Notes for an address by

The Honourable Jim Prentice, PC, MP
Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and
Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-status Indians

to

Senate Standing Committee on Human Rights

Ottawa, Ontario

October 30, 2006

Check against delivery

Mr. Chair, I appreciate this opportunity to address the Senate Standing Committee on Human Rights. I'd like to begin by thanking members of this committee for their important work on the issue of on-reserve matrimonial real property, also known as MRP.

I salute Senator Jaffer for rising in this chamber earlier this month to acknowledge the work of her colleagues, Senators Shirley Maheu and Thelma Chalifoux. The report A Hard Bed to Lie In stands as a seminal work on the issue of MRP. The committee's thorough research and thoughtful analysis have made a valuable contribution to our understanding of the issues, and bring us closer to an effective solution.

As you know, I have initiated a consultative process that will help lead to an effective legislative solution for MRP. I have brought copies of the consultation kit - which I understand you have already received - and will be happy to answer any questions you may have in a few moments. First, though, I would like to share a few of my views and explain why I believe that the initiative now underway is the best way to resolve the MRP dilemma.

I agree with the view expressed by this committee that the present gap in legislation contributes to gross violations of human rights. And I share your desire to implement a speedy solution.

For this government to take unilateral action, however -such as amending the Indian Act so that provincial family law can apply on reserve-would be a serious mistake. In fact, two national Aboriginal organizations have rejected this course of action. Furthermore, the provincial and territorial officials who would suddenly have responsibility for on-reserve MRP are unlikely to welcome amendments on which they have not been consulted. Without the endorsement of these key players, the amendments are sure to fail.

What we need is a solution that has the support of First Nations individuals and communities, and all Canadians. And I'm convinced that the collaborative process now underway will both lead to an effective legislative solution, and will also garner the support needed to implement that solution successfully.

This process is an exercise in consultation and consensus-building led by the Canadians most affected by MRP-First Nations peoples.

The Native Women's Association of Canada and the Assembly of First Nations are conducting independent consultation and dialogue sessions; other groups may also choose to hold sessions of their own, and some have already approached INAC with proposals. In addition, officials with my department have begun discussions with the provinces, territories and organizations not represented by NWAC or the AFN.

All of these discussions and sessions have a common focus and objective: to identify an effective legislative solution to issue of on-reserve MRP.

We are all acutely aware of the fact that this issue has remained unresolved for far too long and that must be addressed if we truly want to ensure the well-being of First Nations individuals and communities. As you are aware, the matrimonial real property - or the family home - is the most valuable piece of property a couple on a reserve owns and, upon the breakdown of a marriage, the division of this property affects all involved - both spouses, their children, their families and, by extension, the broader community.

As we move forward, the rationale guiding our commitment to resolve this issue is straightforward. We want to ensure that the legal rights and remedies available to Canadians off-reserve are also available to First Nation individuals living on-reserve.

However, we need to make sure that we address this legislative void in a manner that is acceptable to those who will be affected: First Nations individuals -particularly women and children - and First Nations communities.

That is why I believe the process currently underway will achieve what we are hoping to achieve: a solution that provides a balance between individual and collective rights.

As such, I would like to make clear that this is not intended to lead to any kind of privatization of reserve lands.

Being led by my representative Wendy Grant-John - a respected leader, successful entrepreneur and skilled negotiator - and in partnership with the Native Women's Association of Canada and the Assembly of First Nations - I am confident that this process will lead to innovative and balanced solutions we are looking for. Solutions that will help ensure that matrimonial real property rights are protected while respecting community interests to protect reserve lands for future generations.

To lead this process, and the subsequent consensus-building effort, we're fortunate to have a woman whose remarkable accomplishments have garnered praise from groups on all sides of the MRP issue. Wendy Grant-John has been elected chief of her First Nation no fewer than three times and has also been voted into the post of AFN Regional Vice-chief. She is also an entrepreneur and a former INAC executive.

Ms. Grant-John has a significant challenge ahead of her. As special ministerial representative on MRP, I have asked her to seek consensus on a solution to MRP. Should no consensus emerge, she will provide me with her best recommendation for action. And, I am determined to act on her advice.

We have heard concerns during the consultation process to date that many First Nations people believe that my department has drafted MRP legislation already. Let me assure you, as I have assured the National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations, that there is no draft MRP legislation. MRP is a complex issue and we need to consult those people affected to inform any legislation option that I take forward to my Cabinet colleagues.

We have also heard concerns that many First Nations people are afraid that the underlying objective of this process will lead to the erosion of reserves. The goal of this process is to address this long standing human rights issue. It is not the Government of Canada's intention to extinguish reserve status through any MRP legislation. One of the principles that my department has stated throughout is that reserve lands shall not be alienable. Let me assure you that reserves shall remain for the use and benefit of First Nations for which they were set aside.

I also believe this is the best approach to MRP - consultations followed by consensus-building followed by legislation - because it offers the best hope for an effective, practical and sustainable solution that will not affect the inalienability of reserve lands. In fact, this process will encourage those most affected by the issue to take ownership of it. After all, the success of any new law depends on how well citizens understand and support it.

Mr. Chairman, the time has come to close the legal loophole that surrounds MRP once and for all. And this government is committed to enacting a solution that works for everyone-for provinces and territories, for First Nation communities, for Aboriginal women and children, and for all Canadians. To create this type of solution absolutely requires the active engagement of all key stakeholders. And this is precisely what the initiative now underway will accomplish.

Thank you. I will do my best to answer your questions.

Back to Index Page