Hon. Marc Miller, P.C., M.P., Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations: Thank you, senator. As you know, the business is closed, to my knowledge, and is no longer accepting the illegal dumping of waste.

This issue involves several jurisdictions. We have to add the Indigenous jurisdiction to that of Quebec. There are a lot of responsibilities to share in all this, between the federal and provincial governments, and the community itself also has a role to play. I’ve had many delicate discussions that will remain confidential with the band council and the Government of Quebec. However, with the provincial election, these discussions with the Government of Quebec have been suspended.

This situation is quite distressing to the people who live in the region, especially the people of Kanesatake.

[English]

Hon. Marc Miller, P.C., M.P., Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations: Thank you, senator. Certainly, service standards have trailed particularly during the pandemic as people were working from home. At times applications have to be done by hand, particularly with paper documentation.

The service standard varies. If it’s a renewal, the service standard is only a few weeks and shouldn’t take that much time. If it is a new application, or an application under Bill S-3, it’s something that can take a little more time, and often an unacceptable period of time.

We have allocated a number of resources to increase and prioritize the processing of applications, particularly when it is for people who need immediate care that depends on the issuance of a status card. This is work that Minister Hajdu is doing with her team in Indigenous Services Canada to make sure that, in particular, the site at Winnipeg is running in a way that is up to the standard that we would like to see things happen.

Again, this is a highly volatile turnaround time, depending on the type of application. I could admit to you quite freely that throughout the pandemic things have, yes, slowed down.

Hon. Marc Miller, P.C., M.P., Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations: Certainly, senator, it’s immensely frustrating to see these original pieces of art being reproduced, and correspondingly undervalued. Currently there is not a ton of initiatives that are being undertaken to address this, and it’s unfortunate. It’s not something that has been prevalent in the last few years, although it was occurring long before a couple of years ago. Particularly with the increased interest in Indigenous culture, there is a market that is being created. You only have to go to a downtown Montreal tourist shop to see a lot of fakes.

It’s work that we have to engage with the provinces on for jurisdictional reasons. Creating a Criminal Code provision would probably be fraught with a number of problems, and, obviously, there are undoubtedly copyright or passing-off laws that could be, with difficulty, applied. It isn’t something where there is a comprehensive approach across governments to address in a comprehensive fashion.

I appreciate you highlighting that, and it’s something that, perhaps, can be tackled in the coming years with proper community consultation.

Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson: Minister Miller, in a December 7, 2020, letter, former premier Joe Savikataaq of Nunavut wrote to your colleague Minister Wilkinson, who was Minister of Environment and Climate Change at the time. In it, he said:

The [Government of Nunavut] . . . respectfully insists that, until we have achieved a devolution agreement and an offshore oil and gas agreement, that Nunavut lands and waters not be used to meet these targets.

— referring to Canada’s 2030 conservation targets.

During the Nunavut Land Use Planning Commission hearings on the Draft Nunavut Land Use Plan, which were held in Cambridge Bay just last week, the Kitikmeot Inuit Association reminded those present that, under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, the regional Inuit associations decide who has access to and what activities can occur on Inuit lands. However, despite these interventions, federal departments continue to engage with communities directly on targeted efforts to create new conservation areas in Nunavut, circumventing both the GN, and, in the case of Talurjuaq’s proposed area, the Kitikmeot Inuit Association. In fact, DFO paid to charter —

Hon. Judith G. Seidman: Welcome, minister. Yesterday we learned from Statistics Canada that in 2021 over 17% of Indigenous people lived in crowded housing that was considered not suitable for the number of people who lived there. Furthermore, one in six lived in a dwelling that was in need of major repairs.

I think you would agree that these numbers are very concerning. It is a well-known fact that poor housing is connected to major health issues, mental health problems and higher rates of suicide, besides the violence that you spoke of earlier.

I understand that Budget 2022 proposes to provide $4.3 billion over seven years towards improving and expanding Indigenous housing in Canada.

Minister, what can you say to reassure Indigenous families that your government will deliver on its commitments and begin to alleviate the housing crisis in Indigenous communities?

