44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 29, 2022 10:00AM
Mr. Speaker, I think the committee has a duty to adhere to calls to action 53 to 56. The Prime Minister will report on reconciliation every year.
Certainly, let us talk about the tragic story of residential schools. As my colleagues from the NDP and the Bloc Québécois have said, it will be very important to continue to focus on the survivors and their families, and the traumatic legacy that continues to affect indigenous communities across Canada to this day. A council will allow us to reach out nationally across the country, to raise these issues and to keep highlighting the importance of responding to calls to action 53 to 56.
117 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I will start by acknowledging that Canada's Parliament is located on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people. I would like to continue the third reading debate on Bill C-29, an act to provide for the establishment of a national council for reconciliation.
Reconciliation is not a new idea or process. This is something that has been actively working its way through our country for the last 50 years: in 1982, through changes to recognize and affirm indigenous rights in the Constitution; in 1996, with the report by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples; and in 2015, with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada's calls to action.
Today, after careful consideration at second reading and through study by the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs, we are considering the national council for reconciliation in response to the TRC calls to action.
Although the INAN committee has made some important amendments to the legislation, this bill, at its core, remains much the same. Bill C-29 would establish a national council for reconciliation as an indigenous-led, permanent and independent non-partisan oversight body to monitor, evaluate and report on Canada's progress on reconciliation. This is significant.
It responds to calls to action 53 to 56, and it supports the Government of Canada's commitment to accelerate and implement the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action.
Many of my hon. colleagues are familiar with origins of this legislation, but let me provide an overview.
Since the TRC released its final report, our government has responded to the calls to action through reconciliation efforts. We committed to implementing the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People. We established a National Day for Truth and Reconciliation. This year, we witnessed the Pope offer a historic apology to the residential school survivors in an indigenous community.
This is supplemented by the work done at the grassroots level. There are many encouraging initiatives under way across Canada and across many sectors, but no one is monitoring or reporting on that activity on a national scale.
As was pointed out in the committee study, thus far, we have not had the mechanism to share emerging best practices and create a dialogue to celebrate progress and provide recommendations for improvement. We lack a formal structure for monitoring reconciliation work at all levels of government and society in Canada. Such oversight is critically important for making progress and leaving a lasting and meaningful legacy. That is exactly what the national council for reconciliation would do.
As envisioned by the TRC, an indigenous-led, non-political, independent and permanent national council for reconciliation would provide a structure to monitor, evaluate and report on reconciliation efforts.
This was laid out in four of its calls to action: 53 and 54, which call for the creation of a national council for reconciliation through legislation and funding; and also in 55 and 56, which further clarify the expectations for the council in various levels of government on data and information sharing and reporting on the progress.
Since the TRC released the calls to action, we have been working with indigenous partners, leaders and communities to develop this proposed legislation. We have strived to uphold the principles set out by the commission. Keeping indigenous voices and survivors at the heart of our work is a key part of this legislation.
Front and centre in our process to establish a national council for reconciliation has been the leadership by the interim board and the transitional committee. Both independent bodies were composed of first nations, Inuit and Métis members who provided their advice on a path forward, taking into account a wide range of diverse voices and perspectives.
I will take a few minutes to outline the process we used to develop the bill and the engagement that was done at each stage.
Five years ago, we set the wheels in motion to establish the council with the creation of an interim board of directors. The board comprised six indigenous leaders representing first nations, Inuit and Métis, including the former truth and reconciliation commissioner, Dr. Wilton Littlechild.
Its mandate was to make recommendations on the creation of a national council for reconciliation. To formulate its recommendations, the interim board engaged with community members; academics; business, arts and health professionals; and other interested parties to gather their input.
In 2018, the board presented its final report to the minister, which contained 20 specific recommendations related to the name, vision, mission, mandate, structure, membership, funding, reporting and legislation of the national council of reconciliation. The interim board's recommendations formed the basis of the bill.
