THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Wednesday, November 8, 2023
The Standing Senate Committee on Indigenous Peoples met with videoconference this day at 6:47 p.m. [ET] to examine the federal government’s constitutional, treaty, political and legal responsibilities to First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples and any other subject concerning Indigenous peoples.
Senator Brian Francis (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: I would like to begin by acknowledging that the land on which we gather is the traditional, ancestral and unceded territory of the Anishinaabe Algonquin Nation and is now home to many other First Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples from across Turtle Island.
I am Mi’kmaw Senator Brian Francis from Epekwitk, also known as Prince Edward Island, and I am the chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Indigenous Peoples.
Today is National Indigenous Veterans Day and, later this week, on November 11, we commemorate Remembrance Day. I want to take a moment to say wela’lioq — thank you — to all service members and veterans for their service, bravery and selflessness. I also want to honour those who lost their lives, including First Nations, Inuit and Metis men and women who died while protecting freedoms and privileges that, in some cases, they did not enjoy in Canada. Let us remember.
I will now ask committee members in attendance to introduce themselves by stating their names and province or territory.
Senator Hartling: I am Senator Nancy Hartling from New Brunswick.
I want to thank you, Senator Francis, for reminding us about the service that the Aboriginal people gave in the wars. I appreciate that. Thank you.
Senator Martin: Welcome. Senator Yonah Martin from British Columbia.
Senator Sorensen: Karen Sorensen, Alberta, Banff National Park, Treaty 7.
Senator Audette: [Innu-aimun spoken.] Welcome. Hello. Michèle Audette.
[Translation]
Senator Dupuis: Good evening, and welcome to the committee. Renée Dupuis, senatorial division of The Laurentides, Quebec.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, for reminding us of the very important contribution of Indigenous veterans, which has not been fully recognized in Canadian history.
[English]
The Chair: Thank you, senators.
Today, we are continuing our study into the effectiveness of the Canadian Human Rights Framework in the promotion, protection and realization of the rights of Indigenous peoples. Specifically, we are considering whether existing mechanisms could be improved or whether new ones are required, including Indigenous-specific ones.
In this panel, we will hear from Anemki Wedom. Thank you for joining us today. I now invite you to give opening remarks of roughly five minutes.
Anemki Wedom, as an individual: [Indigenous language spoken.]
Mr. Chairperson, I’m joining you from the unceded territory of the Algonquin nation. I want to offer my deep respects. It holds a special place in my heart. This is where I was given my traditional name, Anemki Wedom. Whenever I come to this territory, I’m so grateful because my traditional name came from this territory, from the water walker, the late Josephine Mandamin from Ontario. I wanted to acknowledge this territory and give special thanks for allowing me to be a guest in this unceded land.
I do a lot of volunteer work in addressing murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls and two-spirited people. I’m a volunteer member with the Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs coalition for MMIW. I also participate as a volunteer member for the First Nations Justice Council, the Women’s Advisory Committee for women’s public legal education, as well as youth.
I’m originally from the Kamloops territory. This evening, I’m standing on the shoulders of my grandfather Andy Manuel. I’m standing on the shoulders of my father Lawrence Thomas, and I’m standing on the shoulders of my cousin, Kwemcxenalqs Manuel, all of whom were murdered, all of whom suffered a brutal death. As well, I’m standing on the shoulders of my auntie Margaret Thomas who suffered a brutal death. Her body was dismembered and scattered throughout a field in our community and was treated as if her life had no value. This evening, I want to honour them, and I stand on their shoulders tonight to be able to express my reflections, suggestions and ideas moving forward to address this challenge that we have.
I’ve been involved for many years in wanting to advance the dignity of our women, our girls and our two-spirited people through many different forms and many different places across the country. One of the things that I feel strongly about is that the current human rights law does not honour our women, our girls and our two-spirited people. There is a critical lack of an intersectoral approach by human rights. It does not embrace our collective rights as women.
Canada professed to lift up the UNDRIP legislation to honour the human rights, and it is often portrayed as an aspirational document. However, if you were to read the legislation, and if you were to review the initiatives on how they are implementing UNDRIP, there is no reference whatsoever to Article 22, which requires governments to pay special attention to women, youth and persons with disabilities, as well as Article 44, which says we have the right to determination. As a rights and titleholder myself, as a Secwepemc woman from the unceded territory of the Kamloops te Secwepemc, the lack of meaningful engagement of the rights and titleholders from the community levels in advancing our human rights is sadly missing. It’s sadly missing in the processes that exist.