Hon. Marc Miller, P.C., M.P., Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations: Thank you, senator. I would add tuberculosis, consistent with the prior discussion.

We have made a number of investments since 2015 in Indigenous communities — $400 million specifically in Nunavut — in housing.

We know it’s not enough. Budget 2021 had several billion dollars in infrastructure, which included, in some cases, housing, as well as the Rapid Housing Initiative that has been put forward successfully throughout the pandemic.

When I spoke to communities that were going through a COVID outbreak, sometimes their number one discussion point with me wasn’t COVID. It was actually housing. It’s prevalent everywhere.

It is not entirely measured. We don’t know exactly what the funding deficit is. We have a sense of it. There is a lot of work that Minister Hajdu is putting into it, actually quantifying it, going on the principle that you cannot mend what you cannot measure.

What it will require, simply — and with difficulty as well knowing budget cycles — is consistent investments into housing properly targeted into Indigenous communities and administered in the right way, which is in the spirit of self-determination. In the last budget, there was approximately $800 million that went specifically into Inuit Nunangat for the next few years. We know that will not be enough to close the gap, but it will make a significant dent in the housing shortage that exists across Indigenous communities.

Obviously, it is uneven. Not every community is the same, but it is one where we will have to be relentless. Any government that purports to run this country needs to be relentless in pursuing this.

[Translation]

Hon. Marc Miller, P.C., M.P., Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations: It will be about monitoring, independence and accountability, all led by eminent leaders in the Indigenous community, such as Willie Littlechild, Rosemary Cooper, Édith Cloutier and Mike DeGagné, who are all well known across Canada.

The objective is obviously to inform the government on where we stand with the 94 Calls to Action from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. This bill was introduced in response to the Calls to Action themselves, including 53 to 56, which call on the government to create an independent, non-political organization that is funded and monitors progress made by the Government of Canada and the other institutions that have been called to action.

This will break the government’s annoying habit of saying that it is responding to a certain number of Calls to Action without having the claim be corroborated and verified independently, in particular by Indigenous people.

We have responded to a lot of Calls to Action and continue to do so, but we need a well-funded independent organization, regardless of what kind of government is in place. It goes without saying that this bill is a priority for this government. I hope that the Senate will pass it. I look forward to your feedback, because there may be some aspects that need to be polished. This bill is very important to reconciliation and to the independence of the process.

Hon. Marc Miller, P.C., M.P., Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations: It’s not my place to have a public opinion on how the AFN operates, since it’s a major national Indigenous organization that helps ensure that the people who sit on it are well served by the Government of Canada. It has a very strong voice, representing many Indigenous voices across Canada.

If there are problems within the organization, I won’t comment publicly on that. This organization, like all others, has internal accountability processes. I’m not blind to the challenges that exist between the national leader and the executive, which is also duly elected. I must remain impartial, both publicly and privately, about this internal process. Of course, these things are alleged and have yet to be proven. As you know, there’s only one way to know the truth.

[English]

Hon. Mohamed-Iqbal Ravalia: Honourable senators, I thank the minister for being here today. September has been officially recognized as Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders Awareness Month by the Government of Canada since 2020. Addressing this disorder is one of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls to Action. Specifically, Call to Action No. 33 states:

We call upon the federal, provincial, and territorial governments to recognize as a high priority the need to address and prevent Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD), and to develop, in collaboration with Aboriginal people, FASD preventive programs that can be delivered in a culturally appropriate manner.

I recognize that several investments have been made with respect to the program and to help support First Nations and Inuit communities in preventing FASD births and to enhance the quality of life for those affected by this disorder.

Can you please speak to the strategies that have been taken to best maximize these investments? How are these investments being evaluated? Thank you.

Hon. Marc Miller, P.C., M.P., Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations: Clearly, when we talk about health transformation in Indigenous communities, addressing specifically fetal alcohol syndrome is one that Indigenous communities have been advocating for for a long, long time. This is something that goes through a number of the elements and a number of the reforms that Minister Hajdu is tasked with, particularly introducing health-based legislation that is distinctions-based, to allow communities to deal with what is specific to them and what plagues them, in developing and addressing the devastating effects of fetal alcohol spectrum disorder which, in turn, to refer to the conversation we had before, fuel incarceration rates.

