[Witness spoke in Kwak'wala]

[English]

My traditional name is Galagame'. I'm from the Kwikwasut'inuxw Haxwa'mis people of the Musgamagw Dzawada'enuxw. I asked you to hear my words, as I'm speaking from my heart, on behalf of many first nations in regard to salmon. It is a food source, a basis of our culture, traditions and language, and it is in dire straits.

On the topic so far about the Fisheries Act, I'm always mindful of the commitments of each of your parties and of government as a whole in terms of reconciliation, the implementation of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and charting a meaningful path forward with first nations. It is a very complicated and complex path, indeed, but where does it hit the road? I believe that for the government, it needs to start with legislation.

I need to impress upon you the opportunity that salmon and fisheries represent in accomplishing reconciliation and food security for first nations across British Columbia, and how this is beneficial to the environment and the massive economy that is wild salmon. By enacting a path forward that rebuilds and looks after salmon in British Columbia, you can meaningfully address reconciliation at a province-wide scale in a way that benefits all Canadians and the environment. You can accomplish this and begin the path of reconciliation the Crown has made, doing so through revisions to the Fisheries Act to reflect the realities that my brother Stu just spoke of: the legal pluralism in Canada and the inherent rights and title of first nations people in British Columbia.

We have witnessed the government making small steps in programs and services. These are useful and beneficial, but these are not fundamental reconciliation steps; it is still a Crown-controlled initiative. What happened along the way is that first nations embraced the opportunity and developed various capacities, with technical skills and understanding of the management of fisheries. There are many mature organizations in British Columbia that have the ability to manage, so I ask you, what is the destination of this capacity development, then? Is it simply to sit with government and argue, or are we really going to hit the road with reconciliation and empower first nations through legislation to have the appropriate management that reflects the legal pluralism of this country?

First nations who reside in their traditional territories, who have their hands in the river and the ocean and know what's going on intimately, can inform management rather than somebody at 200 Kent Street. Let's be serious: That's where the solutions lie. This can happen by encouraging each of you to put forward recommendations wherein we see a meaningful inclusion of this authority, inherent in nature, in the mechanism called the Fisheries Act, which DFO cannot then reinterpret at its leisure through policy. It becomes a “thou shall”.

This is a significant path that I bring forward because I don't think that Canadians by and large understand what reconciliation means. They will fear it if they don't know what it means. If we take the step that I just described, we could enact reconciliation, embrace the UN declaration, enact Supreme Court law and breathe life into subsection 35(1), which is going to benefit all Canadians in a real and tangible way.

This is the vision I see as critical for the relationship between the Crown and first nations in British Columbia. Having a central government is one thing. Having a minister in Ottawa who doesn't have any connection to the territories we are representing and speaking to is, in our language, k̓i's na̱ḵa—it's not right.

I encourage you to explore how, within the Fisheries Act, you create the appropriate space to embrace all that I've just described as a legal imperative that's incumbent upon this government to embrace and enact. That would then see us move forward together, as envisioned in this concept of reconciliation. What I've found is that, when we have Supreme Court law—and I'm confident that every one of you understands where that sits in the function of democracy in Canada—conservation is first, and second to that are first nations. For your purposes as the Crown, call it FSC—food, social and ceremonial. It's very nice of you to come up with a term and I hope you understand it—I'm just kidding.

For us, it's much more than that. It's the foundation of our culture, our traditions, our attachments to our lands and our language. These are the things the residential schools targeted to destroy. What I say—and I think about the broader commitments of all parties in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action—is this: Why not invest in salmon to rebuild culture, language, traditions and attachment to lands? It's a tangible exercise, and along the way we can have a reconciliation and food security that benefits all Canadians.

This is the vision that I have, and I know the work—

Transcript

Discussions (0)