LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF MANITOBA
THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Wednesday, October 31, 2018
TIME – 6 p.m.
LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba
CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Dennis Smook (La Verendrye)
VICE-CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Doyle Piwniuk (Arthur-Virden)
ATTENDANCE – 11 QUORUM – 6
Members of the Committee present:
Hon. Messrs. Cullen, Eichler, Hon. Ms. Squires
Mses. Fontaine, Klassen, Messrs. Marcelino, Piwniuk, Mrs. Smith, Messrs. Smook, Wishart, Wowchuk
PUBLIC PRESENTERS:
Bill 29–The Wildlife Amendment Act (Safe Hunting and Shared Management)
Mr. Scott Phillips, Municipalities in the Ag Zone
Mr. Cameron Neurenberg, private citizen
Mr. Archie McPherson, Reeve for Westman Area
Ms. Michelle Assailly, private citizen
Mr. Joseph Maud, First Nations in Treaty 2 Territory
Mr. Cornell McLean, Lake Manitoba First Nation
Ms. Cindy McKay, private citizen
Mr. Brian Kotak, Manitoba Wildlife Federation
Mr. Jimmy Thunder, Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs
Mr. Jeremy McKay, private citizen
Bill 35–The Crown Lands Amendment Act (Improved Management of Community Pastures and Agricultural Crown Lands)
Mr. Dean Harder, National Farmers Union, Manitoba
Mr. Brian Lemon, Manitoba Beef Producers
Mr. Christian Artuso, Bird Studies Canada
Bill 223–The Child and Family Services Amendment Act
Mr. Manoj Nowrang, private citizen
Ms. Mary LeMaître, private citizen
Ms. Michelle Scott (and Ms. Breanne Hepp - by leave), Ma Mawi Wi Chi Itata Centre
Bill 228–The Animal Shelter and Rescue Awareness Day Act
Mr. Kevin Toyne, Winnipeg Humane Society
Ms. Katie Powell, Save A Dog Network Canada
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS:
Bill 29–The Wildlife Amendment Act (Safe Hunting and Shared Management)
Joe Masi, Association of Manitoba Municipalities
Tom Teichroeb, Manitoba Beef Producers
Michel Leclaire, The Wildlife Society, Manitoba Chapter
James Battershill, Keystone Agricultural Producers
Pamela Robins, Function Four Ltd.
Bill 35–The Crown Lands Amendment Act (Improved Management of Community Pastures and Agricultural Crown Lands)
James Battershill, Keystone Agricultural Producers
Lynne Fernandez, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Barry Ross, Association of Manitoba Community Pastures
Duncan Morrison, Manitoba Forage and Grassland Association
Katherine Storey, private citizen
MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION:
Bill 29–The Wildlife Amendment Act (Safe Hunting and Shared Management)
Bill 35–The Crown Lands Amendment Act (Improved Management of Community Pastures and Agricultural Crown Lands)
Bill 36–The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Impaired Driving Offences)
Bill 223–The Child and Family Services Amendment Act
Bill 228–The Animal Shelter and Rescue Awareness Day Act
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: Good evening. Will the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development please come to order.
This meeting has been called to consider the following bills: Bill 29, The Wildlife Amendment Act (Safe Hunting and Shared Management); Bill 35, The Crown Lands Amendment Act (Improved Management of Community Pastures and Agricultural Crown Lands); Bill 36, The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Impaired Driving Offences); Bill 223, The Child and Family Services Amendment Act; Bill 228, The Animal Shelter and Rescue Awareness Day Act.
I would like to inform all in attendance of the provisions in our rules regarding the hour of adjournment. A standing committee meeting to consider a bill must not sit past midnight to hear public presentations or to consider clause-by-clause of a bill, except by unanimous consent of the committees–of the committee.
In addition, if necessary, the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development will meet again to consider these bills tomorrow, November 1st, at 6 p.m., in room 255.
We have a number of presenters registered to speak tonight on various bills, as noted on the list of presenters before you. On the topic of determining the order of public presentations, I will note that we have some out-of-town presenters in attendance, marked with an 'asterik' on the list.
With these considerations in mind, then, in what order does the committee wish to hear the presentations?
Mr. Ian Wishart (Portage la Prairie): As presented numerically.
Mr. Chairperson: As presented numerically–no, it–the–as been put–Ms. Fontaine?
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): To proceed with the out-of-town guests first, please.
Mr. Chairperson: Is that agreed by the committee to proceed with the out-of-town guests first? [Agreed]
Written submissions from the following persons have been received and distributed to the committee members: Joe Masi, Association of Manitoba Municipalities, on Bill 29; Tom Teichroeb, Manitoba Beef Producers, on Bill 29; Michel Leclaire, The Wildlife Society, Manitoba Chapter, on Bill 29; James Battershill, Keystone Agricultural Producers, on Bill 29 and 35; Lynne Fernandez, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, on Bill 35; Barry Ross, Association of Manitoba Community Pastures, on Bill 35; Duncan Morrison, Manitoba Forage and Grassland Association, on Bill 35; Katharine Storey, private citizen, on Bill 35.
Does the committee agree to have these documents appear in Hansard transcript of this meeting? [Agreed]
Before we proceed with presentations, we do have a number of other items and points of information to consider. First of all, if there's anyone else in attendance who would like to make a presentation this evening, please register with the staff at the entrance of the room. Also, for the information of all presenters, while written versions of presentations are not required, if you are going to accompany your presentation with written material, we ask that you provide 20 copies. If you need help with photocopying, please speak with our staff.
As well, in attendance with our–in accordance with our rules, a time limit of 10 minutes has been allotted for presentations, with another five minutes allowed for questions from committee members.
If a presenter is not in attendance when their name is called, they will be dropped to the bottom of the list. If the presenter is not in attendance when their name is called a second time, they will be removed from the presenters' list.
Prior to proceeding with public presentations, I would like to advise members of the public regarding the process for speaking in committee. The proceedings of our meetings are recorded in order to provide a verbatim transcript. Each time somebody wishes to speak, whether it be an MLA or a presenter, I first have to say the person's name. This is the signal for the Hansard recorder to turn the mics on and off.
Thank you for your patience. We will now proceed with public presentations, out-of-town guests first.
Mr. Chairperson: I will now–on Bill 29, I will now call on Scott Phillips, Municipalities in the Ag Zone.
Mr. Phillips, do you have any written materials for distribution to the committee?
Mr. Scott Phillips (Municipalities in the Ag Zone): No, Sir, I do not.
Mr. Chairperson: Then you may proceed with your presentation.
Mr. Phillips: Good evening, everyone. First off, I'd like to thank for being asked to come in tonight. Hope no one's missing out on the trick or treats, and I'm honoured to be allowed to speak.
My name is Scott Phillips, councillor in the RM of Sifton. For those that are unaware of that, that is in the southwest part of the province. It is–and definitely an ag zone. I am here to represent several dozen towns, RMs and groups, which cover tens of thousands of miles in the western Manitoba, which believe this ban should take place immediately.
For the last few years, I've sent in hundreds, if not thousands, of pieces of testimonials, pictures, evidence and, sadly, obituaries as a result of night hunting-slash-spotlighting.
I personally live near Crown land and have seen the spotlights late at night. I've heard shots late at night and like a fool have gone out to confront the culprits. So anyone that thinks, who is this guy and what does he know, I live there, I see it, I live with it.
It is extremely unsafe to human life, unethical to wildlife. It causes several insurance claims to livestock mistaken as wildlife as well as equipment. This is not sustainable to any way, shape or form, and anyone who took hunter safety would agree with this.
I, along with thousands of taxpaying citizens, seek closure on this before something tragic happens again. And whether we like to admit it or acknowledge it, it is going to happen again. So the–this is not an isolated issue or an isolated area, it's a province-wide one, and we need to work together on it.
I, along with everyone else, is grateful for the parties of the day here to have found common ground on the dangers of spotlighting as we take the final steps in this closure.
For those that have got my emails for the last two, three years, if this ends, you won't be getting the hundreds of emails and saying, where's my reply, et cetera. I've been extremely animated on this, as it's hit home, it's hit personal, guys, and it has to end. There's nothing safe about it, folks.
That's all I can say. Thank you again for letting us come in, and look forward to the rest of the evening.
* (18:10)
Mr. Chairperson: We will now take questions of the presenter.
Hon. Rochelle Squires (Minister of Sustainable Development): Not really a question. Just want to thank Mr. Phillips for coming in this evening, and I want to thank you for your perseverance on this issue, as you have been very passionate, outspoken advocate for safety of all Manitobans and of livestock and property and this has been a concern that you've brought to our attention many times. And I want you to know that we're listening to you and really appreciate you coming here tonight to present. [interjection]
Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Phillips. You have to wait 'til I mention your name before you can speak. Mr. Phillips.
Mr. Phillips: Thank you for the kind words. I know I've sent you and your predecessor several hundreds of emails, and I'm pretty sure I'm blocked by now. But it was well worth it. So we look forward to closure.
Ms. Judy Klassen (Kewatinook): Thank you for your presentation. So I'm wondering, you stated you represent a lot of people in western Manitoba. So my question is, what have you done to make daylight hunting safer for hunters? Have you opened up the lands that are rightfully ours to hunters?
Mr. Phillips: Yes, actually, for those that don't know, I work quite closely with Sioux Valley Dakota Nation. I have several First Nation guys that work for me. I have set them up with a lot of landowners with bushland along the rivers and creeks, to allow them to hunt on there. I know that some people don't get a fair shake in life, but I've done lots in the last few years, personally, to make sure that the guys can take advantage of hunting and fishing and so forth.
Mr. Chairperson: Do we have any other questions of Mr. Phillips? Seeing as no more questions, we thank you for your presentation, Mr. Phillips, and we will move on to the next presenter.
I will now call on Cameron Neurenberg, private citizen.
Cameron Neurenberg. Do you have any written materials for distribution to the committee, Mr. Neurenberg?
Mr. Cameron Neurenberg (Private Citizen): No, I do not.
Mr. Chairperson: Then you may proceed with your presentation, Mr. Neurenberg.
Mr. Neurenberg: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.
My name is Cameron Neurenberg, as the Chairman has indicated. I am an agricultural producer residing in the RM of Lac du Bonnet. We farm on both sides of the Winnipeg River. And I'm also a hunter, a lifelong hunter. Primarily a big game hunter. I'm an executive committee member of the Manitoba Wildlife Federation a board member of the Lac du Bonnet wildlife federation and environmental and land use committee member of Keystone Agricultural Producers.
I will address the issue of safety as it pertains to Bill 29, first off. East side of Lake Winnipeg is fairly unique. We don't have a high–as high a concentration of agricultural units that you would in other areas of the province. Primarily, the area north of the Winnipeg River is Canadian Shield. We farm bordering the Canadian Shield. We have close proximity to Whiteshell Provincial Park. The Lac du Bonnet area is a high, high traffic recreational area for urban Winnipeggers and many of them are hunters and anglers. So we are exposed to hunting pressure from various sources.
We are proponents, on our farm, are proponents of advocating for written permission. You approach us, we grant written permission, we know who's on our land and that's how we address the safety issue.
Given the fact that we're on the east side of Lake Winnipeg, I have been involved in an organization called the committee for moose management, which is an organization that encompasses eastside communities, indigenous communities along eastside of Lake Winnipeg. We have been working co‑operatively for 20 years to develop wildlife management strategies within that geographic area. We have had significant successes. We've made good friendships, and have found lots of common ground. So that's a big background there.
With regards to safety, it is difficult to comprehend as to how it came to pass that the authors of the Constitution of our great nation would enshrine an activity that places its citizens at risk. And yet this is where we find ourselves presently. We have rural areas where–in–within Manitoba where school buses carrying children, farm families tending livestock and managing crop production at unconventional hours are working in an environment that allows hunting at night when one cannot see anything beyond the range of the artificial light being utilized.
Bill 29 is courageous in addressing this serious safety issue on behalf of all Manitobans.
The shared management component of this bill is one of–that is of particular–well, I guess the best way to say it, it's dear to my heart. As I mentioned earlier, I've been a member of the Committee for Cooperative Moose Management, moose matters committee on the east side of Lake Winnipeg, and these are forums that are in place to facilitate the shared management initiative that is being proposed in this bill. As a member of the executive committee of the Manitoba Wildlife Federation, we have struck a steering committee to take a leadership role in this historic endeavour. And MWF is committed to participate in developing a shared management strategy that benefits all Manitobans.
Working with east-side indigenous community members, there is a general recognition that the current approach to resource management is unsustainable and unworkable for all peoples, and it needs–we need to change it. To–the resource management is not working for anyone, and diligence to turn this ship is required, as to resources are dwindling, absent strong management strategies with grassroots input.
In that spirit, MWF has reached out to First Nations elders as well as grassroots Metis Manitobans to come together and co-operatively create a truly shared management strategy.
In closing, I encourage all MLAs to support Bill 29 and set the tone for comprehensive, inclusive resource management policies for all Manitobans. We must and can do this for future generations.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Neurenberg. We will now move on to questions.
Ms. Squires: Thank you very much, Mr. Neurenberg, for coming down here tonight and presenting to us your thoughts on Bill 29. And I just want to take the opportunity to thank you for your work on the conservation of moose and other iconic species here in Manitoba. You've been a large part of many committees that are working towards ensuring that these species are here and available in the future for our future generations as well. So I want to thank you for your work in that regard.
Mr. Neurenberg: Thank you, Ma'am.
Ms. Klassen: Thank you for your presentation.
I was wondering if you could name some of the communities you work with along the east side.
Mr. Neurenberg: Over the years, Hollow Water First Nation, Black River First Nation, Sagkeeng First Nation, and we have, through the Moose Matters committee, in the last three years, worked with Bloodvein First Nation. And Brokenhead First Nation often hosts and facilitates the meetings that we have.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank you for your presentation, Mr. Neurenberg. Seeing as no other questions, we will now move on to the next presentation. Thank you.
We will now call on Pam Robins. Pam Robins?
Pam Robins does not appear to be here. We will move her to the bottom of the list.
We will now call on Bob Austman, hunters safety instructors association of Manitoba. Bob Austman?
Bob Austman is not here. Mr. Austman's name will be moved to the bottom of the list.
Our next presenter, Archie McPherson, reeve of Westman area.
Mr. McPherson, do you have any written material for the committee?
Mr. Archie McPherson (Reeve, Rural Municipality of Pipestone): No, I don't.
Mr. Chairperson: Then you may proceed with your presentation as soon as you are ready.
Mr. McPherson: I'd like to thank the committee for the opportunity of appearing here tonight, even though it was on short notice at 1 o'clock this afternoon. I was heading back to the field when I got a call, so three-hour drive later, we made it. And I'm thankful to be here.
I don't have anything prepared, so I'm going to kind of shoot from the hip. I am very grateful that all parties involved over the past several years have come together to get to the point we are at tonight here with bringing this legislation forward. As some of you are probably aware, it was the RM of Pipestone that originally brought the resolution forward roughly four years ago, so it was gratifying to see that we're at this stage of the–giving this legislation hopefully passed through.
* (18:20)
I'm not sure if there's possible–amendments could be made to this. All the way through with this, we were concerned about allowing night hunting in the southern part of the province in designated, large parcels of Crown land. And I'll use the Spruce Woods for example. I think it's still creating a lot of possibility of danger to local people. They talk about possibly issuing permits and whatnot. If you issue eight permits for a given night to allow somebody go into–hunt in Spruce Woods, how do the game wardens not know that there's not another 10 parties in there hunting without–properly permitted?
And it can create some pretty dangerous situations. As a former RCMP officer back in the '70s and the '80s, we were actively involved in enforcing The Wildlife Act. Worked in conjunction with the game wardens a lot of times. I personally was involved in a lot of dangerous situations–high-speed chases, loaded firearms, alcohol involved. It's not a pretty situation to be in.
Talked to several game wardens. They're already concerned about issuing permits in the southern part of the province. They realize that there's going to be lots of problems and concerns for safety and whatnot. I just question why we'd jeopardize our good game wardens to put them in those kinds of situations. We've got a lot of designated area in the northern part of the province that–thousands of square miles where there's no one that could be possibly injured, possibly other than the hunters themselves. So if some amendments could be made to that effect, I would be very grateful for.
I encourage everyone to pass this bill. It's certainly in the safety of all people in the Province of Manitoba.
And with that I–again, thank you for the opportunity to speak before you.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. McPherson.
Ms. Squires: Thank you so much for coming down here, and especially for driving three hours to be here. And I want you to know that your concerns with the bill and your comments are greatly appreciated and provides us something to think about.
So, much appreciated for your time tonight and for your commitment to safety in Manitoba. [interjection]
Mr. Chairperson: Mr. McPherson, you have to wait to speak until I–Mr. McPherson.
Mr. McPherson: Thank you, Madam Minister.
Ms. Klassen: Thank you, as well, for making the three-hour trek and for bringing forward your concerns over the permit system. I know that in my east-side communities, there's a lot of permits that are handed out, and we still don't know who's in our traditional lands and territories in my riding.
The question I have for you is, you know, is there anything in particular that you have done to make daylight hunting safer for all our hunters in Manitoba? [interjection]
Mr. Chairperson: Mr. McPherson.
Mr. McPherson: I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I've worked in the past with firearm safety courses. I've–I'm well known in the area. I've hunted all my life. Lots of people from Winnipeg, Brandon, come out our way deer hunting in the past. It's getting less because the deer population isn't the same as it was back in the '70s and '80s, and it's probably consistent throughout the province with the primary deer hunting out our way–although there's moose there, now.
I've assisted a lot of people in acquiring permission to land because I know everybody in the area and all the farmers. I farm myself. So people would say, well, who's land are we on, can we get permission? And I'd–I–hundreds of people over the last 40 years I've helped get permission to get on land and so on and so forth. So I was always kind of the go-to person when it come to hunting and getting permission granted, so on and so forth.
Mr. Chairperson: Are there any other questions of Mr. McPherson?
Mr. Doyle Piwniuk (Arthur-Virden): Thank you, Mr. McPherson. I'm glad that you came here today and presented, and I also want to congratulate you on being acclaimed as the reeve again for Pipestone. And thanks again for coming out and supporting this bill.
Mr. McPherson: Thank you, Mr. Doyle.
Mr. Chairperson: Any further questions? If not, we thank you for your presentation, Mr. McPherson, and we will move on to our next presenter. Thank you.
We will now call on Michelle Assailly. Michelle?
Michelle, if you could give me the proper pronunciation of your last name, please.
Ms. Michelle Assailly (Private Citizen): Certainly, it's Michelle Assailly.
Mr. Chairperson: Assailly. Thank you.
Do you have any written material for the committee?
Ms. Assailly: No, I don't.
Mr. Chairperson: Then you may proceed with your presentation. Thank you.
Ms. Assailly: Hello. I am a relatively new hunter, even though I grew up on a farm in rural Manitoba. My husband and I both enjoy the meals prepared from meat that I have harvested. He's not interested in hunting, and he worries sometimes when I'm out later in the day because I'm not the only one out there. And he obviously is a little nervous.
There's many safety issues surrounding hunting at night. It goes against everything that our hunter education safety courses teaches new hunters. Night hunting is also contributing to the decline in some of our wildlife populations and makes these populations less sustainable.
The fact is, the safety zones for firing firearms at night is zero. You cannot see beyond your target. And this is a key principle in hunter education programs. It's also a key principle across Canada and North America's hunter education programs.
This can be verified at International Hunter Education Association's website, which is iheacanada.ca. IHEA has recognized the importance of heritage and cultural values in Canada, and the International Hunter Education Association Canada fosters a collaborative educational network that sets a foundation for a safe, respectful and responsible hunting community for today and tomorrow.
Night hunting is unsafe for any Manitoban, regardless of hunting rights. As a government and concerned citizens we have the possibility through implementing this bill to protect all citizens of Manitoba from personal danger from night hunting, and also to protect our rights to hunt safely.
Night hunting's also unsafe for non-resident hunters, people that come up from the US, which could affect local tourism, and it would cascade into affecting our economy in a detrimental manner.
There are two very apt acronyms that I get directly from the RCMP, which is a national organization. The first acronym is ACTS, to remember four vital acts of firearm safety. The C in that acronym stands for control the muzzle direction at all times. You can't see past your target during night hunting. The second acronym is PROVE, p-r-o-v-e, to remember to prove that it's safe. The V stands for verify the feeding path. This would be impossible during night hunting. There is such a thing as fair chase in ethical hunting, it's sporting, which is absent in night hunting.
We must manage our harvesting of key species to ensure there are animals for us to hunt in the future. We see there's alarming declines in our moose population, for instance. Dr. Vince Crichton has indicated this in various media, including his podcast called Moose Management, which can be accessed at panoramicoutdoors.podbean.com and also on iTunes. See also his video The Man Who Would Be Moose; it's very interesting to watch.
What is going to be done to make sure I have an opportunity to ethically harvest a moose for my freezer in a free–in a few years from now? I've never harvested moose. This is an opportunity to make a difference, and this is why I'm here.
Night hunting is not ethical hunting. Further, spotlight night hunting isn't moral; lazy, reckless and cowardly tactic, often employed by greedy, unskilled poachers who couldn't bag a deer on a fair playing field if their disgusting, cheater lives depended on it.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Ms. Assailly.
Ms. Squires: I just want to thank you for coming down here tonight and espousing some of the facts and opinions about safety.
Ms. Klassen: Thank you for your presentation. I–you used some very strong language and which, you know, I feel was not necessary, but I can–I know that your frustration is coming through in the language that you're using.
I do believe that there is a way that we can work together to make sure that both the interests of all hunters are carried forward. You know, this bill blankets everything night hunting. In my area up north, night hunting–that's one of the primary ways that my people harvest beaver. And so, you know, this bill does not take into consideration for those kinds of hunting, and so that's why, you know, I'm sitting here today trying to make sure that our voices of every Manitoban gets heard.
* (18:30)
And so I appreciate your comments and I was just wondering if there was any recommendations–I've tried to put recommendations–if you had any.
Ms. Assailly: I would recommend maybe–I do a lot of volunteering with hunter education and Manitoba Wildlife Federation and stuff like that, and I would suggest that there needs to be a lot more education for existing hunters. I mean, don't just teach the brand new ones. There might be something still to be learned later on, or possibly getting a lot more strict with action or fines or jail time against people who, you know, are really rampantly, horribly doing it, because there's some really good examples out there of nasty people night hunting for nothing more than profit. Thank you.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): Miigwech for coming in to present to us.
I do want to just touch base on your last comment that you just made in respect of lots of nasty people night hunting. In your opinion, can you give me some examples of what you're talking about? [interjection]
Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Assailly,
Ms. Assailly: Sorry–there was a group of hunters that were arrested in southern Manitoba at night with lots of moose meat, a couple of trucks and a helicopter, and I believe they all got impounded because they were flying this meat across the border.
