- Member of Parliament
- Member of Parliament
- NDP
- Nunavut
- Nunavut
- Voting Attendance: 67%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $178,285.32
- Government Page
Uqaqtittiji, today being the national day of action for MMIWG, we know all too well that indigenous women, girls and two-spirit victims who have been taken or murdered do not get to tell their stories. When the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights supported the NDP's proposal to make a recommendation allowing victims the right to opt out of a publication ban, this was an important way to make sure victims can tell their story.
I wonder whether the member agrees that this kind of recommendation, which would help increase the understanding of how they got to that situation, is what would help make sure we have fewer victims of this nature.
115 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Uqaqtittiji, I only had a chance to look at our House notes and not the bill specifically, so I am not understanding the bulk of what the member spoke about on AI and consent, and why it is not mentioned or has not been discussed during the debate so far.
I do see that Bill S-12 talks about discretion being given to judges for those who are at risk of reoffending. Could the member speak more to what Bill S-12 needs to do to make sure that discretion is not widened so much so that public safety is made a concern? This is so we can do a better job at making sure that we are protecting victims.
120 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Uqaqtittiji, I agree with the member that protecting victims is so important, and judges' discretion is not to be taken lightly. I wonder if the member can share more ideas on how we can ensure that judges' discretion is not too wide, so that we are ensuring a proper way to make sure that there are better protections for victims for public safety.
63 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Uqaqtittiji, I would like to thank the member for her intervention. I would be remiss to not acknowledge the great work that the member for Victoria did in addressing some of the issues in this bill.
Does the member agree that Bill S-12 balances the constitutional guaranteed rights of all Canadians and the need to maintain public safety?
59 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/3/23 11:35:26 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-6
Uqaqtittiji, I do, to some extent, agree with some of the member's statements, especially when it comes to the lack of impacts the bill has in engaging indigenous peoples in the various pieces of legislation it would be making amendments to. I wonder if the member would agree that Bill S-6 could be improved by ensuring regulations would require that indigenous peoples are better engaged in any of these pieces of legislation.
74 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/3/23 11:21:44 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-6
Uqaqtittiji, I would like to challenge the Conservatives' rhetoric about red tape and the lack of red tape being removed in the bill before us. They have used a lot of words like needing tools to make regulations nimble. I would like to challenge this fictional reality with actual text that is in the bill, and I will read a tiny example of what is in the bill. It reads:
It also amends the Weights and Measures Act to, among other things, enable the Minister of Industry to permit a trader to temporarily use, or have in their possession for use, in trade, any device even if the device has not been approved by the Minister or examined by an inspector.
How is this a form of red tape when it is allowing measures to happen without specific devices, which are even undefined when it comes to the Weights and Measures Act?
152 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/3/23 10:20:59 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-6
Uqaqtittiji, considering the title of this bill is an act respecting regulatory modernization, in this time of reconciliation, a lot of legislation is quite outdated when it comes to indigenous peoples. A lot of regulations are quite outdated when it comes to indigenous peoples.
Specifically I would like to ask about the Species at Risk Act, because it does point to some species that impact my riding as I talked about to another member of Parliament, regarding barren-ground caribou, the Atlantic walrus and the Atlantic cod. I think the Species at Risk Act would make significant improvements about how these species at risk would be dealt with.
Does the member agree that, in terms of modernizing regulations, modernization must include regulations to ensure that indigenous engagement always happens when it is going to impact indigenous well-being?
138 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/3/23 9:26:02 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-6
Uqaqtittiji, first of all, I do not know what the education system is like in the member's riding of Dufferin—Caledon, but simple mathematics is what should be expected in Bill S-6.
I know that this legislation covers about 30 pieces of legislation to try to help reduce red tape. I wonder if the member agrees that, because the bill covers at least 30 pieces of legislation and the summary says, “repeal or amend provisions that have, over time, become barriers to innovation and economic growth”, the bill is actually a good way to make sure we reduce red tape.
105 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/3/23 8:42:30 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-6
Uqaqtittiji, I would like to thank the member for including provisions in this bill regarding species at risk, because this act actually has a lot of detrimental impact in my region. There are two specific species, one of which is the barren-ground caribou. On the marine side, it is the Atlantic walrus. Those populations are known to be quite dramatic. It is hard to determine if they are at the time a species at risk.
I see that in this bill, Bill S-6, there are regulations talking about the importance of creating a recovery strategy, but I wonder if the member would agree that whatever plans are being created about species at risk, indigenous peoples must be at the forefront of the decision-making.