To continue this process, in December 2021, the transitional committee was appointed. It has done important work to date convening discussions on the council's functions, identifying key milestones and timelines, and proposing an engagement approach. It also reviewed a draft legislation framework developed by the Department of Justice based on the interim board's recommendations. It led preliminary engagements on the framework with indigenous partners and non-indigenous experts, including lawyers, data specialists and financial and reconciliation experts. It also gathered feedback and advice in areas such as reconciliation, law, data, organizational finance, information sharing, governance and accountability.
In March 2022, the committee provided its recommendations on how to strengthen the draft legislative framework. The committee also suggested that this proposed legislation be brought forward as quickly as possible, amplifying the wishes of survivors, who want to see this council become a reality during their lifetimes. This fall, it passed second reading and was referred to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs on October 6, which brings us to today.
I would encourage the swift passage of the bill. As hon. members here know, this is something that I am personally passionate about. We must do more when it comes to implementing the calls to action and advancing reconciliation. I am committed to doing everything in my power to ensure the council has the support it needs to do the work of monitoring the implementation of the calls to action. I hope that other levels of government across the country can commit to working with the council as we have committed to doing.
As we debate this bill at third reading, we cannot take our eyes off the end goal and what this legislation would truly accomplish, which is advancing reconciliation in this country. I encourage my hon. colleagues to consider how they can support the council once it is established and how they can connect the council with initiatives or community members at home.
Advancing reconciliation is something that must be done hand in hand with indigenous people across the country. Reconciliation is not linear and will not come easy, but in our work we will always strive to advance progress and address the existing gaps. This is the goal of Bill C-29.
1167 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General report that was published two weeks ago points to the abject failure of the Indigenous Services Canada department to implement any of the concrete changes related to how it handled the emergency planning for first nations communities. They were recommended in the audit of 2013.
In 10 years, the department could not change its approach to make the lives of indigenous people better. How confident is the member of the Liberal government that it would act on any of the recommendations made by the national council for reconciliation?
93 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is important that we not confuse Indigenous Services Canada's Crown-indigenous relations with the work we are doing on reconciliation. When we are talking about the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, we are talking about survivors who attended residential schools and who made suggestions on how we move forward. That is the blueprint for the calls to action.
While the national council for reconciliation would remain focused on implementing the calls to action, in the future it is also important that we do all of the things we need to do to close the gap between indigenous Canadians and the rest of Canada and to address the harms created by colonization. Only then do we get to the pathways for prosperity that we need for all indigenous people across Canada. However, as a starting point, we owe it to survivors to make sure that the first things we do are in relation to the calls to action that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission moved forward on.
169 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his fine speech.
I would like to know his views about the council's governance and representativeness within the council.
In terms of governance, the bill proposes that the board of directors be composed of a minimum of nine and a maximum of 13 directors.
In terms of representativeness, the bill proposes that the board of directors include representation from first nations, Inuit, Métis, other peoples in Canada, indigenous organizations, youth, women, men and gender-diverse persons.
I would like my colleague to tell me what he thinks of the council's governance and its representativeness.
105 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I think the important part of our government's working hand in hand with the transition committee is to make sure that indigenous leaders and indigenous communities themselves are taking on a key role. What we want to do is open up the door for them to take the wheel and drive the bus, not for us as a federal government to be overly prescriptive and say how we are going to do this step by step. It is up to them. We want to put it in their hands, and that is the process we are going to move forward.
103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the government has broken many promises to indigenous people over the last seven year, such as the promise to lift long-term drinking water advisories across the country by 2021. If this body had been set up before, would it have helped? If so, why did we not do this earlier?
53 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, one of the beautiful things about the national council for reconciliation is that its initial task is to move forward on the calls to action. However, we know we have a long way to go on reconciliation in Canada. As the national council for reconciliation knocks off all the different things we are doing to ensure better lives for indigenous people and indigenous communities, its role will change. It will be looking at things like language, overincarceration and making sure we have better processes around the justice system, but that does not prevent it from moving on in the future.
We also want to make sure we are doing exactly as I said earlier, which is closing the gap between the way indigenous people live on reserve and off reserve. That is a key part of reconciliation. We need to close the gaps, address the harm and make sure we create pathways to prosperity.
156 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, this may be received as more of a comment than a question.