This is not something that you can sort out with a single bill introduced in Parliament. It’s something that requires that health transformation which is yet to be effected. For that, we need provincial buy-in as well, in addressing these from a harms-based perspective, not waving books at people when they show up at a medical institution for help. It deals with a lot of the issues around systemic racism in the health care system.

These are elements that the Government of Canada cannot tackle alone. It’s something that will need the full participation of provinces and territories. I do thank you for asking the question.

Hon. Marc Miller, P.C., M.P., Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations: Thank you, senator. It’s an exceedingly important question, a difficult question to ask in the midst of the various fairness hearings. One hearing is occurring now in front of the CHRT, for which the court has reserved judgment for a couple of weeks. As well, the corresponding Federal Court decision will come out. I think it would be undue in terms of process for me to speak as to the different legal arguments that exist.

I would note that both Minister Hajdu and I wrote a letter to Dr. Blackstock, and I believe it’s public that we would ensure that every First Nations child who has been removed would get a minimum of $40,000.

Our challenge has always been a global one, which is addressing the spectrum of harm that occurred all the way back to the 1990s that the CHRT does not deal with. We’re dealing with three class actions with the CHRT where we’re trying to make sure every complainant is dealt with in an equitable fashion and come to a deal with rights holders, making sure that those who were entitled to even more than $40,000 would actually get that.

The CHRT order could only give as much as $40,000. We’re dealing with people who have suffered harm where the amount could go into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. This is a matter of fairness for people. In some cases, what we have proposed will actually ensure that the people who were hurt the most will get more than the CHRT could ever order.

Those are arguments that are currently in front of the court, so I will exercise a touch of reserve in speaking more about it.

[Translation]

Hon. Jean-Guy Dagenais: Minister, on June 7, 2022, at a meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on National Finance, of which I am a member, I asked one of the senior officials from Indigenous Services Canada about the use of a $2.1-billion allocation for families and children under Jordan’s Principle. Philippe Thompson revealed at the time that your government had begun negotiations to award a contract to a third party to administer our tax dollars which have been allocated to Indigenous communities, but he refused to tell us who these negotiations were with.

As the minister responsible, can you tell us to whom this contract has been awarded or to whom it will be awarded? How much will it cost Canadians to have a third party administer this $2.1 billion? Finally, could you tell us what percentage of that money will go to these unnamed administrators rather than to Indigenous children?

Hon. Marc Miller, P.C., M.P., Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations: I could talk for more than a minute and a half about the Jordan principle, which, to answer your previous question, is subject to long-term reform to ensure that the funds are properly administered.

Everyone knows that the funds weren’t well-administered by the Government of Canada. I’d rather not speak about a third party because I’m not familiar with the contract as such, but I could look into it. The reality is that it’s a principle that, with respect to the money allocated, has changed significantly in recent years, because this envelope has increased by several billion dollars.

We must carry out a comprehensive reform so that children who are entitled to receive money for their care can obtain it more quickly and, in certain cases, on an urgent basis. Together with the First Nations Child and Family Services Program, we’ve committed to moving forward with long-term reform to respond to the dispute to which a senator referred earlier.

This process is constantly evolving, but not yet perfect. That could be part of this dialogue, but I’m not familiar with the details of the file you’re asking about.

[English]

Hon. Donald Neil Plett (Leader of the Opposition): Minister, would you be able to provide us with a list of all the Indigenous organizations that you have consulted with on Bill C-11, as per your obligations under UNDRIP, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples? I don’t care whether they were at a committee or not. Would you undertake to send us a list of all Indigenous organizations that you consulted with before tabling this bill?

Hon. Marc Miller, P.C., M.P., Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations: Are you talking, senator, about Bill-C15?