126 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- May/3/23 8:28:55 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-6
Uqaqtittiji, I know that this is a difficult bill, because it covers so many regulations in so many different acts. I am sure the member has also been exposed to many issues and barriers that are caused by regulations, being an indigenous person himself. I wonder if he can speak to why he has made the determination that he has and whether he does or does not support Bill S-6, and speak to what it means for indigenous peoples.
80 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Uqaqtittiji, I rise for the last time today, on national Have a Heart Day.
Before I begin, I wish safe travels to all of the delegates who attended the Northern Lights trade show here in Ottawa last week. It is an important event that promotes the great work that Nunavummiut are doing to support Canada’s economy. It is a great event to showcase the beauty and talent that artisans from the NWT, Nunavut, Nunavik and Nunatsiavut have.
I extend my congratulations to all the participants and winners of the Arctic Winter Games in Woodland, Alberta. I have heard great stories of triumph, heartache and celebration. I thank the volunteers who have devoted their time to the success of youth to achieve their best in such events.
I thank my NDP colleague, the member for South Okanagan—West Kootenay for sponsoring Bill S-222 in this place. It is a step in the right direction to help eliminate greenhouse gas emissions. The government has the responsibility to do its part. We must all do our part to reduce emissions. We must all do our part to protect the environment. This bill, while short, has important implications. There must be a fine balance between keeping forests and reducing reliance on harmful materials.
Over the last 20 years, I have driven back and forth between Ottawa and New Brunswick to visit family. I have noticed major changes over those 20 years. Roads have improved. Communities have grown, and forests of trees have been decimated. Although I know that I cannot live in remote wooded areas for long periods of time, I know how important trees are. I know that we must find solutions to replacing harmful products, such as plastics and other materials known to accelerate climate change.
As Canadian businesses and organizations are shifting to more sustainable practices, this bill helps to ensure that the federal government will work toward those concerns. We are often asked to stretch the limits of our knowledge to learn about important issues that constituents are concerned about. In this speech, I stretch my limits in attempting to understand how mainstream society consumes resources.
The aim of this bill is to allow the federal government to use wood for improvements to infrastructure. By using wood in the repair and building of federal infrastructure projects, Canadian businesses can be better supported. In 2013, production in the forest sector contributed $19.8 billion, or 1.25% to Canada’s real gross domestic product. With the decline of the forestry industry in recent years, there is an opportunity to revitalize this sector while protecting the environment.
In my riding, although we are not manufacturing wood, families rely on wood for homes, heating and other projects. We rely very much on the import of wood from our neighbours to the south. I use this seat to make sure that concerns are brought forward, my constituents' questions are answered and their needs are met.
As the critic to Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, my job is to amplify the voices and the concerns that indigenous peoples have. I meet with indigenous communities, chiefs, elders and advocates who are asking the government to listen and take meaningful action to repair the damage it has done. This is important work, but the government must also stretch itself. It needs to be putting in the hard work to make sure Canadians are heard and this is acted upon.
In Budget 2017, the government provided Natural Resources Canada with $39.8 million over four years, starting in 2018–19, to support projects and activities that increase the use of wood as a greener substitute material in infrastructure projects. We are calling on the government to make good on its promises and be true to its word.
This is important, especially in the context of the federal government’s relationship with the indigenous peoples of Canada. The government has promised to protect indigenous people's lands, consult with indigenous communities and work toward reconciliation. Too often, this does not occur. The government must take the issues being raised by Canadians more seriously. The government has promised greener solutions to address climate change.
All too often, I have watched the government break promises it has made to indigenous peoples and to Canadians. All too often, the government has taken minimal or incremental steps that improve the lives of indigenous peoples. The Liberal government has said that there is no relationship more important than that with indigenous peoples. Protecting and upholding indigenous people's rights is a responsibility of the government.
The bill is silent on this important matter. How will indigenous people's rights be respected? How will this amendment increase tenure for first nations communities? How will first nations management be guaranteed?
It is my hope that amendments will be made to acknowledge that Canada is founded on indigenous people's lands, and provisions must account for that. As Canada continues to work toward a better future, indigenous people must be heard and their land rights must be upheld.
Indigenous governance and management must be included. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples must be included. No development of any kind should exclude the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous people.
884 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Uqaqtittiji, I thank my constituents in Nunavut for putting their trust in me. I will continue to work hard to ensure their needs are being met and to ensure their voices are being heard.