Quite frequently, due to motions passed before committees, I am able to go before committees instead of bringing up my amendments at report stage, which is what normally would occur. In the case of Bill C-29, I want to put on the record that I have never had a more collaborative, supportive and open process with the minister responsible and with the hon. member for Sydney—Victoria. I felt that the first reading of Bill C-29 failed to deliver on the calls to action, particularly the specific information requirements set out in call to action 55. My amendment, with very few modifications, was accepted at committee, and I am very grateful for that.
I know the hon. member comes from the Mi'kmaq, Maliseet and Passamaquoddy nation. I say to him wela'lin, and thank him and the minister for their openness to opposition amendments.
162 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for her participation at the committee. I think all parties in the House strengthened this bill and made it possible. That is how reconciliation moves forward in the House. We should move forward in a non-partisan way and together. We owe this to indigenous peoples in Canada, and when we all work together, great things happen.
66 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, before I start, I am asking for unanimous consent to share my time with the member for Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River.
26 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/29/22 4:08:44 p.m.
- Watch
Is it agreed?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member for Langley—Aldergrove.
17 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, today we are talking about reconciliation between the Crown and first nations people. I want to focus on the concept of economic reconciliation.
Canada is a wealthy nation, wealthy in natural resources, in human resources, in technological and industrial advances and in many other metrics that economists use to measure the wealth of nations. However, unfortunately this wealth is not shared by all people, and that is unjust.
Just to be clear, I am not here to promote the government's ill-conceived wealth redistribution tax plans involving the carbon tax, which it masks as an environmental plan, or its focus on the middle class and those striving to get into it despite tax policies that are pushing people out of the middle class. I am not talking about its ill-conceived housing policies, which apparently are designed to help people get into homes, even though those policies are driving first-time buyers out of the market while the dream of home ownership is evaporating for many young families. I am talking about the creation of wealth.
The former finance minister, Mr. Bill Morneau, after he left the government and was cut loose from the Liberal Party's talking points, pointed out what is obvious to many of us in the House: The problem with the government is that it is overly focused on wealth redistribution and not focused enough on wealth creation. I agree with that. That is obvious to me and to many others in the House.
There is no better way for a nation to create wealth than for all the people in the nation to work, to do what they are good at, to trade with each other and to enjoy the dignity that work brings. In pursuing their economic self-interest, the whole nation becomes wealthy.
Adam Smith did not invent that concept 250 years ago; it is an ancient concept. Just to prove that, I am going to quote from the ancient and wise King Solomon, who several thousand years ago had this to say about work and the dignity it brings: There is nothing more rewarding for people than to eat, drink and enjoy the fruits of their labour. That is what I want to talk about today as we talk about reconciliation. All people should be able to enjoy the fruits of their labour.
That brings me to the topic of the day: the setting up of a national council for reconciliation, as called for in the 2015 truth and reconciliation report by the commission that the previous Conservative government appointed. We appointed that commission to tackle the ongoing and deeply embedded societal challenges plaguing our development as a nation caused by the ill-conceived government policies of previous decades. Those policies failed. Separating children from their families is indeed very bad public policy, and many people are still suffering today. This is Canada's shame. How do we fix it?
I have spoken with many people in my community of Langley, in Fort Langley to be specific, who are residential school survivors. The announcement coming out of Kamloops a couple of years ago triggered memories. The memories are fresh, the pain is real and the anger is just below the surface. The sad thing is that the news is not even news. We have known about this for a long time. As a matter of fact, six of the 94 calls to action of the truth and reconciliation report talk about unmarked graves under the heading “Missing Children and Burial Information”. The report is now seven years old and not enough progress has been made. It is time to get the job done.
Bill C-29, which is what we are debating today, is an act to provide for the establishment of a national council for reconciliation. It is a step in the right direction. This council will be tasked with monitoring and reporting on the government's post-apology progress on reconciliation.
I believe there is full agreement on both sides of the House that we need to correct and compensate for the misguided policies of the past, but we are not all agreed on how we get there. The Liberals like to make announcements and boast about how much money they are spending on programs. The Conservatives, on the other hand, want action. We want to get everyone to work. We want to remove barriers to the full participation of indigenous communities in all sectors of society.