Hon. Dennis Glen Patterson rose pursuant to notice of Senator Gagné on September 20, 2022:

That she will call the attention of the Senate to the life of our late Sovereign, Queen Elizabeth II.

He said: Honourable senators, I rise to speak in tribute to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and also to speak of the special relationship Her Majesty had with the North, especially with St. Jude’s Cathedral, the Anglican cathedral in Iqaluit.

In 1970, Queen Elizabeth came to what was then the Northwest Territories, or N.W.T., the first reigning monarch to visit there. This was the first of three visits to the North. The Queen was accompanied by her husband, Prince Philip, and their then younger children Charles and Anne. She had planned to begin her visit to Canada by flying into the North, beginning in what was then Frobisher Bay. But the weather that day was very daunting — heavy overcast with no ceiling at all. However, minutes before Her Majesty’s plane arrived, having flown direct from London, the clouds providentially lifted.

The visit was thrilling for the Inuit residents of Frobisher Bay, many of whom were and are devout Anglicans. They were really excited to see their Queen in person — the person in the Anglican Book of Common Prayer, the person to whom they sang “God Save the Queen” and the head of their church. The Inuit were touched when Queen Elizabeth spoke a few words to them in their own language.

This first of three visits to the Arctic by Her Majesty and many more by members of the Royal Family, including Prince Philip and Prince Charles on more than one occasion, generated the excitement normally associated with the moon landing. In fact, young Charles said as he stepped off the plane, “It looks like the moon!”

Her Majesty often showed her ever-present sense of humour in her visits to the North as related to me by our former Senate colleague Pat Carney, who was there. The former mayor of Iqaluit — of Frobisher Bay then — Bryan Pearson was in charge of the gift presentations. He said that they couldn’t have someone staggering up to the stage with a kayak on his shoulders, so he had an Inuk gentleman make the presentation and two others who will lift it onto the stage. This was done and the Queen studied the kayak carefully. “Do you think I would do very well in a kayak?” she asked Prime Minister Trudeau the first. “I have one myself,” he told her.

During that visit, Her Majesty also turned the sod for St. Jude’s Anglican Cathedral, the first cathedral in the huge Diocese of the Arctic, which was built by Inuit carpenters in the shape of an igloo and completed in 1972. Queen Elizabeth also donated the cathedral’s cherished and beautiful baptismal font with its soapstone base.

Tragically, the cathedral was lost to arson in November 2005, and the demoralized congregation faced the giant task of rebuilding from scratch. I remember relaying to Her Majesty the promising news that a rebuilding committee had been formed for what became a successful $12 million undertaking from our small community.

Her Majesty and the family were active supporters of St. Jude’s. Every time any member of the Royal Family, including Her Majesty, visited Iqaluit after that first visit in 1970, they visited the cathedral. In recent years, Prince Edward and the Countess of Sussex ensured that when they visited the newly opened cathedral, it would be available as a place where they would receive visitors during their time in our community.

Her Majesty has seen a lot of the Arctic since she and her family first set foot in Frobisher Bay. After time spent in what is now Nunavut’s capital, the Royal Family made the long journey to one of Canada’s very most northern communities, Resolute Bay on Cornwallis Island, which at 74 degrees north latitude is Canada’s second most northerly community after Grise Fiord. It was there in Resolute Bay in 1970 that Her Majesty said the words that are emblematic of her affinity with the Arctic. “You have not seen Canada until you have seen the North,” she said in that remote location.

After those stops in the eastern Arctic, the royal entourage flew to Tuktoyaktuk with the media following in a Hercules aircraft. When the Herc broke down in Tuk, the press was stuck there and had to make do overnighting in the school gym, but the royal party flew on to Inuvik with the media left behind. Former Iqaluit mayor Bryan Pearson — who had been travelling with the media — and former senator Pat Carney abandoned the media in Tuk and slipped down to the local float plane dock on a channel in the Mackenzie River to fly on in time to meet the royal party at their next stop in Inuvik.