Although we have an MMIW secretariat, that really needs to become independent of government. Why should we have that secretariat part of Crown Relations when they are the biggest colonizer of our people through the ongoing systemic discrimination of the Indian Act and the ongoing sex inequities that are perpetrated through the Indian Act legislation? One of the things I really urge the committee to consider in tabling your final report on this study is removing that secretariat from Crown Relations so that they can become an independent commission and could engage more experts to address the many inequalities and ongoing inequities for Indigenous women, girls and two-spirited people wanting to exercise our human rights and to lift them up.
I would offer to this standing committee the recommendation to look to our neighbours in the States. A couple of weeks ago, I had the privilege of participating in a summit with tribes in Seattle and Spokane. They hosted their second annual summit on murdered and missing Indigenous persons with tribes in the States. We have a lot of young women and women that are sex trafficked out of Vancouver down into the States because we have a port authority there, and it’s very close to the border. It’s very easy for our women and girls to be trafficked down into the tribes in the States. One of the things that I appreciated about the work that the tribes are doing in the States is they enacted federal legislation through the State of Washington to establish an independent task force addressing MMIW across all states in the United States. They also have state task forces. What I would like to see in Canada is a federal task force similar to the one down in the States.
In how it’s struck as a federal commission in the States, they addressed the issues of the lack of adequate law enforcement and investigative resources, and it is one of their subcommittees. They also incorporate, as part of their committee, a committee that takes a critical look at policies and programs and the vacuums that exist. It also has a committee that addresses policing and law enforcement. It includes another committee around criminal jurisdiction and prosecution as well as sharing of information through federal and state levels. They have a separate committee that has a special focus on victim family resources from an Indigenous gender context. Another committee they have included is a legislative committee that monitors various policies and legislation that the American government implements in addressing murdered and missing persons.
Earlier this year, in March of 2023, the relentlessness of a staff sergeant exposed brutal violence that was perpetrated on young Indigenous women in Prince George. There was a whole ring that entailed the judge, police and the mayor, as well as local officials, who were part of a ring to abuse young girls. A judge was charged, and he ended up going to prison. He ended up dying in prison. The sad thing about all of that is that all of the information around that investigation was covered up. Through the relentlessness of that particular staff sergeant, who fought for 14 years, the truth about the way in which the RCMP had literally covered up the complaints that were submitted to the civilian commission of the RCMP was exposed.
We have had so many negative responses and lack of cultural responsiveness, not only by law enforcement but even in the inequities of victims’ services.
The multiple forms of oppression that our women are facing have escalated with the opioid crisis. That has become another tool to destroy and to kill our young women. Our young women are preyed upon by drug dealers. In fact, my cousin Kwemcxenalqs was killed in the Downtown East Side last summer, and within a span of two weeks, there were four Indigenous women killed in Downtown Eastside Vancouver.
The youngest was 13 years old. She was a foster child who ran away from her foster home because she was being abused in that particular foster home, only to be found murdered in a single rooming house in the Downtown Eastside Vancouver. The drug dealer who killed her was well known to the police. He had a long history of preying on young Indigenous women and girls, as well as Asian women, in the Downtown Eastside. The police had gone to his apartment on three separate occasions trying to find this young girl. Ironically, the third time they went back to the rooming house, they discovered her body, along with three other bodies in that single rooming house.
We’re in dire straits, with no adequate protections or adequate law enforcement and/or implementation of effective investigative procedures. There is a real lack of adequate support for the families. Who do they go to when they have a loved one missing? Who is there to advocate for them and to help them understand? What are your rights when a coroner comes and investigates the death of a loved one? What are your rights? All of those complex processes. So many of our families don’t have the support that they should have access to in order to access justice.
I’ll leave it there for now. I have a lot more to say, but I’m sure you have lots of questions.
The Chair: Thank you very much, Ms. Wedom.
I will now open the floor to questions from senators, and I’ll start by asking the first question. How can a national body draw upon community-based processes and expertise, such as restorative justice or involving elders?
