Jaime Battiste · TranslatePolitics.ca

Statements by Members

40th Anniversary of Mi'kmaq Band

2026-06-11

“I'm happy these musicians volunteer in the community and sing in the Mi'kmaq language. I compared them to the Rolling Stones to praise them.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, June is National Indigenous History Month, and I want to acknowledge the history I witnessed on Saturday when Mi'kmaq rock icons The Relatives took to the stage to celebrate their 40th anniversary as a band. Tom Johnson, Stan Johnson, Derek Johnson, Darren Stevens, Robert Stevens and Tom Sylliboy have been playing crowd-pleasing get-up-and-dance music across Cape Breton and Mi'kma'ki for four decades. With great original songs like Nutepaqn, Kweji'juow and Perfect Love Song, The Relatives are pioneers in singing songs in the Mi'kmaq language. Not only are The Relatives talented musicians, but they have been exemplary members of the community, volunteering, mentoring, or performing for local causes. They have had deep and lasting impacts that reach far beyond their music. In some circles, the longevity of the band has earned them the moniker of the “Mi'kmaq Rolling Stones”. I am proud to recognize them. [Member spoke in Mi'kmaq and provided the following text:] Welukweyoq aq weltaql. [Member provided the following translation:] You are doing great, and the music sounds great. [English] I thank them for their 40 years of excellence.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

Government Orders

Business of Supply

2026-05-07

“You think you have all the answers about Indigenous rights? Maybe your party should try being an intervenor in court. But the Supreme Court probably wouldn't let you, because they listen to rational arguments, not irresponsible political ones like yours.”

“I want people to be calm about natives taking their land. I say natives don't want anything more than their 'fair share'. I want natives to be inside the nation-wide system.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, truthfully, when I go across this country, I hear chiefs and leaders talking about justice. They talk about the rights that they had, the title and the resources, and they just want their fair share. They are not asking for anything over and above what Canadians receive. They want to be part of a system. They want to be a part of growing. They have these rights, recognized by section 35 and often upheld in the courts, and when those rights are upheld, they often negotiate with our federal government to figure out how we implement those rights. It has happened for the Mi'kmaq in 1990 with the Marshall decision. It happens in British Columbia with aboriginal title. The government, the nations and the province find ways to create dialogue, get to the negotiation table and ensure that we are representing all rights in a situation where all parties are winning and no one loses out.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I don't want to say what I think about a committee. I want us to do nothing and wait for the courts instead.”

“I don't like that Conservatives talk about aboriginal law. I taught it. I want the government to negotiate with indigenous nations after court cases, to protect Canadians' interests carefully.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I respect that member, and I want to respectfully say that I have heard a lot of Conservatives get up and pretend they know something about aboriginal litigation. As someone who taught aboriginal and treaty rights law at university, I have heard some of these arguments. When a court case comes to the Supreme Court of Canada, many intervenors will come in with many different arguments. For the members opposite to suggest that there was one opportunity to have an argument that might go to the Supreme Court of Canada is non-factual. It is not based in any kind of actual fact from anyone who has ever read an aboriginal title case or anyone who has actually looked at the court cases and said, here is what happens when indigenous nations have proved what their section 35 rights are. We sit down and negotiate with them. We protect the interests of Canadians, but we also do it in a way that does not create fear, mistrust and—