Upon her arrival in Inuvik, the Queen was surprised to be met by Mr. Pearson. When she saw Mr. Pearson, she exclaimed, “Are you following me, Mr. Pearson?” He answered, “Oh, yes, Your Majesty. Just to make sure everything goes well.”

Senator Carney related how without the media, she and Mayor Pearson had the Royal Family all to themselves as they visited the local fur shop, tried on hats and jackets, and examined prints and sculptures. During that visit, the Queen met the late Chief John Tetchi of Fort McPherson. He wore his treaty uniform of blue pants with a red stripe and a jacket with yellow lapels.

We were honoured again in the North in 1994 when Queen Elizabeth visited Yellowknife to dedicate the new Legislative Assembly of the Northwest Territories and then went on to stop in Rankin Inlet, where the entire community turned out to greet her. Then she went on to Iqaluit, where she visited the cathedral for which she had turned sod. Our commissioner, the Queen’s representative in Nunavut, the Honourable Eva Aariak, said it well at a memorial service held last Sunday in her beloved St. Jude’s Cathedral. She said that Queen Elizabeth showed her great power in a quiet, dignified way of serving others with love.

I’m pleased to pay tribute to Her Majesty and acknowledge her keen interest in and understanding of the North and its Indigenous First peoples, a passion I know is shared by her son King Charles. May she rest in very well-deserved peace. Thank you. Qujannamiik.

(On motion of Senator Gagné, debate adjourned.)

The Senate proceeded to consideration of the ninth report of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology (Bill S-208, An Act respecting the Declaration on the Essential Role of Artists and Creative Expression in Canada, with amendments and observations), presented in the Senate on June 20, 2022.

Hon. Ratna Omidvar moved the adoption of the report.

She said: Honourable senators, Bill S-208 was referred to the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology for second reading on April 7, 2022. It proposes a declaration on the essential role of artists and creative expression in Canada, which would be implemented through an action plan under the direction of the Minister of Canadian Heritage.

Over the course of two meetings, the committee heard from the sponsor of Bill S-208, our colleague the Honourable Senator Bovey, in addition to stakeholders from Canada’s arts and cultural communities.

On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank those witnesses for sharing their time and stories with us.

The committee is recommending four changes through two amendments to Bill S-208 that reflect the testimony and discussions that we heard. Three changes were made to reflect the role of Canada’s two official languages in arts and culture. A new paragraph was inserted into the preamble to acknowledge that English-speaking and French-speaking artists are integral parts of the two official-language communities of Canada and should therefore have equal opportunities to pursue their artistic endeavours in order to enhance the vitality and development of English and French linguistic minority communities.

In proposed subclause 4(2)(d.1), the Minister of Official Languages was added as a mandatory party to consultations that will be undertaken by the Minister of Canadian Heritage to implement the declaration. Subclause 4(3) defined certain measures that the Minister of Canadian Heritage must consider while developing the action plan. In particular, paragraph 4(3)(g) mandates that the Minister of Canadian Heritage must “encourage greater investment in all areas related to artists, the arts and creative expression in Canada.”

In keeping with the previous amendments, an additional proposed subparagraph 4(3)(g.1) specifies that French-speaking artists, and organizations representing those artists, also be given specific consideration.

Finally, the committee is recommending an additional subparagraph, 4(3)(g.2), which specifies that artists who represent the ethnic and racial diversity, and all other diversities of Canada, and organizations that work on their behalf, also receive specific consideration for greater investments.

In addition, the committee appended three observations to the report. The first observation is that some committee members had questions that they hoped to have been answered by the Department of Canadian Heritage itself. Although invited, the committee did not hear from the department on Bill S-208, and it therefore did not have the opportunity to understand the potential impact of this legislation on department policies and programs. They were given every opportunity to appear.

Second, witnesses discussed the lack of a national cultural policy framework in Canada, despite historical attempts to develop such a policy. The committee recognized this gap and therefore included an observation stating the need for the Government of Canada to develop a national cultural policy framework in consideration with the provinces and territories, and with all art groups.

