Rebecca Alty

Mr. Speaker, efforts to deny, distort or minimize the truth about residential schools is deeply harmful and will always be condemned. Denialism is a cruel rejection of well-established facts, and it undermines the truth that is essential to reconciliation with indigenous people. That is why our government is moving forward with a $5-million investment in education and public awareness so that Canadians can continue to learn from survivors, their families and communities and better understand the painful legacy of residential schools. We will confront denialism with the truth and ensure that it is never erased or forgotten.

Mr. Speaker, efforts to deny, distort or minimize the truth about residential schools are deeply harmful and will always be condemned. Denialism is a cruel rejection of well-established facts, and it undermines the truth that is essential to reconciliation with indigenous people. That is why our government is moving forward with a $5-million investment in education and public awareness so that Canadians can continue to learn from survivors, their—

moved that Bill C-10, an act respecting the commissioner for modern treaty implementation, be read the third time and passed. Mr. Speaker, I begin by acknowledging that we are gathered today on the unceded territory of the Anishinabe Algonquin people. We are now at third reading of Bill C-10, the commissioner for modern treaty implementation act, and that is no small achievement. I want to extend my deepest thanks to the modern treaty partners whose experience, persistence and leadership shaped this bill at every step. I also want to thank the members of this House who have helped advance the bill. At its core, this legislation is about more than establishing the commissioner for modern treaties. It is about something much bigger. Fundamentally, it is about our commitment to advancing reconciliation through partnership and making sure that the commitments we make today lead to tangible, measurable results. It is about moving from intention to implementation so that modern treaties deliver real outcomes for indigenous communities, including strong governance, greater economic opportunity and improved quality of life. As we look at the work that brought us to this moment and everything we have accomplished together, one lesson stands out: Real progress happens through partnership. This bill was co-developed with indigenous modern treaty partners every step of the way. Before we began drafting this bill, we worked together to develop Canada's collaborative modern treaty implementation policy in 2023. That policy, the first of its kind, set shared expectations for federal departments and created a more consistent approach to implementation across government. It set standards for shifting the culture of the federal system towards stronger relationships and accountability. Building on that foundation, we co-developed this bill with modern treaty partners. Their lived experience guided every component. They shared where current approaches were not always delivering consistent results and they shaped the commissioner's mandate, authorities and reporting structures. By its very design, this bill is stronger and more credible. It reflects the shared ownership of a common objective to improve the modern treaty relationship and derive the full benefits of these agreements for partners, their neighbours and all Canadians. Bill C-10 reflects a recognition that collaboration with indigenous partners must be the norm. Modern treaty partners are governments and our strategic partners shaping the future of this country, and this bill reflects that truth. This is both principled and practical. All indigenous modern treaty partners spoke strongly in support of the legislation. Our government supports it and it is my hope that the opposition will support it so that it can move on to the Senate. After all, it is rare to see legislation with this level of shared support. The commissioner for modern treaty implementation act would create an independent commissioner whose sole focus would be supporting effective, consistent and transparent implementation of Canada's modern treaty commitments. Modern treaty partners have been united in their call for stronger oversight. They have emphasized the need for a mechanism that helps everyone understand where progress is being made, where challenges remain, and what steps are needed to honour the full spirit and intent of modern treaties. With this legislation in place, the commissioner would, one, conduct independent and expert oversight of any activity carried out by the Government of Canada that relates to the implementation of modern treaties; two, report to Parliament to hold the Government of Canada accountable for its modern treaty obligations; three, be independent, objective and impartial in the discharge of their mandate and have expert knowledge of modern treaties; four, have the authority to require departments to provide the information necessary to carry out its mandate. Modern treaties partners have long called for this mechanism that can look across governments and help make treaty implementation consistent, effective and timely. This kind of independent oversight would bring clarity to the work. It would highlight where progress is happening and where more attention is needed. It would also create the space for honest dialogue, the kind of early, constructive conversation that would prevent problems from growing. Across government, we see how independent oversight improves outcomes. Modern treaty partners deserve the same consistent oversight, given the depth, complexity and importance of their constitutionally protected agreements. The implementation of modern treaties is a matter that concerns every government, now and into the future. Current and future governments will need visibility into federal performance and a system that is equipped and compelled to follow through consistently on commitments. Bill C-10 would help deliver that. With this commissioner in place, issues that have been difficult to surface would gain visibility, patterns that were previously hidden would be easier to identify, and both Parliament and partners would have access to clear, independent reporting. This transparency is essential to building stronger treaty relationships and a stronger Canada. I also want to take this opportunity today to talk a little more about modern treaties and why they are so critical to reconciliation and to building a stronger future. Modern treaties are a distinct expression of reconciliation and a constitutionally entrenched commitment between the Crown and indigenous