Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 61 - 75 of 87
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
You're absolutely right. We have actually reached out directly to health centres and to health providers. Sometimes that information doesn't necessarily get back to leadership. We can work on getting that information there, and then directly to the public.
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
I would ask Valerie to step in on that. A briefing was given to all parliamentarians this morning with some very important details, so I'd ask her to elaborate a bit on it. It's a very important question.
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
Given the options we have before us, in the case that there is an outbreak and there is a necessity to self-isolate, we're looking at the option of having isolation tents. We're looking at the ability to have increased personnel to specifically address overcrowding.
It is unacceptable. I think all Canadians need to realize the level of overcrowding that exists in indigenous communities. We have made historic investments, but given the timeline that you're describing the most expedient thing is to increase our capacity and to have a sensitive and appropriate approach, in particular to handwashing and the capacity to self-isolate. We know the communities are more vulnerable. That's why we're dedicating additional resources to that.
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
Again, Gord, we have a staged approach. As the Prime Minister has mentioned, money is not an issue. This is about getting surge capacity in place and having a staged approach. If and when issues occur in community, it has to be appropriate to the community. We have to have that proper level of engagement in a community.
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
Can you clarify that? Are you talking about Kashechewan with respect to the coronavirus or with respect to potential flooding?
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
Again, we're engaging with every community. Kashechewan is not the only community at risk. Should communities be at risk, we'll be prepared to intervene in a way that isn't simply with respect to flooding, but also with respect to medical needs if the tandem occurrence of an outbreak occurs, which would obviously be extremely—
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
I think the issue you raise is an immensely compelling and distressing one. It was highlighted most notably in the murdered and missing indigenous women's report. In fact, we can talk about different departmental responsibilities.
The preparedness for that falls under Minister Bennett's mandate. It doesn't prevent me from speaking to it. Clearly, we know from the report that being accompanied when travelling to access shelters is a key awareness in communities and of capital importance. Given the statistics you raised, and it is clear in the public mind that we need to address these issues on a community-wide basis. That includes clear issues with respect to policing, which is mentioned in my mandate letter and Minister Blair's mandate letter, and issues with respect to accompaniment in various medical situations when women are most vulnerable and when travelling. This is something we have addressed. There is also the need for an increased number of shelters on and off reserve, which we've proceeded to invest in and will continue to do so.
This is a multi-pronged approach because of the precarity of indigenous women in particular to the violence that accompanies and is characteristic of human trafficking. It is one of the issues that we have focused quite heavily on in our upcoming action plan, but also as a whole-of-government approach to address this entirely unacceptable situation.
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
There is broad funding. I think people should await the action plan, but even before the action plan is announced this coming summer, there has been money invested in a number of these initiatives.
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
MP Battiste, you raise a very important aspect of the mandate that isn't necessarily written in my mandate letter, which is making sure that non-indigenous Canadians are part of this and educating all of Canada as to the issues that have underpinned and marred the relationship and prevented it, in some ways, from moving forward. Education and communicating to non-indigenous Canadians that this is part of who we are and part of our identity is key.
I want to salute your initiative and your dedication to doing this, even before you were an MP. It is key to moving this forward. If we're only doing it among leadership, we're not exactly succeeding. We may be advancing, but we're not succeeding. It has to be among peoples. That's the main reminder that all of us need to take home.
In terms of funds, I think you'll note that in the 2021 main estimates, the amount for elementary and secondary education was $2 billion. Financially, as I mentioned in my introductory remarks, we've closed the gap in education. It's a very important social determinant of health, and key to closing the educational aspect of the socio-economic gap. With that, the success rates are amazing. There are amazing stories about indigenous children—who should never have been in that situation—in control of their educational system. You highlighted that.
There's a very tainted history, as everyone knows, with the educational system and residential schools for indigenous children. When controlled and administered in a culturally appropriate way that is sensitive to community needs, the outcomes are the same if not better. The experience with the Mi'kmaq is one example—hopefully, one of many.
These are key to who we are and key to whom we believe we are as a nation, but more importantly also as a community, making sure that we don't fail another generation of indigenous children.