Finally, the committee heard from various witnesses that the current arts and culture funding regime is not always equitable. In particular, concerns were raised about Indigenous, racialized, disabled, senior and LGBTQ2+ artists and organizations representing them, as well as new and emerging artists. The committee acknowledges those challenges and urges the Government of Canada to ensure equitable funding for emerging artists and organizations, and established artists and organizations.

Finally, colleagues, I wish to thank Senator Bovey for her incredible leadership in bringing us to where we are now. Congratulations, Senator Bovey. Thank you.

[Translation]

Hon. Mary Jane McCallum: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak in support of Senator Patterson’s Bill S-228, An Act to amend the Constitution Act, 1867 (property qualifications of Senators). I note that Senator Patterson has a sister motion before the Senate as well, Motion No. 19, which deals with the same subject matter, and I will be ardently supporting both initiatives.

I would first like to commend Senator Patterson for reintroducing this legislation. I note this is our colleague’s third time bringing such a bill forward, championing this initiative from other parliamentarians who have come before us. I am hoping this time around, Parliament collectively will agree that the property qualifications for Senate eligibility are an outdated requirement, which is no longer consistent with modern society.

Colleagues, what Senator Patterson’s bill aims to accomplish is simple in its dual purpose: It would alter the eligibility requirements for Senate appointments by removing the requirement of owning land worth at least $4,000 in one’s home province, as well as removing the requirement of having a personal net worth of at least $4,000.

We in this chamber are not oblivious to the current state of the country and the ever-changing, unpredictable climates under which we live. We need look no further than the severe housing crisis that is impacting every region of Canada or the burgeoning levels of inflation, which are making the cost of living untenable for many in Canada. In considering today’s economic and housing realities, we must acknowledge that they represent massive barriers that are gatekeeping many Canadians from the possibility of serving their country in this chamber.

Colleagues, these property requirements are elitist and antiquated. They serve no purpose in today’s society beyond entrenching a further unnecessary divide between the haves and have-nots.

Four thousand dollars today, based on inflation calculators, would have equalled well over $100,000 when this requirement was enshrined into our Constitution. It was intended to ensure that those who took a seat in this august chamber were of the very upper crust of society, the propertied elite. Even though the value of $4,000 is not what it used to be, the sheer existence of this requirement still precludes countless Canadians, the majority of whom make up the middle and lower classes of this country, from holding the very position that we do. Based on what — solely because they rent or do not hold title for their dwelling?

I would hold, colleagues, that this chamber works best when it is truly reflective of the population of Canada. After all, we have long argued that diversity is our strength as a nation. The working class and the economically marginalized are voices that have had very little space in this chamber since Confederation. The deeply entrenched and colonial system we work under has all but assured that. However, would we in Canada not benefit from having this chamber be a better representative of the country at large?

Senator Patterson put this issue into clear perspective when speaking of his home region of Nunavut. As Senator Patterson has described, he estimates that 80% of the people in his territory would not be eligible to apply to become a senator because they do not own land. I cannot fathom excluding four out of every five people from being eligible to become a senator simply based on whether they own $4,000 worth of property.

Honourable senators, the property requirement is of particular concern for me because of what it means for First Nations in Canada. Many of you may not realize this, but countless individuals who live on reserve are ineligible for this position because they do not actually own title for the land on which they live. This is not by choice, of course. This is a by-product of colonization, which has relegated First Nations onto reserves, which are federally held land.

This issue is best described by Ms. Francyne Joe, the former president of the Native Women’s Association of Canada, who is currently doing important work with the National Association of Friendship Centres. Beyond serving in such high-profile roles, she has long been an outspoken advocate for First Nations, Inuit and Métis women, highlighted by her work on the Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls file. While she had once pondered applying to become a senator as a strong and competent voice for a highly marginalized population, she was stopped short by the property qualification.

In Francyne Joe’s own words, this was her experience:

My name is Francyne Joe, and I am a Shackan First Nations member . . . located in BC’s Central Interior.

. . . I researched the process of putting my name forward for a Senate Appointment as there is an open seat for BC and I felt that I would be a good candidate for such a role. I meet most of the necessary criteria such as age, citizenship, non-partisanship, knowledge, good personal qualities and residency . . . . However, the eligibility criteria related to a qualification of property are a barrier.