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I want people to stop worrying about private property. The government wants to protect private property. We are appealing the court decision that caused uncertainty. The agreement with Musqueam does not affect private property. Other agreements did not affect private property. We will keep negotiating and protecting property rights.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Richmond East—Steveston. I want to take a few minutes today to separate fact from fiction. Right now, when it comes to aboriginal title in this country, there is a lot of confusion. That confusion fuels concern and, in some cases, misinformation is making it worse. Let me be very clear from the outset: Some of the anxiety Canadians are feeling right now is understandable and it is rooted in the fact that this area of law is not settled and is evolving. For many Canadians, this is not an abstract. It is about their homes, their businesses, their communities and their sense of security. When people hear conflicting information about something as fundamental as property rights, it is entirely reasonable that they ask questions and expect clear answers. For decades, Canadian courts have developed aboriginal title law carefully and incrementally since it was first recognized back in 1973. The decision in the Cowichan Tribes v. Canada case at the Supreme Court of British Columbia took a novel approach. It found that aboriginal title could exist in areas that include private fee simple lands and suggested that those interests could actually coexist. The court did not invalidate private property held titles. It did not remove land from individuals. What it did was introduce a new and complex legal question about precisely how continuing private property interests could coexist with what the court also declared was a superior aboriginal title interest. Our government has been clear. We do not agree with the court's decision in Cowichan. We recognized that it creates uncertainty, and that is why it is being appealed. Canadians deserve clarity on something as fundamental as property rights. That is not just our view; it is reflected in the fact that the courts themselves are not aligned on this issue. I want to bring to members' attention that in New Brunswick, the litigation involving the Wolastoqey Nations v. New Brunswick and Canada decision at the Court of Appeal reached a very different conclusion. The court stated that it was open for courts to make a finding of aboriginal title over private property, which could lead to a compensation award against the Crown, but that declaration of aboriginal title could not be made over private property. Therefore, we now have two court decisions in Canada taking opposite approaches. That divergence is exactly why we need to have clarity from the courts, and that is why it is being appealed. This is an important point. When the law is unsettled, it creates space for speculation. It creates space for competing interpretations and, in that space, misinformation can take hold and facts can be twisted. This is where myth begins to enter the picture because while this legal uncertainty is real, it is being used and weaponized in some cases to suggest that negotiated agreements are putting private property at risk. That is simply not true. It is important that we say that clearly, but also respectfully, because many Canadians asking these questions are doing so in good faith. Therefore, let me address one example directly. There has been commentary about the Musqueam agreement and what it does and does not do. Here are the facts. It does not impact Canadians' private property. This agreement does not grant new rights. It does not define or finalize the scope of any existing Musqueam aboriginal rights and it does not attach any such rights to specific parcels of land. What it does do is acknowledge that rights exist, which they do under section 35 of the Constitution, and it creates a structured process for Canada and Musqueam to work together to better understand how those rights may be addressed over time. That is it. It is a framework for negotiations. It is not a transfer of land or change in ownership and it does not affect private property. It does not override provincial jurisdiction and it does not give any decision-making authority over land or resources to Musqueam through this agreement. In other words, it is about creating a path forward for dialogue and clarity, not changing who owns what today. In fact, private property was never part of these negotiations and will never be part of any future negotiations. I would remind colleagues that in British Columbia, jurisdiction over private property rests with the province. It is not something that the federal government can simply negotiate away, and it has not done so. The Musqueam themselves have been clear that this agreement is not about pursuing privately owned land, so when Canadians hear claims that agreements like this somehow put their homes and businesses at risk, those claims are not grounded in fact. They are grounded in trying to create fear. The distinction is important. On the one hand, we have court decisions that are exploring new and unsettled legal territory. On the other hand, we have negotiated agreements that are designed to create clarity, not uncertainty. That distinction matters because litigation and negotiation do very different things. Litigation can clarify the law over time, but it often does so in a narrow, incremental way that can leave broader uncertainty in the meantime. Negotiation allows parties to sit down, address concerns directly and build solutions that reflect real-world impacts. No modern treaty, negotiated agreement or federal approach has resulted in Canadians losing privately owned land. This goes back to 1973 when aboriginal title was first recognized and discussed in the Calder case. In fact, negotiated agreements consistently do the opposite. They provide predictability and clarity and explicitly protect private interests while advancing reconciliation. We saw that recently in the agreement with the Haida Nation, which addressed aboriginal title while clearly providing for the protection of private fee simple lands. That is the value of negotiations. Negotiations allow complexity to be addressed directly and balanced outcomes to be reached. Courts answer legal questions. Negotiations build lasting solutions. We are committed to ensuring those negotiations go forward in a way that creates clarity. Yes, there is uncertainty right now. Canadians have legitimate questions, and we are acting to address that uncertainty by seeking clarity through the courts where the issue is already being raised. At the same time, that uncertainty cannot be used to misinterpret the facts. We will continue to engage Canadians with honesty and transparency and acknowledging what we know, what we do not know yet and what we are doing to get clarity. Fear must not replace facts. Reconciliation must move forward through respectful, balanced and negotiated agreements. At the end of the day, Canadians have confidence that their rights and interests are being protected and reconciliation is being advanced in a thoughtful, measured and fact-based way. That is how certainty is built and trust is strengthened and how we will move together. I want to dwell on this because there has been a lot of misinformation. Conservatives continue to act as if aboriginal title in Canada is a new thing. It has been recognized since 1973. We have seen multiple British Columbia tribes go to court and have their aboriginal titles recognized, from the Nisga'a to the Delgamuukw and the Tsilhqot’in. There is not one example where these court cases resulted in someone losing their fee simple property rights. It just has not happened. To suggest that for some reason or somehow these tribes are going to come after this title and take people's homes and property is just irresponsible, not factual and meant to create fear and misinform Canadians. On this side of the House, we will continue to balance our efforts toward reconciliation with the interests of Canadians. We have done so in every single indigenous case that has ever gone to the Supreme Court where indigenous tribes have won, and we will continue to do so moving forward. For Canadians at home hearing this, our government is ready, prepared and willing to negotiate and ensure that we are protecting property rights at the same time as advancing reconciliation.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I don't want to talk about property rights. I want to bring up cases from a long time ago to distract from the real issues people are worried about now.”