Ms. Wedom: I have a real problem with the current human rights processes because they really focus on individual rights as opposed to collective rights. There is a real lack of an intersectoral approach when we’re dealing with human rights, both at the federal level and at the provincial level. If our human rights embraced the international conventions, such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, as part of the principles for the implementation of our protection and advancement of our human rights, that would be a much more powerful approach. Right now, they are weak. A lot of our folks aren’t even utilizing those avenues for complaints, so how can we entrust the process that is already broken?
The Chair: Thank you for that.
Senator Sorensen: Thank you for being here.
Based on where you have expended your energies and time in your life, you are certainly among like-minded people. One of the mandates of the Senate is to give voice to underrepresented groups, like Indigenous people, visible minorities and women. That is our job. We’re happy to have you here today to educate us further.
My question is somewhat similar to Senator Francis’s. You have an impressive resumé, but you didn’t comment on the work you have done with the YWCA Metro Vancouver. I know the YWCA is a very vocal advocate for issues for women, girls and gender-diverse people. In most communities, I think that is the focus.
Ms. Wedom: I can certainly share some insights in terms of the work I do with YWCA.
Senator Sorensen: That is great and is what I’m asking. Not unlike Senator Francis’s question, for non-profits like that, what are some of the programs they offer that other organizations and the Government of Canada might be able to learn from? It’s such a grassroots effort at a community-wide level, from my experience.
Ms. Wedom: The YWCA Vancouver is in a very fortunate position compared to most YWCAs because they have a social enterprise. I think through having a social enterprise, it allows them to enhance their services and programs for grassroots women, particularly in the Downtown Eastside through YWCA Crabtree Corner. I think that’s one of the advantages they have.
The lack of real outreach on the part of Women and Gender Equality, WAGE, which is the federal ministry for women — at one time, they were decentralized, so they had regional offices across the country. They were able to play a much more animating role in reaching out to women’s groups to support them in accessing resources to address violence and/or other issues impacting upon women and girls.
There is a real disconnect federally not only between Crown Relations and — I still refer to them as Status of Women Canada — and/or these other departments, even Justice. Justice Canada used to have an Indigenous gender component to their Aboriginal justice program. They wiped it out. Crown Relations used to have an Indigenous gender unit, and they wiped it out. So there are no avenues at the federal level where it’s really lifting up the Indigenous women’s input in the advancement of policies and reforming legislation that can ensure equity of access to justice, employment and training initiatives, and inequalities in the way the administration of justice is not applied in a holistic fashion that it can and should.
Senator Sorensen: In that response, I have that you have an Indigenous Relations manager. There was a specific role to deal with the issues that they were dealing with. You find currently in the federal government that those roles have been eliminated or have just been mashed into other roles.
Out of curiosity, what is the social enterprise? The Y in Banff operates as a hotel.
Ms. Wedom: Yes. YWCA hotel.
Senator Sorensen: There you go. Stay at the Y.
The Chair: Ms. Wedom, in your opinion, why have Indigenous human rights mechanisms not been established to date?
Ms. Wedom: The impacts of colonialism run very deep within our community and external to our communities. You not only have Indigenous women’s human rights being violated on some reserves — I wouldn’t say all reserves. There is the lack of implementation on matrimonial real property rights, for example, where women are fleeing from violence. There isn’t a capacity to support First Nations to implement matrimony real property by-laws, for example. There is a disconnect in that regard on reserve.
You have the ongoing legacy impacts of the institutions of genocide. I’m a third generation survivor of the institution of genocide, and that internalized violence has become escalated because of the opiate crisis. Three of my cousins — all young people — died through opiate addiction. All of their parents are survivors of the institution of genocide. This whole legacy impact has not been adequately addressed, both external and internal within our communities.
On top of that, the lack of accountability on the part of human rights bodies is deplorable. In British Columbia, one of the things I am excited about is that they are going to be passing data legislation which will give us a better opportunity to critically look at how systemic racism and discrimination operates within the provincial ministries. We need to have something like that implemented federally.
The Chair: Thank you for that.
Senator Hartling: Thank you very much for being with us tonight and for the experience you’re bringing here. I’m a great fan of the YW. We have one in New Brunswick. They do good work.