Now, I don't have names for that, I'm sorry. It was just something that was discussed at a get-together one time, but there's other incidents that I've heard of. That's the kind of nastiness that I'm talking about, where it's just sheer–sometimes it's not even meat; sometimes it's just for the horns, like for the antlers. You can't, you know, harvest a moose and just take the antlers. That's really wasteful, and with declining populations, I think that's disgraceful, really, but, yes, for nasty people I would say probably the ones that are harvesting it so vastly as to make it a commercial enterprise.
Mr. Chairperson: Do we have any more questions for Ms. Assailly?
If not, we thank you for your presentation and we will move on to the next presenter.
I will now call on Joseph Maud, First Nations in Treaty 2 Territory.
Joseph? Do you have any written material for the committee, Mr. Maud?
Mr. Joseph Maud (First Nations in Treaty 2 Territory): Yes, I do.
Mr. Chairperson: Okay. We will have our staff distribute it. As soon as it's distributed we will–then you may proceed with your presentation. Oh, there's more to hand out?
Mr. Maud: One more.
Mr. Chairperson: You may start with your presentation, Mr. Maud.
Mr. Maud: Good evening. I don't know how to address you guys–members of the Manitoba Legislature? My name is Joseph Maud. I am a treaty member of Skownan First Nation, a Treaty 2 member. I am also–prior to being employed with the Treaty 2 office, I served faithfully for 12 years as a council member for Skownan First Nation. And prior to that I was a Canadian Armed Forces soldier. So, but anyways, I am speaking for Treaty 2.
I'm speaking not only for myself, but speaking for the First Nations in Treaty 2 Territory when I tell you that this committee and the government of Manitoba would do the people of Manitoba a great favour if you would delay this passage of this bill, any further process regarding this bill. There is still time to sit tight and do the right thing. I'm speaking for the entire Treaty 2 territory and nobody else. We can go from west of Brandon to the Berens River, from Pine Creek all the way to the Winnipeg River, to the US border. There are 22 million acres in this territory, which encompasses most of southern Manitoba.
We have a lot of talking about, to do it together. Why aren't we talking? Doing it right means engaging in serious sit-down discussions with First Nations. This has not taken place. We are reasonable people. We will find a reasonable solution which does not jeopardize the people of Manitoba and which does not contravene our rights and interests.
You have a law here in Manitoba which they say you will act in accordance with the United Nations declaration on right of indigenous peoples. This bill, as it stands, is contrary with the rights set out in the declaration. As this bill stands, it is contrary to the Constitution of Canada. Why act in a way which will cause us to challenge this bill in the courts, to challenge it successfully, at the end of the day? Why set yourselves up for a bad–for bad relations with us, when we are seeking your friendship? Why do you refuse to sit down and talk? I ask you honourable legislators to do your duty to your people, to your province, and set this bill aside for the next six months while we work together to accommodate each other's needs.
Our children, your children, need to be able to live together in friendship. Do not leave them with bitter feelings when it would be easy for us to work together. That's my presentation.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Maud. We will now take questions.
Mrs. Bernadette Smith (Point Douglas): Thank you for your presentation. I appreciate you coming down and speaking on behalf of Treaty 2 territory. My question to you is, do you know of any territory in Treaty 2 that was consulted about this bill?
Floor Comment: Pardon me?
Mr. Chairperson: Mister–
Mrs. Smith: Do you know–
Mr. Chairperson: Okay, Miss Smith–Mrs. Smith, sorry.
Mrs. Smith: Do you know of any of the communities in Treaty 2 that were consulted on this bill by the minister?
Mr. Maud: The Province of Manitoba, I guess, engaged Treaty 2. We had a series of this–earlier this year, in March–February and March. We went to the nine communities and talked about night hunting. Like I said, it was just a general discussion. I would not call that consultation. Nor was there any accommodation for any of the legislators here, or your staff, to come to Skownan or any of our Treaty 2 communities and talk in Ojibwe. There's a lot of words that cannot be translated from English to Ojibwe or vice versa. So it was a general discussion on night hunting. That's all I will say that was. It was just a general meeting. No consultation, it was just a general discussion.
Ms. Klassen: Thank you for coming out tonight. I really appreciate it. I hope the minister will thank you as well–again, and in friendship, because you have made the trouble of coming all the way out here.
My mom is from Lake Manitoba First Nation, so you know, I'm very concerned to this bill. And you're right, there is something that needs to be done. But it needs to be done in co-operation with our people. These are our lands; at the end of the day, these are our lands and our territories. And we do acknowledge that there's something that needs to take place. And it needs to take place with us at the tables.
* (18:40)
I've spoken to many chiefs across Treaty 2 territory, and they said the same thing that you're saying today, that it was just a 'deneral' discussion. They actually 'quode'–we actually have somebody who is being quoted as saying this is not to be taken as a consultation. And so I appreciate you voicing that today here too.
My question is: What are some of the solutions that, hopefully, it'll perk up the ears of the PC team here to make sure that this bill does not pass today?
Mr. Maud: Okay, I want to point out, I guess, when you say solution, and I'll just–like, I guess in, kind of in a similar context about fishing, like, there was a–in Lake Dauphin, there's a conservation issue about our people being charged.
And so what Treaty 2 did, is that we have experts, our own elders, than how–that know how to sustain and manage the wildlife, including fish. We, Treaty 2, approached one of our experts in–of Skownan First Nation about helping to restock Lake Dauphin. We had no money. We had no funds. This spring, the Province of Manitoba put out a conservation measure, like, any fish caught over 25 centimetres to 30 centimetres, our people would be charged. We said, don't charge our people; we have a solution. We'll help restock Lake Dauphin, which we did successfully. We restocked 500,000 fingerlings into Lake Dauphin. So that was–so there's solutions that Treaty 2's offering.
I want to point out one other–15 years ago, the Province of Manitoba came to Skownan First Nation. They seen that how our people are fishermen, are land users, managed Lake Waterhen really good. They have–our treaty fishermen, they've been doing it for centuries. They came up to Skownan, the Province of Manitoba: Skownan, would you be interested in eco-certifying Lake Waterhen?
So the dialogue, chief and council, the fishermen, the Province of Manitoba, 15 years–this is started about 15 years ago. So what happened? Four years ago, Lake Waterhen was the first eco-certified in the western hemisphere, the first eco-certified lake in the western hemisphere. So that's because our people look after Lake Waterhen. Our people manage it. They don't overfish. They don't overkill. They clean up the lake. It–the Province didn't have to tell us how to manage our resources; we did it–we did this on our own, and like I said, it's a shining example that our people know how to manage the resources, whether it be wildlife or fish, and in this case, night hunting.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank you for your presentation, but we're well over the five-minute question allotted–question period allotment. We thank you for your presentation, Mr. Maud, and we will now move on to our next presenter. Thank you.
I will now call on Chief Cornell McLean, Lake Manitoba First Nation.
Chief McLean, do you have any written material?
Mr. Cornell McLean (Lake Manitoba First Nation): No.
Mr. Chairperson: Then you may proceed with your presentation when you are ready.
Mr. McLean: Good evening. Thank you, Chairman, and also say hi to Minister Squires.
I was supposed to do that same speech as Joe just did, but I'll just wing it. First, it's about to accommodate and consent, I guess, for my community and also for the communities of Treaty 2. I'm also a vice-chief of Treaty 2. We've had several discussions, meetings, with Minister Squires, people from her office who work–who are from my community as well, came visiting, spoke about the night lighting, the safe hunting issues.
I have no problems with the safe hunting, night lighting. I'm not going to tell my people that they can't harvest for and feed themselves and they can't go night lighting. I think it's our right as First Nations people and as the First Peoples of this country that we're entitled to, you know, to feed our families from–whether it be from the lake or from the bush. At the end of the day, like I say, we had people from Minister Squires' office come to Lake Manitoba, speak about the night lighting, the safeties of it. It's just going to become unsafe if it's taken away. They're going to do it anyway, right? You know what, let's be truthful with ourselves here.
Like, myself being a hunter as well, I don't go night lighting, so, you know, I don't see the pros and cons of it. I'm a guy that–I don't shoot from the side of the road either, so–there's Crown land that's designated for us, so, you know, I practise that. And I only take what's needed for my community, for my members, for my family. So, you know, I think it should be done in a meaningful way.
We need to be accommodated by the Province before we're able to provide our consent as First Nations people.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you, mister–Chief McLean, for your presentation.
Ms. Squires: Thank you very much, Chief, for coming down here tonight, and thank you for the dialogue that we've had in the past.
And I really look forward to ongoing collaboration with you on future conversations about how we can ensure the conservation of our iconic species and work together in a shared management of our resources. So thank you for being here tonight.
Mr. McLean: Thank you.
Ms. Fontaine: Miigwech, Chief McLean, for coming to present to the committee tonight.
So, just to be clear for everybody in the room, I know that when you describe the staff from the minister's department coming to your community, you talk about it in terms of visiting. So–and similarly, I think Mr. Joseph Maud spoke about it in the same way.
And so, was there any attempt by the minister or her department to begin or execute thorough consultations with chief and council, with elders, with hunters, in your community?
Mr. McLean: I'll say it was like a sheep in wolf's clothing, the way I'll put it.
The person was my band member that came to my community to address us on the hunting issues, came during a meeting that we were having with Treaty 2. And my members were there, and a lot of my young members and my older members spoke to my band member, I'll call him, and explained to him about the pros and cons of night lighting.
And he assured us that this wasn't a consultation process, that he was going to take our information back to the minister, and we were going to have meaningful dialogue to get to where we needed to get in terms of what was safe and what was unsafe for night lighting.
Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Klassen.
An Honourable Member: Follow-up?
Mr. Chairperson: Ms. McLean–or–sorry. Ms. Fontaine.
Ms. Fontaine: So, just to be clear then, you wouldn't consider that consultation–first question, would you consider that consultation? And was there any follow-up based on what you were just saying, that you were going to–beginning those discussions? Was there any follow-up from the minister's office?
Mr. McLean: There was follow-up. No, it wasn't consultation, but there was follow-up. We–myself along with the grand chief of Treaty 2, along with the other chiefs, came and met Minister Squires in her office.
Ms. Klassen: Thank you for your presentation, Chief.
Welcome here. I really appreciate your words because, you know, it officially puts it on the record what I have been trying to say in House, that there was no true consultation.
So, you know, while we have the PC team here, can you tell the minister and her colleagues here what true consultation looks like? Because they are having a heck of a time trying to figure that out.
Mr. McLean: Well, I don't think it's just a phone call or–you know, I think it needs to be meaningful discussions, with the minister or deputy minister coming to my community to address my members, you know, to tell us what we want.
Mr. Ted Marcelino (Tyndall Park): Regarding the suggestion that this bill could be held and make it a little–make more time for it to be discussed among those who will be mostly affected by it.
Can you comment on that, please?
* (18:50)
Mr. McLean: Well, we were told that this bill was going to be in the spring. Here we are today.
You know, who will be mostly affected? Well, we just had a community hunt in our community. Feeds all of our elders. And then we take care of all of our big family. So it'll certainly affect our people–my people.
Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Klassen, we have about 15 seconds left, so if you could make a quick one. [interjection]
Oh, sorry. Ms. Klassen. I guess I didn't–
Ms. Klassen: I'd like you to speak to when there is a harvest, you know, the sharing that goes on in the community. If you could speak to that, explain to these members what that means.
Mr. McLean: It goes by the size of the family. It's once a year. Like, in the fall. It's–it goes–it'll go half a deer to the elders and then a full deer to the families.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank you for your presentation, Chief McLean, but our–we're, again, well over our time allotted for questions. So I thank you very much and I will now move on to the next presenter.
I will now call on Cindy McKay. Cindy McKay?
Do you have any written material for the committee?
Ms. Cindy McKay (Private Citizen): Yes, I do.
Mr. Chairperson: Okay, if we could get that handed out.
Ms. McKay, you may start your presentation.
Ms. McKay: Hello, my name is Cindy McKay. I'm from Pine Creek. I'm a band member there, as well as a councillor.
Miigwech for accepting our–my request to make a submission on the above matter. In short, our submission today addresses concerns, comments by the honourable Minister of Sustainable Development (Ms. Squires) to members of the legislative process.
Specifically, these comments are: First Nation hunters are routinely shooting bullets through the night into farmhouses, damaging property and causing lives to be lost–when, in truth, there's no evidence of this. How does one know who's shooting when it's nighttime? When we have other hunters that come into your areas? But that's not your area, it's our territory.
First Nation hunters are the main reason for species loss–when, in truth, there is zero evidence of this. In contrast, the evidence suggests that animals are being starved due to inadequate wilderness habitat.
Bill 29 creates a shared management process–when, in truth, the bill pays lip service to the idea of shared management and leaves all power in the hands of the government.
And I share the same comments with the chief that there was no consultation in my community. They came there and they only listened to the one individual that was in line with the agenda, which is to ban night hunting. So there was no consultation there.
I need some water.
We made sure at the time when they came that this was not consultation. There was no follow-up after that. We didn't know where the report–we didn't know what the statements–or, where the statements went. There was no follow up at all. Now, if you want to be meaningful, you need to provide us with meaningful consultation.
Pine Creek First Nation was duly consulted–when, in truth, the engagement with Pine Creek was inadequate.
In addition, we know the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, Southern Chiefs' Organization and Anishinaabe Agowidiiwinan, Treaty 2, have expressed opposition to Bill 29 and the consultation process leading up to it.
The government of Manitoba ought to respect these organizations, as they speak for us, the rights holders. Thus we hope this committee considers our submission and proceeds accordingly.
Again, how does one know that was our people? We feed our people.
That's it.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation.
Ms. Squires: Thank you very much, Councillor McKay, for coming down here this evening and sharing your thoughts with committee and for providing us with your comments here that we can review accordingly. So thank you.
Ms. McKay: Miigwech.
Ms. Fontaine: Aaniin. Miigwech for coming to present this evening and travelling down here.
So I just want to be clear in respect of your submission. And the comments that are written here in the four bullet points, those are comments that the Minister for Sustainable Development made about your community and to members of your community, to be clear?
Ms. McKay: As far as I'm aware, by talking to some band members, yes.
Ms. Klassen: Yes, thank you for pointing out the more–for coming out here as well, but for pointing out the more plausible explanations for the possible decline in moose populations. You–I don't particularly believe this minister when she says that the populations are declining as she has gone on record as stating. You know, there's been a lot of good harvest this–in my community, so that points exactly to the opposite of what she's saying.
But, you know, it's quite frustrating when we hear that she's gone on record and saying these things in our communities and, you know, not truly listening to all the people that are talking. You know, they've done that time and time again in our committees, when they would be going with a person who is aligning with them and then just completely shutting down and ignoring, you know.
I would like for you to say, as an indigenous woman, how that makes you feel.
Ms. McKay: I was very disheartened when they left, and I felt really helpless knowing that our hunters were not even listened to. They were–they came there with only one agenda–is to ban this night hunting, and that's the only people they listened to.
And we specifically told them that it was not consultation.
Mrs. Smith: Thank you for your presentation. We appreciate you coming down and sharing some words from your community.
You know, I've heard a few people speak about people who are, you know, doing this for sport.
Can you speak a little bit about, you know, the meaning of being able to hunt and provide for your family in your communities and what this bill would do, to that effect?
Ms. McKay: Well, it would stop our hunters from feeding our families, simple as that.
Ms. Squires: So, with all due respect, I do want to clarify and emphatically deny that these aren't my words, either on the record or off the record.
Ms. McKay: I don't think you were there in person, were you?
Ms. Squires: So, if you're talking about a specific consultation that was held in your community, my officials were there, but I was not there in person. And therefore that sort of clarifies that I would not have been able to make these comments on the record or off the record.
Ms. McKay: But your representatives were there, and like I said, they were not listening to our hunters at all.
* (19:00)
Ms. Squires: Then I would hope that we can have the record state that these are certainly not my words. I never said these on the record or off the record.
Thank you for the clarification.
Mr. Chairperson: Ms. McKay? Ms. Fontaine.
Ms. Fontaine: So, I guess I won't comment on the minister's comments right now, and the attempt to really kind of dismiss the concerns that you're bringing here on behalf of the whole community. I think the minister is more concerned about her reputation than actually the families of Pine Creek.
I do want to just point out for the record that the minister did just state that she hasn't been to your community. And so, therefore, I would indicate to the committee for the record that there has been no consultation with Pine Creek, and the minister just confirmed that just now.
Miigwech.
Ms. McKay: You're absolutely correct. There was no consultation.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank you for your presentation, Ms. McKay, but we are, again, well into–well over our five minutes. So we will now move on to the next presenter.
This concludes the out-of-town presenters on Bill 29.
We will now move to the out‑of‑town presenters on Bill 35.
Could the minister please take the seat.
I will now call on Dean Harder, National Farmers Union, Manitoba.
Mr. Dean Harder.
Mr. Harder–is Mr. Harder present?
Mr. Harder's name will be moved to the bottom of the list.
The next out-of-town presenter we have is on Bill 228, The Animal Shelter and Rescue Awareness Day Act.
I will call upon the member responsible for this bill, Bill 228. Okay.
Katie Powell?
Katie Powell's name will be dropped to the bottom of the list.
We will now move back to Bill 29.
I will now call on Brian Kotak, Manitoba Wildlife Federation.
Brian, do you have any written material for the committee?
Mr. Brian Kotak (Manitoba Wildlife Federation): Yes, I do.
Mr. Chairperson: Okay, we will get it distributed to the committee.
And you may start your presentation when you are ready.
Mr. Kotak: Thank you very much. And thank you for the opportunity to speak about our support of Bill 29.
The Manitoba Wildlife Federation represents more than 14,000 hunters, anglers and outdoor enthusiasts in the province. For 75 years, our organization has promoted the safe use of firearms and safe and ethical hunting practices. Bill 29 will better protect public safety, protect property, and help conserve our vulnerable wildlife resources.
Tonight I'd like to address some of the specifics of Bill 29. First and foremost, this bill provides a much needed mechanism to deal with public safety issues surrounding the dangerous practice of night hunting. The sad statistics of hunters and even nonhunters being killed or injured by the use of firearms at night is tragic. How many near misses or actual incidents are not even reported in those statistics? Sadly we're speaking about people, not statistics.
As hunters it's our collective responsibility to ensure not only our own safety, but also that of others while we undertake our hunting traditions. Unfortunately, at night it's not possible to know who else is out there in the forest and in the field.
Our organization is responsible for administering the Manitoba Hunter Education Program. With more than 180 instructors, each year we teach a new generation of several thousand hunters and prospective hunters how to be safe and ethical hunters.
One of the most important aspects of this training for all hunters is to correctly identify their target. That is, be sure you know what you're shooting at. This may sound pretty obvious, but when you're looking through a rifle scope at night is what you're looking at a whitetail deer or a mule deer?
The difference is important, as one species can be legally hunted. The other is a threatened species in Manitoba and hunting is prohibited. Sometimes the obvious is just not so obvious, especially in the dark at night.
Equally important is to know what is behind your target. Even in an area that you're familiar with and may have hunted many times before, it's impossible to know what your target is at night. It's far too easy to get turned around at night, impossible to know if somebody else is out there, if farm machinery has been moved around or if livestock are now in a particular pasture or forest.
Knowing your target and what's behind it is vitally important. Today's firearms are powerful. When not handled safely, they are extremely dangerous. For example, according to the ballistic information used in the Canadian Firearms Safety Course, the dangerous range of even a small calibre cartridge such as a .22 long rifle is more than 1.6 kilometres.
The dangerous range for larger calibre rifles used for big game species such as deer, elk or moose is even greater: over three kilometres for a .243 calibre, over five kilometres for a 30-odd .6 calibre, and over five and a half kilometres for a .7 millimetre magnum.
These are calibres commonly used for big game species in Manitoba, and this is why our hunter-education instructors focus so heavily on the safe handling and use of firearms, and why we teach that hunting at night is so dangerous and unacceptable.
In addition to the public safety aspect, damage to property, whether it's houses, vehicles, barns, agricultural equipment or livestock, continues to occur as a result of night hunting. Rural property owners and their assets are particularly at risk and Bill 29 is needed to protect property.
The populations of our wildlife species are declining throughout the province, especially moose and elk. Some populations are so low now that any level of hunting threatens their sustainability and existence. Night hunting is contributing to that decline as well as preventing these populations from recovering. Enacting legislation that limits night hunting will help those populations.
Defining where it is safe to hunt at night–our organization is concerned that night hunting will still be allowed in the province even with these proposed restrictions. However, we do acknowledge that this bill attempts to balance the rights of Aboriginal peoples to hunt for sustenance with the protection of public safety, property, and our wildlife.
In order to provide as much protection as possible under this legislation, The Manitoba Wildlife Federation insists that careful consideration be given when defining where it is safe to hunt at night, particularly in the southern zone.
We are willing to take a part in the process to identify safe night-hunting areas and so are the knowledgeable hunter-education instructors that we entrust to teach new hunters about safe and ethical hunting practices.
We also agree with the complete prohibition of night hunting by all persons on private land. Our organization also supports the requirement that any Aboriginal person who wishes to hunt at night in a designated night-hunting area in the southern zone must apply for and hold a valid time- and geographically bound permit.
We're pleased to see the acknowledgment of a need to facilitate dialogue between private land owners, Aboriginal hunters, governments and other interested organizations to create mechanisms for granting written permission for safe hunting by Aboriginal peoples on private land during the daylight hours.
This is an important initiative, given the continual reduction in the amount of Crown land available for hunting and trapping by Aboriginal hunters in southern Manitoba over the last century or more. Many of our members are rural and private landowners and were very interested in being a part of that dialogue.
The Manitoba Wildlife Federation is very pleased to see the concept of shared management in Bill 29. This form of wildlife management is long overdue in Manitoba and is an important mechanism for interested parties to work collaboratively to ensure the sustainability of our wildlife resource.
Several informal models of this management style already exist in Manitoba, such as the committee for co-operative moose management and the East Side Lake Winnipeg Moose Matters Committee. Both committees forge partnerships and promote open dialogue between indigenous and licenced hunters. Both committees have also developed recommendations to government on rebuilding our moose populations in eastern Manitoba.
* (19:10)
These are well-thought-out recommendations developed collaboratively and agreed upon by consensus. Shared management committees need to be developed now. Whether these are new committees or utilizing existing members–or, members of existing ones, we desperately need the model to be implemented now, and the priority should be for regions of the province where wildlife populations are at risk or where these ad hoc committees have already been working for years.
Finally, I'd like to touch briefly on the topic of enforcement. All legislation needs to be enforced. In the context of Bill 29, adequate enforcement means focusing on priority areas. This means focusing on the geographic areas where our wildlife resources are declining or being prevented from recovering due to night hunting.
