during questions. I would just like to remind the member of his colonial behaviour. He is telling an indigenous woman that I should be thankful for his government's continued violation of our rights, including not respecting and fighting against EI amendments that would make this legislation align with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights—
81 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/12/24 4:52:48 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would also ask, in terms of decorum in the House, that as a white male, maybe he needs to check his privilege at the door. He is lecturing an indigenous woman about how we should feel about bringing our kids home, but maybe because he represents a riding with the highest number of kids in care, and he drops names of women in our community that I also work with, he should not objectify indigenous women in the House of Commons.
84 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague from Winnipeg North tried to boast about how much progress his government has made, especially when talking about the crisis of murdered and missing indigenous women and girls. By the way, the Yellowhead Institute just reported that the government completed zero calls to action in 2023.
I will go back to the amendment I proposed in committee, which would make sure the legislation conforms with Bill C-15. It reads:
For greater certainty, in this Part, a reference to the placement of one or more children with a claimant for the purpose of adoption includes a situation in which one or more Indigenous children are placed, in accordance with the customs or traditions of the Indigenous group, community or people to which they belong, with a claimant, other than their parent, for the purpose of giving the claimant primary responsibility for providing their day-to-day care.
It would mean we could keep our kids in our homes. The core of reconciliation, the reason we have it in the first place, is that they kidnapped our kids and brought them into residential schools. There are more kids in care now than at the height of residential schools.
If this member is so dedicated to reconciliation, I am wondering why he will not bring our kids home and support this amendment.
225 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is such an honour to rise today to talk about Bill C-29. I want to let the House know that the NDP wants the bill to pass. I am always very honoured to work with my good colleague, the member for Nunavut. She has put a lot of effort in to amend the legislation to make it much stronger.
If we want to reconcile in this country, we must focus on children and families. I say that because I want to go back to why we have to have these discussions in the House to begin with; it is for the country to try to reconcile, as was affirmed in the Haida Nation case, the sovereignty of indigenous people with the assumed sovereignty of the Crown. I share that because it was an assumed sovereignty that began a violent genocide of indigenous people in Canada, which began with the dispossession of lands and led to the dispossession and kidnapping of our children and taking them off to resident schools, where they experienced all kinds of abuses.
It is important to note that, as we sit here in the House debating the bill before us, there are more kids now in the child welfare system than there were at the height of residential schools. We will not reconcile in this country until all governments make a concerted effort to bring our kids home. However, I worked on the legislation in committee making amendments, and that does not happen in real time, even though in the last session the Liberal government passed Bill C-15.
I would like to read article 5 of Bill C-15, under the title “Consistency”. It says, “The Government of Canada must, in consultation and cooperation with Indigenous peoples, take all measures necessary to ensure that the laws of Canada are consistent with the Declaration.” I share that because at every turn on matters impacting children, the Liberal government continues to not support the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous people to make decisions about our own children. I will give an example: The national child care strategy, until the NDP amendment, did not support the inclusion of honouring the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples to make decisions on matters impacting our children.
Why is this significant? First, it is because the government is now obliged to ensure that all legislation is compatible with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Second, it is because one of the most serious violations that has reverberated in our communities and has had lasting impacts is when they robbed us of our children and shipped them off to residential schools. I have said in speeches before that, as a mother, I cannot even imagine the pain that reverberated in our communities when those communities fell silent each September when they stole our children, many of whom never returned home.
I share that because every day, even now, there is a growing movement of residential school denialism, where survivors and descendants have to confirm the fact that genocide did occur in residential schools and that many of our children did not in fact return home but are buried around schools around the country. What school needs a graveyard? What school is built with a graveyard attached?
There was nothing about the residential schools that was about education. I say that because although the government talks a good game of reconciliation, and although it passed Bill C-15 in the last Parliament, it is one thing to pass a bill but another thing to change colonial behaviour, a tradition of colonial violence in this place. That includes something I had to experience today, having the member for Winnipeg North lecture me about the dark cloud I place on this place when I talk about the ongoing genocide of indigenous women and girls, and when I complain about the fact that the government has not moved fast enough around the crisis of murdered and missing indigenous women and girls.
681 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am just pointing out that the member did mention Winnipeg Centre. I assumed the comments were made toward me when he said my riding, but let us leave that.
Going back to what I was saying, the fact that he felt a need to defend himself in the middle of my speech is another example of what I had requested in my point of order, which was for him, through you, Mr. Speaker, to leave his white male privilege at the door and not to tell indigenous women what to talk about when they are talking about indigenous kids.