I, and a lot of us, see that gender-based violence has definitely gotten worse in Canada and the world, particularly for Indigenous women. You have certainly gone through a lot of loss yourself and know this first hand. There is also the disconnect you mentioned of the government. Maybe Status of Women Canada was a great resource to us back in the day, but it seems to be less available to us.
Can you make some recommendations to our committee as to what our committee could maybe help to move forward or put in recommendations? I’m thinking of things that you could see that we might be more mindful of.
Ms. Wedom: I think the idea of using the Indigenous task force down in the States as a prototype would be a really good model because that task force has the ability to cross jurisdictional boundaries, which is a huge impediment for a lot of our women who are impacted by violence. I also think that it has to be properly resourced, and it needs be sustainable so it can affect policy and legislative reform across the federal government and interjurisdictionally.
I would also like to see a specialized Crown prosecutor’s team that specifically looks at addressing gender-based violence within each of the regions. Canada has jurisdiction for the Criminal Code, so we would need to have a federal task force. On the provincial side, it doesn’t matter.
We have high rates of Indigenous women and girls that continue to be escalated and imprisoned. The ombudsperson for prisons tabled his report nine years in a row and said we need to fix this problem. The ombudsperson’s roles and the human rights roles that have been suggested and contemplated and were recommended through the inquiry report, they have no clout to affect the jurisdictional impediments, nor any clout to really affect departmental change.
We need a shift of that colonial mindset that is embedded across federal governments in terms of the way in which they don’t have an Indigenous gendered lens to really enhance and invoke programming and services that are going to really lift up Indigenous women and girls and two-spirited people.
Senator Hartling: Who has the clout? You mentioned clout and the ability to make these changes. Whose hands is the clout in?
Ms. Wedom: They ought to enact federal legislation to make that happen. That’s what they did with the tribes in the States with their task force. They enacted federal legislation in the White House so that it could affect federal legislation and policy reforms. When we look at these human rights bodies, even if you were to read the federal human rights report and look at their last annual report, how much are Indigenous women even mentioned in that annual report? We are invisible.
[Translation]
Senator Dupuis: You’ve said very clearly how the human rights commissions that currently exist don’t take women’s collective rights into account. Instead, they focus on individuals. You also reminded us that, for years, these commissions, including the Canadian Human Rights Commission, had no authority to examine complaints, because the law prohibited filing a complaint if you were a member of a First Nation or a First Nations community.
In 2000, a report was made public, because four people had been commissioned to review the Canadian Human Rights Act. One of the conclusions of this report was precisely to abolish this prohibition on filing complaints.
Does this mean that, from 2008 to 2023, in your experience, there have been no major changes in the way these commissions, and the Canadian Human Rights Commission in particular, operate? Do I understand you correctly that this is one of the reasons why you are saying that there should be an independent commission to examine the collective rights of First Nations, Indigenous peoples, including Indigenous women? Have I understood you correctly?
[English]
Ms. Wedom: Yes. Absolutely. It is critical that we have experts in different areas — forensic experts, lawyers, Indigenous women leaders, a mixture that would make up these expert independent commissions — so that, through their collective wisdom and knowledge, they can really advance and do a paradigm shift that needs to happen systemically, federally, provincially, municipally and at the First Nation community levels.
We have members who are reluctant to even file complaints with human rights particularly on reserve because of their fear of being denied future rights and benefits. When we are dealing with situations of internalized violence within our communities, there needs to be safe space for those women girls so that they have anonymity, and if they choose to want to exercise their rights to file a human rights complaint, they would not be intimidated or threatened by whoever it is that may be in the elected positions, because in certain instances they have no recourse. If they are a single mother and they require to hang on to their home in their community, if they are fleeing violence and they have no matrimonial real property rights, it starts that whole cycle where the children then become abducted into the child welfare system. The women end up becoming couch surfers and homeless. They lose their home because their children are abducted. We need those safe places so that they can be assured to have access to justice.
[Translation]
Senator Dupuis: From my experience working with First Nations communities, I see that women in these communities are very busy working in all kinds of services, such as education, health, and others. In your opinion, if we’re talking about creating a commission on the rights of Indigenous peoples, when you say that the process should be led by Indigenous people, should it involve these women who are on the ground, in the communities, and who are likely to develop a system that will be respectful of the customs and values of the communities?