However, focusing on key geographic areas will not be effective if the human resources are not in place. We've seen a large decline in the number of conservation officers in the province over the last decade. Currently, there are too few conservation officers that are stretched too thinly across too large a geographic area.
Equally important is having the courts and judges impose stiff penalties to those convicted. We have witnessed judges imposing minimal or no penalties. Last week, in–a provincial court judge sentenced two hunters convicted of spotlighting off a provincial road and in an area closed to hunting. The judge's sentence included returning the confiscated vehicle, imposing no fine and told the hunters to go out and shoot five deer or a moose and provide the meat to their community. Is this a failure of the Crown attorney? The judge? Both? What message is this sending to hunters who break the law? What message does this send to our conservation officers who risk their very own safety as part of protecting our wildlife?
The reality of any new legislation is it–that it requires proper and effective enforcement and significant penalties to act as a deterrent. For Bill 29, this is critical.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you tonight about Bill 29. This is an important piece of legislation, not just for our members, but for all Manitobans and for our wildlife resources. The Manitoba Wildlife Federation looks forward to taking an active role in its–in the implementation of Bill 29.
Thank you for your attention and for the opportunity.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Kotak.
Ms. Squires: Thank you for coming down here this evening, Brian, and sharing your thoughts and presenting on behalf of the Manitoba Wildlife Federation. I know we have had a long process thus far in working together on the longevity and the conservation of our natural species and our habitat here in Manitoba.
And I look forward to this continued relationship as we move forward with the many challenges we face in the Province of Manitoba.
Thank you.
Mr. Kotak: Thank you for those comments, Minister Squires. And I personally look forward to being able to continue to work with everybody–with our First Nation partners that we currently work with, with licenced hunters and with government to–especially on the shared management, to get that in place.
Mrs. Smith: So thank you for your presentation. It's nice to hear that the minister is consulting with someone. You heard various speakers come up and, you know, speak about their lack of consultation.
Do you believe that First Nations should be consulted on this bill?
Mr. Kotak: Absolutely. That is a legislative requirement, a requirement of the constitution of Canada. Yes, and we–we've been reaching out to governments of all stripes for many years on this issue. So it's imperative that everybody is around the table to make all this happen.
As far as what can–constitutes consultation, that is not a question that I can answer.
Mr. Chairperson: Mrs. Smith, on a follow-up.
Mrs. Smith: You just answered it. So–I was going to ask you if you thought that meaningful consultation had happened between the Province and First Nation communities.
Ms. Fontaine: I'm–miigwech for your presentation. So I am–I note that in your presentation you kind of set up a dichotomy between, you know, those that are in favour of banning night hunting, and indigenous peoples because you constantly talked about Aboriginal people getting licences and you're in favour of Aboriginal people getting–applying for licences to effectively hunt in our territories.
I'm curious why the dichotomy. Is there only–is it only indigenous people that night hunt according to your view? Is there any other individuals that night hunt that–your presentation set up just this dichotomy between yourself and the folks that you represent and all indigenous people.
Are we the only ones that are night hunting?
Mr. Kotak: No, absolutely not. There are non‑indigenous hunters, poachers, out there that are out night hunting as well. And I hope that through this–not just this legislation, but through stronger enforcement, stronger penalties, that we will see, you know, whoever are committing these crimes to be brought to justice on behalf of our wildlife.
Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Fontaine, on a follow-up.
Ms. Fontaine: So, they're not crimes yet. At any rate, I did–now I forgot my–so why didn't you, in your presentation, talk about or include those individuals that, as you said, do it for sport or for fun or whatever? Why were you solely focused just on indigenous people?
Mr. Kotak: Because I believe the legislation is place–in place already for night hunting for non‑indigenous people. Enforcement is the issue there in my mind.
Ms. Klassen: I concur with your statements that there needs to be training or more conservation officers, but I need–I know they need to be fully trained.
You know, there's so many disgusting stories of what COs have done, you know, held a chief to gunpoint, literally gone into his home and raided his freezer and took everything out of that freezer. And I just want you to speak to the issue once again so that the minister is clear that–what your stance is in regards to conservation officers.
Mr. Kotak: Well, certainly, conservation officers should be held to a high standard of conduct, and part of that conduct is respect. I'm not familiar of any cases with–of conservation officers. I won't say that it doesn't happen, but I can't say that it does happen. But our organization advocates for ethical hunting. Our–and the same would be–go–would go for how we enforce the laws, is that it–it's got to be done respectfully.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank you for your presentation, Mr. Kotak. And we will move on to the next presenter.
It has been brought to my attention that Mr. Dean Harder is an out-of-town presenter but was in the hallway with his child when we called his name. What is the will of the committee? Should we allow Mr. Harder to make his presentation on Bill 35? [Agreed]
Mr. Chairperson: Do you have written material for the committee?
Mr. Dean Harder (National Farmers Union, Manitoba): I do.
Mr. Chairperson: We will get it distributed, and–
Floor Comment: Sorry about that. We were out trick-or-treating.
Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Harder, I have to ask you the question; that noose around your neck, is that a prop or this your costume from Halloweening?
Mr. Harder: Oh, it's from Halloween. It's Halloween.
Should I–okay, I'll wait.
Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Harder, you may start your presentation.
Mr. Harder: So, thank you for considering our comments here on the proposed Crown Lands Amendment Act, Bill 35. I'm here representing the National Farmers Union in Manitoba and farmers who are unable to speak for themselves due to timing of this meeting and distance to the Manitoba Legislature. We have some very real concerns.
The Manitoba government has frequently proclaimed its support for farmers, especially young farmers, and so it is especially baffling that with little notice, Halloween night at 6 p.m., they've chosen to speak on this, and any government mill–bill for that matter.
And this lack of respect of turning a fun night–you want to sit down? Nope. Sorry about this.
* (19:20)
Turning a fun night into something truly horrible for farmers cannot be more ironic. Community-based ranchers will from this point forward, be asking, why has the Ag Minister played a trick on us? Is this bill for real? Do you not think real, substantial consultation is appropriate? The National Farmers Union and its members haven't been brought in to even one consultation on this issue. Perhaps the government itself is scared because it knows the real consequences to farmers. The Crown Lands Amendment Act, Bill 35, contains clauses which are a direct harm to all cattle farmers, ranchers and will especially harm Manitoba's young cattle farmers and their families.
Clause 2.2(2)(b) and (c) and 2.2(3) of Bill 35–[interjection] Do you want to sit down?
Floor Comment: Yes.
Mr. Harder: Yes, do you want to sit? Okay, you stand right there. Thank you. Yes, all right.
That's Mikaela [phonetic].
So, these allow the establishment of lease fees and pasture rents by auction and are completely unacceptable. Neglecting to include a point system, and which we've had, which considers a farmer's proximity to a lease, neglecting to give points for young farmers, neglecting to even consider if a bidder is a resident farmer at all, are unacceptable. An auction is a poor and unfair way to establish a price. There are better ways to establish a fair market price for pasture rents and Crown land leases. A survey of the private rents being paid for pastures would be one logical way to establish a fair market price. Bill 35 bases a lease or rental price solely on a bid where the only criterion that matters is the highest price and which throws young ranchers into competition with the highest absentee out-of-province corporate bidder. This is bad agriculture policy for any province.
One of our cattle operators–operating members states: This government often proclaims a desire to reduce red tape. It is notable that the new Crown land lease system does not reduce any red tape for farmers. It might reduce red tape for government itself, and perhaps this is the intent, but that red tape would only be reduced if the new prices established by bid were to be applied across all leases regardless of the accessibility or the grazing quality of the land. Doing so might cut corners in the process, but the result is unfairly high rents for cattle ranchers for the poorer quality leases. Again, this is bad agriculture policy.
I just talked to another farmer family on the phone yesterday. The son is 28 and his parents are in their 50s. They're having to move because community pasture area has been taken up by Saskatchewan cattle in the community pasture in their area, and their land base isn't big enough. So when asking to purchase land, they've come up with some real challenges right now that we don't see addressed by the bill currently.
Now, here's their question: One of our concerns is that the price that ranchers are asking for their ranches when they only have a small parcel of deeded land and a lot of Crown, they are putting way too much value in the Crown land, and it is something that you will never own. Plus a bank will not lend money on the Crown land. Also, how secure is that Crown land? It's surrounding that farm area. Will it be yours after you spend all this money buying a ranch, only to lose it to another rancher that bids more for the Crown?
You see, even private land prices that are not Crown land are already speculatively going up on their value due to these changes that are being made. And private land tied to public land leases with no transfer guarantees or even a high likeliness of transfer are being put into private parcels. In this instance, something was assessed at $200,000 was–that was assessed at $200,000 was priced at $900,000, as if cattle ranching wasn't enough of a gamble.
We are in a large generation transition, and it is ludicrous that start-up and young Manitoba farmers are being pushed out of the way by this bill. And we've heard stuff about–you're probably going to hear stuff about, oh, this creates more transparency. But you have a board in that–in this position.
You have a board that is elected, and they have judged stuff on a point system. And is it more transparent if you have an auction and it goes to business No. 543246? Is that more transparent? I wouldn't say so. You don't even necessarily know who that owner of the land is now, and, if you do, what can you do about it? Nothing, it seems like. I would hope not. I hope changes, at the very least, could be made.
If the government wanted to shift production out of the hands of ranch families and into the hands of out-of-province corporations, and especially direct harm to young ranch families, then Bill 35 would achieve this. If government still owns the land, then why are they unwilling to be good stewards with it? I–we don't understand.
The National Farmers Union believes all of us should be wanting more farmers and not less. Do you honestly think that large-operator, employee-based operations are an efficient way to raise cattle? If so, you're wrong. Ranch families have absolutely proven to be the most efficient cow-calf production system due to their hands-on approach, attention to detail and their ability to bring up dedicated young farmers who contribute to their communities. Employee-based, large operations simply do not have the same commitment to success, which is critical to an industry which deals in mother cows and the birth of their calves.
Bill 35 will not cut red tape for farmers. Instead, these amendments will transfer access to grazing land away from young cattle farmers and into the hands of, dare say it, the elite. The government, through passing this bill, has dedicated to throw those efficient young cattle ranchers to the wolves in an auction for Crown land leases in which no family could outcompete in the end deep pockets, of pension plans or Cargill or your friendly multi-provincial ranch company.
Bill 35, as it stands, is clearly and unfortunately a government cash grab on the backs of young cattle ranchers. Moving to simplified, highest bidder only scenarios contributes to elimination of the next generation of efficient ranching families.
So this Halloween, rip up this nightmare. Return to the point system for assigning Crown land leases and fight for more farmers, not less.
Thank you for considering our submission.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Harder.
Hon. Ralph Eichler (Minister of Agriculture): Thank you for your presentation. I understand that you're trying to get your child out to Halloween, and we appreciate you taking time to come in tonight.
Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Harder, do you have any comment on that?
Mr. Harder: Oh, well, thank you for your understanding.
Mr. Chairperson: Do we have any other questions of mister–Ms. Klassen?
Ms. Judy Klassen (Kewatinook): I just want to say thank you. You have an adorable little one there, and thank for your patience. And, hopefully, she still gets a bit more treats tonight.
Mr. Harder: She had some candy while waiting, so she's had her sugar fill.
Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Smith–Mrs. Smith, you had a question?
Mrs. Bernadette Smith (Point Douglas): Yes, I just want to thank you for coming out tonight and for, you know, pointing out that obviously we need to keep, you know, our farmers and our cattle ranchers here in Manitoba, and not bringing in people from outside Manitoba and, you know, putting money before people, which this government seems to continually do. We need to invest in the families that are here in Manitoba.
And, you know, just again, thanks for coming in and taking time out of your young daughter's experience of knocking on doors and collecting candy. So miigwech.
Mr. Harder: Well, the next generation is really important, and, you know, for too long we've said, you know, like, in one sense, we want people to believe they can have a future while the people, the farmers, they're passionate farmers. They want to farm. And that's what I'm passionate about.
That's why I'm doing this, to be honest with you, because I think we have to give them a standing chance. And, you know, this is the government's land; they can do things differently, and they have the ability to do things differently than the private sector. And so, you know, why are we removing the opportunity to have those that are close and part of their communities and taking that away from them?
So this is why we're really concerned. And, you know, I've heard there's going to be potentially more community–yes, there could be more community pastures because of this. But there's no guarantee that we're seeing in this bill of that scenario. There's no guarantees to young farmers wanting to buy new land or making that huge risk. So I think we need to give them that leg up that they really do deserve.
Mr. Ted Marcelino (Tyndall Park): My question to you, Mr. Harder, is: What is the solution to the dilemma that we might face if the Crown lands are set up for auction and it becomes unaffordable on the part of a young farmer?
Mr. Harder: Well, the scenario that has occurred is instead of buying land themselves, then they have to become employees of larger companies if they want to stay ranching, which, you know, has its own risks. You know, they cannot be their own entrepreneurs anymore, and that's a concern.
* (19:30)
And bringing up the auction scenario, are we looking at scenarios where there can be one auction for a huge amount of land? Is that the scenario that you're actually considering? So it's not even on individual parcels? Because that's, you know, that's an added danger here that's going to occur that I really encourage this committee and others to reconsider–and the Ag Minister.
So this is why we're concerned.
Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Marcelino, on a follow-up.
Mr. Marcelino: Yes, and one of the most amiable ministers in the Cabinet today is the Minister for Agriculture that we have here present today.
What will you tell him regarding your fears about this bill?
Mr. Harder: I mean, I've expressed it to the most point, and perhaps there's stuff in the back end being looked at, but, you know, by not giving the opportunity in the system, as part of this option, to those closest to the land already, you can have a scenario where you might have your farm, but you need–you'd like that land around it to be able to–you know, it makes sense.
Locality makes sense as part of the reason why they should have, or be able to use, with stewardship, this parcel. There's a reason, and I really encourage going back and including that as part of where this land goes to, where it gets used.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Harder, but our time for questions has expired.
I will now call on the next presenter.
(Continued)
Mr. Chairperson: We will be moving back to Bill 29.
Our next presenter for Bill 29 is Jimmy Thunder, Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs.
Mr. Thunder, we have your written presentation here, a number of–so we will be distributing it to the members of the committee.
You may proceed with your presentation, Mr. Thunder.
Mr. Jimmy Thunder (Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs): Thank you for providing the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs the opportunity to make this statement regarding Bill 29.
The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs acknowledges that we are gathered on Treaty 1 territory, the ancestral and sovereign territories of the Anishinabe Nation.
The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs Chiefs-in-Assembly would like to clearly state that we strongly oppose Bill 29, which is clearly an unjustified infringement of Aboriginal and treaty rights that are protected by section 35 of Canada's constitution.
This bill will also dismiss the requirements, including that of free, prior and informed consent, as found in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. And it will ignore the calls to action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, including No. 43 and other related ones that call on federal and provincial governments to use the united declarations on the rights of indigenous peoples as a framework for reconciliation, and even Manitoba's own Path to Reconciliation Act.
Our position was shared with Premier Pallister in a letter from grand chief–former Grand Chief Derek Nepinak dated June 27, 2017. It should be noted, that correction: this was from the former Grand Chief Derek Nepinak. This letter is attached in your handout.
Our position was also–included the AMC Chiefs-in-Assembly Resolution APR-17.11. This is also included in your handout. This resolution states, among other things that Anishinabe law be applied to the discussion on night hunting. The elders support First Nations who have developed and codified their laws that sets out the protocols on hunting, including night hunting.
The treaty right to hunt not be altered, diminished or abrogated in any way. That the recognition of food sovereignty and traditional diet of First Nations is taken as a priority. That the First Nations unfettered right of access to First Nation ancestral lands and resources are recognized by the government of Manitoba for the purposes of hunting, fishing, trapping and gathering, and the commercial right to make a living off of those resources.
The Chiefs-in-Assembly support community and regional engagement, with the financial support of the Province of Manitoba, to develop the critical discussion needed to ensure successful relationships are built in the context of treaty and Aboriginal rights to hunting.
The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs remains very concerned that affected Manitoba First Nations have not been meaningfully engaged, despite the fact that the Province of Manitoba has stated it, quote, engaged more than 20 First Nations communities in co-ordination with the following organizations: Southeast Resource Development Council, Swampy Tree Tribal Council and Anishinaabe Agowidiiwinan. End quote.
Manitoba never provided the AMC with their engagement reports on what First Nations actually said, and we would encourage the committee to properly inform itself on what First Nations actually said during this engagement.
In closing, the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs cannot support Bill 29 as is presently drafted as it will impact the AMC member First Nations' treaty and Aboriginal rights. We recommend that Manitoba properly obtain free, prior and informed consent as identified in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Absent that, if the bill does become law, the AMC chief's office will explore all its political and legal options, inform the AMC Chiefs-in-Assembly and seek direction from the chiefs on how to proceed, including, but not limited to, pursuing a remedy in court.
Thank you for your time.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Thunder.
Hon. Rochelle Squires (Minister of Sustainable Development): Thank you for coming down here this evening, Mr. Thunder, and for presenting to us and providing us with the package that you just have, and I look forward to continued dialogue with you.
Mr. Thunder: Thank you.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): Miigwech for your presentation. I missed a little bit of it; I apologize. I really had to go to the washroom and I apologize.
But, similar to many of the other indigenous leadership that have presented tonight, there's been a theme tonight, and the theme is that while the minister espouses that she has consulted and worked in partnership with indigenous peoples and our leadership, really there's been an absence of that.
And so I see–I–first off, I just want to get on the record, whether or not you believe that the AMC has been adequately consulted with, and then, secondly, were the engagement reports requested by the minister's office–or by AMC from the minister's office and there just wasn't any response, or was there a promise to get the engagement reports and just nothing has come from that minister's office?
Mr. Thunder: For that question I would like to request to confer with my fellow associate from AMC.
Mr. Chairperson: Can we agree to pause the clock? Is that all right with the committee? Agreed? [Agreed]
Mr. Thunder: So, it is our belief that we did ask for them, but it is our expectation that they would have been provided for us if meaningful consultation was the intention.
Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Fontaine–oh, sorry–Ms. Klassen. Sorry.
Ms. Judy Klassen (Kewatinook): Thank you for coming out and for your presentation. It was very well drafted. And I would like for you, if you can restate, again, the practices that we do have so that my colleagues across the way know that we actually do have methodologies and systems within our own communities and that's why we keep saying we weren't consulted, is because we were never given that opportunity to talk.
So, if you could expand on that, I'd appreciate it.
* (19:40)
Mr. Thunder: Yes, it is–the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs is actually surprised that this is still an issue, that, you know, those of us who have been hunting for thousands and thousands of years don't have an adequate methodology to ensure that we're hunting in a safe manner.
You know, this–again, going back to, you know, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, you know, just the idea that we do have a framework. We are willing to be consulted. We're being–we're willing to be addressed and to co-develop these rules of safety. We do want people to be safe.
We don't–we do want people to be able to hunt in a way that is–that they're able to provide for their families and a way that nobody gets hurt. And the idea that we are not part of the process of ensuring that this safety happens is, 'quitely'–quite frankly, surprising to not only the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, but all of the First Nations communities that we represent.
And, quite frankly, we really feel that it's about time that we are consulted–that we're consulted in legislation that relates to our fundamental treaty rights.
Mr. Rick Wowchuk (Swan River): Thank you for your presentation.
Could you maybe tell me what the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs have in place for you to deliver the hunter education program? Because we've heard a lot tonight here about safety and you have agreed, you know, that your–safety is up most in your mind.
So do you have instructors within the First Nation communities that deliver the programs for your young hunters?
Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Thunder, do you have a response to that?
Mr. Thunder: I would refer–I would like to refer back to our–[interjection]–I would like to refer to–[interjection]
Mr. Chairperson: Order. Order.
Mr. Thunder has the floor, if he has a response.
Mr. Thunder: I would like to refer to our handouts. We have–we speak to that in our 10 points. The–I've only read four of the resolutions–the four points of the resolution that we have handed out. I would refer to that document.
And, yes, I would agree that it is–it's a bit of a ridiculous question. We've been doing this for thousands of years. We have elders that retain this traditional knowledge. And, if there's anything further required, we can submit it to you in writing.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank you for your presentation, Mr. Thunder.
Time for questions has expired.
We will be moving on to the next presenter.
Thank you, Mr. Thunder.
We will now call on Paul Conchatre.
Paul? For the Manitoba Lodges and Outfitters Association? Is Paul present?
Mr. Conchatre does not appear to be present. His name will be moved to the bottom of the list.
We will now move on to Rick Ryan, private citizen.
Is Rick Ryan present? Rick Ryan?
It appears that Mr. Ryan is not present. He will be moved to the bottom of the list.
We will now call on Jeremy McKay, private citizen.
Jeremy McKay? Mr. McKay, do you have written material for the committee?
Floor Comment: I do. It's actually the Pine Creek First Nation–
Mr. Chairperson: Mr. McKay, you have to–before–I have to recognize you before you speak. Mr. McKay.
Mr. Jeremy McKay (Private Citizen): Yes?
Mr. Chairperson: Go ahead and say what you were going to say.
Mr. McKay: I do have written materials. They're the same material that Councillor McKay had previously distributed.
Mr. Chairperson: Okay, so then we do have them.
So then you may proceed with your presentation, Mr. McKay.
Mr. McKay: Okay. Boozhoo. [Ojibwe spoken.] My name is Jeremy McKay, and I'm a band member of Pine Creek First Nation.
I'm just going to go off script here for a short while and clarify a matter that was dealt with before. So Councillor McKay had mentioned some comments by the honourable minister. I think she situated them at a different place at a different time, but those are, in fact, the comments of the minister and they can be found in the Hansard of October 3rd, 2018.
Part of my role as a young person from Pine Creek is to research into these matters and to inform our leadership. So that's what I've done in this situation. Specifically, they're found at page 3366 and 3367.
Moving on to my comments that I had prepared this evening. So my comments will briefly provide some additional contexts to the letter of pine 'cleek'–Pine Creek First Nation that, as I mentioned, Councillor McKay had previously distributed. I will begin with the issue of safety and sustainability.
One of the challenges–one of the most challenging things about the engagement on this bill over the last couple of years that I've been involved with has been the stereotypes projected at indigenous peoples. I think we got a little bit of a sample of that this afternoon. And there's been a real failure to communicate between parties on each side of the issue.
I think a small microcosm of that is this room itself, where we have the Anishinaabeg people on one side and the moniyaw people on the other side. That's typically been the nature of this process for a couple of years now.
So that end, one of the first requests that I made to the provincial representatives that we were talking to is to set the stereotypes aside and engage in a process to gather facts and evidence so that we can be–or, so that we can move forward in an informed way and have an informed discussion.