As an Indigenous woman . . . I am disappointed by this criteria -- and I question if its truly necessary and the reasons behind the criteria.

When my mother married, the Indian Act automatically transferred her to her husband’s band, Shackan -- and when she divorced, she had to re-apply to return to her band, Lower Nicola. For funding purposes, I remained a Shackan band member -- I receive no housing benefits because there is very limited land on Shackan reserve available. My mother received property on [the Lower Nicola] reserve -- it passed to her when my grandparents died. It is a good size property located within minutes of Merritt, BC -- about 10 acres that was used for farming and ranching . . . .

My grandparents had this land for decades and it was passed on to my mom and her brother. Houses were built on the property for my grandparents and their kids; an indoor arena was erected for rodeos which supported the agriculture part of my grandparents’ business; a large garden was planted annually to produce for family and community; corrals, barns and workshops were built -- there is even a small family cemetery on the property. But to a realtor, the property is located on-reserve so there is no value and therefore, I would not be able to use in my application for a Senate role.

My mom would like me to transfer to [Lower Nicola] then she could put me on the Certificate of Possession documents as joint-owner, but the difficulty is that the property needs some work which requires money. If I put monies into our home property which means so much to me and my two children, then I cannot purchase off-reserve property to clearly meet the eligibility requirements to be a Senator. But this property obviously has value to myself, my family and even to other community-members.

As you can see from this personal story, colleagues, the currently held property qualification requirements pose an extra barrier for First Nations’ entry into the Senate.

Honourable senators, there had been much hand-wringing when legislation to remove this barrier was first brought before Parliament. This was largely due to the onerous threshold that needed to be met federally and provincially to fulfill the requirements of the Constitution’s amending formula.

However, greater clarity and flexibility have been given on this matter thanks to the Supreme Court of Canada. In 2014, the SCC gave their much-anticipated reply to the reference question regarding Senate reform. As was stated in the SCC decision:

We conclude that the net worth requirement (s. 23(4)) can be repealed by Parliament under the unilateral federal amending procedure. However, a full repeal of the real property requirement (s. 23(3)) requires the consent of Quebec’s legislative assembly, under the special arrangements procedure. Indeed, a full repeal of that provision would also constitute an amendment in relation to s. 23(6), which contains a special arrangement applicable only to the province of Quebec.

As Senator Patterson clarified in his March 24 speech on this bill:

. . . the decision states Parliament can, indeed, unilaterally remove the net worth requirement for all senators and the real property requirement for every senator except those in Quebec, which this bill aims to do. We do not need to invoke the amending formula and involve provinces, apart from the special situation . . . in Quebec.

Colleagues, throughout my tenure in the Senate, great pride has been taken in the ongoing modernization and rejuvenation of the upper chamber. The Senate has arguably become more accessible and more inclusive. It is up to us to continue this march, and supporting this bill represents an important step on that journey.

The property requirement is an outdated relic of the past. As Senator Patterson has argued, this is no longer an appropriate or relevant measure of the fitness of a person to serve in the Senate. Not only is it arbitrary in this day and age, it also happens to represent one of the biggest, if not the biggest, systemic barrier for Canadians applying to serve in this chamber.

It is disconcerting when I think about the number of Canadians who are ineligible to become a senator based solely on this single requirement. It frustrates me even more when it is evident that those who continue to be excluded from applying are those who historically have been — and continue to be — among the most marginalized and least represented voices in the Senate of Canada.

Honourable senators, the path forward to righting this wrong and correcting this antiquated rule is before us. The highest court in this country has provided a blueprint with which we can accomplish this feat with relative ease. I urge you to support Senator Patterson’s Bill S-228 and its sister motion so that we can remove a large barrier to entry into the Senate of Canada, thereby enriching it for generations to come. Kinanâskomitin, thank you.

Senator Patterson: Bravo!

Hon. Ratna Omidvar: Yes, please.

Would Senator McCallum take a short question?