[English]
Ms. Wedom: Absolutely. British Columbia has 27 distinct tribal nations, each with their own unique tribal identities, culture and language. That cultural nuancing is so important to be understood when you are looking at policy making. What happens is we are treated in a homogenous way. Our uniqueness and distinctiveness as Indigenous women and where we come from is invisible in the policy and legislative-making processes. It always likes to homogenize us like milk. That’s the analogy I like to use.
[Translation]
Senator Dupuis: When you speak about an independent commission that could be created, that would deal with human rights issues, not just complaints, should this commission be responsible for doing an analysis of every bill, to find out if it affects the rights of Indigenous peoples, Indigenous women, Indigenous youth, in the same way that when a bill is introduced in cabinet, an analysis is done to find out if the bill has an impact on the rights of certain groups in society?
Should this commission be given the responsibility of analyzing, as you said, systematic discrimination based on individuals, in relation to the realities of Indigenous peoples?
[English]
Ms. Wedom: I absolutely agree with that.
I will give you another example. If you read the Canada Health Act, it says universality. There are seven legal principles, including universality, accessibility and affordability, and none of those legal principles are applied to our Indigenous women and girls or two-spirited people, particularly when women and girls are violated. There is no easy, safe access for forensic nurses, for example. If they are brave enough to go to the hospital to have forensic testing done, they get re-traumatized by the system. We really need that careful consideration so that there is true equity implanted in these processes because the systemic inequities are the barriers that are perpetrating our inequality.
[Translation]
Senator Audette: What people and my colleagues don’t know is that the woman appearing before us tonight, when we were young, with Gina, was one of my mentors at Quebec Native Women. I’m moved to welcome you here to our shaputuan, which is a little square. We’re trying to change it from the inside and follow your career with Bernie Poitras Williams, who is my spiritual grandmother and who tells me a lot about your actions for murdered and missing women and girls. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for being so strong, and thank you for your experience and the way you tell us how things should be done.
Three points struck me particularly. First, there’s the secretariat for murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls, located within a federal department, whose objective was to mobilize departments. The idea of moving away from this could be one of the recommendations to be included in our report, to make it a more independent space. We mustn’t forget how to mobilize this large, rigid machine. How do we force it to honour the calls for justice of this great inquiry?
Secondly, you mentioned that the commissioners were approached by the United States to find out how this investigation had been conducted. A lot of pressure was brought to bear. For my part, it was the call for justice number 9.9 of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, for all the unsolved files and all the stories to which there was no answer.
Is this what you were referring to, that could bring out the unsolved files and ensure those in the justice system are treated properly? I’m talking about old cases and current ones.
Thirdly, my colleague Senator Dupuis asked the right question: how do we put a mechanism in place? I understand that in Vancouver, an ombudsman’s office has opened a section for First Peoples. Is this the case? If so, are these examples from which we could learn and be inspired?
[English]
Ms. Wedom: Yes. I think of the Indigenous unit that they have with the B.C. ombudsperson. That’s what they refer to it as. They have five field workers. I’m not sure exactly what their titles are, but there are five individuals who go and reach out to Indigenous folks to help inform them around dealing with any complaints they may have with regard to violations with provincial Crown corporations and/or provincial ministries. However, it is still such a new unit. There is also such a distrust in folks really believing that the process is going to work for them. You know, our people have suffered so much from a lot of good intention but no real meaningful action, a lot of yip yap and good aspirational words, and that’s about it.
Invoking federal legislation to create this independent commission would be the way to go. Design it as it is in the States where they have a cold case unit, but they also have these other separate working committees that specialize in those different areas that I referenced earlier on in my comments.
The other part is holding the government departments to account. When I talk about government departments, I also mean the workers who work within these government departments. If you look at, for example, the Canadian Human Rights Commission, it has a human rights class action suit against the federal human rights commission by Black Canadians. What does that say? That speaks volumes about our federal human rights commission. We have Indigenous workers working in Indigenous Crown Relations and Indigenous services who also have a human rights complaint against the department. Crown Relations and Indigenous Services have a fiduciary obligation on behalf of our people, but they continuously breach that fiduciary obligation, and they are off-loading it to the provinces. They are off-loading it to First Nations communities.