For example, we wanted to know how many people are being hurt by night hunting. When we talked to some of our relatives in our communities, very few recall any injuries that have occurred, and they've been practising this method of hunting for as long as they can remember and back a few generations for sure.
And is it really indigenous people who are posing such a huge and imminent purported safety risk? I think we heard before that there are others that may be engaged in hunting in this province that could be part of the problem.
In addition to that, is night hunting really harming the moose population? When I discuss with my elders, they talk about the moose population, and they, too, are concerned with the declining numbers. But their reason for that is loss of habitat, and I think that, in addition to indigenous peoples, our four-legged resident–relatives have been experiencing loss of habitat for, I guess, 150-some years now.
And, when I would raise these concerns to the provincial representatives that I would talk to, they would quickly dismiss these concerns and change the topic. They would start talking about treaty obligations, and I think there would be an attempt to shame us into saying that we are not fulfilling our inherent responsibilities as indigenous peoples.
So that was the response I would get when I would bring up valid and legitimate concerns regarding the accusations of safety and sustainability.
Regarding shared management, we were actually fairly excited when this process begun. We were excited because we finally have an opportunity to deal with shared management of natural resources, and that is something that, I think, excited me and many members of my community.
We wanted to learn more about what the possibilities were, so we talked to our relatives down south, the Chippewas, who have been engaged in a shared-management regime for quite a while now on night hunting, and we learned a little bit about their process.
* (19:50)
So what they told us is that they have trained guides in their communities that accompany night hunters. They go out the day previous and identify a shooting path. They train their hunters, which includes a marksmanship component, and they practise safe night hunting in an area that's way more populated than Manitoba.
So we were–like I said at the beginning, we were really excited about this opportunity to have a shared management regime that would reflect something like the model down in Wisconsin, but upon reading the bill, we quickly realized that indigenous peoples would simply be participating on a recommendation level. We would not at all be empowered to make any decisions in a meaningful way.
So, subject to any questions or comments, those are my submissions for this evening. Miigwech.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank you for your presentation, Mr. McKay.
Ms. Squires: Thank you, Mr. McKay, for coming down here tonight and presenting to the committee on Bill 29, and I appreciate the previous dialogue that we've had on this, and I look forward to hearing from you as we move forward.
Mr. McKay: Miigwech.
Ms. Fontaine: Miigwech for your presentation. It is always particularly a beautiful thing to see when our youth get engaged and represent our communities in such an articulate and beautiful way that you did tonight, and so I just want to honour you for that. And your community should be extremely proud, your chief and council.
I do want to go back to some of the comments that you made earlier on just clarifying the previous presentation and the comments that were made by the minister. And I know that you said that they are in Hansard, and we are trying to get one of our staff to go pull up those Hansard right now. But can you maybe just expand a little bit on that? Like, where were those comments made by the Minister for Sustainable Development about indigenous people here in Manitoba?
Mr. McKay: So, those–our record of those comments were made on–well, we took those from the official Hansard report from October 3rd, 2018. I have a copy of the Hansard right in front of me. They begin on–like I said earlier–page–I don't know. You guys are smart enough to find them. But those are–I think those are fairly moderate comments. There's been some more aggressive comments by this government in different venues, so that's–that shouldn't be a shock to really anyone here.
Ms. Klassen: Thank you for coming out to present today. We also didn't mention that you're a graduate from law school, and I want to personally congratulate you on that right now. Every time–I want to point out that every time I've mentioned four-legged relations in the House, I have been outright laughed at by the members opposite, the members of the PC team. But just so you know, from my youth, for the generations yet unborn, that will not stop me from trying to protect those who cannot speak for themselves today. So I want to also thank you for teaching us about what our southern relations are doing across the border there, and if you can expand on that and what your hopes–you know, are you wanting them to stop the bill tonight and then bring in some of those teachings? If you can expand on that.
Mr. McKay: Yes, definitely. We think the bill should be delayed until we can have a proper discussion about what shared management is. And this is a unique circumstance where we're not just pulling things out of thin air. There is a precedent for this in different parts of the world actually not that far from us. So yes, I think we should have a full conversation of that.
But before my time is up, I just want to give thanks to Ms. Klassen, Smith and Fontaine for being here today. This–I think this process would be a lot more difficult if you three weren't here tonight, so miigwech.
Mr. Chairperson: We want to thank you for your presentation, and we will now move on to the next presenter. Thank you very much, Mr. McKay.
(Continued)
Mr. Chairperson: We will now move on to Bill 35, the presenters from Bill 35.
Is Brian Lemon in the crowd? Brian Lemon?
Mr. Lemon, do you have any written material for the committee?
Mr. Brian Lemon (Manitoba Beef Producers): I do.
Mr. Chairperson: We will get the page to distribute that.
You may start your presentation.
Mr. Lemon: I hope my voice lasts. I'm in the middle of our fall district meetings, and I've been spending evenings speaking fairly loudly to producers across this province, so. [interjection] You know what, the water won't help. But anyway, thank you.
My name is Brian Lemon. I'm the general manager with the Manitoba Beef Producers. The Manitoba Beef Producers are pleased to provide comments to Bill 35, The Crown Lands Amendment Act.
Manitoba Beef Producers believe the changes proposed through Bill 35 are positive. MBP, or Manitoba Beef Producers, is the primary voice of Manitoba's beef industry, representing approximately 6,500 beef producers involved in all the various aspects of the beef industry, including cow‑calf, backgrounders and finishing sectors. Cattle production is a major economic driver in Manitoba, creating thousands of direct and indirect jobs and deriving millions of dollars in purchases of goods and services. MBP appreciates this government's and, more specifically, Minister Eichler's personal commitment to growing the beef herd and its confidence in our sector. MBP believes the long-term economics of livestock production in Manitoba are sound.
Taking advantage of these economic opportunities, though, depends on having stable, consistent and predictable policy and regulatory environments. This includes the policies related to Crown lands and ag Crown lands. These lands are critically important to both the current and the future viability of Manitoba's beef sector. Many producers rely on predictable access to Crown land leases as a major part of their operations, and, in many cases, affordable access to these lands is going to be essential to new entrants due–to our industry and to the efforts to grow the provincial cattle herd. If the beef cattle sector is to grow, it is essential that these lands be distributed in the most predictable and transparent manner possible and that their use be both effective and efficient for producers. These are critical principles to maintain in relation to Crown land legislation, regulation and policy.
Over the past year, Manitoba Beef Producers has engaged in several discussions with provincial government about Crown land policies. This included changes that were made to the ag Crown land leases regulations and the ag Crown lands grazing and hay permit regulations last year.
Manitoba Beef Producers also participated in the consultations related to the modernization of the policies related to these programs. Bill 35 proposes to provide for an auction as a one–as one option for determining fees and rents for agricultural Crown lands. MBP believes–or has provided input around an auction process during the previous consultation processes and supports this approach in principle. The old points-based allocation system was often very frustrating for cattle producers, creating confusion and leading to appeals. MBP believes demand should be the determinant of price for agricultural Crown land, and the truest way for this is an open auction process.
MBP supports the use of a face-to-face auction process. MBP cautions that placing any minimum price on these lands will interfere with the market forces and will artificially raise the price to producers. It is MBP's position that there should be no minimum prices for agricultural Crown lands. Rather, the market and the producer's willingness to pay should be allowed to determine the cost of these lands and these permits–these leases and these permits.
Further, MBP recommends the creation of a system whereby the bid results are made publicly available, such as the bid results library that's used by Manitoba Infrastructure. This would help ensure greater transparency and help inform producer decision-making processes. MBP looks forward to the discussions with the government about how the public auctions would work, including methods for notifying prospective bidders of available parcels.
Bill 35 also allows for certain lands to be designated as community pastures and to regulate how they are used. Manitoba Beef Producers sees considerable value in this approach.
Just as access to agricultural Crown lands is key to the success of Manitoba's beef industry, so too is access to community pastures. When the federal government announced that it was winding down its Community Pasture Program and transferring the land to the federal–or to the provincial government, MBP sprang into action.
Working with the pastures' patrons advisory committees and other stakeholders, including the government, MBP advocated for the creation of an independent, not-for-profit group to assume management of these pastures. This led to the creation of the producer-run Association of Manitoba Community Pastures.
* (20:00)
MBP is appreciative of the past funding through Growing Forward 2 and from the Canadian Agricultural Partnership that has facilitated the transfer of these lands and creation of AMCP.
Bill 35 notes that, and I quote: the purpose of the community pastures to support haying and grazing on rangelands in a manner that maintains and conserves the ecological integrity and natural biodiversity of the area. So clearly these pastures support both livestock production as well as providing valuable ecological goods and services.
Earlier this year, a report released by the International Institute for Sustainable Development provided an ecosystem services evaluation for AMCP-managed pastures. The study found that the ecological goods and services derived from these pastures are worth $13.3 million annually, taking into account factors such as forage production, carbon sequestration, biodiversity, and much more.
MBP sees considerable merit in the AMCP continuing to manage this valuable pasture system. Just as AMCP provides sound stewardship for the pastures that they manage and helps the Province meet its conservation objectives, so do cattle producers utilizing agricultural Crown lands.
MBP believes that beef producers–as beef producers, our members are some of the very best stewards of the landscape. With this in mind, MBP believes that it's important to place agricultural benefits of these assets at a level footing to the environmental objectives.
MBP believes that the two sets of objectives are completely complementary and should be considered symbiotic, and the agricultural production should not be sacrificed to deliver the environmental or conservation objectives. MBP believes this could be achieved, in part, with the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Eichler) being delegated authorities over all of section 7.2 of the act by the Lieutenant Governor.
MBP notes that section 7.7(7) of Bill 35 provides for the making of regulations with respect to community pastures including, and I quote: governing, regulating and prohibiting any use, activity or thing in designated community pastures or specific designated community postures. End of quote.
MBP believes this provides the opportunity for regulations for informed access by members of the public seeking to enter Crown lands within the community pasture system. This principle needs to be applied to all Crown lands–or, agricultural Crown lands, sorry.
MBP has never looked to block public access; rather, is looking for informed access by members of the public wishing to access Crown lands used by cattle producers. Specifically, MBP believes that public access must be limited to those circumstances where the public has prior authorization from the lessee or permit holder to access the Crown–the ag Crown lands.
MBP believes these rights need to be strengthened to protect livestock, producers and the public. Unauthorized access can lead to significant biosecurity issues, can endanger livestock and producers, can endanger the public, and can lead to litigious liability concerns.
Providing clear rights of access and clear prohibitions for unauthorized public access will strengthen the effective and efficient use of these agricultural Crown lands. MBP respectfully requests that a provision for informed access to all agricultural Crown lands be added to The Crown Lands Act.
Going forward, MBP looks forward to engaging with the government about the regulatory framework that will accompany the changes being made in The Crown Lands Act as well as other topics such as unit transfers, ownership requirements, improvements on the agricultural Crown lands, and lease and permit lengths.
MBP also looks forward to participating as the government undertakes a fulsome review of the act in the coming year, which I understand is to take place by the department. By working together, the cattle sector and the provincial government can envision agricultural Crown lands system that will help strengthen and grow Manitoba's beef industry.
In closing, Manitoba's cattle producers are the single largest users of agricultural Crown lands. and the success of the agricultural Crown lands program has a bearing on the success of beef producers. Thanks–Manitoba Beef Producers thanks the committee for the opportunity to provide comments on Bill 35 and I would be pleased to answer any questions.
Thank you.
Hon. Ralph Eichler (Minister of Agriculture): Thank you for your presentation. I know you've been on the road talking to producers each and every day. It's that time of year where you're able to get together, your producers, and we appreciate you sharing your comments with us.
But we heard a presentation earlier tonight in regards to staying with the old points system, and it’s going to be–the new legislation should be heartful for young producers to get started.
Would you just explain to the committee the Manitoba Beef Producers' position on this comment?
Mr. Lemon: I almost jumped you.
Certainly, I think we recognize that in the–in prior times, there was a specific policy focused on trying to help new entrants with the Crown lands policies. It's Manitoba Beef Producers' position that if we're going to be successful with these lands, they need to be effective and efficient, and that's–should be the guiding principle, if we can look at a way to make sure that these lands are used in the most effective way possible regardless of the producer. An auction is really a way of–is a way of measuring demand and measuring a way of a producer's willingness to pay. And so we're supportive of the auction.
Mr. Ted Marcelino (Tyndall Park): Mr. Lemon, the question I have–oh, thank you, first, for being here.
There's concerns about young farmers, or those who are stepping out to become beef producers, getting sidelined and marginalized by bigger corporations because of the way that this bill would allow big corporations to get ahead in bidding by auction those agricultural Crown lands that will become available.
Knowing fully well that you represent the beef producers of our province–and we thank you for your work–do you think it's a well-founded fear on the part of the young farmers?
Mr. Lemon: I think certainly there's lots of work to be done with the–working with the government and the industry in terms of the actual design of the regulatory framework and the policies that come out of these changes. But what I've seen in the–in what's being proposed, we're talking a corporation where every member of the corporation has to be a farmer, has to be actively involved in managing the land. I would suggest that that probably goes a long way towards alleviating a lot of those concerns about–we heard about pension funds and things like that coming in and bidding on those lands.
So I think as long as we leave it in the hands of producers–and, you know, our producers are going to be–they're going to be worried to make sure that they're able to actually compete against their fellow producers for this land. I don't think any of them think it's going to fair that they compete against large corporations for the–for access to the land, but I think what I've seen in the bill thus far, looks like you need to be a producer to–a farmer or a rancher to apply for a lease.
Mr. Marcelino: Yes, don't you think there is an imbalance in the availability of credit regarding, say, an auction of a substantial acreage of forage or grassland which is agricultural Crown land? Do you think it's not even material or relevant in the way that most young farmers think about their future in this province?
Mr. Lemon: I think access to capital is a huge challenge for all producers. And having access to–I would argue that producers–there is probably no more important relationship than relationship they have with their banker. And so access to capital and access to Crown land is a way around that. And so that's not something unique just to young producers, albeit I certainly can see that, young producers getting in, the access to capital issues are that much more exaggerated, for sure.
Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Marcelino, but our time is pretty much up, so if you–
Mr. Marcelino: I'll make it short.
Drought has affected some of our agriculture Crown lands, especially those that produce forage. And has that been a concern, let's say, of cattle producers abandoning their business?
Mr. Lemon: I think we're seeing a larger number of cattle going to market this fall than we would typically see, for sure. And that's directly related to the availability and the affordability of feed. So certainly that is happening, for sure.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank you for your presentation, Mr. Lemon, and we thank you for being here.
We will now move on to our next presenter. I will now call on Christian Artuso, Bird Studies Canada. Christian Artuso?
And if you could correct me if I'm mispronouncing your name.
* (20:10)
Mr. Christian Artuso (Bird Studies Canada): Fine job, Sir.
Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Artuso, do you have any written material for the committee? We will get the page to distribute it. Once it's been distributed, you may start your presentation.
Mr. Artuso, you may start.
Mr. Artuso: Thank you, everyone. I did provide a written comment but I might ad lib a little bit or add an additional comment, perhaps.
My name is Dr. Christian Artuso. I work for Bird Studies Canada where I–nationwide NGO, concerned, of course, about conservation. I also work with many other organizations and various committees. I'm also involved in the Range and Implementation Management Group and we work directly with the AMCP, the Association of Manitoba Community Pastures at a larger level.
Tonight I'm going to speak on behalf of Bird Studies Canada, and I'm mainly here just to talk about section 7.7. So, on behalf of Bird Studies Canada, I'm actually here to express my support for this amendment. And perhaps you might find it a little surprising that a conservationist would say that, but I've outlined the reasons for this below. They are in bullet form on the handout.
And primarily, I'm here to support the statement of purpose which is expressed in 7.7(1), and if you'll let me read that, it says: the purpose of community pastures is to support grazing and hanging on range lands in a manner that maintains and conserves the ecological integrity and natural biodiversity of the area.
I think that is superbly stated. Let me explain why. In the prairie ecosystems of the Great Plains–and of course we are in the Great Plains here, and southern Manitoba west of the Canadian Shield is part of the Great Plains system–grazing is a key ecosystem process that has maintained grasslands for millennia.
Formerly, of course, this was bison who provided this service. However, interestingly enough, today well-managed cattle grazing can provide the same service if done well in proper context: native mixed-grass prairie. Interestingly enough, if you remove the process of grazing, the habitat changes over time. This is a relationship that the animals and plants have, to speak to an earlier point.
Now, the plough print in Manitoba has been expanding significantly. This is particularly 'imparent' since the turn of the 21st century and we have lost a great deal of native grassland habitat, so much so that grassland species at risk that are designated as either threatened or endangered under both the federal act–that's the Species at Risk Act, or SARA, and the Manitoba act, that's the Manitoba Endangered Species and Ecosystems Act, or ESEA, and, I might add, as well by the IUCN, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature globally–these species have disappeared from much of their former range in Manitoba.
Many species which used to occur as far as Winnipeg even in the 1980s–in fact, I live in St. James and some of these species were found in St. James until the early 1980s, you now have to travel to the west of the province, in fact the far west province, and the only place you will find these grassland-dependent species is where sufficiently large parcels of prairie grasslands occur.
In recognizing this and the urgency of the situation, conservationists, 'conservant' sentences–concerned citizens, are united to find ways to prevent the further loss of native prairie.
Much of the remaining native prairie in Manitoba is, interestingly enough, in cattle production. This means that conservationists such as myself partner with cattle producers as stewards of a declining ecosystem.
Now, community pastures represent some of the largest tracks of native grassland in Manitoba. And well-managed examples–and I'd like to give you two examples that I'm quite familiar with: Spy Hill-Ellice and Ellice-Archie Community Pasture near the town of St-Lazare in western Manitoba. If you're not familiar with them, these pastures provide exceptional biodiversity values, and I would stress the exceptionality of these pastures.
Since 2015, I have been–Bird Studies Canada and myself have been conducting surveys on these two pastures and have documented that, in fact, they contain the highest concentrations in the province of some of our rarest species, most notably Sprague's pipit, which is provincially threatened; chestnut-collared longspur, which is professionally–provincially, excuse me–endangered; as well as good concentrations of Baird's sparrow, which is also provincially endangered; and a long list of other birds and animals and plants. As an ornithologist, I tend to speak to the birds.
I'd like to further mention that these–this area, these pastures, these community pastures actually represent probably the only area left in Manitoba where a person can truly experience what native prairie means, where you can immerse yourself in the so-called sea of grass, that famous term, and be surrounded by the full palette of colour, song and fragrance that is native prairie. It's hard to find.
Nonetheless, these community pastures, though they are an extraordinary biodiversity asset, are vulnerable to loss and disturbance and their future is by no means secure. They warrant immediate protection. If they are converted to other land-use types or if they're overly compromised by linear developments, surface disturbances, then the aforementioned species may indeed become extirpated in this province.
Increasingly, therefore, this presents an opportunity for conservationists and agriculturalists to work together. These lands can be managed to simultaneously produce good-quality food–in this case, that's beef, since these are ranches–and support ecological integrity and natural biodiversity. This integrated approach, I think, will serve future generations of Manitobas well–Manitobans well, both economically and environmentally.
And, if I might add to my script the interesting example given by Mr. Harder earlier tonight of hardship and the–a producing family have to move away from their home community when a community pasture in Saskatchewan was lost and they did not have enough land to graze their cattle, hence forcing them to move away. And this is a real concern in other parts of Canada–in prairie Canada. And I'm very pleased here tonight that we have this amendment that should allow for the protection of these community pastures in this province.
So, in conclusion, protection of these pastures, as enabled by this amendment, is both urgently needed and laudable. I would like to emphasize, however, that designation is the first step. Certainly, sound management must follow. That is absolutely critical. This should include mechanisms to prevent disturbance to the designated pastures, and I hope to have the opportunity to work together with you to do just that. But once we've achieved designation, we can work together to further support our native biota and provide a home for some of our most threatened species.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Artuso.
Mr. Eichler: Thank you for your presentation and taking the time tonight to present to us. And I found your presentation quite interesting. In regards to, following up my colleague from Tyndall Park, in regards to it being a bit of a drier year in certain parts of the province.
Now, the community pastures are managed by the Manitoba community pasture association, and is there any concerns in this legislation or advice you may have for us as we get ready to move forward, whether it be in the regulations or anything in the act?
Mr. Artuso: Thank you for the question, sir.
No, I don't have specific concerns that I wish to address tonight, but the principle should be upheld of maintaining–managing in such a way as to maintain the ecological integrity and natural biodiversity of the area. I do believe that is a key concern.
I do–I have had the opportunity, especially over the past three years, to work with a lot of beef producers. I have surveyed a lot of private land with beef producers, and I've–interestingly enough–found them to be excellent stewards of the land and have been pleased to find large numbers of species at risk on some of our well-managed cattle pastures in the province. So I do think we have an opportunity to work together. I do think that these things can work together–and, again, as long as we adhere to those key principles.
* (20:20)
Mr. Marcelino: Your favourite subject, which is–which are the birds, is also mine. And I usually worry a lot when I don't see birds along the highways feeding when I'm driving through, especially Highway 59 and Highway 75 and all the way to Highway 6 just during the fall. I usually visit northwards to see the changes in the–but that's beside the point.
There is an advisory group that will be formed as a result of the efforts of the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Eichler). And is that something that you would consider if given that role as a member of that advisory group so that we could protect the birds?
Mr. Artuso: Thank you very much for the question, Mr. Marcelino.
If you'd like to see some prairie and the birds, then I'd be happy to take you on a transect starting in Winnipeg and going west instead of north. And the reason I would like to do that is to show you just how many species have disappeared from the immediate area of Winnipeg. And when we get into the grasslands further west, we would find those species again. The North is also wonderful, and the boreal forests and so on and so forth.
But I'm here to speak about prairie. Yes, absolutely. I would graciously accept such an invitation. As I did mention, I do have one of the few NGO seats on the RIMG, the Range Implementation and Management Group, which is mostly government, but there are a couple of non-government organizations that provide advice. And I have, with the proper permissions and right of entries, been allowed to survey some of these community pastures for birds over the past three years–
Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Klass–sorry.
Mr. Artuso: –and hope to continue to do so.
Ms. Klassen: I want to put it on record that–the fact that the presenter was asked for advice by the minister. Hopefully our other ministers will do this in upcoming committee meetings of other presenters.
And I just want to say thank you for your presentation here today. [interjection]
Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Artuso.
Mr. Artuso: Oh, I apologize. Thank you very much.
Mr. Chairperson: Seeing as no further questions, we thank you for your presentation, Mr. Artuso, and we will move on to our next presenter.
This concludes the presenters from Bill 35.
Mr. Chairperson: We will now move to Bill 223, The Child and Family Services Amendment Act.
Manoj Nowrang? Manoj Nowrang?
