44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 29, 2022 10:00AM
Madam Speaker, I listened carefully to the speech by my colleague from Outremont.
As we know, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. I would therefore like to understand what my colleague and her government truly think about the Indian Act. How can her government claim to be relying on Bill C‑29 to embark on a true reconciliation process without talking about the possibility of replacing or eliminating the Indian Act, which the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations has described as unacceptable? I would like to hear my colleague's comments on that.
98 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, Bill C‑29 would establish the national council for reconciliation. This council will be a permanent, independent and indigenous-led organization. It will monitor and support the progress being made towards reconciliation in Canada, including the full implementation of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action. Indigenous and non-indigenous people have a lot to do to contribute to this council.
66 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I certainly appreciate the debate today on this very important issue. According to Statistics Canada, almost 800,000 indigenous peoples are not represented by the AFN, the ITK or the MNC. Why would you only choose four of the five NIOs knowing there would be thousands of voices left out?
52 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Uqaqtittiji, I have a similar question. According to clauses 9 and 10, with respect to the composition and the nominations, while only four national organizations are named as being able to nominate directors, there will be five to nine other directors that can be nominated through other means.
Does the member agree that these five to nine other directors can represent those other indigenous groups so they can be heard through other means?
73 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the colonial approach that we have taken historically with indigenous people across the country, including in the north and on the east coast and west coast, still seems to be playing out given the fact that making this commission work is going to require government funding for which the government will be made accountable to Parliament.
I am wondering whether the hon. member sees this as a conflict of the intent of reconciliation and what we might possibly do differently to make reconciliation work, even in this context.
90 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague, whom I have had the pleasure of working with on the status of women committee. I appreciate working with her tremendously.
One of the observations I have made of the Conservatives' contributions to the debate today is their complete focus on economic reconciliation. I read something from the Yellowhead Institute that basically said the focus, including by the Liberal government, is on things like economic reconciliation.
I do not feel they have demonstrated the same sort of respect for indigenous nations that make other decisions about their lands outside of resource extraction. This goes to free, prior and informed consent regarding how they wish to use their lands. It is one thing to talk about economic reconciliation and respecting indigenous people's rights to make decisions about their own affairs, but I have not seen that demonstrated in practice.
Does my hon. colleague respect nations that choose not to participate in resource extraction on their own lands and territories? Does she support that?
173 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, that is absolutely true. Some 800,000 indigenous people live off reserve. They are incredible and important, and we are not addressing them. It is a very critical amendment and we hope the Liberals listen to it.
39 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, before I begin, I would like to acknowledge that Canada's Parliament is located on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.
It is a pleasure to begin report stage debate on Bill C-29, an act to provide for the establishment of a national council for reconciliation.
We have concluded an in-depth, detailed study on Bill C-29 at the INAN committee. Over the past month, a total of 32 witnesses gave their testimony during seven meetings on Bill C-29. Witnesses included representatives from national indigenous organizations and indigenous groups. The members of the transitional committee were also invited as witnesses. We worked together in a collaborative spirit and listened to the many witnesses with open minds.
During clause-by-clause consideration of the bill, 41 amendments were proposed and 26 were adopted to strengthen the bill in terms of diversity, representation, transparency and accountability. These amendments respect the council as an independent indigenous-led organization. The vision of the council was set forth by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the interim board, and the transitional committee has been strengthened, not changed.
I would like to highlight some of the key amendments that were made by the committee to this bill.
Many of the amendments that have been adopted focused on strengthening the composition and representation of the board of directors of this council. The original bill outlined that the board should include first nations, Inuit and Métis, as well as other people here in this great nation; other indigenous organizations; youth, women, men and gender-diverse people; and people from various regions of Canada, including urban, rural and remote regions. Amendments have been adopted that include two directors from the territories to ensure representation of the north.
All parties submitted amendments to have the Native Women's Association of Canada nominate a director to the board in recognition of the need to respect women's voices, contributions to policy and research, and, more broadly, to respect reconciliation. This includes the implementation of the missing and murdered indigenous women and girls calls for justice.
There was also broad consensus that the committee must include representation of elders and survivors of residential schools and their descendants, in recognition of the knowledge they carry and the origins of the National Council for Reconciliation, in the TRC calls to action. We know that elders are central figures in indigenous cultures and, equally as important, individual communities. Survivors and their descendants are important voices in the advancement of reconciliation.