The Chair: Ms. Wedom, some witnesses have told us that the mandate of the proposed tribunal should extend beyond domestic human rights framework, which we heard does not provide effective remedies for violations of economic, social and cultural rights. Do you agree with that perspective?
Ms. Wedom: Absolutely. That’s why I prefaced my earlier comments to say that it needs to embrace the international conventions, like CIDA, and the convention on the rights of the child would be critical in thinking about our future generations. The other conventions on the social and civil rights — all of those international conventions should be incorporated as part of this independent human rights framework.
The Chair: Thank you for that, Ms. Wedom.
Senator Martin: Chair, I want thank you for recognizing the National Indigenous Veterans Day. I know for myself, being of Korean descent, that there were those who served in the Korean War, and I am here because of them. I want to recognize all the veterans in our nation today.
Ms. Wedom, thank you for your presentation. It took me a while to follow everything you were saying, because your depth and breadth of experience is beyond mine.
I have a couple of questions. The first is related to accessibility, which is a key concern for rural and remote Indigenous communities. How will the proposed Indigenous human rights mechanism ensure that individuals in these areas have equal access to services and to have their needs met?
Ms. Wedom: This goes back to how it’s going to become sustainable to accommodate the diverse topography across this country. As I was suggesting earlier on, they not only like to homogenize Indigenous people, but they like to homogenize all Canadians too. They think what is good in Whitehorse is good in Ottawa. There are factors that need to be taken into consideration when we talk about remoteness, isolation and rural communities having equity of access to services and support. Quite often, a lot of these commissions, for example in British Columbia, B.C.’s Office of the Human Rights Commissioner, don’t have the capacity to travel to communities to promote human rights. It’s the same at the federal level. You don’t see a progressive reach-out on the part of human rights bodies to cultivate, nurture and advance Indigenous human rights from a gendered context.
Senator Martin: You said B.C.’s Office of the Human Rights Commissioner and the federal commission are having difficulty reaching these remote places. It’s a challenge all around. Are there examples? You mentioned the Indigenous task force several times. Are there models that we should be considering?
Ms. Wedom: One of the areas in which I’ve been doing a lot of networking is in relation to the whole issue of forensic nursing. We need more Indigenous folks to get into forensic nursing. We need to be advocating for those particular specialized areas that could really lift up victims and provide adequate support in a culturally responsive way that honours the distinctiveness of First Nations, which is so critical.
I also think that part of that whole challenge is in the way in which policies and services are developed. They really don’t take into account the different demographic needs that create those inequalities. It needs to be embraced as part of, I’m hoping, this new and improved federal task force for MMIWG that may evolve and will encompass these legal principles from these conventions that will guide the work of this task force to ensure equity of access for folks from rural and remote areas, using creative approaches.
For example, one of the things I’ve been advocating for in the area that I come from — Tk’emlúps te Secwe̓pemc is not really a small town, but it’s not really a big city. It’s almost in between a small town and a small city, but not really. When you look at the accessibility of services for forensic nursing, you’re lucky if you find one forensic nurse who operates out of Kamloops. One of the things we have been doing is talking to university institutions, Thompson Rivers University, to encourage them to invoke specialized training for such things as forensic nursing. I think we need to bring on institutional partners to enable a comprehensive approach.
Senator Martin: That’s one of the key points, the institutional partners, because it starts with training these specialized individuals who can then be part of the system. That’s very important. Thank you.
The Chair: The floor is still open if anyone has any other questions. I’m not seeing any, so the time for this panel is complete.
I wish to again thank Ms. Anemki Wedom for joining us today. Just as a reminder, if you wish to make subsequent submissions, please submit them by email to the clerk within seven days.
Before we suspend, I want to extend a warm welcome to Senator Prosper to the Committee on Indigenous Peoples, as well as to the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure, also known as steering committee, where he’ll represent the Canadian Senators Group. He will replace Senator Patterson, who I want to thank very much for his contributions over the years. We wish him all the best.
Unfortunately, senators, our next witness for the remainder of our meeting is not available to join us, so that completes our business today.
(The committee adjourned.)