Bill S-223, an act to amend the Criminal Code and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act related to the trafficking in human organs, is important to many Canadians and people abroad. This bill, if passed, could do one of three things.
The bill’s proposed amendments to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act could help to ensure that receiving organs or benefiting economically from this illicit trade is inadmissible in Canada. This is particularly important for developing countries where impoverished people are experiencing forced removal of organs, like kidneys and livers. This could be a strong message to countries like India and Pakistan that have corrupt agents to people in developed countries, including Canada.
The bill, if passed, could send a clear message that the government should do what it can to protect the vulnerable people who are exploited by these heinous crimes. Most importantly, the issue of organ trafficking is not a partisan one and we need to work together to get this bill passed.
We know that organs, like kidneys and livers, are being forcibly removed from many people worldwide. It is a very real problem on which the government has been needing to pass legislation for a while. It is something that, through several Parliaments, we have been waiting for substantive action on. This is the opportunity to pass this important legislation.
The World Health Organization has noted that one out of 10 organ transplants involves a trafficked human organ. This totals about 10,000 a year. We know this is a crime that disproportionately affects people who live in developing countries that do not have access to the same rights, privileges and equality under the law.
The Canadian government, by taking a firm stance on this issue, is sending a message that the trafficking of human organs is a criminal action and should be punished as such. In addition to supporting this initiative, more should be done to encourage ethical, safe organ donation domestically to alleviate the need for trafficked organs.
A total of 2,782 organ transplants were performed in Canada in 2021, according to the Canadian Institute for Health Information. There are more than 3,300 Canadians on waiting lists for a kidney transplant, which is almost double the number from 20 years ago, and close to a third of them are from Ontario, according to the Canadian Institute for Health Information.
Organ donation is greatly needed within this country. With such a large need within this country, it is important to have a conversation on how the Canadian health care system needs to talk about these needs. With so many Canadians needing organ donations, the illegal trade of organs in Canada continues to grow.
The people who are exploited in this trade have given testimony speaking to their experiences. There are stories of people who have woken up in a drugged haze to someone wearing a surgical mask and gloves telling them that their kidney has just been removed and that they need to take care of themselves. Often, these victims can suffer very serious, lifelong health consequences from that and because of the nature of the operation, some people have ultimately died from it.
In expressing what matters to indigenous peoples, this is an opportunity to remind all Canadians and parliamentarians of the consequences of federal government neglect in investing in first nations, Métis and Inuit health. Indigenous peoples continue to suffer elevated health indicators worse than those of mainstream Canadians.
Generally, the health care needs of indigenous peoples are not being met. Nunavut continues to rely too much on a medical travel system that does not invest well enough in the potential to invest in human resources in Nunavut and indigenous peoples across Canada. An article regarding challenges experienced by indigenous transplant patients in Canada confirmed:
Northern, remote and rural Indigenous populations are further challenged as small population sizes mean that there are significantly fewer local diagnostic and health-care services, and the distances to travel to receive these services is often challenging for patients and families, particularly when regular treatments are required.
By addressing the seriousness of this issue, and through years of discussion, this bill should be passed.
I am pleased to see that this Parliament has tried to address that by making it easier for people to sign up and become an organ donor. However, the illegal organ trade continues to grow and people continue to be exploited. The demand for organs is high and as our population ages, we certainly need to have smart and effective policy to address this issue. It is important that education on organ donation be made more accessible to Canadians.
Canada has a shortage of organs, with 4,129 patients in 2020 waiting for transplants at the end of the year and 276 Canadians who were waiting on a transplant list dying. That was up from 250 to 223 in previous years.
Indigenous children, including first nations, Inuit and Métis, experience persistent health and social inequities and face higher rates of end-stage organ failure requiring solid organ transplantation. The reasons for these inequities are multi-faceted and linked to Canada's history of colonialism and racism. Organizations and labs across Canada continue to conduct research to present their findings of inadequate health care system experiences that indigenous peoples face. With a better discussion, there is hope for the future.
New Democrats have long opposed all forms of trafficking, be it human trafficking for sexual exploitation, labour trafficking or the trafficking of human organs. We continue to fight for human rights.
We all must do what we can to protect vulnerable people. By passing this bill, Canada can send a strong message to other countries. Let us stand together in sending this message out.