partners. They promote strong and sustainable indigenous communities and affirm indigenous rights over lands and resources, but as I said, modern treaties are not only instruments of reconciliation. They are engines of economic growth that create certainty for investors, the government and indigenous governments; enable major projects; and support long-term prosperity for indigenous communities and all Canadians. We have seen this clearly across the country. The Nisga'a nation, British Columbia's first modern treaty partner, is seeing significant economic development and is taking on an increasingly active role in major projects. The Nisga'a nation is a proponent of the Ksi Lisims LNG project, a major project that has the potential to create jobs, generate economic opportunities and deliver long-term benefits for Nisga'a citizens and the entire country. By taking an active role in projects like this, including by pursuing equity ownership, the Nisga'a are helping ensure that major developments create lasting prosperity and economic opportunities that can benefit generations to come. At the same time, the Nisga'a are continuing to strengthen their self-government, including by holding their own elections in accordance with the Nisga'a nation's own constitution. This is a powerful example of what self-determination can look like in practice, building economic opportunity while exercising the rights and responsibilities of self-government. In the Northwest Territories, the Tłı̨chǫ government has invested in an all-season highway project that would connect remote communities and open up new opportunities in mining. This infrastructure development is helping community members access health service and education and supporting local businesses. Another example of this is the Gwich'in Renewable Resources Board. This board promotes sustainable use of land and resources while preserving traditional practices. It plays a leadership role so that the fish, forests and wildlife of the Gwich'in area remain healthy and sustainable. Its mandate is to work in the public interest and represent all the parties to the modern treaty: the Gwich'in, the people of the Northwest Territories and all Canadians. These examples remind us of what can be when modern treaties are implemented effectively. They show that treaties support well-being, stability and prosperity. They drive growth, create jobs, build up our economy and ultimately build Canada strong. Bill C-10 offers a concrete way forward. By making implementation more visible and consistent, the commissioner would oversee the system from a whole-of-government perspective and make sure we are working consistently toward effective implementation. Progress must be visible, it must be measurable and it must make a difference in people's lives. Trust is central to every treaty relationship. It takes time to build and ongoing effort to maintain. Trust is built through action: consistently meeting commitments and demonstrating results over time. The commissioner would be an investment in these relationships; in trust, accountability, efficiency and a more just and prosperous future for all Canadians. Strong accountability measures promote responsible governments. They support credibility and, importantly, results. Modern treaty partners would continue to play an important role in the establishment and operation of the office of the commissioner for modern treaty implementation. The appointed commissioner must have the confidence of both Parliament and modern treaty partners. That is why the appointment process includes direct consultation with modern treaty partners. When executing their mandates, the commissioner would determine the procedures, terms and methodology to be followed for each review or performance audit after engaging with the relevant modern treaty partners. The commissioner would also provide relevant modern treaty partners with the opportunity to review and comment on any preliminary findings and recommendations of the commissioner, with any comments published in the final report. These processes have been specifically designed to provide credibility, transparency and independence for the commissioner and their office. These requirements would also ensure that modern treaty partners remain active participants in the commissioner's work. Modern treaties represent a concrete step on the path of reconciliation. For modern treaties to truly move us forward, we must strive to find better ways of implementing their spirit and objectives. The commissioner would help us do that in a way that reflects the importance of these relationships to all of us. As we reach third reading, I want to reflect on what this bill means in the broader context of reconciliation. Since the signing of the first modern treaty in 1975, successive governments have recognized the importance of these agreements because they know that Canada's future lies with strong, respectful relationships. They have understood that when we honour our commitments and build stronger partnerships with indigenous peoples, we create a stronger, fairer and more successful country. In these uncertain times, we need partners we can count on. Indigenous modern treaty partners are exactly those partners. Modern treaties cover more than 40% of Canada's land mass, including 80% of the north. It is clear that the only way we can move forward and build Canada strong is in partnership with indigenous modern treaty partners and in accordance with our obligations. This creates unique opportunities for collaboration between modern treaty partners, Canada and other stakeholders on shared, crosscutting priorities in sectors including energy, natural resources, defence, finance and real estate. Modern treaty partners are already leading in this space in innovation, investment and development across Canada. They are doing it within federal implementation approaches that can continue to be strengthened. This is the time to act. It is the time to strengthen how we carry out our commitments and advance reconciliation in concrete ways. That begins with passing Bill C-10. Reconciliation must be practical, must be measurable and must deliver results that people can see and feel in their daily lives. This bill is a practical step forward, one that supports partnership and helps modern treaties deliver the results they were meant to achieve. Once again, I want to thank modern treaty partners for their leadership, advocacy and unwavering commitment to this work. The journey we took together to co-develop this legislation shows what is possible when trust, creativity and collaboration are at the heart of the process.