Finally, the committee added representation for indigenous persons with French as their first or second language learned.
These amendments ensure that the board of directors is representative of the diversity and plurality of indigenous peoples.
The bill has also been updated to recognize that the revitalization and celebration of indigenous languages is part of reconciliation and, more importantly, the resurgence of reconciliation. The functions of the council now include protecting indigenous language rights. This includes supporting the participation of indigenous peoples in the work of the council through translation and interpretation services.
As members will recall, the House passed the Indigenous Languages Act to preserve, promote and revitalize indigenous languages throughout this great country. Ronald E. Ignace was appointed as the Commissioner of Indigenous Languages. These amendments align with our government's commitment to implementing the Indigenous Languages Act in order to reclaim and strengthen indigenous languages.
It would be the national council's work to monitor, to evaluate, to conduct research and to report on the progress being made toward reconciliation. To do so, it would need to access information from all levels of government as outlined in call to action number 55. The original bill included the development of an information-sharing protocol that would obligate the government to share with the council information that would be relevant to its purpose.
Establishing this protocol through legislation is an innovative tool to hold the Government of Canada accountable for supporting the council's needs to efficiently as well as effectively implement its mandate, while also preserving its independence from government. It would be developed within six months of incorporation of the council.
Another amendment has been adopted, which requires the government to provide the council with the information identified in the Truth and Reconciliation call to action 55, such as the number of indigenous children in care compared with non-indigenous children and data on comparative funding for education, health indicators and the overrepresentation of indigenous people in the justice and the correctional systems. Like other amendments adopted at INAN, this respects the work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
As I noted at the beginning of my remarks, the legislation would obligate the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations to table the council's annual report in both Houses of Parliament and, as amended, the Prime Minister to formally respond to the council's report. This responds to call to action 56, which calls on the Prime Minister to formally respond to the report of the national council for reconciliation by issuing an annual state of aboriginal peoples report, which would outline the government's plans for advancing the cause of reconciliation.
It is important that the council's report leads to action. The Government of Canada is committed to reconciliation, but recognizes the important role of other levels of government and sectors in supporting this work.
Finally, I would like to discuss the amendment that was introduced today. As I previously mentioned, the bill now includes a provision to ensure inclusion of indigenous persons whose first or second language is French. The government is proposing revised wording to the amendment in clause 12 to remove the term “mother tongue” as it is a gendered term. This would ensure that the wording is clear so the council would know how to interpret and implement it.
Before I conclude, I want to take this opportunity to acknowledge and to express my sincere appreciation to the residential school survivors once again for sharing the truths of their experiences. Without them, we would not be where we are today.
I would encourage each and every member of this Parliament and our colleagues who worked together to bring this forward to move quickly to pass this important legislation and to move forward once again with reconciliation.
1060 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Uqaqtittiji, I have a question regarding the composition and nomination that can happen. As we have discussed in the House, four national organizations can make nominations, but five to nine other directors can be nominated from others. This does not prevent other organized indigenous organizations from making their nominations.
Does the member agree that these four members are sufficient to ensure there is national representation, but that others are not excluded from submitting their nominations?
75 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I do apologize for directing my earlier answer directly to the member. I have a habit of talking eye to eye and straight on.
For the member opposite, again, a member who does great work and who has a passion for indigenous issues on the committee as well as in her daily work in the House. The short answer is yes.
Again, with respect to self-determination and reconciliation, a lot of the composition and those who will be part of this committee will be brought forward by the committee itself. The minister has put the foundation in place, but the expectation is that we will be getting out of its way, as I mentioned earlier, to ensure that it is not abiding by any of the old practices of government when it comes to colonialism, that, in fact, it is opening the door for it to make its decisions through self-determination, the composition being a part of that effort.
163 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am very honoured today to rise on behalf of survivors, community members and elders who had to unfortunately live through the traumatic experience of Canada's horrific residential schools.
Today we are talking about an issue that is living in the hearts of children, their parents and their grandparents. Today throughout this debate we heard from the government about the importance of finally tabling this much awaited legislation, legislation for which survivors and their families have been calling for years now.
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission travelled across our country, spoke to survivors and families about the importance of finally building an independent body that would be tasked with seeking justice on behalf of indigenous families that are still with us today.
That is the need and goal of the call to action we are speaking of today.