I mentioned the financial support. I think it's for all to see in the main estimates. I won't go on further about that, but it's making sure that education is done in the language and is culturally appropriate. It isn't simply something you do on a Friday afternoon when everyone's tired. It's a core part of the education. It's key.
It's key to—what people use as a catchphrase but a very important one—“decolonizing”. It's about realizing what the history of Canada and indigenous peoples is. With that comes power. With that comes confidence and success, in the way that first nations dictate the pace. Obviously, uncertainty comes with that, but that's fine. It's a sign of who we are and how we move that relationship forward.
As well, educating—and you touched on that—non-indigenous Canadians is essential. It's why some of the truth and reconciliation reports touched on private actors like institutions—university institutions—in endorsing language courses. Everyone needs to realize that we're all on the same land, and no one's going anywhere, but if we want to advance the relationship, it has to be done with mutual respect, co-operation and friendship.
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
I acknowledge how hard you're working to get me out of a job.
Some hon. members: Oh, oh!
Hon. Marc Miller: I admire the game, not necessarily the results, but you'll appreciate that I'm doing the same thing.
I think we have to compare apples with apples here. It's key, because it leads into the statement you made.
A number of the FTEs reflect the transfer from the first nations and Inuit health branch from Health Canada as part of the disaggregation, not only of Crown-Indigenous Relations but Indigenous Services Canada, and making sure that first nations health is treated in a culturally appropriate way. So it came under my ministry. We need to reflect that, as well.
As to the other numbers, I guess what we would say is that the penetration rate of the funds into the communities is very, very high. I would like to turn to them, but I will turn to my officials to give you a little more clarity on that.
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
To the extent that the services and administration haven't been involved—like in FNHA or in territories—we have had an excellent response rate from provinces. We have joint protocols in many measures to augment and coordinate among each other. You don't want authorities tripping over each other. With responsible leadership, I think everyone is cognizant of the fact that we have to rely on science and to check our operational controls and our capacity to surge.
I won't speculate as to unwillingness. I think everyone is on the same page and knows the emergency and urgency of this pandemic and at the very least how to slow it. There is good to very good communication among governments to ensure that communities in need get the services they need when they need them. Should they not, we are prepared to step in aggressively.
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
We have a wide variety of measures we can put in place when these issues arise. The very strict standards around water are such that issues arise more frequently. Correspondingly, we respond quickly. If you look at what happened in Fort Severn, we're working quite quickly to thaw the pipe that froze.
These things do arise, and we're ready to act quite quickly.
As to the inventory, if we have a second, I'll let my staff respond to the inventory.
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
Thank you, Chair.
I want to start by acknowledging that we are gathered here today on the traditional and unceded territory of the Algonquin peoples.
I know that this directly impacted many of you in the room today, as it impacted the communities you represent, and the lives of your constituents.
The conversations that happened in Smithers with Minister Bennett are a positive and vital step, but there's no doubt that there's more work to do, work that many of you in this room know well as members of this important parliamentary committee. There's a lot of work to be done in addressing the underlying concerns of the Wet'suwet'en and the resulting solidarity actions that took place across the country.
However, I'm glad that together we can demonstrate a peaceful, achievable resolution. I believe the easy way is not always the right way. Sometimes using force is a sign of weakness. Over the past few weeks, we've seen the result of ignorance, fear and lack of understanding in vitriolic messages and comments online, through stories of individuals being targeted in public and private, and we saw that not far from here in Ottawa. An indigenous youth group had to move their planned weekly gathering due to the receipt of a death threat.
I think this shows that we have a long way to go when it comes to learning the dark parts of the history of this unreconciled country and its peoples, and truly making an effort to learn from one another and listen.
I've said this before and I'll continue to say it: When we don't have an open and honest dialogue, we simply can't move forward together.
Consistent, open and respectful dialogue is paramount to achieve peace, cooperation and prosperity in this country for all peoples.
It's in this spirit of peace and co-operation that I gathered with members of the Kanyen’kehá:ka along the rail tracks in Tyendinaga, as members will know. We pursued an open dialogue and made concerted efforts to move towards a peaceful resolution. Modest but important progress was made through this dialogue.