Mr. Speaker, it is important work. Having a commissioner for modern treaty implementation has been a call from modern treaty partners. As to the importance of the commissioner, they would be an agent of Parliament who would submit reviews and performance audits directly to Parliament. It is really important to note that the whole-of-government approach the commissioner would be taking is an opportunity for them to make findings and recommendations regarding implementation and to really be able to work with modern treaty partners and government to improve our relationships. It is an opportunity to have findings and recommendations, to make sure they are public and to make sure we are reporting on the progress that is made. That is a really important part. A lot of the audits may show the areas where we need to do work, but it is equally important to show the areas where we have done a lot of work. The commissioner would have that opportunity, and I encourage all members of the House to continue to support this work. Again, this bill was co-drafted with modern treaty partners. It is a call they have been asking Parliament to take up. It is also related to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act action plan that the government has, specifically chapter 5, section 9, which states that the co-development of indigenous modern treaties is really important.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for his question, and I would also like to thank the Bloc Québécois for its support. It is important that the whole House have the commissioner's reports, so that everyone is aware of the importance of modern treaties and so that people can see the recommendations. I encourage my colleagues, when they examine the budget, to bear these considerations in mind. They will see that the funds are there to support modern treaties. I would like to raise another point. The commissioner deals solely with the work of the federal government, and not with that of provincial or territorial governments.

Mr. Speaker, the legislation was co-drafted alongside the 27 modern treaties, as well as with federal officials. However, I would note that the consultation period was broader than that. There were over 130 partners, including indigenous modern treaty partners; first nations, Métis and Inuit groups, which also participated; national indigenous organizations and provincial and territorial governments. It was a broad consultation that occurred. As to the process of selecting the commissioner, it would be done in consultation with modern treaty partners. Following that, it would go to the Governor in Council. It would then be brought forward for feedback from the leaders of the opposition parties. Again, it is about co-development in drafting and co-development in selecting the commissioner.

Mr. Speaker, when looking at the socio-economic conditions of modern treaty partner communities, we see there is an increase in socio-economic conditions, which shows the importance and value of modern treaties. I would highlight that it is for the commissioner to continue to strengthen our relationships. The commissioner would conduct independent and expert oversight of any activities carried out by the government, would seek to ensure timely and effective implementation and would report directly to Parliament to hold the government accountable on the relationships, objectives and obligations. This is an important report that would be coming to Parliament so that all parliamentarians could see the work being done throughout the year. They would have the opportunity to see what is working and the areas where we need to step up and continue to make progress. The opportunity and benefit of the commissioner for modern treaties lie in continuing to grow this relationship and highlighting the work that is ongoing and still needs to be done.

Mr. Speaker, I definitely agree with my colleague. Modern treaty partners are critical in advancing many of the projects we are seeing right now, such as the Nisga'a nation with Ksi Lisims and the Tłı̨chǫ first nation with the Arctic economic and security corridor. In Iqaluit, we have NTI, which is leading the hydroelectric project. We are seeing modern treaty partners across the country not only in equity, but also leading the charge in these major projects, and we really look forward to continuing to work with modern treaty partners to build Canada strong.

Mr. Speaker, it is an important question and one that is currently before the courts. In the recent Wolastoqey decision, the Court of Appeal in New Brunswick, which is the highest court in the province, has refused leave to appeal. It found that aboriginal title cannot be declared over private property. On the other side of the country, in the Cowichan case, the B.C. judge found that they could coexist. We disagree with B.C.'s decision and are appealing it to maintain the clarity and certainty of private properties. However, as we are seeing differing views in the courts, we continue to be there to get the certainty.

Mr. Speaker, I find it disingenuous that the members opposite continue to suggest that we are not protecting the private property rights of Canada. Here is what we have been doing: We disagreed with the B.C. Supreme Court's ruling and appealed it; we supported Montrose, a private property owner in the area, to present evidence that was not before the court during the trial. Section 92 of the Constitution sets out that private property is provincial jurisdiction. It is excluded from all discussions of aboriginal title at the federal level. For Cowichan, B.C. is acting within its jurisdiction to put measures in to support any implicated property owner—