1002 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/24/22 1:57:28 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-4
Uqaqtittiji, I just wanted to comment very quickly that, given that most Nunavut lawyers are legal aid lawyers, I feel that the MP for Edmonton Strathcona was perfectly in line when she made her intervention about legal aid lawyers.
I want to thank this member for her great speech focusing on Internet connectivity. Given that this bill will focus on only three specific areas for streamlining processes, can the member describe how maybe those concerns are actually not warranted, given that it is only going to be in so few circumstances?
91 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/24/22 10:52:27 a.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-4
Uqaqtittiji, the member for Fundy Royal spent much of his time not actually talking about Bill S-4. I am not sure if he read the whole bill, but he talked about consent and how it is mentioned in numbers. The bill does provide options for legal counsel. With the consent of the prosecutor and consent of the accused, in proceedings, the accused can appear through a lawyer so that there is not only a reliance on the accused being in court.
Having said that, I know that the member represents a riding that is rural. Does he agree that Canadians living in rural and remote communities, especially given the size of Nunavut, should have the same access to the technology needed for serving a jury summons so that victims whose justice is delayed will actually get the justice they deserve through this bill?
144 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
[Member spoke in Inuktitut and provided the following text:]
ᐅᖃᖅᑎᑦᑎᔨ, ᐊᒃᓱᐊᓗᒃ ᖁᕕᐊᓱᒃᐳᖓ ᒪᑭᑦᑕᕆᐊᒃᓴᖅ ᑖᒃᓱᒥᖓ ᒪᓕᒐᒃᓴᖅ S-21 ᑕᐃᔭᐅᓪᓗᓂ ᓯᓚᖅᔪᐊᕐᒥᒃ ᐊᓈᓇᒋᔭᖅᓄᑦ ᐅᖃᐅᓯᓕᕆᓂᖅ ᐅᓪᓗᖅ ᐃᓕᑕᕆᔭᐅᖁᓪᓗᒍ.
ᐱᒋᐊᕈᑎᖃᕈᒪᓪᓗᖓ ᖁᔭᓕᒍᒪᓪᓗᒋ ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᒋᓚᐅᖅᑕᒃᑲ ᐸᓛᓐᑎᓇ ᒪᒃᑭᒃ, ᒫᓂᑲ ᐸᓂᐸᑯᑐᒃ, ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᒫᓂᑲ ᐃᑦᑐᒃᓵᖅᔪᐊᖅ.
ᐃᖅᑲᐅᒪᓪᓚᕆᒃᑕᒃᑲ ᐃᓕᓴᐃᔨᑦᑎᐊᕙᐅᓪᓗᑎᒃ. ᕐᑯᔭᓕᕐᑲᑕᐅᔪᒪᔪᖓ ᐃᓕᓐᓂᐊᕆᐊᖅᑎᑕᐅᕙᓚᐅᖅᓯᒪᔪᓕᒫᓂᒃ. ᐊᒃᓱᕈᖅᑎᑕᐅᔪᒃᑰᒻᒪᕆᓚᐅᖅᑎᓪᓗᓯ ᒫᓐᓇᒧ ᑎᑭᐅᑎᓯᒪᑎᑦᑎᕐᑲᑕᐅᒐᓯ.
ᑭᖑᓪᓕᕐᒥᒃ ᕐᑯᔭᓕᒍᒪᔭᒃᑲ ᐃᓐᓇᒻᒪᕇᑦ. ᐊᒃᓱᐊᓗᒃ ᓇᒡᓕᒋᕙᓯ. ᕐᑭᑐᕐᖓᓯᓐᓂ ᐊᖅᓵᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᓚᐅᕋᓗᐊᖅᖠᓯᒃ ᓇᒡᓕᖕᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᒫᓐᓇᒧᑦ ᑎᑭᐅᑎᓯᒪᕐᑲᑕᐅᓯᒪᓪᓚᕆᒃᑲᓯ.
[Member provided the following translation:]
Mr. Speaker, it is a tremendous honour to speak today, as I represent Nunavummiut, on Bill S-21, an act to establish international mother language day.
I would like to begin by sharing my gratitude to the Inuktitut teachers I had in grade school: Blandina Makkik, Monica Panipakutsuk and Monica Ittusardjuat. They were such kind and caring teachers.
I share my gratitude with the former residential school students. Despite the abuses you suffered, you have contributed to our well-being and where we stand today.
Finally, I must acknowledge the indigenous elders, especially those whose children were taken from them. It is by your love and care we are able to thrive today. I care very much for your well-being.
