National Council for Reconciliation Bill
Third Reading--Motion in Amendment Negatived
November 7, 2023
Honourable senators, I will make a very short statement. This is a complex issue and I’ve listened to it quite carefully. At the end of the day, I want to follow the principle of “nothing about us without us.” I therefore take my lead from my Indigenous colleagues in the chamber and feel it’s my duty and responsibility to be an ally, especially when they’ve explained the issue as well as they have.
The suggestion that Senator Audette made to discuss the issue further or look into it further at another point is a useful compromise so that we’re not completely ignoring the request by CAP — the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples — to be part of the council. Thank you.
Honourable senators, I’ve learned that, in the Senate, it’s in vogue to say at this point, “I wasn’t planning to speak to this topic today.”
Here’s what I’d like to say, with reference to the Supreme Court of Canada’s 2016 decision in Daniels v. Canada. The Congress of Aboriginal Peoples asked three questions. First, should they be recognized as Indians? The answer was yes. Second and third, did they have the right to be consulted and should they automatically be part of negotiations? The answer was no.
This is an extremely complex issue both politically and legally. I cannot imagine the Senate, on the basis of an amendment like this one, deciding to take a stance one way or the other. I must therefore vote against the amendment.
Thank you.
Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion in amendment?
Those in favour of the motion will please say “yea.”
Those opposed to the motion will please say “nay.”
In my opinion, the “nays” have it.
Do we have agreement on a bell?
Is leave granted?