Mr. Nowrang, do you have written material for the committee?
Mr. Manoj Nowrang (Private Citizen): Yes, I do.
Mr. Chairperson: As soon as it's distributed, you may proceed with your presentation.
Floor Comment: Can you give me a 'noj'? It's Manoj.
There's–oh, yes, that's mine. Thank you.
I just wanted to just begin–sorry. Oh, yes.
Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Nowrang, you may now proceed with your presentation.
Mr. Nowrang: Well, I wanted to talk about, of course, the amendment to The Child and Family Services Act. And I wanted to begin with a quote. It's from Dr. Cornel West. It stated that a socio-cultural conception of oppression and privilege enables us to see both the oppressed and the privileged as full and equal participants in a common history and an ongoing dialogue that, although it may not be easy, and it may at times seem impossible, is our only hope for both personal and social transformation.
So I wanted to begin with that because I wanted to speak specifically to this, because it's very connected to my lived experience. And that's what I'm sharing tonight, is a paper that I wrote in part for my master's. And it's about the time that I spent as a child in care, a child that grew up in poverty, grew up in housing. And unfortunately, my parents were not afforded the support that they needed in order to maintain themselves as a family. And, as a result, I ended up being put into care. And, unfortunately, in that–those moments, experienced moments of abuse, both physical, sexual.
And I stand in front of you today because I honestly believe that, as a society, we owe it to children, the 11,000 in Manitoba, the 48,000 in Canada, that families who, just like all of us, we care dearly about our children. We all have had that a hundred-eighty-degree turn where we realize we were no longer the centre of the universe and the children that we have are the most important thing and the biggest gift that we leave to the world. And I know that my parents could have certainly used a hand up, not a handout, and I think any parent who loves their kids wants their best for their kid. And what they bring, and they bring to the schools every day, are the best they have.
In my work as an educator, I know that my experience working with kids that are in care and my background has really helped me to inform me on the needs of these families and these children and knowing that an amendment to The Child and Family Services Act in this regard and more work in terms of–together as the systems that operate and function, whether it's through social work and education and supporting parents in different ways.
I know that the Maori people were recently in and met with the Ma Mawi Wi Chi Itata Centre to look at reconnecting families and their children and looking at ways that we could create a circle of support for these families and children. And I know that Ma Mawi Wi Chi Itata is, you know, a grassroots organization that's doing it. And I know that we, as a–as sitting in this room, members of a Legislative Assembly, working more collaboratively–we always use that word, but I'm not sure if we always know what it means.
So I just wanted to just express this to you, and I would hope that you would take the time to read this paper because I put a lot of tears into it because it helped me to really come to terms with things that have happened to me and really allowed me to kind of be able to become the leader that I need to be.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Nowrang.
Mrs. Bernadette Smith (Point Douglas): Mr. Nowrang, I want to thank you for your presentation and for, you know, providing us with your paper and all of your work that you in Seven Oaks School Division in reunification and making sure that families are a part of any kind of meetings that happen in the school division, so it's not just the foster parent, but if parents can be involved, that, you know, you're helping to make sure that they're involved.
And your story, you know, that's why I think it was so important for you to be here tonight, because we often, you know, associate this with just indigenous–you know, indigenous community. And I thought it was important for, you know, the members to see that this affects everyone and that we all, you know, are in this together, and we all need to ensure that families have what they need. And you certainly shared that tonight, that if you–your family had had that, that, you know, perhaps you wouldn't have had the experience you had.
So I just want to say thank you for coming out tonight, and I certainly will be reading your paper.
Mr. Nowrang: Yes, I do want to reiterate, you know, the fact that we do that good work every day in my school division and that we do include families, you know, in those conversations. I also want to say, and I want to recognize, that I do have a lot of neechie [phonetic] friends and family that I've spent a lot of time with, that I've grown up with in–from regional housing, some of them; from Sagkeeng; from Camperville Metis community, and I'm very connected to them. And I'm very connected to them because of the stuff that we went through and how we supported each other.
But I do know that the work that I do now, in terms of truth and reconciliation, is connected to exactly what Ms. Smith had–Mrs. Smith had said. It is connected to the work. And I think it just doesn't stop with education; it has to come through within our governments and social work.
Ms. Judy Klassen (Kewatinook): I just want to say thank you. I definitely will–once you told me that your tears are in here, I definitely want to take that story and carry it with me. And I also like that–the fact that one of my favourite singers, you've used that as your header here. I appreciate that sentiment as well.
* (20:30)
And, you know, we'd–I often say that, you know, you picture the MTS centre full of kids, you know, and that's our CFS kids here in this province alone. And, you know, I passed–I got a unanimous resolution passed here within my first six months of being elected, and, you know, we're trying to–we all are collectively trying to reduce the number of kids in care. And it is a great struggle, but I believe that there are good people at the helm, such as yourself, helping us to make sure that our children, you know, can go home.
And so I really appreciate your sentiments today and for presenting here. Thank you.
Mr. Nowrang: Thank you. I do appreciate your comments as well. And I know that having a sense of identity that I didn't–wasn't able to develop, I see it in the children from indigenous backgrounds that I work with, that are in care, and how the necessity of–we all need that sense of identity, that sense of belonging, because we have a source that informs us and makes us be able to be the leaders that we are and be able to do what we do every day.
And I think that it's imperative that those kids get that understanding and that understanding of who they really are.
Mr. Chairperson: Are there any further questions for Mr. Nowrang?
We want to thank you for your presentation, Mr. Nowrang. And I will now call on the next speaker, Dr. Mary LeMaître. If you could correct me on the pronunciation of your last name, that would be–
Ms. Mary Lemaître (Private Citizen): Oh, well, that was very good. I'm a French professor, and I'll give you an A for that.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you.
Once the–your written material has been distributed to the committee, you may–I'll call on your name and you can present–start your presentation.
Ms. LeMaître: Tansi, aaniin, han, bon soir, good evening. My name is Dr. Mary LeMaître. I am the communications person for KAIROS for the Cambrian-Agassiz region, which is–which Winnipeg is included in. And I'm also a professor at the University of Winnipeg in the modern languages department. I do my research on colonial discourse; that is, stereotypes about indigenous Canadians, what these stereotypes are, where they come from, how they affect our relationships–so what relationship dynamics they create, what colonial structures they help to keep in place and how we can change them.
So I'm here this evening to say that I support Bill 223. And I have, here, listed several reasons why, if you'd like to follow along.
First of all, when children are taken away from their families and they're put into foster care, they often feel displaced, unloved. They're disconnected from their families. I just spent the evening speaking to a young woman who's studying criminal justice right now. And she was taken away from her family, put into foster care. And it was abusive. She was adopted by family. And now the–she didn't know she had all these siblings, and they're trying to reconnect, and she's–she was telling me about how, you know, difficult that whole situation is and how–just from the negative experiences that she had going through–while being adopted and then being into–in foster care for–in seven different places within four years, from 14 to 18–how she felt very disconnected. And she suffers every day from the impacts of having gone through the care.
And the next one is that when children go through foster care–so, when you take a child out of his or her family, you are undoing a safety net that's there. When my daughter graduated from high school–and she turned 18 and graduated–she was allowed to stay at home. If you're in foster care, when you're 18, you're on your own. And this young woman I spoke to this evening was telling me about the struggles that, you know, foster children have when they get out of the system.
And I just have a few alarming statistics for you. So, at the Siloam Mission, 55 per cent of the homeless people who–sorry–who go there have gone through CFS because when you–a kid ends up on the other side of 18 and they have to fend for themselves, it's a pretty big task and a lot of them don't succeed very well.
And we also know that a lot of kids end up in the criminal justice system. So, just some facts–so, nationally, 63 per cent of those in prison have gone through care. In Manitoba, 88 per cent indigenous and 63 per cent non-indigenous inmates have been in CFS during adolescence. And based on a BC–British Columbus–Columbia studies–study, more children in CFS go to prison than graduate from high school.
So it's so important that we help to keep families together and that we support them because when we take them–children out of their families, we make them vulnerable.
It also makes more sense economically. If Mom doesn't have enough money to put food on the table or she's required to get a larger place and she doesn't have the funds, it costs the state a lot less money to help her than to put her–each of her children into foster care where the person is paid up to $1,750 per month to take care of that child.
Also, you know, I have a lot of indigenous friends, and some of them have had their children taken away from them. And I'm–one story that really alarmed me was a friend of mine, Kona [phonetic]. I am a single mom, and up until the age of six, my daughter and I, we had the same bedroom and she had her kid's bed beside mine, but she usually slept in my bed.
And my godbrother, he's Italian and his wife is Norwegian, and they moved to Ontario and, you know, back in the '90s, everybody was doing the European thing, which to–was to have a family bed. So he and his wife and his two daughters, they all slept together in the same big, long bed. My friend Kona [phonetic], who lives up in Peguis, her daughter is only six months younger than mine. So my daughter was born in June, June 2nd, hers December the 6th, and because she did not have a bedroom, a separate bedroom for her child, her child was taken away from her.
So it seems to me I hear a lot of stories that, you know, that we have really stringent standards for people to meet if CFS gets their eye on them, but the rest of us don't need to adhere to those standards. A lot of people have more than one child in–per bedroom. They don't have to have a separate bedroom per child. However, if you are–if CFS finds that you have–and this happens a lot to indigenous people–you just have one bedroom and more than one person in it, then they will take your child away from you. Some people can't afford to have an apartment with two bedrooms. Some people, if they got an apartment with two bedrooms instead of one, they would have less money for food. So it makes more sense to support families instead of separating them.
And just lastly, you know, I do this research on colonial structures and on reconciliation, and in this age of reconciliation, it's so important that we who have privilege, we who have power, that we make changes. We didn't create the systems; we inherited them. But it's good for us to be able to start changing them. It's good for us to support families.
A lot of indigenous families, they've suffered the impact of residential schools. There's a cycle of poverty that a lot live in, and it's not something that is–that they live in because they're indigenous; it's because we have, here in Canada, a system which puts indigenous First Nations people in a separate, less funded system. And that poses lots of challenges, and here I speak to you, as men and women of good will, that we have the power, we have the ability to make things better, to do better.
* (20:40)
So dream big and I'd just like to say again that I support this bill. It's–it makes way more sense to support families than it does to break them up, because when you break them up, you cause a whole bunch of problems.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Dr. LeMaître.
Mrs. Smith: Thank you, Ms. LeMaître, for your presentation. I want to say thank you, miigwech, for sharing that personal story. I'm sure you hear lots of personal stories in the work that you do. And I've heard you come and present at many committees around, you know, children and families, so I want to thank you for your work around that.
I also want to say, you know, the statistics that you've provided are definitely alarming, and that's one of the reasons why I got involved in politics, was to help make change.
So I'm wondering if you could maybe tell us, what do you think that this bill passing would do for families, especially families living in poverty?
Ms. LeMaître: Well, I think that, as I said, when you separate families for the reason of poverty–I mean, we live in Canada. We live in a country that is rich in resources, that has one of the highest standards of living in the world, and there's no reason why we shouldn't be supporting families. You know, there–our children are our future. So if we are putting money into supporting families, as opposed to taking–you know, separating them–which costs more money in the end and creates more problems, which cost more money in the end–then I think it's a win-win situation for everybody.
Children who–the young woman I was speaking to, she said she lost her language. She lost her ties to her language, to her culture, to her family. There are all things she's lost, and they're very hard to get back. So, you know, if the reason that–right now, you know, if somebody's–if children are being taken away for reasons of poverty, that doesn't make sense. You can be a good parent and, you know, be going through a rough time. So it's more important that we, as a society, support our families and support our children as opposed to breaking them up.
Ms. Klassen: Thank you for your presentation.
I recently buried one of my constituents who was a CFS child. And, you know, we hear so many disgusting things that we have to deal with as leaders. The chief shared with me that the reason why they couldn't identify her or couldn't get the body back initially was because they had to reconstruct her face. And she was missing for a while and, you know, it's just completely disheartening and shocking. And, you know, I have to try and go to bed every night and try and think–try and put that out of my mind.
And you mentioned that children are more vulnerable to exploitation here, and I was wondering if you could speak to that. Maybe we can appeal to the hearts here, to everybody here.
Ms. LeMaître: Well, we need to just look at Tina Fontaine to see there's an example of a child who was made more vulnerable by being separated from her family.
You know, and for me, where I see it the most–so–well, of course, when you put children into the system, 40 per cent of the children who go into CFS are abused there as well. And–you know, and I've heard a lot of stories from people who said that, you know, they had a good mom, but she didn't have–she was going through a hard time; she didn't have a lot of funds, so they were taken away, and they ended up in homes where they ended up being abused.
But, you know, when–and then also they're more vulnerable because more kids end up in the penal system. A lot of them end up there before they're even 18. One story I heard this evening was there was a girl who went to–she had a family meeting; the person didn't come home. She came back; she was really upset, and they told her to get over it, and then–and she got very upset. They called the police, and then, next thing you know, she's in juvie hall.
So, you know, there's that as well. So once you are there, then it kind of makes it easier for the kids to end up in the penal system when they get older as well.
And then just as I said, the fact of being on your own when you're 18, having to fend for yourself, that's an enormous task. I don't know–I would not have been able to do it. I know my daughter–I mean, she's got a net, so she can stay at home, and she's doing her master's degree–oh, sorry.
Mr. Chairperson: Wrap it up. You're over your time.
Ms. LeMaître: Am I–is my time up?
Mr. Chairperson: Yes.
Ms. LeMaître: Yes. Okay. Yes, so it just–it makes people more vulnerable in our society when they're torn away from their families. It shouldn't be happening if it's for poverty reasons, because that's something that costs the State less to help, and it's more beneficial to the family in the end.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank you for your presentation, Doctor. We will now move on to our next presenter.
Our next presenter is Michelle Scott.
Michelle, do you have written material for the committee?
Ms. Michelle Scott (Ma Mawi Wi Chi Itata Centre): No.
Mr. Chairperson: Then you may proceed with your presentation.
Floor Comment: Hi, I'm Breanne Hepp–
Mr. Chairperson: No, the committee needs to have Michelle Scott do the presentation, I believe.
Floor Comment: We're requesting to present together.
Mr. Chairperson: To the committee–we need both of your names, if you could both say your names. Is it all right if they present jointly to the committee? Is–what is the committee's will? [Agreed]
So we still need your names for our clerk.
Michelle, could you start, please?
Ms. Scott: Good evening, all. We are happy to be here tonight on behalf of the Ma Mawi Chi Itata Centre to show our support of Bill 223, which is the amendment of The Child and Family Services Act as it relates to children not being deemed as a child in need of protection due to social-economic barriers and challenges.
The Ma Mawi Wi Chi Itata Centre was established in 1984 in Winnipeg to reclaim indigenous peoples' inherent role and responsibility as the caregivers for children and families. This bill will assist organizations such as our own to support families and deliver services which are provided to address the multiple needs of families, rather than children coming into care of the child and family services system.
In the true spirit of our name, Ma Mawi Wi Chi Itata Centre, we all work together to help one another. Our centre has been a grounded, stable presence in Winnipeg's indigenous community for over 30 years. Many of the families we support face barriers and challenges related to their socio-economic status. However, we operate from a passionate belief in the resiliency of our indigenous families and recognize they live and grow with the full range of spiritual, mental, physical and emotional strengths necessary for strong family functioning.
Ms. Breanne Hepp (Ma Mawi Wi Chi Itata Centre): We truly believe that prevention is key in the work we do with our children, families and community. The passing of Bill 223 will tear down the fear and stigma that many of our families are faced with when trying to access support and various services with different systems.
There's often the fear that if a parent reaches out for help, that they are judged and deemed vulnerable to provide for the needs of their children. This in itself creates further isolation from the resources and systems that were created to help them, not fight against them.
* (20:50)
It will be crucial that more work continues to be done so that grassroots community organizations have the capacity and resources to respond to the needs of our families. Currently, many organizations are limited as to what they can assist families with due to limited funding and pilot-funded projects.
Community organizations need sustainable funding to continue the heart medicine work they do, which works within the community to build on the capacity of families.
We need to ensure that our indigenous ways of knowing and being are nurtured within everything we do as it relates to families. Our elders, wisdom carriers, families, youth and children know what they need, and their voices need to be heard and valued at all levels of decision making. We need to support indigenous models of care, such as the family group conference model, which is an indigenous ceremony that was used pre-colonization that empowers the family and the community to address the needs of the children.
In closing, we'd like commend all who have worked on the passing of this amendment and hope that it's a first step in making positive changes to this act.
Miigwech, and thank you for having us here this evening.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank you for your presentation, Ms. Scott and Ms. Hepp.
Mrs. Smith: Well, thank you, Mrs. Scott and Ms. Hepp, for coming down and presenting. We certainly appreciate hearing from Ma Mawi. I want to commend you guys on all of the great work you do. You know, you've been already doing this work that this bill is going to, you know, put in place for the government to do as well.
So keeping families together, you're in the North End; families know where you are. Well, you're all over the place. You have places all over. But–and especially your family group conferencing model, that's definitely something that I know school divisions have also adopted, and ensuring–and I was talking about that when Mr. Nowrang presented, because they've also adopted that. And having the Maori come down and make sure that, you know, we're taking some practices that have worked in other communities and bringing them here–and certainly we've seen the impacts that have–it's had on our families, our community.
So I just want to say thank you from us to you for the great work you do. Keep it up. And maybe you could speak a little bit about, what do you think this bill is going to mean for families, and how do you think it's going to provide the extra support and–like, mister–Ms. Klassen spoke earlier about the norm. And sometimes the norm for some is not the norm for all, and Dr. Maître [phonetic]–Dr. LeMaître also alluded to that, that, you know, three kids sleeping on a mattress in a living room was the norm for me growing up. But, if someone were to come in the house, they'd probably go, well, you know, they don't have a bedroom, they don't have their own bed. We need to apprehend them and make sure that they're cared for, because they're being neglected.
But–so what do you think this bill is going to mean for families?
Ms. Hepp: Well, I think that, at Ma Mawi, we talk a lot about the Ma Mawi way, and we have a different way of doing things, a different approach to how we help families in our community, how we support them. And so I guess with the change, this bill, we're hoping that more agencies have the opportunity to look outside the box and find new ways to help people and listen to people and get them what they need, not what we think they need.
Mr. Chairperson: Miss–oh, Ms. Scott, did you have something to say?
Ms. Scott: Yes.
Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Scott.
Ms. Scott: Sorry. Just in response to that, I did come from front line, and I believe, with this bill being put in place, that it would keep families together, and I think that it would give the families a better chance at success in their future and with their children and stop tearing families apart.
I know there was some discussion about, you know, what's appropriate for children to eat, you know, kind of where I–you know, for breakfast and what they're eating for lunch and what they're eating for supper. And, you know, we kind of reiterated that we were just really grateful that they were eating at all, and it really didn't matter at that point what they were eating, but they were doing what they could to make it a success in that family and seeing everybody kind of come together, so it's–I think it's a really great thing to see this come in.
Thank you. Miigwech.
Ms. Klassen: Just want to say thank you to both of you for presenting today. And we've touched on a lot of issues that we see as normal in our communities, right? And it's not just in the North End here in Winnipeg, but indeed all across our province.
And it was unfortunate, you know, I owned a laundromat in my reserve, and I tried selling fruits and vegetables at a–but to break–just to break even, I had to sell them at $1.67 for one apple. You know, it was cheaper for a mom to buy a drink and a bar or a drink and a chip. But they–and it was more filling than one apple, right? And so, you know, our norms are completely different from mainstream society. We will get–you know, we will progress. I have great hope in our people.
And I just want to point out that, again, that there was a common–a resolution I put forward regarding CFS, and it was based on those ideas, the fountain, the circles, the group conferencing. My colleague, Dr. Gerrard, actually even went to Australia to go and meet with the actual creators of that system that was brought over by the Maori.
And so I just want to say thank you for all the work you do, and we really appreciate your being there for our people.
Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Hepp, we're pretty much out of time, so I'll allow a few seconds if you both want to comment–
Ms. Hepp: I was just going to say thank you.
Mr. Chairperson: That concludes our list of presenters for Bill 223.
Mr. Chairperson: We will now move to Bill 228.
I will call on Kevin Coyne [phonetic], Winnipeg Humane Society. Kevin Coyne [phonetic]?
Mr. Coyne [phonetic], do you have any written material for the committee?
Mr. Kevin Toyne (Winnipeg Humane Society): I do not.
Mr. Chairperson: Mr. Coyne [phonetic], you may proceed with your presentation when you are ready.
Mr. Toyne: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. My name is Kevin Toyne, with a T. And I'm a lawyer at the law firm Hill Sokalski Walsh and Olson, in Winnipeg. And I'm here tonight on behalf of and in my capacity as a member of the board of directors of the Winnipeg Humane Society to speak in favour of Bill 228.
The Winnipeg Humane Society was founded in 1894, and since its founding the society has been Manitoba's leading animal welfare organization. The society prides itself on being a strong voice for all animals–pet, farmed and exotic–and it has played an active role in trying to improve the lives of all animals in Manitoba for many years. For example, on behalf of the province, the society now conducts over 80 per cent of all animal cruelty investigations originating in Winnipeg, and that represents over 60 per cent of all animal cruelty investigations in Manitoba.
Now, the Winnipeg Humane Society is also the largest animal shelter in the province. We care for over 9,000 animals each year and perform more than 3,000 spay and neuter surgeries for Manitobans that can't afford those procedures themselves. Our staff, volunteers and donors support and work closely with over 30 animal rescues across Manitoba, provide training to pet owners six days a week and actively participate in education, outreach and animal compassion programs.
As the member for St. Johns (Ms. Fontaine) stated during the first reading of this bill, Bill 228 recognizes the phenomenal work being done by those on the front line of animal rescue and spay and neuter clinics and mobile clinics across the province. The Winnipeg Humane Society wholeheartedly supports raising awareness about the important and critical work being done by all of Manitoba's animal shelters, rescues and their dedicated supporters.
And in the Humane Society's view, improving animal welfare should be and largely is a non‑partisan issue. For example, the society's membership is diverse in many different ways and it is supported by those that vote for all of Manitoba's major political parties.
On July 29, 1998, Harry Enns, then-Agriculture minister in the Filmon government, stated in reference to the then-new Animal Care Act, that Manitoba will be at the forefront of animal protection. Last year, you and your colleagues made every May 20th Service and Therapy Animal Day by passing Bill 201, proposed by the member from Fort Richmond. And during second reading on that bill in March of 2017, the member for Selkirk (Mr. Lagimodiere) noted that Bill 201 is a non-partisan bill and encouraged all members to support it. And similarly, during second reading of this bill, back in June, the member for Southdale (Mr. Smith) stated that, I don't think there is anyone in Manitoba or anyone in this Legislative Assembly that wouldn't agree that animal welfare is an important issue.