That is why Conservative members of the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs put forward a motion to amend Bill C-29 to incorporate the concept of economic reconciliation. Inexplicably, members from the other parties on that committee voted against it. I hope that in debate today we can convince them otherwise, because without economic reconciliation, there is no reconciliation.
In British Columbia we have a very good example of what economic reconciliation can look like. The Coastal GasLink LNG project is a provincially regulated project that is going to link the very rich natural gas fields of northern British Columbia to the LNG Canada processing plant on the coast in Kitimat. The pipeline route runs through 20 first nations communities, and all 20 of them will benefit economically from this project.
The project has signed benefit agreements with all 20 nations. It has signed option agreements to sell at 10% equity interest in the project to those nations. It has issued many contracts to indigenous subcontractors, service providers and local businesses, and it is funding job training. This is a long-term economic benefit for first nations communities. That is what reconciliation looks like.
I want to end with a real-life example of what economic reconciliation looks like for first nations peoples. To do so, I am going to read testimony given by Mr. Ellis Ross, a member of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia and a first nations person, when he appeared at the committee on indigenous and northern affairs last month. I will read from his testimony, which I think zeroes in on exactly what the issue is. He said:
A number of aboriginal leaders feel strongly that economic reconciliation not only lifts up first nations but also obviously lifts up the provinces and the country. The proof is out there.
In my community, for example, the economic reconciliation that we participated in...made us one of the wealthiest bands in B.C.
He continued:
[W]e have young aboriginals getting mortgages in their own right without depending on Indian Affairs or their band council. They're going on vacation. They're planning futures for their children.
In discussing previous governments' attempts of reconciliation, this is what Mr. Ross had to say:
Well, government, you can't; if you could fix it, it would have been fixed long ago. If you're going to do something, then do something in partnership with first nations that can make their band councils—and, more importantly, their band members—independent.
Mr. Ross ended with this invitation, which I believe is still an open invitation to anybody in the House who is interested. He said:
If you want an example, come to my village, Kitimaat Village, B.C. I'll show you around.
To sum up, we in Canadian society have made a lot of errors in the past. We can learn from our mistakes, but we can also learn from our successes, and there are a lot of successes. This is just one example that I raised. Let us learn from them. Let us move ahead with indigenous communities and reconciliation.
1277 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I have a critique of what I have been hearing today.
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission went all across this country hearing from survivors. We heard about the abuses. We heard about the mental, physical and sexual abuses. We heard about the addictions. We heard about the need for mental health resources. We are hearing about communities trying to establish their connection with their language.
However, the Conservatives seem to think that instead of listening to the survivors and the 94 calls to action of what they have laid out as a blueprint moving forward, what we really need is for indigenous people to adopt more of a capitalist approach to how they do things moving forward. If they just had a little more money in their pockets, they would not worry about the loss of their language and the abuse their parents or grandparents had to go through.
I am trying to figure out where the Conservatives are. Do they not feel that is a little paternalistic? Instead of talking about the 94 actions that are actually within the calls to action, they keep talking about the term “economic reconciliation”, which is nowhere in the calls to action by survivors.
205 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, that question gives me the opportunity to emphasize how important economic reconciliation is.
Again, I want to quote from Mr. Ellis Ross, who said:
In my community, for example, the economic reconciliation that we participated in not only made us one of the wealthiest bands in B.C., but it also, for some reason, got rid of the alcohol parties. I think a study should be made in that respect.
Absolutely, get people to work and they will live healthier lifestyles, and they will promote their children's future. To quote Mr. Ross, “They're going on vacation. They're planning futures for their children.”
That is what it looks like. That is what a good job would do for a person.
126 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I just want to make sure I understood my colleague's speech.
What has to be done to create more unity and inclusiveness in society is to get rid of taxes and lower income taxes so that one day there will be a trickle-down effect that will unite everyone in Canada and Quebec.
Have I correctly understood the underlying Conservative mentality in the speech my Conservative colleague just gave?
72 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I do not know where that came from. I am not talking about more taxation. I am talking about less taxation. I am talking about promoting free enterprise. I am talking about promoting resource development. I am definitely talking about allowing the people in whose traditional lands these resources are developed to be able to participate economically. I believe that was the emphasis of my talk.
