“Mr. Speaker, it is great to be back representing the good constituents of the riding of Waterloo and to be having this really important debate. Similar legislation was introduced in a previous Parliament but unfortunately did not come to fruition. We know there are many communities looking to advance legislation such as this. It is good to hear the goodwill on the opposition side in wanting to see this legislation advance, and I hope to see that done quickly, because if we want to see implementation and action, passing this legislation is definitely an important step. I would ask if the minister could please tell us who was part of the co-development of this act. Were others engaged in this process? That is something that constituents in the riding of Waterloo are asking. They are also asking how the commissioner would be chosen. Any insight from the minister would be greatly appreciated.”
Statement grade
A+
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity.
Average 100 / 100
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Claims 100%
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Mr. Speaker, Claims · 117 wordsthe legislation was co-drafted alongside the 27 modern treaties, 1as 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; 2first 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.3Following that, it would go to the Governor in Council.4It would then be brought forward for feedback from the leaders of the opposition parties.5Again, it is about co-development in drafting and co-development in selecting the commissioner.
