OTTAWA -- The Conservative government took the unusual step Wednesday of recalling a Commons committee from summer recess, in the hopes of passing a measure aimed at extending human rights protection for aboriginals.
The aboriginal affairs committee was summoned to meet next Thursday as the Canadian government was chastised by international indigenous leaders at the United Nations for opposing adoption of a global human rights declaration that has been 20 years in the making.
During a media briefing in New York, Les Malezer, chair of the United Nations indigenous peoples caucus, criticized the Canadian government several times for being unco-operative and for preparing to vote against the declaration in the current session of the UN general assembly.
Jean Crowder, the New Democratic Party's aboriginal affairs critic, said the committee recall is part of a "cynical game" intended to embarrass the opposition parties because they also have been highly critical of the government's posture at the UN.
Crowder suggested opposition MPs may fly in for the meeting and decide that they will not hold clause-by-clause hearings. The committee has already passed a motion calling for 10 months of consultations with aboriginal groups before they will pass Bill C-44.
The bill repeals a 30-year-old provision of the Canadian Human Rights Act that effectively permits certain types of discriminatory treatment, as set out in the Indian Act. The 1977 exemption, which was supposed to be a temporary measure, shields aboriginal band councils and the federal government from discrimination claims over issues such as living conditions and access to shelter and clean water.
Anita Neville, Liberal aboriginal affairs critic, said the government seems determined to cast opposition MPs as opponents of human rights "and I think they are doing that deliberately to save face for themselves on the UN declaration."
She was referring to frequent statements by Indian Affairs Minister Bill Prentice that if the opposition cares so much about the UN declaration, they would hurry up and pass Bill C-44, which was in the Commons and committee for 25 weeks before the summer recess.
"That we support the intent of the bill is unequivocal," Neville said. "What we object to is their ramming it down the throats of First Nations."
"It's an issue that's been hanging fire for 30 years," said Bill Rodgers, communications director for Prentice. "The minister is keen to ensure that there isn't one segment of our population that doesn't enjoy the same human rights as the rest of us."
The NDP, Liberals and Bloc Quebecois, which have a combined majority in the committee, all support the intent of Bill C-44, but want to have more consultations with aboriginal groups. They also want a much longer implementation period than six months proposed by the government. Transition periods of 18 to 36 months have been proposed.
Opposition MPs also want amendments to ensure that the bill does not jeopardize native land and resource ownership and control. Experts in aboriginal law with the Canadian Bar Association warned MPs that without amendments, the bill could lead to inadvertent "dispossession" of reserve lands.
But despite the opposition's combined strength on the committee, the government is unlikely to agree to their proposed amendments. Committee chairs are not permitted to accept amendments that change the nature or intent of legislation.
Chairman Colin Mayes said he has received requests from all four fellow Conservative MPs on the committee to begin the clause-by-clause study that would lead to the eventual passage of the bill. But while the committee can be summoned, Mayes sounded braced for a fight with opposition members over whether the hearings will actually go ahead.
"I try to be as neutral as possible," he said. "I really do believe that you're there at the pleasure of all committee members, not the government and I think it's important that you respect those opinions from all of the members.
"So I will sort of wait and see what the determination is and whether there is a consensus that they want to move forward or whether they are not willing to deal with this at this time."
Ottawa Citizen