We are here today because of the violent kidnapping of our kids, which has had lasting impacts on our families. It goes back to the dark cloud our parents and families felt when they robbed our kids, leaving our communities silent. Can members imagine being in a community without laughter and without play? I cannot imagine that and not to have the privilege of being able to raise my son. For no reason other than who I am and where I was born, the government is able to steal my child and to have that legislated. That is why these amendments are so critical to legislation if we are going to reconcile and to honour this new bill, Bill C-29. That is why amending legislation so it is compatible, especially on matters impacting our children, is so critical. I would argue, through you, Mr. Speaker, that the government violating its own law and its own constitution by not ensuring legislation is compatible with Bill C-15, as we saw with the child care legislation in the last session that we managed to get through committee.
Now the government is going against amendments to make the legislation compatible with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and is trying to overturn it in the House. If the Liberal government is not willing to give our kids back when we have more kids in child welfare than we did at the height of residential schools and when we know that 90% of kids in care are indigenous and that all this new adoptive care legislation will probably not apply to 90% of parents, which once again will leave the financial burden on families to care for their children, then the government is not ready to reconcile.
The government took over 13 non-compliance orders in the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling to let them know that it was intentionally racially discriminating against indigenous and first nations kids on reserve on matters impacting child welfare. It finally came up with a settlement that was $17 billion less than what was ordered by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruling. Then, I have to listen to the government talk all the time about how it wants reconciliation, when we constantly have to fight for the fact that our kids deserve the same as other kids in the country, and I have to go to committee and fight for the EI legislation.
I would like to, once again, read to the House the amendment that would allow us to uphold Canadian law and that was passed at committee, even though the Liberal members abstained from the vote and outright voted against it during the national child care legislation. They are now trying to overturn it in the House because it was passed at committee.
I will read the amendment, which states:
For greater certainty, in this Part, a reference to the placement of one or more children with a claimant for the purpose of adoption includes a situation in which one or more Indigenous children are placed, in accordance with the customs or traditions of the Indigenous group, community or people to which they belong, with a claimant, other than their parent, for the purpose of giving the claimant primary responsibility for providing their day-to-day care.
I will refer to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in the NDP's attempt to make this legislation compatible. It says:
Article 19
States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the indigenous peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free, prior and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them.
Article 20
1. Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and develop their political, economic and social systems or institutions, to be secure in the enjoyment of their own means of subsistence and development, and to engage freely in all their traditional and other economic activities.
2. Indigenous peoples deprived of their means of subsistence and development are entitled to just and fair redress.
That would include equal benefits under EI.
It goes on to state:
Article 21
1. Indigenous peoples have the right, without discrimination, to the improvement of their economic and social conditions, including, inter alia, in the areas of education, employment, vocational training and retraining, housing, sanitation, health and social security.
2. States shall take effective measures and, where appropriate, special measures to ensure continuing improvement of their economic and social conditions. Particular attention shall be paid to the rights and special needs of indigenous elders, women, youth, children and persons with disabilities.
Once again, like The Twilight Zone, I am here fighting to bring our kids home. I am here having to plead with the government as to whether it is really ready to reconcile or not. I have been told there is a bill, Bill C-54, that the government will put forward and that it wants to consult with indigenous people. My reply is for the government to find me one indigenous person who would argue against the right for them to raise their children in their own traditions and customs. The kinds of things we have to consult on, basic human rights, being used as a stalling mechanism is another form of institutional racism. I will provide a couple of examples.
How do indigenous people feel about clean drinking water? Let us consult on that for four years. How do indigenous people feel about toilets and how fire trucks are going to get to their communities so their houses do not burn down? The government asks them to say how they feel about that. Find me one indigenous person who feels they need to consult about human rights and life and death matters at every turn. I can provide a whole list. I can give an encyclopedia of them, in fact. I can point out the Indian Act that the government developed without the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples.
I can name a million resource extraction projects where militarized police are smashing in the doors of indigenous women, being called out by the United Nations where there was no consultation, yet when we ask to bring our kids home, when we say we want to uphold Canadian law so this new legislation is aligned with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, something the government is obliged to do, what does it say? It thanks me for my work and says it needs to consult on it.
What do I call that? I call it systemic racism. What do I call child welfare? I call it a pipeline to murdered and missing indigenous women and girls. What do I call that? A pipeline to the justice system. What do I call the sixties scoop? I call it a loss of identity, the disruption of our families that we will never get back and the ongoing genocide of our families.
This is shameful, and I am going to call out this shame unapologetically, because it is time for all governments, without excuse, to bring our kids home, period. It is time for our kids and our families to get the same resources that are afforded to other families in this country.
Do you know what I think the problem is, Mr. Speaker? I am going to be fully transparent here. It is money. Because 90% of kids in care are indigenous, the government is going to fight it every step of the way, like it did the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.