We also heard from the Conservatives. We heard about the need for economic reconciliation. Although much of what they are advocating for ignores the reality and plight of survivors, I do recognize the need to see true economic opportunities for indigenous people, but they must go beyond resource extraction. They must truly need indigenous people and their values, and truly lead to a better outcome for indigenous people led by them through self-determination processes.
This work is real. Right now, people across the country are deciding in their families, with their kids, in public schools and even in churches. They are having discussions with regular everyday folks about what it means when we say “reconciliation”. When I say “reconciliation”, it is important that we understand where I am coming from and where members from indigenous communities are coming from when we use that language. Reconciliation implies there was at some point some kind of conciliation that took place in Canada. It is important to recognize that indigenous people have often found themselves in the back seat of government decision-making.
Something we must avoid at all costs in legislation is the prescriptive use of government control to insist who sits at the table to guide, and maybe in some ways influence, the nature of the independent purpose of the legislation.
Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 is new for some Canadians, but not all Canadians. Some might remember what happened in the late seventies and early eighties as indigenous people across the country organized. They built new organizations. They fought for their voice. They brought their voice into this place to demand justice, that the rights of indigenous people, their inherent and treaty rights, would be protected. We are not far from that moment in our history. Canada is a very young country, but what is needed is truly concrete action rather than words.
This is not only indigenous people saying this, it is Canada's top Auditor General. She stated just last week, “In 2011, at the end of her mandate as auditor general of Canada, Sheila Fraser summed up her impressions of the government's actions after 10 years of audits and related recommendations on First Nations issues with the word 'unacceptable'.” Five years later her predecessor, Michael Ferguson, used the words "beyond unacceptable".
She further said, “We are now into decades of audits of programs and government commitments that have repeatedly failed to effectively serve Canada's Indigenous peoples... It is clear to me that strong words are not driving change.” She has said, “Concrete actions are needed to address these long-standing issues, and government needs to be held accountable.”
Those are not the words of the New Democrats. Those are the words of Canada's Auditor General, by which I stand firmly.
The age of accountability is upon us. Indigenous people are done waiting. Indigenous people are done asking. Indigenous people are now demanding that the government take seriously and earnestly the words of its own Auditor General in echoing the facts of the failures of the government almost 10 years ago. Those words are still being echoed by the Auditor General today. We must do better.
By better, I point to some jarring statistics. Before I do that, I want to mention that when we use numbers in this place, it has to be founded with the earnest understanding that those numbers represent people, real children, people in each and every one of our communities. There is not one MP in the House who does not and is not affected by the policies of this place, in particular the policies directed at indigenous people and, most important, children. Canada's history in the prosecution of children continues still today.
Statistics Canada said that a 2021 census showed that indigenous children accounted for 53.8% of all children in foster care. This has gone up since the 2016 census, which found that 52.2% of children in care under the age of 14 were indigenous.
If I asked the government this question, which I have today, it will simply deflect and say that the provincial governments are responsible. However, that does not stop the advocates, the strong members like former Chief Norma Kassi, who said, “The doors are closed at the Residential Schools but the foster homes are still existing and our children are still being taken away.”
These are real truths, truths that may not be spoken in this place but are spoken across the country every single day, including in the courtrooms. The very honourable Cindy Blackstock, a champion and true warrior for indigenous people, fighting for the most vulnerable children, said:
...the last residential schools closed in 1997. That trauma echoed forward and then these First Nations children and families had fewer public resources to be able to deal with it. But they were often judged by Canadian public who didn’t know any better...And that perpetuated the cycle of racism and the cycle of trauma.
What she is telling us is that members of Parliament must listen earnestly to the fact that if we do not act now, this will continue generation after generation. That is how deep these wounds truly are.
We can think about the mistreatment of indigenous children, not just the residential school period but also in the sixties scoop, of which I am an intergenerational survivor. The sixties scoop was not all that long ago, and it affects families every day. Some family members we never meet. I have never met all my family members. This is not a rare story. This is a common story of many people from coast to coast to coast.
It gets even worse. Many face mistreatment, even now as we speak, such as physical, sexual and spiritual abuse. There are at least 14,100 maltreatment incident investigations for indigenous children, according to the Canadian child welfare research portal's most recent statistics. If we are not talking about the basic principles of justice in this place for the most vulnerable people in our society, what are we truly doing here? There are 14,000 children who are malnourished in Canada and we are talking about who gets to sit on a national board for reconciliation.