Government Orders

Canadian Space Launch Act

2026-04-28

“I want my riding to get benefits from this bill. I think space is neat.”

“When the government spends money on this spaceport, it must go to indigenous and rural areas. Many jobs will be created for these groups. You must give them lots of money and power in the project. That is the Liberal plan.”

“I want the government to spend money so Canada can launch its own rockets. Don't question the cost. It's for safety and security. My riding gets money from this program.”

“I want the Canadian Space Launch Act to pass. It would help my riding and create jobs. The government invested $200 million in a spaceport in my area. The space industry is growing fast. If we don't pass this, companies might take their innovation and jobs to other countries. Satellites are important infrastructure. We need to be able to launch, maintain, and replace them. I'm grateful this will help my riding. The Conservatives oppose it but I think it's good for Nova Scotia.”

Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Marc-Aurèle-Fortin. Today I rise in support of legislation that will drive a level of investment in Cape Breton—Canso—Antigonish that has not been seen in generations. The future of the space industry in Canso holds tremendous potential for our riding and our province. Over the next few minutes, I will speak to the deeply positive impacts that Bill C-28 would have. First, I would like to start off with a little bit of gratitude for our government and for our federal government making a historic, $200-million investment in Nova Scotia, in my riding, to help establish a spaceport in Nova Scotia as a cornerstone of Canada's future satellite launches. This investment will create good jobs, support innovation and grow Atlantic Canada's role in a fast-growing global industry. It will also help us rely less on foreign launch sites and build a stronger, more sovereign role in getting satellites into space. From coast to coast to coast, Canadians are turning ambition into capability, developing launch vehicles and spaceports, refining the engines that will lift them and building the satellites that will strengthen our economy and protect our sovereignty. These innovators are ready. Their talent is world-class, but they are held back, not by a lack of vision or capability, but by the absence of a modern legal framework that allows them to launch from home. Today, with the Canadian space launch act, we hand them the key. Today, we unleash the innovation engine. Innovation is in our DNA, but innovators need the right conditions to thrive, a framework that matches the scale of their ambition, which is what this legislation would provide. The global space economy is projected to grow more than 200% by 2032. Here at home, Canada's space sector workforce grew by almost 6% in 2023, reaching an all-time high. Canadians are ready to compete and lead in this rapidly expanding market, and this legislation will give them the clear framework they need to do it. Without a domestic legal regime, Canadian companies face stark choices: wait indefinitely or take their innovation and jobs abroad. That is a choice this legislation ensures they would never face. Why does launch matter so much? Satellites are critical infrastructure woven into daily life. When a ship threads through fog in the St. Lawrence, when paramedics locate a caller in seconds, when communities in the north rely on satellite links for school and telehealth, when utilities and banks synchronize time across vast networks or when our armed forces secure communications, maintain situational awareness, navigate environments and collect intelligence, each of these everyday capabilities depends on space-based assets overhead. Satellites are only as reliable as our ability to launch, maintain, defend and replace them. Sovereign launch capability is not a luxury, but a strategic necessity. Let me speak directly about the innovators who are the human face of this act. NordSpace, headquartered in Ontario and operating in Newfoundland and Labrador, is advancing plans for a commercial spaceport that would create high-skilled jobs, attract investments and