Rebecca Chartrand
Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, Manitoba · Liberal · Canada
“Mr. Speaker, qujannamiik to my beautiful colleague for her tireless advocacy. There is so much to celebrate during National Indigenous History Month.”
“Mr. Speaker, I represent some of the poorest communities in this country, so when the member opposite tries to lecture me on affordability, I have to ask: Why does he vote against every single measure that is supporting Manitobans, including affordable child care, grocery rebates, automatic tax filing and cutting taxes at the pump?”
“Mr. Speaker, we know that a food subsidy alone will not solve the food insecurity issue. That is why we have been working to engage 124 of the nutrition north communities to ensure that we work with them to find the solutions for their communities. What we are working toward is moving from a food subsidy to a food economy.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am so happy to be on this side of the House. Canadians voted for this new government because we have a plan and that plan is working.”
“Mr. Speaker, did the member vote for the measures that would support this person in his riding? Did he vote to support Red Seal training? Did he vote to support the reduction of taxes at the pump or the creation of a national school food program?”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians voted in this new government to get results, and that is what we are doing. The member opposite voted against every measure we are taking to support Manitobans. We are investing in housing, infrastructure and aerospace. In fact, I just met with students from the Plumbers and Pipefitters Union, Local 254.”
The complete record
Every one of 79 lines we hold for Rebecca Chartrand, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 2.
“Mr. Speaker, qujannamiik to my beautiful colleague for her tireless advocacy. There is so much to celebrate during National Indigenous History Month. For the first time in history, there are two first nation female ministers in cabinet, a growing indigenous caucus and opportunities to move beyond community benefit agreements to revenue sharing with indigenous people through major projects. Together, we are reducing barriers and accelerating regulatory processes in the north. Together, we are reducing all of the challenges in the north, hand in hand, and building Canada strong.”
“Mr. Speaker, I represent some of the poorest communities in this country, so when the member opposite tries to lecture me on affordability, I have to ask: Why does he vote against every single measure that is supporting Manitobans, including affordable child care, grocery rebates, automatic tax filing and cutting taxes at the pump? He needs to get onside and start voting and working for Manitobans.”
“Mr. Speaker, we know that a food subsidy alone will not solve the food insecurity issue. That is why we have been working to engage 124 of the nutrition north communities to ensure that we work with them to find the solutions for their communities. What we are working toward is moving from a food subsidy to a food economy. That means a whole-of-government approach. I continue looking forward to working with the member opposite to find solutions.”
“Mr. Speaker, we are working with northerners on solving all the issues in the north, including affordability, and we will continue to do so. I am happy to work with the member opposite on finding some solutions.”
“Mr. Speaker, I am so happy to be on this side of the House. Canadians voted for this new government because we have a plan and that plan is working. I do not know why the member opposite has voted against every measure that is supporting Manitobans: affordable child care, cutting taxes at the pump, automatic tax filing, and the groceries and essentials benefit that came out last Friday, which is supporting so many citizens in his riding. He needs to get on board and start supporting what we are doing on this side of the House.”
“Mr. Speaker, did the member vote for the measures that would support this person in his riding? Did he vote to support Red Seal training? Did he vote to support the reduction of taxes at the pump or the creation of a national school food program? These are the measures our government is taking to support Canadians, and Manitobans in his riding, but he continues to vote against them.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians voted in this new government to get results, and that is what we are doing. The member opposite voted against every measure we are taking to support Manitobans. We are investing in housing, infrastructure and aerospace. In fact, I just met with students from the Plumbers and Pipefitters Union, Local 254. They are so excited about our Red Seal program and are working hard to get that $5,000 bonus. I do not understand why the member opposite keeps voting against these measures.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians sent the new Liberal government here to get things done, and that is what we are doing. The Manitobans I am talking to want to talk about affordable child care; grocery rebates; automatic tax filings, which remove barriers for northern remote communities; cutting taxes at the pump; and creating a national school food program, so children do not go hungry. The member opposite needs to stop misinforming Canadians and recognize what we are actually doing.”