I challenge the government to go far beyond rhetoric, far beyond tabling legislation, but I agree with the fact that I need to use this opportunity to echo that more must be done. This is barely the first step to ensuring the government truly does what must be done.
We know these children will continue to need our support. They will continue to need indigenous people. They will continue to need their language. They will continue to need access to land. That is critical to our people's rebuilding.
I want to thank my hon. colleagues for debating this very serious topic. I hope we can unite the House, not just for the principles of fairness found within this legislation but toward justice for indigenous people, not just today but every single day in the House. That is my hope.
1341 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member touched upon the importance of the children. Several calls to action speak to education and the need to talk about the true indigenous history all across Canada, Métis history, Inuit history and first nations history.
I wonder if the member opposite could talk a little about what he sees in his province. We now have National Day for Truth and Reconciliation. We have a national council of reconciliation, $126.5 million. Could the member opposite talk a little about whether thinks the education that children are currently receiving on reconciliation and indigenous history within his province is adequate or does more need to be done?
111 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for Edmonton Griesbach for his comments. I have appreciated the opportunity to work with him on a number of files over the last year.
I want to go back to the amendment that has been proposed by the Liberals. In 2018 the government signed an accord recognizing the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples as one of the five national indigenous organizations, which is why at committee the Conservatives brought forward a motion to add a seat at the table for this organization. That passed with the support of the NDP and the Bloc Québécois members.
Given that the Liberals are now bringing forward an amendment to remove that seat, I wonder if the member for Edmonton Griesbach can clarify if the NDP members will vote, as they did at committee, in favour of reserving a seat on this board for the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples.
154 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I want to mention something very critical to the understanding of this place, Canada, and the government in relation to the conversation of representatives who represent indigenous people. When we say “national organizations”, what are the nations we are talking about, and who belongs to those nations? It is critical that we flip that question upside down and understand that indigenous people are truly grassroots people and that Canada must meet them where they are, not the other way around.
Therefore, to appease the member, I understand where the Conservatives are coming from. The composition of this board is seemingly and perceptively looking as though it is lacking independence, because the government is appointing members, and the Conservatives are trying to appoint members right now. The New Democrats are saying that the composition does not matter. The composition needs to be one that truly understands that indigenous people have to be met where they are, on the ground.
162 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, it is important that we thank the survivors, the important members of indigenous governments and the grassroots leaders, but in some ways it is also important to give a shout-out to the children who are enduring this pain every single day and relying on parliamentarians in the House to provide the kind of justice that not only indigenous children but all children deserve in this country. When we talk about not being political with respect to these issues, it is important that we also understand that there is far more to do to ensure that these children get the justice and the kind of compensation they deserve for this treatment.
113 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is incumbent on all of the board members to fight precisely what the member opposite is highlighting. There are a number of difficult choices that we have to make when the committee appoints members. We are within a structure that has been imposed on indigenous people, so there is an inherent contradiction in sitting here, appointing board members and deciding who goes on what board for what reason.
This is not a slight on any notion of economic reconciliation. In every interaction I have with indigenous peoples and communities, one of the main points of their economic reconciliation is making sure that they are dealing with someone who has paid the bills over the last 100 years, and in a lot of cases we have not. There is a basis of it that has fuelled the poverty that exists in communities today. The suspicion with which they treat the Government of Canada and anyone they interact with is well justified in hundreds of years of not paying the bills.
It starts with that premise, but it moves on into many other areas of closing the capital gap that exists between non-indigenous and indigenous investors and investments. It spans a much broader range than was normally understood as simply the purview of the economy.
217 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is precisely this type of commission that will allow us to make sure we are focused on survivors and their families.
It is not lost on anyone that the vast composition of the House is non-indigenous. We sometimes superimpose our own views of what we think is good or not good for indigenous peoples. Having a commission like that to remind us, particularly in the wake of the last year and a half of discoveries in and around unmarked graves, will be an opportunity and a catalyst to keep reminding the House of the importance of putting survivors and families first, knowing that this is trauma that has passed on from generation to generation.
There are still survivors who are speaking for the first time, courageously. There are also people who are courageously choosing not to speak out about their experiences. We need to honour them and their silence as well. This is a very difficult time still for communities and will be for some time. However, having an institution like this, which will be able to radiate across Canada, will be key in keeping survivors and their families front and centre in this ongoing national tragedy.
201 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