moved that Bill C-27, An Act to give effect to the Final Self-Government Agreement for the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee. Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure to rise today to speak to the second reading of the legislation that would give legal force to the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę self-government treaty. It is very timely that we are having this debate now as we celebrate National Indigenous History Month. While this month is a celebration, it is also a reminder, not only for Canadians but also for us as parliamentarians, of the work we need to do to help build a stronger, more equitable future for indigenous peoples. By advancing this legislation today, all members of the House have the opportunity to support a stronger future for the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę. This moment has been a long time in the making. All of us know that the heart of this legislation is in the north, in the Sahtu and with the people of Norman Wells. It began with elders, leaders and families that carried a vision for their nation. It began with their determination to see their governance restored, their authority recognized and their future placed back in their own hands. When we speak about progress, we must also speak about legacy. In the Sahtu, that legacy is profound. More than 30 years ago, the signing and enactment of the Sahtu Dene and Métis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement fundamentally changed the landscape of indigenous governance and land management in Canada. It was a landmark for not only the Sahtu but also the entire country. It created certainty, stability and a foundation strong enough to support other self-government negotiations into the future. The agreement brought clarity to land stewardship and resource management across a vast region that has since shaped decisions, influenced national policy and guided how we approach modern treaties across Canada. It set a precedent, and communities across Canada refer to it as they advance their own agreements. It made space for new models of partnership between indigenous governments and Canada, between communities and industry, and between northern peoples and the federal system. The 1993 agreement changed the way Canada understands shared responsibility for land, water, wildlife and resources. It proved that reconciliation, when grounded in respect, can create not only fairness but also stability for investment, planning and shared prosperity for future generations. From that foundation came the first self-government agreement in the Sahtu, the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement, which was a milestone that inspired and encouraged others across the region. Today, we are here to advance the second of five potential agreements that were envisioned all those decades ago, the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę self-government treaty. This treaty is not an isolated achievement. It is part of that continuum, a living legacy of a region that has consistently led the way on land claims, self-determination and innovative governance. Today, we build on that legacy through Bill C-27. If passed, it would establish the agreement as a self-government treaty in Canadian law. It would formally recognize the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę government as the government of the Sahtu, Dene and Métis of Norman Wells and would affirm what has always been true, which is that the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę hold inherent rights of self-government, rights affirmed in section 35 of the Constitution Act of 1982. This is practical, meaningful and legally binding recognition. The treaty confirms the authority of the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę to make their own laws; elect their own leaders; protect and revitalize their languages; strengthen their culture; deliver their own programs and services, including education and health care; manage land use and development decisions within their jurisdiction; and chart their own path forward as a nation. However, I also want to consider what this means not just for governance but also for people. Fundamentally, self-government is a deeply human concept. It affects the classrooms in which a child learns. It affects the homes in which families live. It affects the care a grandparent receives, the language heard in the community hall, the decisions made at the council table and the confidence and optimism of young people imagining their futures. Self-government means that programs are designed locally by people who understand the community. It means language and culture are protected, not as an afterthought but as central priorities when developing policies and programs. It means that governance reflects Sahtu values rooted in respect, responsibility and relationships. For the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę, this treaty is a return to an age-old system of governance grounded in culture and social and spiritual practices passed down over countless generations. Their ancestors governed themselves long before Canada existed, and this legislation would recognize that truth and restore the space for indigenous decision-making to flourish again. These authorities reflect what the community has long envisioned: decisions being made by the people who live there, who know the land, who share the culture and who carry the responsibility for future generations. This legislation would honour commitments, renew relationships and, just as importantly, help unlock new opportunities for the nation to build and prosper on its own terms. I can say with confidence, because the community has shown it again and again, that the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę are ready. After 20 years of negotiation, countless meetings and tireless leadership, they are ready to take on self-government. One of the most important aspects of this legislation is the foundation it would establish for economic opportunity. Under the legislation, the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę would have jurisdiction with respect to direct taxation of its citizens within its land and authority over internal and local affairs, as well as the ability to finance their self-government. These tools would help support long-term planning, create jobs and generate their own revenue. As an indigenous government, the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę government would be positioned to engage directly on development projects, ensuring that benefits flow into the community and that development reflects local priorities and values. This is good news for the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę. It is good for the region, it is good for the Northwest Territories, and it is good for Canada. Stable governance encourages investment. It speeds up decision-making, gives clarity to investors and aligns economic development with cultural and environmental stewardship. It also means that projects can move forward with community support. This is how the north succeeds, by making certain that the people who live closest to the land have a real voice in how it is used. Before I close, I want to take a moment to thank everyone who played an important role in getting us to where we are today. I thank leaders, elders, youth, negotiators and community members. They have shown what can be achieved when partnership is genuine and relationships are built on trust. To the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę, mahsi cho for their leadership, mahsi cho for their patience and mahsi cho for their partnership. As a proud northerner, as a minister of the Crown and as someone who has spent my life working with and learning from communities across the Northwest Territories, it is an honour to play even a small role in this moment. As we observe National Indigenous History Month, this legislation gives us the chance to live up to our highest ideals as a country, to honour our commitments and to walk forward with indigenous peoples together. I urge all members of the House to join me in working to pass this critical piece of legislation without delay.