inspire the next generation of Canadian engineers and scientists to see rocket launch from Canadian soil. Based in Toronto, Canada Rocket Company is helping to reverse the brain drain by bringing skilled Canadians home to build cutting-edge light- and medium-lift rockets, advancing Canada's objective of securing reliable access to space. Reaction Dynamics, headquartered in Quebec, is developing advanced infrastructure-light launch vehicles that position Canada at the forefront of environmentally responsible access to space: nimble, sustainable and globally competitive. In my home riding, Maritime Launch Services is building one of Canada's first spaceports in Canso. Currently under construction and set to be built by 2028, it is expected to contribute $300 million to our GDP annually. Once fully operational, it will create 1,600 jobs in my riding. I want to repeat that: 1,600 jobs in rural Nova Scotia. That is an amazing thing, and I have so much gratitude for that. This project will deliver enormous economic opportunities for our communities and families. It will contribute to rural economic development, drive tourism and show the world that Nova Scotians can get big things done. That is why I am shocked that the Conservative leader took to Elon Musk's social media company to oppose this competing commercial spaceport project. It is not surprising that there are no Conservatives in Nova Scotia as MPs, because every time a company decides to invest in our province, the Conservatives launch a crusade to kill the jobs, investments and economic benefits for Nova Scotians. We saw it when they opposed legislation, supported by the Progressive Conservative government, to build offshore wind. Thankfully, we did not let them block billions in investment, thousands of jobs, economic opportunities for first nations and our ability to be a renewable energy superpower. We saw it when they opposed the Mersey River renewable project, which would allow Nova Scotians to switch off Nova Scotia power to a new provider. Now they are opposing Nova Scotia's ambitions to be a leader in Canada's commercial space industry, which is expected to be worth $40 billion. With spaceport Nova Scotia, when Nova Scotians look to the stars, they will know that our province contributed to the future of space, built and led right here in Canada. More than 20% of our current economy relies on satellites. In Nova Scotia, we want to continue to be at the forefront of building our economy and these satellites. These companies are proof that Canadian innovation is alive from coast to coast to coast and ready to compete if we give it the framework. This legislation is their launch pad. Atlantic Canada's competitive advantages for commercial space launches are enormous. Our northern geography provides direct access to several desirable orbits essential for earth observation, climate monitoring and defence. Long coastlines offer the ability to launch safely over water, and our border with the United States, the world's largest satellite producer, means seamless supply chain integration. As the global launch infrastructure approaches capacity, international companies are seeking stable alternatives. Canada is positioned to be that destination, but only with the legal framework to welcome them. This legislation is about unleashing Canadians' potential, telling the entrepreneurs across Canada that their government believes in them and is giving them the tools to succeed. Supporting this act means supporting engineers perfecting rocket engines in Sherbrooke, construction workers building launch pads in Nova Scotia, communities that will grow around Canada's spaceport, and every scientist, technician and innovator ready to write the next chapter of our space story. All that remains is for this House to say yes, to ignite the innovation engine, empower Canadian entrepreneurs and ensure that the next rocket to leave Canadian soil carries the full weight of Canadian law, Canadian ambition and Canadian pride. Canada's innovators and economy are ready for us to finally take to the stars, on our own terms, and I am happy to see that happening.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