68 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member is well-meaning in his suggestions in terms of economic development, so I do not mean to suggest anything other than good intentions.
However, the reality of the Trans Mountain pipeline is that it is neither economical, nor are there markets, nor is there anything long term for any part of our population. I will say to him that in terms of the hearings that were held before the National Energy Board, the Kinder Morgan corporation put forward that it plans to create through its project fewer than 100 permanent jobs. It also put forward that it was going to be the 100% backstop for costs. The corporation then carved off its Canadian operations, kept the money it had raised towards building the pipeline and used it to pay off the debts of the parent corporation, at which point it told the federal government it was not going to build it. There is no case that it is economically viable.
Meanwhile there are many nations all along the pipeline route that want it stopped because it violates their rights under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. I would just suggest to the member that the particular example he gave is rather fraught.
213 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I do not know if there was a question in that, but I will attempt to respond to the hon. member's comments.
She and I have a difference of opinion on what resource development could do and what liquid natural gas could do for British Columbia and also for global climate challenges. We say to promote clean-burning, ethically produced liquid natural gas to replace much dirtier-burning coal. There is a market for it. That is clear if we take a look at what is going on in Europe today.
94 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in this place and represent the people from Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, and today as I speak to Bill C-29 and the creation of a national council for reconciliation, I suggest to this place that this is a continuation of a journey that all Canadians are to be part of as we create a better future.
Speaking previously, in September, I made it clear that it was important to use a consensus-building approach to improve the legislation. Bill C-29, in its formation, deserved a responsible look at areas where it needed improvement, and I have to admit we have heard much testimony today that this was the work that was done at committee with the help of everybody there.
At second reading I pointed out a few issues that I thought needed to be addressed. I talked about the transparency and independence in the selection process of the board of directors. I talked about some words that seemed purposely vague to avoid accountability. I talked about the lack of any measurable outcomes. I talked about the fact that it took over three years to bring the bill to the House in the first place. Finally, I spoke about how the Prime Minister should be the one responding to the council's annual report, as that was the direction in call to action number 56.
In response to those concerns and the testimony of witnesses, we brought forward reasonable amendments to strengthen Bill C-29, and I am very proud today to report that 17 of the 19 amendments we put forward were passed at committee. It is the job of the official opposition to improve legislation and to make it truly representative of all voices, and that is exactly what we did at that committee.
I must admit, however, that I am a bit disappointed today to realize that the government, and specifically the minister, would not accept the democratic will of the INAN committee on the amendment to add a seat at the table for the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples. This is a national indigenous organization that represents over 800,000 urban indigenous people.
A second concern I have coming out of that committee debate is that there was one amendment we proposed that was disappointingly voted down by all the other parties, and that is the one I want to spend a few minutes talking about.
As many of my colleagues have talked about today, we put forward an amendment to add a seat on the board of directors for someone from an indigenous organization that is focused on economic reconciliation. With many options available from the FNFMB, or the First Nations Financial Management Board, NACCA and the CCAB, there are many great organizations doing good work in this sphere, and finding a well-established organization that historically has done great work would have been very easy. It would not have been a barrier to find somebody to sit at that table.
However, the lack of support for this amendment, it should be pointed out, came at the expense of not listening to multiple witnesses who clearly voiced their approval for the inclusion of an economic lens as part of this board. We did not advocate for that to be the only voice; it would have been only one voice at the table. To ignore these voices discredits the very process of reconciliation.
I have observed, over the last few years, Liberal and NDP MPs aggressively challenging indigenous leaders who have appeared as witnesses at the INAN committee to advocate for economic reconciliation. I often find myself questioning why. Why is there an aversion to even having this discussion? Something does not add up. What is it that they dislike about indigenous people being the masters of their own destiny? What is it that they dislike about the creation of a healthy, strong and vibrant community through prosperity? What is it that they dislike about using own-source revenue from true partnerships that address long-standing social issues? What is it that they dislike about leaving behind the destructive grip of poverty to offer hope and opportunity for future generations?