However, there was an immense amount of suspicion towards my presence—fear it was a ruse and that the police would move in. It's not every day that people are surrounded by police, and the reactions are normal. Parts of the conversation with the leadership of the community, elders and community members, including women and children, were very difficult, very painful and very personal. Upsetting stories were shared about this country's troubling treatment of indigenous peoples.
These are very serious issues which demand our attention, and have demanded it for hundreds of years, and there's no place in this discussion for rhetoric and vitriol.
The question I have found myself asking in the last few weeks is this: are we going to do things the way we have always done them, which has brought us to this point in our relationship, or do we take a new approach that engages in a true government-to-government relationship?
My greatest challenge in the past month in particular, but in the relationship in general, is trust. It prevents the best and most well-thought-out initiatives from moving forward. It is clear that our work must earn that trust over time.
In looking towards building a better future where we earn that trust, I believe it's important to acknowledge the past. For almost 500 years, indigenous peoples have faced discrimination in every aspect of their lives. The Crown, in part, has prevented a true equal partnership from developing with indigenous peoples, imposing instead a relationship based on colonial, paternalistic ways of thinking and doing. This approach has resulted in a legacy of devastation, pain and suffering, and it's not acceptable.
Many of us know where this has gotten us: a broken child and family system where indigenous children up to the age of 14 make up over 50% of kids in foster care even though they represent 7.7% of all Canadian children; shocking rates of suicide among indigenous youth, causing untold pain and hurt that will plague families and communities for generations to come; untenable housing situations where water that is unsafe to drink or even bathe in comes out of the taps; and communities that don't have reliable access to roads, health centres, or even schools.
When we formed government 4 years ago, we made many significant promises including on some of these areas I just touched upon.
We have delivered on much of that but the most important lesson we learned was that everything has to be done in true partnership. That Canada will succeed when we follow the voices of those whom we have ignored and disrespected for far too long, and those who lead communities across this country.
We know that there is no quick fix for the decades of systemic discrimination that indigenous peoples in Canada have faced. But our government is committed to putting in the time, energy and resources to right past wrongs and build a better way forward for future generations.
We do our best to undertake this work in a way that departs from much of our shared history—a history in which the inherent rights, leadership and cultural vitality have not been respected as they should have been.
Our approach is founded on partnership and co-development and is anchored in listening to indigenous leaders, elders, youth and community members and working to support their attainment of their goals based on their priorities.
Since 2016, we've invested $21 billion in the priorities of indigenous partners, priorities that have been set by indigenous partners, and together we've made some progress, but we still have a long way to close the unacceptable socio-economic gap that exists between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples.
For hundreds of years, indigenous peoples have been calling on the Canadian government to recognize and affirm their jurisdiction over their own affairs, to have control and agency over their land, housing, education, governance system and child and family services. Self-determination improves the well-being and prosperity of indigenous communities, and that's something all Canadians should strive to support.
There is no question that self-determination is a better way forward.
Self-governing indigenous peoples have a proven track record of greater socio-economic success. More children are completing high school, fewer people are unemployed, and health outcomes are much better. Indigenous-led initiatives are more successful, as we have seen time and time again.
There is a critical need to support nation and community-led success in every indigenous community in Canada, not just in education, but also in health care, water and resource management, child and family services, in short, in all sectors.
This is why our government continues to work on shifting policies to recognize the inherent right of self-government for first nations, Inuit and Métis. That means moving to novel models of indigenous government and supporting indigenous communities to assert their rights.
We are working to support first nations to opt out of sections of the Indian Act in areas such as land, environment, resource management and elections. As an example, we're working with indigenous institutions in first nations to develop the tools they need to drive local economic development, empower their communities and promote prosperity.
Since 2019, nine first nations have begun operating under their community-ratified land codes through the framework agreement on first nations land management and the First Nations Land Management Act. In addition, 18 first nations have joined the 264 other first nations asserting jurisdiction in the area of fiscal governance by opting into the First Nations Fiscal Management Act.
Self-determination is key to unlocking economic potential, creating opportunities for growth and closing socio-economic gaps. We know that with advancing self-determination, the potential for success is enormous—success of indigenous peoples and, frankly, all of Canada.