The Winnipeg Humane Society agrees that bills such as Bill 201 last year, Bill 228 this year are non‑partisan bills and that they should be supported by members from all of the parties in the Legislative Assembly.
* (21:00)
Now, I only became a member of the board of directors at the Humane Society in April 2017, just before Bill 201 came before one of these legislative committees. And if I had been on the board more than just a week when that happened, I would have appeared before that committee to say the same things then as I am saying tonight in support of Bill 228.
So, on behalf of The Winnipeg Humane Society, I thank you for the opportunity to come here tonight to speak on behalf of our many staff, supporters and donors, and on their behalf, I urge all of you and each and every one of your colleagues to support Bill 228 and make April 10th animal shelter and rescue awareness day in Manitoba.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Chairperson: The committee's apology for having your name spelt wrong, Mr. Toyne.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): Well, miigwech, Kevin, for attending tonight. I know that you've had a very long day, and I know you were trick-or-treating as well, I believe. So I say miigwech for taking time out to come and present to the committee, and more importantly, I say miigwech for all of the work that the board of directors and the CEO and all of the amazing staff and volunteers at The Winnipeg Humane Society does on behalf of animal welfare here in Manitoba.
As you know, I recently took a tour, an official tour, even though, as most people in the committee know, that my Chilly Dog is from the Humane Society, and so we visit there quite often. But actually it was my first official tour of The Winnipeg Humane Society, and I got to see a part of the Humane Society that most of the public doesn't get to see. And while I was impressed before, certainly I'm even more impressed with the operations of the Humane Society and all the work that you do.
But also to you, Kevin, just in respect of your animal rights work that you do, I also just want to say miigwech for that. I want to say miigwech for the expertise and the advice that you've given me personally when we've looked at, certainly, not only this bill, but Bill 227, which is enacting a puppy mill ban here in Manitoba and, alongside, a provincial exotic animal ban.
We do have the Minister for Agriculture here tonight, and I have spoken with him about Bill 227 and seeing if there's a way that we can work together, certainly, in respect of a puppy mill ban here in Manitoba, and I would be curious on your thoughts on that.
Mr. Toyne: Thank you very much for all of your kind words that were appropriately directed at The Winnipeg Humane Society. And I'm somewhat embarrassed to say thank you on my personal behalf as well.
The Winnipeg Humane Society supports legislation introduced by any elected official at any level of government that the Humane Society feels will take steps to improve animal welfare. And the Humane Society would be more than happy to work with members on the government side, the opposition side, regardless of whether those individuals are blue, orange or red, to try to take steps to improve animal welfare.
And, if it's the will of the members of the House to take steps in that direction, we would be more than happy to work with those that are attempting to move it forward, to do so. We certainly value the positive relationship that we have both with the current government and with past governments, and we certainly do what we can to ensure that we continue to work collaboratively with whichever party is in government.
And I hope that answered your question.
Mr. Rick Wowchuk (Swan River): Yes, Kevin, I just want to also say thank you so much for what you do and the part you play and all the people at The Winnipeg Humane Society. We all know how important pets are to families and how you reach out and find those forever homes for so many of those neglected animals. And so thank you.
Mr. Toyne: Thank you very much for your kind words.
Ms. Judy Klassen (Kewatinook): I just wanted to say thank you for your presentation here. You know, I'm a big supporter of this bill, and personally, I'm a big supporter of The Winnipeg Humane Society. You know, there's been many times we've found animals along, and I know we could easily go to The Winnipeg Humane Society and leave them there in care of your organization, along with a cheque to make sure they're taken care of through to the first year, and hopefully by that time they get adopted out.
But–and so I just want to say thank you for your support here today.
Mr. Toyne: Thank you very much.
Hon. Ralph Eichler (Minister of Agriculture): Just a quick comment. Thanks for your presentation.
Living on a highway for a number of years and running a business, we saw lots of dogs and cats being dropped off. But what is it that we could do to help educate the general population on the responsibilities of whatever species that we may have, whether it be a horse, a cat, a dog? Any advice on the education component that we could use that–maybe through your organization, to make awareness of really what the responsibilities are of owning the pet?
Mr. Toyne: Mr. Minister, one of the things that the Humane Society is currently working towards is expanding our education and advocacy efforts to do a number of things, and that includes trying to ensure that those that take on the responsibility of owning pets have a full appreciation as to what exactly that means, and if they start to struggle with those responsibilities, that they know that there's organizations like the Winnipeg Humane Society that's out there.
Over the past number of years, we've done a lot of work to try to change the model that we have to not just be a place where animals can be dropped off, but to actually start working with animal owners to help build the skills, give them the resources, so that they don't feel like the only option they have when they're struggling with a pet is simply to drop it off or to abandon it on the side of the road.
So we're certainly doing what we can do. We understand that we operate in an environment, as you do, of limited resources, and we do the best with what we have. And we would certainly be more than happy to work with the government or all members of the House to take steps to further educate pet owners, animal owners or those that are considering owning a pet.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Mr. Toyne. That took us a little bit longer over our time limit, but we thank you very much for your presentation.
That puts us at the end of the presentations–this put us at the end of the list of presentations we have.
We will now move to recalling the people we had called earlier that had not been present, so we will move on to Bill 29 at this point.
Pam Robins? I have been advised that Pam Robins, No. 4 on the presenters' list for Bill 29, is unable to make their presentation at this meeting but would like to have their written brief considered by the committee as a written submission.
Does the committee agree to receive these documents and have them appear in the Hansard transcript of this meeting? [Agreed]
And Pam Robins' name will be removed from the list.
I will now call on Bob Austman. Bob Austman? Mr. Austman does not appear to be here this evening.
Mr. Austman's name will be taken from the list.
Mr. Paul Conchatre? Paul Conchatre? Paul is not here; his name will be taken from the list.
That–next presenter: Rick Ryan. Rick Ryan. Is Rick Ryan present? Mr. Ryan's name will be taken from the list.
That concludes our list of presenters for Bill 29.
That concludes our list of presenters for Bill 35.
That concludes our list of presenters for Bill 223.
I will now call on Katie Powell for Bill 228.
Katie Powell, do you have any written material for the committee?
Ms. Katie Powell (Save A Dog Network Canada): Yes.
Mr. Chairperson: As soon as it's distributed, you may start with your presentation. Actually, go ahead with your presentation.
Yes, Katie Powell.
Ms. Powell: Thank you and miigwech to Nahanni Fontaine for leading this bill for so many who deserve this special day.
* (21:10)
My name is Katie Powell, and I am president and founder of Save A Dog Network. We are a non‑profit based in Winnipeg who provide long-term, humane solutions to the overpopulation of roaming dogs and lack of veterinary services in Manitoba's First Nation communities. We do this by empowering the people who make up these communities, relocating unwanted dogs mainly out of province and providing these overwhelmed areas with affordable vetting resources and education. We partner with local rescues and shelters like the Winnipeg Humane Society with–for our community members, fosters, local businesses, animal control officers, transporters and adopting rescues throughout Canada to rehome unwanted and injured dogs.
We also partner with some of the best volunteer veterinarians to–in Manitoba to bring affordable veterinary services to isolated First Nation communities. We are a small but courageous collaborative of people who see a massive crisis happening in Manitoba and are pushing for positive changes.
Today, I honourably speak on behalf of these concerned people–many front-line animal rescuers in this province–who are deeply concerned about our northern isolated communities and their safety and emotional well-being–those important and valued humans who are often forgotten and who lack some of the most basic human rights. These northern families are being seriously affected by the alarming rate of roaming dogs, many who have no voice.
Not only do I stand here in front of you all, imploring you to listen and think about these underprivileged families, but also to help stand up for the overworked, emotionally strained volunteer rescuers living in Winnipeg and surrounding areas, like myself, who support these communities and witness more tragedy than any human should.
So why do we do what we do? And it's not just because we're crazy dog ladies. We do this to fulfill an unmet need. Services that are supplied by veterinarians are considered fundamental community infrastructure in a developed world. Isolated Manitoba communities, especially First Nations, are included in this developed world, and by this inclusion should have access to the same public health solutions as non-indigenous communities. This includes veterinary services and access to rescues and shelter resources. This is where Save A Dog recognizes an unmet need and why I'm standing in front of you here today.
There are thousands of dogs that roam Manitoba's North. Many are owned, but many are unwanted. The majority are unvaccinated and breeding at alarming rates while battling the brutal elements and trying to survive. Many dogs lack training and socialization skills, which cause serious problems in these communities, including ripping into garbage, chasing vehicles, attacking family pets and people. Children living in these First Nation communities are 180 times more likely to be bit or mauled by a dog than a–children living in an urban setting. Think about that–180 times more likely. Spaying and neutering these dogs will drastically reduce aggression and roaming behaviours.
There are significant risks to having roaming and aggressive dogs in a community. Infectious and contagious 'diseages'–diseases are some of the most prevalent. Rabies is a preventable viral disease that is spread predominantly through saliva. There is no cure. When vaccinated against rabies, each community's dog population forms a barrier between its citizens and the rabies-infected wildlife, thus protecting the community from a rabies outbreak. We need to raise the rates that are less than 5 per cent in our indigenous communities up to 70 per cent vaccination requirement to protect against this rabies. Vaccinations are inexpensive and easy to administer with access to proper veterinary services.
One roaming fertile dog can produce 67,000 offspring in just six years, with a death rate of 50 per cent. These puppies are often born outside in harsh conditions, and survival is minimal. Being born to an unvaccinated mother puts the puppies at risk to die from these–canine parvovirus and distemper. Out-of-control dog populations in First Nation communities will result in unnecessary dog suffering. Because of lack of accessible veterinary resources, animals are often unintentionally left to suffer, to roam around with broken bones and cuts. This is when infection spreads, which ends up killing these dogs and puppies slowly. This is where proper access to veterinary care and rescue resources will drastically reduce these numbers of the animals that are suffering to break the cycle of violence.
Where these out-of-control dog populations, there's also an increased wilful and neglect acts of cruelty. This has a negative impact on a community's mental, social and physical health. Animal cruelty is a devastating impact on 'childres' witnessing or taking part in animal suffering. It has also been linked to subsequent violence against people: 75 per cent of women who suffer from domestic violence stated their animal was also abused or killed by their aggressor.
When children roughhouse with, throw stones at or hit unwanted dogs or puppies with sticks, it reinforces a negative interaction, regardless if it is in self-defence. The child's perspective of the dog shifts. They learn from those interactions and apply it to other areas of their lives. Preventing the cycle of violence is extremely important to make future leaders in our province.
These problems we are currently facing can easily go away if we all work together, including our Manitoba leaders like yourselves. Our group and the dogs we rescue are living proof that positive changes can happen when dedicated, loving people have faith in you.
I wanted to share a letter from one of our northern community members that I would have loved to have been here today: I would like to express my gratitude for everything that Save A Dog Network, has done for our community of York Landing, Manitoba, a small reserve of about 500 people in northern Manitoba.
Living in this community, you get used to the amount of strays roaming around, but when I heard about dog shoots happening, I knew we needed to do something to help these poor dogs from horrible deaths: dog shoots, freezing to death, starvation and parvo.
Puppies were being dropped off at the garbage dump and left alone in the cold. Someone had posted a picture of two different litters all cuddled together in the freezing cold, and I took it upon myself to post the picture on Facebook to find someone who could help me with these puppies.
Katie Powell of Save A Dog Network reached out to me, and ever since then we have been friends. She still works closely with the community and still contributes by sending dog food, collars, leashes and dog pens.
We had a vaccination clinic with Save A Dog Network in January 2016 because parvo was killing our puppies, and ever since then, we hardly hear of dogs dying from the parvovirus.
Then a spay-and-neuter clinic in April 2016, which did wonders for our community, in terms of keeping people safe from dog bites, overpopulation and having dogs starve to death. We recently had another spay-and-neuter clinic in August 2018 here. Save A Dog Network got about 95 per cent of the dogs spayed or neutered. What a huge difference it has made.
Save A Dog Network has–had made a huge difference in our community of York Landing. I am forever grateful to Save A Dog Network for everything they have done and continue to do for our community. They are truly heroes, and I will never forget Katie and her team.
Corrine Chapman, York Factory Band Member.
A little quote that resonates with me: The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated. Made by Gandhi.
Thank you for listening and helping us to recognize and raise awareness for animal shelters in Manitoba.
Mr. Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation, Ms. Powell.
Ms. Fontaine: Well, miigwech, Katie, for taking the time. Just for the purposes of the committee members, Katie is also a paramedic in our health-care system and was working, and so she took time out of her busy schedule to come and present to us; and, on top of that, does all of this advocacy and spay-and-neuter clinics and rescuing dog really all over Manitoba while also being a paramedic.
So I really do want to just honour you and lift you up for the work that you do on behalf of those that really can't advocate for themselves or speak on their own behalf. And, honestly, Save A Dog Network, along with Katie, your partner there as well, do such phenomenal work.
And I don’t know if committee members realize that, actually, Manitoba's quite unique across the country because of the overpopulation of our dogs. Our dogs are actually–Katie, with Save A Dog Network, sends those dogs out of province. None of the dogs that she rescues are actually adopted here in Manitoba because unlike some other provinces, where they actually are looking for dogs, we have an overpopulation.
So, maybe, Katie, if you wanted to take a couple of minutes and just talk about that process.
* (21:20)
Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Powell.
Ms. Powell: When we started this, you don't realize your own problem until it's hitting you in the face. My organization is one of probably 30 in Manitoba, and I get over 150 requests of unwanted puppies and dogs a month. The–what we've decided is because these dogs that come into rescue care simply don't find homes fast enough, they often, like our CFS children, they grow up and become adults and they never find a home that's going to love them forever.
In other parts of Canada, they don't have the strays that we do, and these shelters are actually empty. They reach out to us because it's such a problem here, and actually, we send all of our dogs–we rescue about 50 a month, and the majority of them do leave the province and find homes in mainly Vancouver and Toronto.
Mr. Eichler: Thank you for your presentation. Thank you coming out tonight.
In regards to the education component–and we know that the pet business is a big business and lots of money's been made of it. But the thing that we can't seem to get across to the general public is the responsibilities in the ownership of a pet. Do you have some advice for us on that?
Ms. Powell: It takes a lot of love and commitment. What we find is that these northern communities don't lack love for their animal, they lack education and they lack resources. So when we go up there, the thing that we like to educate the most are the children. They flock to us, Minister. They love to hear what we have to say. They're so interested in why we're there because it's a luxury to them. Most of these children do not grow up in our urban settings. They are born here and go right back as a baby. They don't have access to proper education school systems, let alone how to properly care for your animal. So that's one thing that we are working on, is designing a program for that strictly indigenous base for our people so we can go up and properly care for them. But naturally it comes, and when we see these kids two years later, they remember us, and they remember what we say.
Ms. Fontaine: So I do want to just–because I don't want to–I don't want there to be on the record that indigenous people don't love or know how to care for their pets, because I know the minister has brought up now two questions in respect of responsible pet education. And I understand that, and I agree with that. I actually think that we should be doing more work in respect of responsible pet ownership.
However, the conditions in First Nation communities, we cannot assume that they are the same as they are in the south in urban areas. First Nation communities don't have access to veterinarian care. They do not have access to the things that we take for granted.
And so when you're living in an isolated First Nation community, like the member for Kewatinook (Ms. Klassen) talking about, that it is cheaper to feed your child Kool-Aid and a chocolate bar with prices so high for food, the last thing that you're going to care about, unfortunately, in the midst of survival, is a dog.
So it's not that people don't love their dogs; it's not that they don't want to take care of their dogs. They simply do not have the resources. And so, when we're talking about training on responsible pet ownership, it is so important that we understand the conditions that many, many First Nation isolated communities face and how they differ from the south here. So I want to put that on the record there.
And again, just miigwech, Katie, for all of your hard work.
Mr. Chairperson: Ms. Powell, our time has expired, but I'll give you a few seconds to answer.
Ms. Powell: Okay. Yes. Thank you, Nahanni. I just wanted to add that–you know, and it's a lot of echo–is that what is the norm up north is not the norm here. And we do our best to empower these communities, especially the leaders, to self-regulate. That's the most important thing. I–we give them all the love and support they need, and they flourish and grow themselves and–as long as we do is love them and educate them, there's no problem in the support that we get back from them.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank you for your presentation, Ms. Powell.
That concludes the list of presenters I have before me. We will now go to–are there any other persons in attendance who wish to make a presentation?
Seeing as none, that concludes public presentations.
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: We will now proceed with clause-by-clause consideration of the bills.
What order does the committee wish to proceed with clause-by-clause consideration of the bills?
Mr. Eichler: As presented on the order paper.
Mr. Chairperson: Agreed? As presented on the meeting notice? Agreed? [Agreed]
Clause-by-clause consideration: During the consideration of a bill, the preamble, the enacting clause and the title are postponed until all other clauses have been considered in their proper order.
Also, if there is an agreement from the committee, the Chair will call clauses in blocks that conform to pages, with the understanding that we will stop at any particular clause or clauses where members may have comments, questions or amendments to propose.
Is that agreed?
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Chairperson: I hear a no.
Ms. Klassen: I want to go clause by clause.
Mr. Chairperson: Of all the bills?
Ms. Klassen: For Bill 29 specifically.
Mr. Chairperson: Okay. Is that agreed? Committee agrees to that? [Agreed]
(Continued)
Mr. Chairperson: We will now proceed with Bill 29.
Does the minister responsible for Bill 29 have an opening statement?
Hon. Rochelle Squires (Minister of Sustainable Development): Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, for providing me an opportunity to speak briefly to Bill 29, The Wildlife Amendment Act. We had heard many great presentations tonight, and I do appreciate the committee's patience and attentiveness to all these great presentations that we heard tonight.
Night hunting is a very difficult and complex issue that affects many Manitobans in many ways. We have seen deaths, serious injuries and far too many close calls as a result of unsafe night-hunting practices in Manitoba. Since 2010, there have been two fatalities in Manitoba due to night hunting, and in September of 2015, an elderly couple reported being woken by a bullet piercing the wall above where they slept. Further, in October of 2017, we know that a youth sustained a non-fatal injury at night in the Pulp River area.
All these injuries and fatalities are entirely preventable, and Bill 29 strives to do just that. The bill addresses concerns regarding the unsafe and unsustainable night-hunting practices while respecting indigenous rights. It enables the creation of shared-management committees to address management and conservation of wildlife in areas of our province.
We have a responsibility to act and further regulate night hunting. We believe that this bill strikes the balance between respect for indigenous hunting and the rights of public safety, and I look forward to passage of this bill.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank the minister for her statement.
Does the critic from the official opposition have an opening statement?
Sorry–does the critic–oh, sorry, I have to release you. Thank–we thank the minister for–I didn't have my mic on. We thank the minister for her statement.
Does the critic from the official opposition have an opening statement?
Mr. Ted Marcelino (Tyndall Park): The bill, on its own, suggests so many things that might go against the Supreme Court decisions that have been rendered regarding the treaty of rights of the indigenous First Nations, especially their right to hunting and to provide for their families. And sometimes it's not what is in the bill, but it is what is not there, which means the guarantees that are given to those who are hunters for purposes of food, especially those in those areas–in the treaty areas, especially–should be part of, at least, the consultations that were done.
* (21:30)
And we have heard, too, that there were not too many, meaning, from the point of view of some of the presenters, it would have been better if we took a closer look and dug deeper in the ramifications and complications of this bill. As the minister has suggested, it's a–this is a very complex bill that might invite more dissention and friction with our First Nations.
And I know that it's not intended to be that way. I understand that, in the bona fides of the bill, it is public safety. I see that, except that it's as if I am looking for more guarantees from the government, that it will be more respectful of the indigenous rights as known to all of us and as held by the Supreme Court in some of those cases that I mentioned before, during my speech during the first reading of this bill.
It is amazing that we are not even considering postponing this bill, considering the suggestion from some who will be severely affected. From their point of view, in their opinion, they will be severely affected, especially that night hunting portion of it.
The traditional ways of the indigenous First Nations from way back–it was mentioned, also, in the Supreme Court decision–that the advancement in the technologies, from the bow and arrow to the rifle, from the torches to the spotlight–it was recognized as a way to provide for the kitchen table of the indigenous family. And I guess I cannot overemphasize the lack of those guarantees that I seek as a legislator. Because we always think in terms of words, but then sometimes in the application of the law and in the enforcement, we lack some of those–foresight.
And, with that, I thank the minister for allowing me.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank the member for his statement.
Does the critic from the official opposition party have an opening statement?
Ms. Judy Klassen (Kewatinook): To correct–sorry–we're the second opposition.
Mr. Chairperson: Does the critic from the second opposition party have an opening statement?
Ms. Klassen: Don't confuse me as an NDP. No, just kidding.
In–I just want to reiterate, in closing, the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs cannot support Bill 29 as it is presently drafted, as it will impact AMC member First Nations' treaty and Aboriginal rights. We have fought long and hard for those.
We recommend that Manitoba properly obtain the free, prior and informed 'cosent', as–consent, as identified in UNDRIP. Absent that, and the bill does become law, the AMC grand chief's office will explore all its political and legal options, inform the AMC chiefs and assembly and seek direction from the chiefs on how to proceed, including, but not limiting, pursuing a remedy in court.
So I just want to put that, once again, on the record. You were–this ministry was asked if they could postpone this so that they could have true consultation as–or–as defined by some of the chiefs that spoke here today, some of the presenters, the indigenous presenters. You know, this bill–where are you guys going to stop? What else are you going to infringe upon us if we say yes to this? There's no way we're going to support this–not now, not ever.
You know, in theory, we want safe hunting. Don't get me wrong on that. We know how to safe hunt. But it's just the practices of people that impose upon us that are forcing my people to do what they're doing and forcing other Manitoba hunters to do what they're doing.
So–and I want to speak to the member who said–who asked the young gentleman from the AMC, you know, is there training within the AMC? You know, I'm–I was excited to hear that, because now I hope that the member puts forth a bill that will give financial support for the training that he asked the AMC for, for my people. It can't be us as opposition–we're not allowed to introduce money bills.
And so, with that, I look forward to that bill being presented by the member, and I want to say that you didn't consult. You didn't even consult me. I'm an indigenous hunter. I didn't know this bill was coming. I would have stopped its introduction at day one in the House had I known. And so, when you're trying to tell me that you consulted, I can't find anybody–north–that has said there was consultation that took place.
And so thank you.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank the member for her statement.
We will now moves–move on to clause by clause.
Shall clause 1 pass?
Some Honourable Members: Pass.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Chairperson: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Chairperson: All those in favour of clause 1 passing, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Chairperson: All those opposed, please say nay.
An Honourable Member: Nay.