The sad answer is that they are more interested in political power and control. By imposing their own views rather than listening to indigenous voices, they create the same environment that indigenous people have lived under in this country for far too long.
It is time for a fundamental change to that approach. In fact, for those who are listening and watching closely, the change has already begun on the ground. Economic reconciliation plays such an important role in the overall discussion. Let me begin by sharing a few stories from my own riding in northern Saskatchewan.
As I returned home this September for this year's National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, I spent time at Pelican Lake First Nation with Chief Peter Bill. As we arrived in the community, I was greeted by Chief Bill, a member of the RCMP and two of Pelican Lake's own community safety officers. With first nations policing being a very important topic the day after the tragedy at James Smith Cree Nation, I asked how their newly established community safety officer program was going. Chief Bill was happy to report to me that the community now has six full-time employees and its own fully equipped vehicles, and that they were in the process of hiring more officers. The RCMP officer explained to me how helpful the program had been in achieving safety in their community.
How did Pelican Lake first nation pay for this community safety officer program? They paid with their own sourced revenue. They invested profits to assist in the overall health and safety of their community instead of waiting for years for government and bureaucrats to plan and meet, develop frameworks, do benefit assessments and feasibility studies, or use the signing of MOUs for photo ops.
Later that day, I was at Flying Dust First Nation. After the formal speeches were done, we all left the hall and participated in a walk of solidarity with residential school survivors. On that walk, if I looked one way I could see a hockey rink that was built a few years ago and just beside that was their brand new 6,000-square foot sporting goods store and facility called “Snipe and Celly Sports Excellence”. If I looked the other way, out by the highway there was the brand new Petro-Canada gas station.
This was a visual reminder of what my friend Vice Chief Richard Derocher had mentioned earlier in the speeches when he spoke positively about reconciliation. He shared his wish that, when people were either visiting or driving through our communities, they would not be able to recognize when they were leaving Flying Dust First Nation and entering Meadow Lake or vice versa. How does that happen? It is by generating prosperity through economic development, which is something that Flying Dust First Nation and the Meadow Lake Tribal Council have a proud history of doing.
In northern Saskatchewan, there are many examples of these success stories. Whether it be Athabasca Basin Development group, the Des Nedhe Group of English River, Pinehouse Business North, Kitsaki Management Limited Partnership from Lac la Ronge, Sakitawak Development Corporation from the Métis village of Île-à-la-Crosse or the Peter Ballantyne Group of Companies, each is creating prosperity and capacity through the ownership and development of business opportunities. These opportunities give their people employment and a sense of pride.
These are groups on the ground that have already started the change. Their approach is the new way forward. It is their stories that the national council for reconciliation should also be reporting, along with many other things, and sharing with all Canadians.
Often Conservatives are labelled as only caring about the economy. Maybe that is our own fault because we do not explain the why. Let me try to do that. One of those community safety officers of Pelican Lake I talked about is named Dalton. I had the privilege of coaching Dalton when he played AA midget hockey in Meadow Lake. He was a sturdy, dependable defenceman who understood his role. He never missed a practice or a game. He was a player whom any coach would love to have on his team.
Dalton took those attributes and applied them to his first career choice to become a power engineer. He was supported in that choice by his mom and dad, and he would have had many options going forward in where he wanted to work, but something inside of him called him home to Pelican Lake. It was an opportunity to go home to get trained as a community safety officer and to be a leader in his own community, to be a driver of change and to set the example for the next generation.
I could not have been prouder of Dalton as I watched young kids come to him in his uniform and ask if he had any more tattoos. They felt comfortable around him. He provided them a sense of safety. He is a quality young man who is providing leadership within his community because the opportunity was there to take. That is the why. That is the outcome of economic reconciliation.
Conservatives promote and believe in economic reconciliation because it is the solution to eradicating poverty and with it the social ills that poverty creates. By putting control back in the hands of indigenous people, they get to begin to manage prosperity instead of poverty, and they get to take concrete steps toward healing through self-determination.
To conclude, I am proud of the work that our team did in making Bill C-29 a better version than when it originally came to the House in June. Many concerns that we expressed at second reading were addressed and have been improved. That is how we follow up words with action.
1687 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