[English]
What I just said was translated from my mother language into English, one of the two official languages.
In my statement today, I will speak about why passing this bill can contribute to a greater understanding of Canada's history toward its treatment of Inuit, Métis and first nations. I will begin with the extraordinary story of the late Clara Quassa of Igloolik. Mrs. Quassa briefly shared her story in an interview available on isuma.tv.
I remember her fondly as a gentle elder. What I did not know until a few weeks ago is that she was forced to send her five children to a residential school in Chesterfield Inlet. She was forced to send them about 800 kilometres away.
She had no more children in her home because they were all sent to Chesterfield Inlet. She remembers them crying when going on the plane. She said that when they returned from the residential school, they were different. She does remember fondly that they still spoke Inuktitut.
One of her children died after being sent to some other facility. She was told where her daughter's grave was, but Clara died having yearned to see her daughter's grave. Despite all of this, I can see her legacy in her adult children, grandchildren and great grandchildren. When I return to Igloolik, I see and hear them speaking in Inuktitut. I see them cherishing her fondly.
What I despair to share is that her story is not unique. There are far too many Inuit, first nations people and Métis who have stories similar to hers. Canada is founded on Inuit, Métis and first nations lands. Canada thrives as a first world country based on the injustices it caused to indigenous peoples. While Métis, first nations people and Inuit have been voicing their stories for generations, their voices were suppressed, ignored and not allowed to be understood by mainstream society.
Canada is a so-called bilingual country with two official languages, English and French. Meanwhile, UNESCO estimates that 75% of indigenous languages in Canada are endangered. Regular Canadians, settlers, have also been victims of Canada's colonial history. Regular Canadians, settlers, have been robbed of their sense of being Canadian. After all, many are proud of being Canadian. What most do not realize is that they are proud of Canada's suppression. They are proud of Canada's oppressive policies. They are proud of colonial laws and policies that continue to impact current generations through intergenerational trauma. They are proud of the chronic underfunding that ensures that Inuit, first nations and Métis remain suppressed, in poverty, undereducated and not able to overcome the mental health challenges of intergenerational trauma.
Indeed, I myself used to be proud to celebrate Canada Day. I too was robbed through Canada's colonial education system. During my participation in the PROC study on the viability of indigenous languages in federal elections, I learned more about first nations and the extent of how endangered their languages are. We were provided data by Statistics Canada reflecting 2017 figures. There are over 70 indigenous languages spoken in Canada, but only 15.6% of the indigenous population have the ability to have conversations in any of these mother languages. We were told that only 170 of those who identify as Kutenai, 255 of those who identify as Tlingit and 455 of those who identify as Haida speak their mother language. These figures must be understood in terms of just how strong Canada's colonial laws and policies are today. The extent to which these languages are endangered shows just how hard we must all work to indigenize Canada's history. We must ensure that all first nations, Inuit and Métis are supported and resourced in order for these beautiful mother languages to be revitalized.
I am thankful to both Bangladesh and UNESCO, which in 1999 proposed that International Mother Language Day be established. By 2002, it was recognized by the United Nations General Assembly. I understand that starting in 1948, the Bengali stood up to the imposition of Urdu by the Government of Pakistan in Bangladesh. I am thankful the Bengali people demanded that their mother language be an official language alongside Urdu. The atrocities experienced by the Bengali are physically and collectively terrible. Once the Bengali demanded change, many were injured and killed at a protest organized by students of the University of Dhaka against the government's repression of Bengali. This protest happened on February 21, 1952. Qujannamiik to the Bengali people. We must acknowledge their enormous sacrifices and celebrate their history.
I must acknowledge what has been attempted to promote and protect indigenous languages. In 2014, Matthew Kellway, a New Democrat, introduced a private member's bill to recognize this day. As we debate this today, we know it did not pass. We now have the Indigenous Languages Act, which created the position of the indigenous languages commissioner. I had the pleasure of meeting the indigenous languages commissioner, Ronald Ignace, and directors Robert Watt, Georgina Liberty and Joan Greyeyes, at their first meeting here in Ottawa. I look forward to the great work they will do to promote and protect indigenous languages.
I do suggest that the bill be amended to replace the word “aboriginal” with the word “indigenous”.
I conclude by stating that the federal government must provide the same resources, rights and privileges to indigenous languages as it does for the two official languages. I conclude that I will gladly support the passing of this bill into law.
1424 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