Mr. Chairperson: In my opinion, the Ayes have it.
Clause 1 is accordingly passed.
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: Shall clause 2 pass?
Some Honourable Members: Pass.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Chairperson: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Chairperson: All those in favour of clause 2 passing, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Chairperson: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Chairperson: In my opinion, the Ayes have it.
Clause 2 is accordingly passed.
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: Shall clause 3 pass?
Some Honourable Members: Pass.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Chairperson: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Chairperson: All those in favour of clause 3 passing, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Chairperson: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Chairperson: In my opinion, the Ayes have it.
Clause 3 is accordingly passed.
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: Shall clause 4 pass?
Some Honourable Members: Pass.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Chairperson: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Chairperson: All those in favour of clause 4 passing, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Chairperson: All those opposed, please say nay.
An Honourable Member: Nay.
Mr. Chairperson: In my opinion, the Ayes have it.
Clause 4 is accordingly passed.
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: Shall clause 5 pass?
Some Honourable Members: Pass.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Chairperson: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Chairperson: All those in favour of clause 5 passing, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Chairperson: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Chairperson: In my opinion, the Ayes have it.
Clause 5 is accordingly passed.
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: Shall clause 6 pass?
Some Honourable Members: Pass.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Chairperson: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Chairperson: All those in favour of clause 6 passing, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Chairperson: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Chairperson: In my opinion, the Ayes have it.
Clause 6 is accordingly passed.
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: Shall clause 7 pass?
Some Honourable Members: Pass.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Chairperson: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Chairperson: All those in favour of clause 7 passing, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Chairperson: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Chairperson: In my opinion, the Ayes have it.
Clause 7 is accordingly passed.
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: Shall clause 8 pass?
Some Honourable Members: Pass.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Chairperson: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Chairperson: All those in favour of clause 8 passing, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Chairperson: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Chairperson: In my opinion, the Ayes have it.
Clause 8 is accordingly passed.
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: Shall clause 9 pass?
Some Honourable Members: Pass.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Chairperson: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Chairperson: All those in favour of clause 9 passing, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Chairperson: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Chairperson: In my opinion, the Ayes have it.
Clause 9 is accordingly passed.
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: Shall clause 10 pass?
Some Honourable Members: Pass.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Chairperson: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Chairperson: All those in favour of clause 10 passing, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Chairperson: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Chairperson: In my opinion, the Ayes have it.
Clause 10 is accordingly passed.
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: Shall schedule B pass?
Some Honourable Members: Pass.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Chairperson: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Chairperson: All those in favour of schedule B passing, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Chairperson: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Chairperson: In my opinion, the Ayes have it. Schedule B is accordingly passed.
* (21:40)
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: Shall the enacting clause pass?
Some Honourable Members: Pass.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Chairperson: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Chairperson: All those in favour of the enacting clause passing, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Chairperson: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Chairperson: In my opinion, the Ayes have it. The enacting clause is accordingly passed.
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: Shall the title pass?
Some Honourable Members: Pass.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Chairperson: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Chairperson: All those in favour of the title passing, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Chairperson: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Chairperson: In my opinion, the Ayes have it. The title is accordingly passed.
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: Shall the bill be reported?
Some Honourable Members: Agreed.
An Honourable Member: No.
Mr. Chairperson: I hear a no.
Voice Vote
Mr. Chairperson: All those in favour of the bill being reported, please say aye.
Some Honourable Members: Aye.
Mr. Chairperson: All those opposed, please say nay.
Some Honourable Members: Nay.
Mr. Chairperson: In my opinion, the Ayes have it. The bill shall be reported. Agreed? [Agreed]
* * *
Mr. Chairperson: Bill be reported.
This concludes our Bill 29 clause-by-clause.
(Continued)
Mr. Chairperson: We will now move on to Bill 35.
Does the minister responsible for Bill 35 have an opening statement?
Hon. Ralph Eichler (Minister of Agriculture): Yes, Mr. Chair, I do.
Mr. Chairperson: The honourable Mr. Eichler, you may proceed with your statement.
Mr. Eichler: Consultation's why we're here tonight. To begin, I want to summarize the consultations that led to development of this bill to amend The Crown Lands Act. In 2017, our government updated the regulations for The Crown Lands Act to bring us to alignment with the New West Partnership Trade Agreement. This agreement is important for Manitoba farmers. We benefit from trading with our 'neighbing' provinces.
On February the 20th, 2018, my department released a public consultation document seeking feedback on modernizing agricultural Crown lands program. There were multiple meetings with our clients, livestock farmers in Manitoba; a presentation at the Manitoba Ag Days; provided information at Manitoba Agriculture Beef and Forage Days.
My staff had several meetings across the province as they met with producers in Swan River, Dauphin, Ste. Rose, Brandon, Neepawa, all in the month of February; Ashern, Teulon, Beausejour in March.
This does not include the numerous meetings that was held by the Manitoba Beef Producers; Keystone Ag Producers; Manitoba forage grower association, Association of Manitoba Municipalities, the Manitoba Conservation Districts Association, the Association of Manitoba Community Pastures, the National Cattle Feeders' Association.
This bill will modernize and improve how agriculture Crown lands and community pastures are managed. The points-based system was inefficient and led to many appeals and animosity over who was allocated the land.
Manitoba's cattle producers have told us directly they prefer an auction system to that of tender or a points-based system–these–because auctions are open, transparent and not subject to delays caused by appeals. They also want to know the value of the bids in real time, which only an auction can achieve.
Environmental protections and the lease agreement: the lease agreement requires producers to use the land in accordance with good management, husbandry and conservation practices. A lease can be cancelled if the 'leasee' or any shareholder of a corporation are not a farmer or a rancher who is 'acly' involved in the management of the leased lands.
A corporation is eligible to obtain or hold a lease only if–and only if–every shareholder is a farmer or rancher who is 'acly' involved in the use of the land. Lease agreements set a limit of the total number of animal units that any one leaseholder can acquire, and that's 4,800 animal units.
This bill will also allow for the designation of lands as community pastures. These pastures benefit not only our Manitoba farmers, but also protect those unique ecosystems. Designated computer pastures will allow the Province to continue to provide grazing opportunities for our farmers, also achieving environmental benefits such as carbon 'sequestion', protecting–threatening species and maintaining biodiversities. Pastures will continue to be available for our First Nations, Metis, 'indiguous' communities to carry out traditional and cultural pursuits.
Community pastures offer a unique opportunity for young farmers to enter to the livestock production without the need for large investments in land. These pastures are integral part in advantage for our province to grow our livestock industry and help establish the next generation of producers through affordable access of pasture.
The Association of Manitoba Community Pastures have been administering these lands. AMCP are great stewards of the land and were 'cipients' of the 2017 sustainability award in Manitoba for sustainability in water and natural area stewardship.
That's my comments, Minister Chair.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank the minister for his statement.
Does the critic from the official opposition have an opening statement?
Mr. Ted Marcelino (Tyndall Park): The usual concerns that have been expressed, even before–even from those who have appeared before this committee, is that there is a certain fear that some young farmers have that they'll be sidelined and marginalized by bigger and more well-financed corporations that may gobble up the agricultural Crown land that will be available.
I understand their fear and when there are regulations that will be proclaimed by the Lieutenant Governor, acting on behalf of the people of Manitoba, regarding the way that the auction will be published, maybe, or the way that the prices are set, the regulations themselves lend to mistakes that may–with unintended consequences of excluding some of our younger but less moneyed young farmers.
I am of the impression that we are supposed to encourage more resident farmers and more ranchers. And–so that we could use all our natural resources for the betterment of our communities, whether urban or rural. It is just those fears that I become a little bit more concerned, especially when there are some vague notions that I get from the bill itself, including the one where the minister will be the one to be able to contract with–or do management agreements with the Government of Canada, a municipality, the council of a band as defined in the Indian Act, Canada, or an organization performing government functions on behalf of one or more bands, (d) a non-profit organization, and (e)–and this is the more vague provision of this bill–any other person or group of persons.
And there's no restriction as to what definition or restrictions we could put in so that there's more specificity as to which group of persons are we referring to in the law. Because this will become law and this will be with us during the next hundred years.
I wish that I could persuade the minister to be a little bit more specific with the wording. He could ask the Legislative Counsel to do that. And I wish that more is said about the standards. When we are delegating power to another person, there has to be a defined goal and a defined framework where those delegated powers might be exercised. And it's one of the principles of law, that when you delegate power it has to be in some kind of framework. And I don't believe that it's here in this law.
Thank you.
* (21:50)
Mr. Chairperson: We thank the member for his statement.
Does the critic from the second opposition party have an opening statement?
Ms. Judy Klassen (Kewatinook): We will not be supporting this bill. You know, it was quite concerning when the movement is for outside of our province to be owning more and more of what is rightfully–should go first to Manitobans. I don't like the idea of farms getting amalgamated. You know, if there was ever an outbreak of any kind of disease with the cattle, you know, you're just wiping out complete herds, as opposed to where there's a chance where there could be, you know, an area protected because they're not right next to where the infection starts. So that was very concerning.
I just want to say we're going to support the youth of our province, our young farmers, and we're going to go with them
Thank you.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank the member for her statement.
We will now move on to clause by clause.
Clauses 1 and 2–pass; clause 3–pass; clause 4–pass; enacting clause–pass; title–pass. Bill be reported.
That concludes Bill 35.
Mr. Chairperson: We will now move on to Bill 36, clause by clause.
Does the minister responsible for Bill 36 have an opening statement?
Hon. Cliff Cullen (Minister of Justice and Attorney General): I do.
As members of this committee will know, cannabis legalization by the federal government was rushed to meet the October 17th deadline. As a result, our government has committed to reviewing our legislative framework for cannabis to determine any gaps that have arisen due to the federal government's rushed timeline. Bill 36 is the result of that review, and I want to thank my hard-working team in Manitoba Justice for identifying this particular gap and suggesting a legislative amendment to address it.
The federal Bill C-46 enables law enforcement to use federally approved oral fluid screening devices to determine whether a driver has drugs in their system. It also creates three new Criminal Code offences for different levels of THC in the blood while driving. Our provincial Bill 26, which was passed in June of 2018, imposes provincial sanctions to correspond with these new offences.
Both Bill C-46 and Bill 26 have two parts, the first part dealing with the new drug-impaired driving offences and the second part dealing with streamlining and modernizing various Criminal Code transportation offences.
As such, part 2 of Bill 26 is about ensuring that our legislation includes accurate cross-references with part 2 of the federal legislation. Par 2 of Bill 26 comes into force on December 18th, 2018 and will replace the existing Highway Traffic Act provisions relating to driver's licence suspensions for refusals of a police demand for a roadside test.
However, the replacement provisions currently exclude refusals on police demands to participate in a physical co-ordination test or drug recognition evaluation. These are essential tools for our front-line police officers. Unless these provisions are amended, when part 2 of the legislation comes into force, police will no longer have the authority to impose a three-month roadside driver's licence suspension for refusing a physical co-ordination test or drug recognition evaluation.
There is also a need to correct some inaccurate cross-references to the Criminal Code, which this legislation also addresses. Correcting this gap in a timely way is consistent with our public safety approach to cannabis legalization. It will ensure that police have the tools they need to keep our roads safe from drug-impaired drivers.
I urge all members of this committee to support Bill 36 to correct this gap and ensure we keep all Manitobans safe on our roads.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank the minister for his statement.
Does the critic from the official opposition have an opening statement? No opening statement from the opposition.
Does the critic from the second opposition party have an opening statement? No?
We will now move to clause by clause.
Clauses 1 through 3–pass; clauses 4 and 5–pass; enacting clause–pass; title–pass. Bill be reported.
That concludes Bill 36.
(Continued)
Mr. Chairperson: We will now move on to Bill 223.
Does the bill sponsor, the honourable member for Point Douglas, have an opening statement?
Mrs. Bernadette Smith (Point Douglas): I do.
So I just want to acknowledge those that came tonight to speak and say thank you to them for sharing their stories, and to all of those that had participated in making this bill–in enacting this bill.
This is something that is long overdue. It's going to be a game changer for our kids, for our families. And it's the right thing to do. So miigwech.
Mr. Chairperson: Does any other member wish to make an opening statement on Bill 223?
Ms. Judy Klassen (Kewatinook): I just want to put on record: Thank you for introducing this. It's much needed and it's about time. And I really appeal to the hearts of my colleagues across the table: Please pass this bill.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank the member for her statement.
We shall now move on to clause by clause.
Clauses 1 and 2–pass; clause 3–pass; enacting clause–pass; title–pass. Bill be reported.
Bill 223–brings it to a close.
(Continued)
Mr. Chairperson: We will now move on to Bill 228.
Does the bill sponsor, the honourable member for St. Johns, have an opening statement? [interjection] Ms. Fontaine.
Ms. Nahanni Fontaine (St. Johns): Miigwech, Deputy Chairperson–Chairperson. It's getting late now.
Just to quickly say that, you know, this bill is mean to honour all of those folks that are on the front line of rescuing animals here in Manitoba as a consequence of the overpopulation of dogs that we have here, very uniquely, in Manitoba. And it is, you know, one way of recognizing the important work that they do, but also drawing attention and building that public awareness on that issue.
Miigwech.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank the member for her statement.
Does any other member wish to make an opening statement on Bill 228?
Ms. Judy Klassen (Kewatinook): I'd like to thank the member for bringing this bill forward, and I can't do justice to Mrs. Donnelly Eaglestick in my First Nation of Little Grand Rapids, who was mauled this past year. And, you know, it's direly needed. We need something to happen, and I really appreciate you for bringing this forward.
Megwetch.
Mr. Chairperson: We thank the member for her statement.
We shall now move on to clause by clause.
Clauses 1 through 3–pass; preamble–pass; enacting clause–pass; title–pass. Bill be reported.
This concludes our bill presentations for the evening.
The hour being 10 o'clock exactly, what is the will of the committee?
Some Honourable Members: Rise.
Mr. Chairperson: Committee rise. Thank you.
COMMITTEE ROSE AT: 10 p.m.
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS
Re: Bill 29
To Whom It May Concern,
On behalf of the Association of Manitoba Municipalities (AMM), which represents Manitoba's 137 municipalities, I am writing to provide some comments regarding Bill 29: The Wildlife Amendment Act.
As the AMM is committed to strengthening public safety in local communities, we welcome the general prohibition on night hunting as prescribed in Section 12(1) as well as Section 27(1), which states no person shall discharge a firearm at night unless permitted in prescribed circumstances by regulation. These proposed amendments are consistent with AMM Resolution #16-2015 sponsored by the Municipality of North Norfolk, and we believe they will create a safer hunting environment for all Manitobans while respecting the constitutionally protected rights of Indigenous peoples.
In addition, the AMM welcomes the provincial government's commitment to consult with stakeholders, including local governments, when facilitating and developing landowner access initiatives as outlined in Section 33(2). In particular, the AMM encourages the Province of Manitoba to closely consult with municipalities located in south-western Manitoba. Promoting safe hunting practices on private and Crown lands through clearly defined and easily understandable processes will be key to ensuring the intent of the Act is respected.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide these brief comments.
Sincerely,
Joe Masi
Executive Director
____________
Re: Bill 29
Manitoba Beef Producers is pleased to provide a few comments on Bill 29--The Wildlife Amendment Act (Safe Hunting and Shared Management).
MBP is the primary voice of the Manitoba's beef industry, representing approximately 6,500 producers involved in various aspects of the beef cattle industry, including the cow-calf, backgrounding and finishing sectors. Our mission is to represent all beef producers through communication, advocacy, research, and education–within the industry and to governments, consumers and others, to improve prosperity and ensure a sustainable future.
One of the key provisions of Bill 29 is that it will provide for a general prohibition on night hunting, except when permitted under section 12.1 or 12.2 or by regulation. MBP sees merit in this approach. In the past there have been instances where dangerous hunting at night has placed people and livestock at risk, and has caused property damage. No one wants to see someone injured or a life lost. MBP recognizes that there are many different people utilizing the rural and northern landscapes and requests that the provincial government engage with all parties as regulations under these new provisions are envisioned, including speaking with beef producers.
MBP has questions about some specific aspects of Bill 29 and what the accompanying regulations may contain.
One question relates to Section 27(1) which proposes to prohibit the discharging of a firearm at night unless the person is hunting at night with a permit or "the discharge occurs in prescribed circumstances." More information is needed. For example, will the regulations ensure that a beef producer is able to humanely dispatch one of their cattle at night if required for some reason? MBP is seeking assurances that this will still be allowed as from time to time it is necessary to humanely dispatch cattle due to illness, injury or a devastating predator attack.
As well, will the regulation be crafted to ensure that a producer is able to destroy a predator or other animal that is threatening or attacking their cattle at night, such as a rabid animal? Under Section 46(1) of The Wildlife Act, there is a provision related to killing wildlife in defence of property. Specifically, producers may kill or take any wildlife (with some exceptions) on their own land for the purpose of defending or preserving their property, with this removal to be reported to Sustainable Development within 10 days.
Bill 29 states that the Minister will have power to make regulations "prescribing when night hunting may occur on private land under sections 12.1 and 12.2", i.e. the two provisions that indicate when night hunting is allowed for aboriginal people. Clarification is needed regarding what this would involve, e.g. owner permission, signage requirements, etc.
Clarification will also be needed on prescribing areas of land for night hunting and how this will work. MBP requests to have input into this process given that beef producers are managing large areas of privately-owned and agricultural Crown lands throughout the province.
Manitoba's beef producers manage thousands of acres of privately-owned and agricultural Crown lands, providing biodiversity and habitat for an array of wildlife. MBP seeks clarification about how cattle producers can be represented on the shared management committee being proposed in Bill 29 in order to make recommendations to the minister on measures to conserve and manage a specified species of wildlife in areas designated by the minister. Bill 29 currently states the committee should have at least one person who owns land in or near the designated area, if there is privately owned land in or near the designated area. As well, how will Manitoba's beef producers who are utilizing agricultural Crown land provide input into this process?
MBP has never looked to block public access to agricultural Crown lands but rather is seeking informed access by members of the public wishing to access these lands used by cattle producers. Specifically, MBP believes that public access must be limited to those circumstances where the public has prior authorization from the lessee or permit holder to access the agricultural Crown lands. MBP believes that these rights need to be strengthened to protect livestock, producers and the public alike. Unauthorized access can lead to significant biosecurity issues, can endanger livestock and producers, can endanger the public, and can lead to litigious liability concerns. Providing clear rights of access and clear prohibitions for unauthorized public access will strengthen the effective and efficient use of these Crown lands.
Having an effective legal framework around regulating practices such as hunting is critical, but it is only as effective as the ongoing monitoring and enforcement of the regulatory framework. MBP encourages the provincial government to ensure that it has the resources in place to monitor compliance, to enforce the proposed changes and to curtail unsustainable and unsafe hunting practices.
In conclusion, MBP supports efforts aimed at ensuring that hunting at any hour of the day is conducted in a safe manner in order to help ensure the safety of people and livestock, and to reduce the risk of property damage. MBP requests continued engagement with the provincial government as the regulations that will accompany this legislation are developed.
Respectfully submitted,
Tom Teichroeb President
Manitoba Beef Producers
____________
Re: Bill 29
On behalf of the membership of The Wildlife Society, Manitoba Chapter (TWSMB), Manitoba's oldest science-based wildlife management organization comprised of professional biologists, ecologists and natural resource professionals throughout the province of Manitoba, we want to provide comments to the Standing Committee on Social and Economic Development with respect to Bill 29–The Wildlife Amendment Act.
The Wildlife Society has developed three position statements that encourage efforts by governments to support safe hunting, safe use of firearms, and provide resources for conservation law enforcement. We have also developed three position statements that encourage governments to consider the use science, scientific peer review, and the public trust doctrine in managing wildlife. We have attached these documents to this letter, and encourage the committee to review them in consideration of this Bill 29.
In addition, The Wildlife Society recognizes and respects to the importance of hunting and wildlife harvest by Indigenous peoples in Manitoba. Co-management (or shared management) has been shown to be a valuable tool to support wildlife management goals. With this in mind, TWSMB's has specific comments on the following sections of Bill 29:
Sec 12.2(3)–This section addresses provisions to restrict permits for night hunting if it threatens the viability of the species. TWSMB has no policy or position related to night hunting but has previously expressed concerns on the status of moose conservation in broad areas of Manitoba (see previous correspondence attached). We would like to reemphasize that the development of a Provincial moose management plan would be important in executing shared management.
Sec 88.1(2)–This section would create a shared management committee, made up of multiple members, including representatives from Indigenous communities, who would advise the Minister on measures to manage a specified species of wildlife in a designated area. TWSMB requests that this committee be mandated to utilize a multi-evidenced based approach where scientific methods harmonize with Indigenous knowledge systems. It would also be important for this committee to be subject to peer review and consider the principles of the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation.
In closing, TWSMB is encouraged to see an increased recognition in Manitoba's legislature of the importance of wildlife and professional wildlife management. We hope that the suggestions we provide here will serve as an important step to a more sustainable future for wildlife for the benefit of all Manitoban's.
Sincerely,
Michel Leclaire
President, The Wildlife Society, Manitoba Chapter
____________
Re: Bill 29
Good evening. My name is James Battershill, and I am general manager of Keystone Agricultural Producers, commonly known as KAP.
We are Manitoba's general farm policy organization, representing and promoting the interests of thousands of agricultural producers in Manitoba. Our membership consists of farmers and commodity groups throughout the province, who set our organization's policy through a grassroots governance structure.
On behalf of KAP I would like to share our organization's position and provide support for Bill 29–The Wildlife Amendment Act–that would restrict night hunting.
KAP members have long been concerned about night hunting, and have called for a ban on it. Many of us know of farmers who have had close calls from stray bullets, and whose livestock have been killed as the animals are mistaken for wildlife. In the worst-case scenario, landowners have not lived to tell about it.
We're concerned about safety for farmers and those living in rural Manitoba, and we welcome the protection this bill will provide to them. Bill 29 generally prevents night hunting in southern Manitoba, but allows indigenous night hunting with a permit in areas specified by the permit.
KAP members have also called for written consent for hunting and trapping on private land, and we support this aspect of the bill for day hunting. In government's efforts to gain access to private land, we understand it will promote the practice of written consent.
This measure will provide a framework for landowners and hunters to talk to each other about the need to address wildlife and people issues on the landscape.
To summarize, KAP fully supports this bill. We believe it will go a long way to allow farmers and others in rural Manitoba to live on their farms and in their communities without fear. We support any type of effort to provide a safe Manitoba.
Thank you.
James Battershill
Keystone Agricultural Producers
____________
Re: Bill 35
Good evening. My name is James Battershill, and I am the general manager of Keystone Agricultural Producers–also known as KAP.