Mr. Speaker, what is before the House would be an important part of that, meaning the establishment of the self-government of the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę. One of the other initiatives that Parliament approved was funding for Our Land for the Future, which is a land guardian program. It is working with indigenous governments across the Northwest Territories to develop the land guardian program. Another indigenous government in the Sahtu region is Fort Good Hope. I was just talking to them yesterday about their land guardian program. It is creating 2 million dollars' worth of local wages, which is 12 full‑time positions and over 100 community members participating throughout the year. It has been important for land, for culture, for wildfire protection and for many more things, so I tip my hat to all the land guardians across the Northwest Territories. The other thing I would note in the Sahtu is the recent Mackenzie Valley Highway. We are working to expedite that project, and we have seen that Rio Tinto is looking to explore for copper in the region.

Mr. Speaker, it is important to go through the regulatory process. One of the initiatives that will support the Mackenzie Valley region, including Norman Wells, is the government's announcement of referring the Mackenzie Valley Highway project to the Major Projects Office. That is the opportunity to work with communities as well as the territorial government, which is the proponent on this project, to accelerate it. With the Mackenzie Valley Highway, it would benefit residents with local food supply and fuel being able to be shipped all year and not depending on barges and winter roads. Already we are seeing more mineral exploration in the region, and we are continuing to support that through critical mineral investments that were announced in budget 2025.

Mr. Speaker, as mentioned, this is a treaty, so it was negotiated with the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę. Following the negotiations, we came to the draft. A consultation then occurred with 30 indigenous nations, which had minor amendments that were then incorporated. The community then ratified this in March 2025. The territorial government ratified it in March 2026. I am looking for the House to expedite this so we can have this approved before the summer.

Mr. Speaker, we are aware of the legal challenges from the United States-based indigenous groups against the Province of British Columbia. However, Canada is not a party to this litigation. The Supreme Court of Canada has indicated that decisions about consultation with non-resident groups may be required in certain circumstances. However, the federal government is monitoring all legal cases when it comes to duty to consult and accommodate, and we are updating when necessary. Again, we are monitoring the B.C. legal challenges closely and we remain committed to building Canada strong.

Mr. Speaker, beyond the investments such as the Mackenzie Valley Highway, the Slave geological province and the Taltson hydro expansion, the important thing about accelerating this legislation is really the importance of the self-governance to the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę. With that, it would be able to make its own laws, elect its own leaders and protect and revitalize its language and culture. This is incredibly important. Without this legislation, it is right now an organization that has to follow the not-for-profit guidance, and so it is a bit disrespectful, really. We should be passing the self-government agreement. This is part of the 1993 land claim agreement that we would be going on to self-government. This would be the second of the five communities that would be seeking self-government. Again, I urge my colleagues to pass this as quickly as possible.

Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, I think it is important to note that the self-government agreement is legislated under the Constitution: their legal authority to pass their own laws, to set up their own elections and to protect their culture. The first self-government agreement was the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement. It will be having its 10th year anniversary this year, and we have really seen how incredibly important it has been in the community of Déline. I really look forward to seeing the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę's self-governance as it continues to grow in the community of Norman Wells. There is the opportunity to also consider moving to the indigenous public governance. However, at this stage, it is not looking to have that authority.

Mr. Speaker, in February, we did sign three Musqueam agreements. One was a framework agreement, which is really outlining how we will work nation to nation. Included in that is section 5.1, which says that it is not a land claim, and section 5.2. Again, I encourage the members opposite to look them up, as they are available online. For the other two agreements, one was about fisheries and one was about marine stewardship, but they are not about private property. Today, for the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę, this is a self-government agreement. The land claim was settled in 1993.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the opposition for supporting this legislation. As mentioned, this is one community of five. Déline was approved in 2016. We are moving forward with this one. The consultation is in process for Colville Lake, which is one of the other communities. If that legislation comes forward and is similar to Déline and Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę, I wonder if the members opposite would support an expeditious passing of that legislation as well.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to get clarity. When the government brings forward self-government agreements, as long as they are focused on areas like governance, citizenship, culture, language and education and they are not focused on land or private property, is it the Conservative position that the Conservatives would be supporting self-government agreements?