Do you know what that tells me? It tells me that we are less than, still, in this country. Our kids are not as valuable. Our women and our 2SLGBTQIA+ people will continue to go missing and be murdered. Why? It is because the government has completed zero calls for justice in 2023.
They finished 13 altogether out of the 81 that they are responsible for as the federal government, yet I had to hear a speech about the dark cloud that I place over their heads. I will tell you something. I will tell you a dark cloud.
I have a friend whose loved one was just murdered in an incident involving grotesque police brutality. That is a dark cloud. That is called systemic racism.
If that is dark, if people say, “Oh, you want your clip, Leah. There, you got your clip, I heard,” and if that is what they think it is about, I do not care. We are going to bring our kids home, and I am going to fight this government or any other government that comes in its place to give us the resources we need to bring our kids home.
I will not be questioned by a member whose riding has the highest number of kids in care in the whole country, justifying and celebrating how well his government is doing, when I am now, once again, fighting his government so that our families do not have to live in poverty. That is disgusting, and it is racist.
1636 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, we passed legislation in the last Parliament. In fact, I worked with the current Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations, amending it, putting this bill forward. We have something, in fact. It is not a lack of legislation. It is now a fact of pushing for a change of colonial behaviour.
We have the TRC's 94 calls to action. We have the 231 calls for justice of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, which provide a framework and a path forward.
We have legislation, Bill C-15, to make sure any legislation going forward respects the human rights of indigenous peoples, because we know, globally, that we needed a declaration because there has been a universal, global violation of the human rights of indigenous peoples throughout the globe.
I am just heeding the government's call to act on the very legislation that it supported.
152 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/12/24 6:08:14 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am kind of concerned with this question, because there seems to be a presumption of who has done it. I am not sure who is burning the churches and why the member is relating it to this speech, but is he insinuating that it is indigenous people? Does he have proof of that? If he does not, I would say that is a stereotype. I would also call that racist. I would first ask the member if he had proof, and then I would be willing to discuss it, because without knowing what the answer is, it is really hard for me to answer what the root of that issue is.
114 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is not about getting past it. History is important, but I would say that this history continues with the child welfare system, and it is about justice. We cannot get past things when things are still in our way that impact our ability to receive justice. For example, the fact is that we still have a crisis of murdered and missing indigenous women and girls. Where is the justice?
We need to implement those 81 calls to action specifically, and I would call for all of them, but specifically the 81 still tasked to the federal government to complete. We need to not just read and talk about reconciliation, but implement and lift up the 92 calls to action from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. We need to ensure that all legislation is compatible with Bill C-15, especially on matters impacting our kids. Ninety per cent of kids in care are indigenous. Do members know why? It is because of the “inter-generational impact of colonization”, most specifically residential schools.
This government has to allow this amendment to go through. It has to if it is serious about reconciliation.
195 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/12/24 6:11:57 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I enjoyed working with the minister very much on the Red Dress Alert. I have to say that I have appreciated, since he has been appointed, that in very short order he has actually pushed things forward. That is reconciliation to me. That is justice.
The Red Dress Alert will save lives. However, it needs to be implemented. We have had a number of consultations to date, and we need to get it implemented in short order. We know that it is a crisis. Through the consultations, we found that there is wide support in figuring out what it is going to look like, but the sooner we get it in place, the sooner we will save lives.
Again, we should never have to use a Red Dress Alert. We need to deal with the root causes so that we do not even have to use the system. However, right now, we are in a crisis, and we need something to deal with the end game, because the system is so broken that is has resulted in this. We need to respond to those 81 calls for justice. I look forward to working with this minister to get the Red Dress Alert out the door as soon as possible.
211 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/12/24 6:14:19 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, again, I will give him the same response. I do not know what the motive was or who burned down the churches. Second, because I do not know that, I cannot call it anti-indigenous violence. I have not heard him debate anti-indigenous violence when he talks about residential school denialism. I know what the motivation is for that. I know where it is coming from. They are very public about it. I do not have the facts, so I cannot assume the motive. That is a basic premise in law. I think as legislators, we can understand the basic premise in law, that I cannot read into an action where I have no facts, and I do not know what the motive is. Maybe he should do some research. Maybe he would understand potential motives, or he could talk to officials.
145 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/12/24 6:40:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my hon. colleague publicly on the arrival of an addition to her family.
There was a lot of discussion in her speech about resource extraction. I have said many times in the House that I firmly support the human right to free, prior and informed consent. Often, I hear the Conservatives talk about nations that choose to participate in resource extraction.
I am wondering if my hon. colleague supports, with the same level of enthusiasm, the free, prior and informed consent of communities that do not wish to participate in the resource extraction sector. If so, how would her Conservative government, should they ever form government, deal with that?
116 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