Our organization is the voice of Manitoba farmers on public policy issues. We work with governments, industry and stakeholders to ensure primary agriculture in Manitoba remains profitable, sustainable and globally competitive.
KAP is funded and directed by our members, which include farmers from across our province and 25 organizations representing specific crop, livestock and specialty commodities.
This evening is an opportunity for our members to have input into Bill 35.
By way of background, the province approached KAP, the Manitoba Beef Producers, and other industry groups for their insights well in advance of tabling this legislation. KAP provided feedback based on the input from our Livestock Committee.
As well, the Agriculture Minister attended our spring Advisory Council meeting in Portage la Prairie and spoke at length about the reason changes are needed for the way Crown Lands are allocated and managed in Manitoba.
Manitoba Agriculture staff have already reached out and met with us on the regulatory development process, and we have invited them to attend our fall advisory council meeting and another Livestock Committee meeting for further KAP input.
I'd like to stress the importance of Crown Lands as a critical tool for producers to access pasture and hayland for their livestock herd. There is a small portion of crown land dedicated to annual cropping, as well.
The minister, department staff, and producers themselves have ambitious targets to sustainably grow the cattle industry in Manitoba. And it appears as if there will be a large market for our increased beef production.
In Asia, quality of life and income continue to rapidly rise. An economist from the University of Iowa who spoke at our annual meeting about his research on Chinese food consumption patterns and its impact locally and globally on food systems, told delegates there is a strong long-term demand for Canadian beef, pork and other proteins.
As well, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, more than 50% of the world's population will enter the category of middle-class consumers by 2020.
As these middle-class consumers adopt middle-class food consumption habits, including more higher-cost protein from animal products, they also start to demand many of the same assurances that existing middle-class consumers do. Food safety animal welfare and environmental sustainability become important.
The good news is that that Canada is uniquely positioned in the global market to grow our livestock sector in a way that can still deliver these important assurances to consumers around the world.
In Manitoba, Crown Lands play an important role in sustainably increasing beef production by increasing the total amount of forage acres available for use.
However, the current Crown Lands leasing program has two principal challenges. Number one, it limits the ability for many young and beginning farmers, who have ambitious plans to grow their operations, to gain access to Crown Lands.
And number two, it provides no assurance that existing leaseholders will use the land to its full potential.
Bill 35 aims to resolve these challenges by enabling the use of an auction system as a price-discovery and allocations mechanism, and changing the length and terms of the lease agreements to allow for more access and regular evaluation of the management of the land.
There are challenges created by these changes that we are working through with Manitoba Agriculture staff during the regulatory process, including addressing intergenerational transfer of farms that effectively utilize Crown Lands, an appropriate price-discovery and allocation model for land where there is only one natural user, and the fact that rental rates need to change over time as markets fluctuate.
I have confidence that we can resolve these issues to the satisfaction of everyone involved because department personnel have worked diligently to identify potential solutions.
There is one challenge, however, that I would like the Minister and the elected members of the Social and Economic Development Committee specifically direct department staff to resolve. This is in respect to young farmers.
The current land allocation system includes a point-base system that is intended to give an advantage to young and beginning producers–a noble, but unfortunately ineffective policy.
KAP would like to see the government investing all revenue generated from the lease of agricultural Crown Lands into programming that supports young and beginning farmers. This is a way to help resolve the unique challenges young and beginning farmers face as they start their careers in agriculture.
Thank you for your time this evening.
James Battershill
Keystone Agricultural Producers
____________
Re: Bill 35
How will the changes reflected in Bill 35 affect the Community Pastures Program, part of what was the federal government's Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration initiative? Referred to as "Canada's greatest success story"–the program started in 1935 to deal with the devastation the Dust Bowl brought to the southern prairies. It included initiatives to deal with erosion, water access, irrigation and grass management through the Community Pastures Programs. These pastures are found in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba and cover over 2 million acres in total.
This program gave farmers and ranchers access to valuable public land which benefitted from the cattle's natural grazing behaviour. Pasture managers were trained in soil and water conservation and native plant management and understood the crucial role these processes play in protecting the endangered species that live on these ancient ecosystems. As reported in the Globe and Mail:
As rare and ecologically important as coastal old-growth forest, the PFRA grasslands are listed by the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) as lands that Canada has made a commitment to protect.
The Harper government axed the program in 2012, and control of the pastures was ceded to Saskatchewan and Manitoba (Alberta's were always under provincial control). Although Saskatchewan's Agricultural Minister claimed in 2013 that there would be a requirement that the pastures would have to remain whole (no cultivation; no drainage), many were worried about a lack of regulation and enforcement of these stipulations.
Manitoba's 400,000 acres fell under the control of the provincial government which continued renting them out to patrons under the management of a non-profit organization–the Association of Manitoba Community Pastures (AMCP). Trained pasture managers stayed on staff with the AMCP. The government of the day agreed to support the program, understanding that the pastures help the province fight climate change and protect biodiversity. It pledged over a million dollars to the project.
In order to understand the current commitment to 'modernize' the program, we have to unpack a couple of the purported improvements highlighted in the consultation backgrounder. The first one concerns "facilitating interprovincial trade, and complying with the principles of the New West Trade Partnership Agreement and the Canadian Free Trade Agreement" (CFTA).
Manitoba signed on to the New West Trade Partnership Agreement soon after your government took power. Although the agreement ostensibly lowers trade barriers between the provinces, critics argue that such barriers are few and far-between and that its primary purpose is to streamline industry, labour and environmental regulations to the lowest possible denominator. The CFTA came into effect in July, 2017, also with the promise to harmonize regulations across the country, and with international trade agreements like the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) with the European Union. Agreements like CETA are notoriously pro-business to the detriment of environmental protection and the interests of dairy and poultry producers.
In the case of the community pastures, regulatory harmonization is a real problem. Saskatchewan recently completely abandoned its community pasture program, stating that "We don't believe that looking after privately owned cattle is a core function of government". This statement from Saskatchewan's Agriculture Minister demonstrates a lack of understanding of the full purpose of the program, adding to what seems to be a long running disregard for the prairie ecosystem. A blog by prairie naturalist Trevor Harriet explains that "the Saskatchewan party has sold 1.1 M acres of crown lands in the prairie ecozone". It is not clear how the pastures will be regulated once the province has fully withdrawn.
Talking to Manitoba cattle producers who support the current program revealed that concerns go beyond the loss of environmental stewardship. The stated goal of "removing the previous requirement that applicants had to be Manitoba residents" opens up the possibility that cattle will be shipped in from other provinces, then shipped home for processing, leaving no economic value added for Manitoba.
Changes will also remove the advantage currently given to younger Manitoba producers who need access to crown lands to build their herds. The modified application process will favour the wealthiest producers who can put in the highest bid, allowing out-of-province producers with deep pockets to elbow out younger producers of more modest means. There are concerns that the desire to "modernize" the program will result in more intensive cattle production that is controlled by big business, and that small producers will fall victim to corporate farming the same way other agricultural producers have.
Finally, these changes fly in the face of economic reasoning. Cattle over-production is causing prices to fall, but the province is ushering in changes so cattle production can expand. And such expansion could put pressure on less agriculturally productive areas such as marsh and/or scrub land that needs to be protected so it can continue providing important environmental services.
Many worry that changes to the Community Pastures Program will be a variation of a familiar theme: the tragedy of the commons. That becomes clear in reading the March 2018 report by the International Institute for Sustainable Development, which concluded that:
Community Pastures were a policy response in a time of crisis. The pastures provide patrons with tangible benefits to their operations, yet the sustainable management practices used have provided benefits to the wider society. Some of these benefits are only now becoming valued by society through policy: carbon sequestration, for example, was until recently a benefit without clear value, yet in the near future the mitigation potential of pastures and other uncultivated landscapes could reach a broader audience and inform understanding of the complete value of these places (28).
Climate change and species extinction represent the greatest crises facing us today. Hopefully this government will show more leadership than Saskatchewan's, and protect these lands for future generations.
We recommend that amendments be made to Bill 35 and its regulations to ensure that Manitoba's small producers are allowed access to this land and that the environmental considerations of the original program are respected.
Lynne Fernandez
Errol Black Chair in Labour
Issues
Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
____________
Re: Bill 35
The Association of Manitoba Community Pastures (AMCP), is pleased to support Bill 35, the Crown Lands Amendment Act as it applies to the Community Pastures.
AMCP currently manages 20 of 24 former PFRA Community Pastures throughout the Province under a short-term lease agreement with Manitoba. The organization was formed in 2014 with help from the Manitoba Beef Producers, to maintain continuation of the Community Pastures under an umbrella organization, after the federal government announced it was divesting itself of the pasture program.
In Manitoba, the transition process was staged over 3 years–from 2014 to 2016.
AMCP is a democratic, producer-led not-for-profit organization with a mandate to sustainably manage productive and biodiverse rangelands enhanced by livestock production. We deliver the following benefits and services to the Province:
o Turned the community pasture program from a money-losing operation under PFRA into a financially self-sustaining operation. The Community Pastures are operating at over 90% capacity–providing grazing services for over 350 livestock producers. Producer loyalty to the community pasture program is high–93% of pasture patrons are returning customers.
o 45 employees working throughout rural Manitoba that ensure healthy range management–through grazing rotations, noxious weed and brush management–animal care, maintenance of provincial assets on the pastures and delivery of the community pasture program. Employees provide oversight of the Crown lands under AMCP's lease agreement–that includes community events, oil well rehabilitation and development, scientific study, recreation, etc.
o As part of AMCP's commitment to sustainable management, we have started conducting range health assessments and developing land management plans for the pastures.
Manitoba acknowledged the strength of AMCP's management when it awarded the Environmental Sustainability Award to AMCP just last May.
AMCP would like to help Manitoba expand its cattle herd and provides unique opportunities for young cattle producers to get started without buying or leasing land.
The Province can continue to have confidence in the AMCP Board of cattle producers and staff to meet the provincial mandate through a long-term lease agreement that would be enabled by the passage of Bill 35–this includes management decisions such as budgeting, grazing regimes, stocking rates, infrastructure investments, etc.
Ultimately AMCP is not seeking significant changes to the provisions of the current lease agreement. We've continually met at our mandate and delivered on our financial projections and are committed to doing so every year going forward. We look forward to Bill 35's passage so that we can continue to work with the Province of Manitoba to manage these large tracts of public land responsibly and economically.
Barry Ross
General Manager
Association of Manitoba Community Pastures
____________
Re: Bill 35
As an agricultural producer-based group focused on forages and grasslands, the Manitoba Forage and Grassland Association (MFGA) recognizes that Manitoba's Crown Lands and Community Pastures provide both economic prosperity and environmental opportunities to Manitoba. MFGA advocates for the sustainable agricultural use of grassland areas of Manitoba Crown Lands and Community Pastures. These lands can provide a valuable land base for forage production and livestock grazing, while delivering numerous ecological goods and services, including wildlife habitat, recreational opportunities, water capture and storage, and the resilience of Manitoba's agricultural landscape to climate extremes.
The Province of Manitoba's Crown Lands Amendment Act bill has passed second reading and is currently at the committee stage on October 31, 2018. If passed at committee, the bill will go forward for third reading. The Minister of Agriculture has referred to the amendment as "an opportunity to introduce new legislation that would modernize agricultural Crown lands and enhance community pastures."
The Explanatory Note on The Crown Lands Amendment Act (Improved Management of Community Pastures and Agricultural Crown Lands) states that this Bill amends The Crown Lands Act as follows:
1) Currently, fees or rent for leases and permits for agricultural Crown lands may be determined by public tender. This bill enables regulations that provide for public auctions to also be used.
2) The Bill enables Cabinet to designate certain lands as community pastures and to regulate their use. The purpose of community pastures is to support haying and grazing on rangelands in a manner that conserves the lands' ecological integrity and biodiversity. Once designated, community pastures must be managed in accordance with this purpose.
With respect to these amendments, MFGA has developed the following positions and recommendations in anticipation of the successful reading, committees and Royal Assent for the Province of Manitoba's "The Crown Lands Amendment Act":
• As a producer-led group, MFGA must remain involved in all policy and partnership discussions and consultations around Crown lands and community pastures in Manitoba.
• The currently existing land designated for agriculture in Manitoba's Crown Lands and Community Pastures must remain in agricultural use going forward.
• Any public auctions designed for fees, rents or leases on Crown Lands or Community Pastures must require in-person participation.
Manitoba Forage and Grassland Association
____________
Re: Bill 35
Katharine Storey is submitting as a private citizen who raises Black Angus cattle at Grandview
To the Social and Economic Development committee of the Manitoba Legislature,
Thank you for considering my comments on the proposed Crown Lands Amendment Act, Bill 35.
The Manitoba government has frequently proclaimed its support for farmers, especially young farmers. And so it is especially baffling that, with little notice, the Manitoba Legislature has chosen Halloween night as the time to receive comments on an issue which particularly hurts cattle farmers with young families. The Crown Lands Amendment Act, Bill 35, contains clauses which are a direct harm to all cattle ranchers and will especially harm Manitoba's young cattle farmers and their families.
Clauses 7.2(2) b and c, and 7.2(3) of Bill 35, which allow the establishment of lease fees and pasture rents by auction, are completely unacceptable. Neglecting to include a point system which considers a farmer's proximity to a lease, neglecting to give points for young farmers, neglecting to even consider if a bidder is a resident farmer at all, are completely unacceptable.
An auction is a poor and unfair way to establish a price. There are better ways to establish a fair market price for pasture rents and Crown land leases. A survey of the private rents being paid for pasture would be one logical way to establish a fair market price. Bill 35 bases a lease or rental price solely on a bid, where the only criterion that matters is the highest price, and which throws young ranchers into competition with the highest absentee, out of province corporate bidder. This is bad agricultural policy for Manitoba.
This government often proclaims its desire to reduce red tape. It is notable that the new Crown Land lease system does not reduce any red tape for farmers. It might reduce red tape for government itself, and perhaps this is the intent, but that red tape would only be reduced if the new price as established by bid were to be applied across all leases, regardless of the accessibility or the grazing quality of the land. Doing so might cut corners in the process, but the result is unfairly high rents for cattle ranchers for the poorer quality leases. Again, this is bad agricultural policy.
If the government wanted to decrease the size of Manitoba's cattle herd, shift production out of the hands of ranch families and into the hands of out-of-province corporations, and especially direct harm to young ranch families, then Bill 35 would achieve do this.
Is the government so out of touch with the cattle business that it thinks that large, employee based operations are an efficient way to raise cattle? If so, you are wrong. Ranch families have absolutely proven to be the most efficient cow-calf production system due to their hands on approach, attention to detail and devotion to the animals. Employee based, large operations simply do not have the same commitment to success which is critical to an industry which deals in mother cows and the birth of their calves.
Bill 35 will not "cut red tape for farmers". Instead these amendments will transfer access to grazing land away from young cattle farmers and into the hands of the elite. It is unbelievable that the Manitoba government would throw those efficient young cattle ranchers to the wolves in an auction for Crown land leases in which no family could out compete the deep pockets of pension plans or Cargill or Koch industries. Bill 35 is nothing more than a cash grab on the backs of young cattle ranchers which contribute to the elimination of this generation of efficient ranching families.
Thank you for considering my submission. Please return to the point system for assigning crown land leases.
Katharine (Kate) Storey
Grandview, Manitoba
____________
Re: Bill 29
I was elected to the Manitoba Wildlife Federation's Executive Committee this past spring and am on the MWF's Shared Management Committee. I'm also a System Analyst with experience designing, developing, and supporting software for maternal child health programs in First Nation communities as well as clinical support services in schools on reserve. That said, my views are my own and this submission does not represent the MWF, my employer, or my clients. Rather, my MWF and employment experiences have shaped how I perceive the challenges being discussed today and I hope that context is helpful for the Committee.
To me, Bill 29 feels like it describes two sides of the same coin, a ray of hope for a shared future and the dark shadow of all that may be lost: traditions, species, ecosystems, and innocent bystanders. Many of the citizens that are expressing interest in Bill 29 identify within one of three groups: First Nations; Métis; or licensed hunters, anglers, and trappers. For the purposes of my keeping my submission from being too wordy or repetitive, I'll refer to them as 'FML Groups' (no disrespect intended). The FML Groups are subject to different rules and regulations but we are often doing what we love in common, adjacent, or overlapping spaces. I believe that building trust between the FML Groups requires both celebration of the dreams we share and honesty about what holds us back from realizing those dreams: individuals who conduct themselves in a shameful manner. We must become a guiding light for each other in order to move forward and work together to preserve the places where we hunt and fish and trap.
Some folks have earned certification through the Hunter Education course that provides a structured approach to learning conservation and safety. Others have gained traditional knowledge and stories that have been passed down for generations. All of us have learned our ways through the teachings of family, elders, and mentors. When we guide new hunters and anglers to act in a manner supporting conservation and safety, they give back to our communities by building on our understanding of the environment and by sharing their harvest.
Unfortunately, every FML Group also includes people who are ignoring the regulations that apply to them, or engaging in unsafe practices, or harvesting in a wasteful manner. Sadly these incidents have become the stories that each FML Group repeats about the others, described as reasons why the other groups are poor stewards of our land and water. Worse, they can become justification for purposefully antagonistic activities or communications, feeding the biased perspectives that are driving us apart when it is critical for hunters and anglers in the FML Groups to find ways to build on our strengths and share our best practices.
Wildlife laws must be consistently applied but I also feel that rebuilding cultures of safety and conservation is of equal importance because community enforcement has real potential to make change. We must face the reality that these illegal, unsafe, and reckless actions are learned behaviours that will continue to be passed on unless we agree that they must be rejected by all FML Groups and replaced with approaches that respect our communities and our wildlife. Our next generation of hunters and anglers deserves the time and effort required to teach them both safe methods and traditional stories from all the FML Groups. Let's help them understand how it all comes together–so that they remember how and why to be careful in the field and respectful of one another.
Our time with nature, on the water and in the fields and forests, connects us with our Creators and reminds us of the glorious interconnectivity of the creatures within these special places. We feel the rhythm of the waves like the beating of our hearts, healing those that may feel broken. The wind in the trees ebbs and flows with every breath, calming our souls when they seek guidance. We are a part of these worlds where we hunt and fish and trap, part of the cycles and the seasons. We see, up close, how the animals change their routes and how the fish are more or less plentiful. We can literally taste changes. Our relationships with these ecosystems form a non-academic knowledge base as we instinctively develop comparisons over years and decades.
In that sense we're not so different from the bird watchers doing regular counts, the farmers monitoring the weather and the soil, and the government staff monitoring big game populations. But we lack a cooperative structure or approach to share what we know (whether quantitative or qualitative) in a way that is respected and applicable for management purposes. Meanwhile, we live in a world where a person who is completely disconnected from our environment can watch a video on the internet, form an uninformed opinion, and use social media to try and impose changes on all of us that may misrepresent the reality we all know. A world where one person's disrespectful treatment of harvested game can be photographed and shared as representing all of us–all hunters and trappers–as inherently bad people.
I fear we're distracted fighting over our different rules and what's left to harvest, likely to fail to save our fish and wildlife from diseases or loss of habitat, bound to lose the traditions that are part of who we are as hunters and anglers and trappers. We love our wild worlds but are often misunderstood because harvest activities are so different from urban and modern lifestyles. These spaces need to be protected by those who know them best and who will be most impacted by their loss. So how do we reconcile our differences and focus on our common desire to preserve our wild spaces? There isn't one right answer, one correct way to address these challenges. I believe that we can start by being brave in the face of reckless behaviour and finding safe alternatives. I hope that we can begin to build a lasting framework that can have an impact for generations to come, a true legacy of combined vision and shared responsibility. Thank you so much for taking the time to read my submission.
With Respect,
Pamela Robins
TIME – 6 p.m.
LOCATION – Winnipeg, Manitoba
CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Dennis Smook (La Verendrye)
VICE-CHAIRPERSON – Mr. Doyle Piwniuk (Arthur‑Virden)
ATTENDANCE – 11 QUORUM – 6
Members of the Committee present:
Hon. Messrs. Cullen, Eichler,
Hon.
Ms. Squires
Mses. Fontaine, Klassen,
Messrs.
Marcelino, Piwniuk,
Mrs. Smith,
Messrs. Smook, Wishart, Wowchuk
PUBLIC PRESENTERS:
Bill 29–The Wildlife Amendment Act (Safe Hunting and Shared Management)
Mr. Scott Phillips, Municipalities in the Ag Zone
Mr. Cameron Neurenberg, private citizen
Mr. Archie McPherson, Reeve for Westman Area
Ms. Michelle Assailly, private citizen
Mr. Joseph Maud, First Nations in Treaty 2 Territory
Mr. Cornell McLean, Lake Manitoba First Nation
Ms. Cindy McKay, private citizen
Mr. Brian Kotak, Manitoba Wildlife Federation
Mr. Jimmy Thunder, Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs
Mr. Jeremy McKay, private citizen
Bill 35–The Crown Lands Amendment Act (Improved Management of Community Pastures and Agricultural Crown Lands)
Mr. Dean Harder, National Farmers Union, Manitoba
Mr. Brian Lemon, Manitoba Beef Producers
Mr. Christian Artuso, Bird Studies Canada
Bill 223–The Child and Family Services Amendment Act
Mr. Manoj Nowrang, private citizen
Ms. Mary LeMaître, private citizen
Ms. Michelle Scott (and Ms. Breanne Hepp - by leave), Ma Mawi Wi Chi Itata Centre
Bill 228–The Animal Shelter and Rescue Awareness Day Act
Mr. Kevin Toyne, Winnipeg Humane Society
Ms. Katie Powell, Save A Dog Network Canada
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS:
Bill 29–The Wildlife Amendment Act (Safe Hunting and Shared Management)
Joe Masi, Association of Manitoba Municipalities
Tom Teichroeb, Manitoba Beef Producers
Michel Leclaire, The Wildlife Society, Manitoba Chapter
James Battershill, Keystone Agricultural Producers
Pamela Robins, Function Four Ltd.
Bill 35–The Crown Lands Amendment Act (Improved Management of Community Pastures and Agricultural Crown Lands)
James Battershill, Keystone Agricultural Producers
Lynne Fernandez, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Barry Ross, Association of Manitoba Community Pastures
Duncan Morrison, Manitoba Forage and Grassland Association
Katherine Storey, private citizen
MATTERS UNDER CONSIDERATION:
Bill 29–The Wildlife Amendment Act (Safe Hunting and Shared Management)
Bill 35–The Crown Lands Amendment Act (Improved Management of Community Pastures and Agricultural Crown Lands)
Bill 36–The Highway Traffic Amendment Act (Impaired Driving Offences)
Bill 223–The Child and Family Services Amendment Act
Bill 228–The Animal Shelter and Rescue Awareness Day Act
* * *