To get there, we need to understand that recognizing and affirming rights is a first step in finding a way forward. We need to support indigenous partners to identify our challenges and then we need to rise to those challenges. Finally, we need to recognize that the most important actions we can take are to listen to the hard truths, embrace change and welcome creative ideas. A transformation like that will take determination, persistence, patience and truth telling.
The work ahead of us will be difficult. As I mentioned, this path will require a lot from us. We will have to work in true partnership and listen, even when the truth will be hard to hear. We will have to continue to communicate, even when we disagree. We will need to continue to collaborate and look for creative ways to move forward, as well as new paths to healing and true understanding.
We've all seen what happens when we fail to maintain dialogue. This leads to mistrust and confusion, which can cause conflict and hinder our common journey. I want to be clear: it is up to the rights holders to determine who speaks for them about their indigenous rights and title. We will continue to work toward continuing these conversations. Despite all these challenges, I know that the hard work ahead of us is well worth the effort.
Together, we can build a better Canada, and that's what we're going to do. It will be a country in which healthy, prosperous and self-reliant indigenous nations will be key partners. We have the opportunity to learn from our shared history, to share our pain and even our joy, and to do the work that will result in a country where everyone can succeed.
I look forward to working with my colleagues on all sides to realize this essential work and enormous potential. It requires the participation of all Canadians.
I look forward to answering any questions you may have.
Meegwetch.
View Marc Miller Profile
Lib. (QC)
I think you are familiar, Jaime, with some of the hereditary structures that exist in Mi'kmaq communities and some of the challenges that have been faced there with respect to elected band councils and, in fact, with some of the progress that has been made. It is absolutely uneven throughout the country
I think, as Carolyn summarized, some progress has been made out west in starting to create the basis for engagement with hereditary leadership. In the country, the Indian Act-imposed band council system is viewed in many indigenous communities as colonialist and paternalistic. It has removed, and the Government of Canada has consciously contributed to remove, structures that existed well before the existence of Canada that are highly democratic in nature and have a very rich history.
As a country and as a nation that wants to move forward with what we call reconciliation, we cannot ignore those voices, conscious of the fact that at times the government, as I mentioned earlier, has been deliberate in dismantling those structures. In some cases we have had very little engagement, if any. I, myself, have been involved in opening dialogues with the Haudenosaunee Confederacy. They are modest. They tend to be not in the public sphere. But there is a lot of work to be done. There is an immense amount of complexity in that relationship because we're talking about many nations that cross the U.S. border as well. It is something that has created within certain communities, in fact, the crisis of legitimacy. This isn't to say that elected band councils are not fierce defenders of their communities. They are. It just has created a reality where there is sometimes a perceived sense of illegitimacy that has contributed to frustrate not only the relationship but the ability to work in partnership. It is something that we are realizing, probably more slowly than we should, but we are realizing it and we need to address fundamental issues that Carolyn had to face over a four-day period with respect to lands and title that had been recognized in the Delgamuukw decision. Simply saying to yourself that you're only going to engage with this particular band council because it suits your needs is highly utilitarian in thinking and not the right way to approach things.
There are some communities that are entirely comfortable with an elected system, and there are some communities that wish to do a different job and move forward. That's why we have all those instruments that I named in my opening remarks. For some communities, that doesn't work and we have to realize that and get creative and see how we come together. This will all contribute to stability, good governance and respect for the relationship, which is perhaps the element of respect and truth that is missing. But I think it is the right way to advance the nation. It can be complicated. It can be messy. But we can't sit here and say we're going to go dictate the terms on which we engage, whether it's rights recognition frameworks or otherwise. We have to realize that in some communities and some nations there is a treaty-based relationship that communities are demanding to be respected and in others there's a much older and some others a much newer relationship.
There is an immense amount of nuance, and I think you hit the nail on the head in asking that question, Jaime, because it goes to the complex nature of that relationship and the steps we need to take to move forward.
Results: 61 - 75 of 87 | Page: 5 of 6

|<
<
1
2
3
4
5
6
>
>|
Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data