“Mr. Speaker, the Port of Churchill plus project is a transformative opportunity to connect Manitoba and western Canadian exports to the world. While early stages mean more work is ahead, the federal government has invested $320 million since 2017, and we are looking to invest another $150 million, as the member knows, to the Port of Churchill and the Hudson Bay Railway. This is to grow northern trade. It will also invest in lowering costs for farmers, stabilizing supply chains and supporting good jobs. This is how we are making Manitoba a global Arctic gateway once again.”
“The national inquiry called the crisis of missing and murdered indigenous women and girls a genocide, not because of one issue but because of a pattern, a system that has, for generations, devalued indigenous women's lives, controlled indigenous women's bodies and failed to protect indigenous women. I wholeheartedly support Bill S-228 , and I thank members for bringing it forward to the House.”
“Bill S-228 is a Criminal Code amendment that makes something unmistakably clear: that forced and coerced sterilization is a crime. It defines sterilization without consent as an act that wounds or maims, making it prosecutable as aggravated assault. Let us be clear about what that means. It means that what happened to indigenous women in hospitals and medical systems, often without their full, informed consent, is not just unethical. It is violence, and not historical violence. Reports have confirmed that forced and coerced sterilization has continued into modern times within our own health care system. When we talk about MMIWG, we must understand that it is all connected.”
“Mr. Speaker, right now in Ottawa, leaders, survivors, families and frontline workers are gathering for the third national summit on missing and murdered indigenous women, girls and 2SLGBTQI+ people. They are coming together under a powerful theme: “from principles to policy, from resolution to action.” Tomorrow, May 5, is Red Dress Day. Across this country, we are going to see red dresses in windows, in trees and on Parliament Hill, each one representing a life that was taken, a voice that was silenced or a family that was forever changed. This is not symbolic alone; it is a call to action. The violence that indigenous women face is not random; it is systemic. It is rooted in policies, institutions and decisions, both past and present. That is why I want to speak to Bill S-228 .”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians sent this new Liberal government here to get things done, and that is exactly what we are doing. Canadians in Conservative ridings want to see us working together. They do not want excuses. They do not want slogans. They want results. The member opposite has voted against everything that will actually help Manitobans, including affordable child care, grocery rebates, automatic tax filing, cutting taxes at the pump and creating a national food program so children do not go hungry. I do not understand what he is against.”
“Mr. Speaker, I do not know who that Manitoba MP is talking to, but when you look at what we are doing here, we have up to 100,000 new Red Seal workers, the Port of Churchill plus project is moving forward, and there are critical mineral jobs in Thompson and stronger trade corridors for Manitoba. What exactly is the member opposite against? Are you against good jobs, stronger supply chains—”
“Mr. Speaker, we are investing so Manitobans can step into good jobs. What is she not seeing here? We are strengthening Manitoba's aerospace sector. We are advancing the economic wealth fund. We are investing $6 billion in the trades so young people can get jobs. The member opposite continues to downplay this work when these measures are directly supporting Manitobans.”
“Mr. Speaker, what Manitobans want, especially young people, is a job. They want opportunity, and that is what the government is delivering. The spring budget delivers real momentum for Manitobans. We are seeing infrastructure investments that keep the province moving in the right direction, from transportation upgrades to community facilities. We are expanding Red Seal training. The member opposite continues to deny what we are delivering on. They need to get on the side that we are on, which is delivering on affordability.”
“Mr. Speaker, we are making life more affordable in the north, not just in big cities but across northern indigenous communities. We have cut taxes for 22 million Canadians so that northern families can keep more in their pocket. The permanent national school food program is saving families $800 a year. We are also cutting costs for jet fuel, which is going to impact communities throughout north of 60. We are tackling food costs and building all-season infrastructure in the north and the Arctic. We are building for all of Canada.”
“Mr. Speaker, we are making life more affordable, not just in big cities but across northern and indigenous communities. We have cut taxes for 22 million Canadians so northern families can keep more on their table. The permanent national school food program is saving families around $800 a year, and we are tackling food costs by building an all-season infrastructure road through the Arctic. We are building the nation and building scalable affordability. We are also reforming nutrition north.”
“Mr. Speaker, let me start by welcoming the member for Nunavut to this side of the House. I also want to acknowledge her strong advocacy for the north. We know that a subsidy alone will not solve the food insecurity issue in the north. That is why we are looking at moving from a food subsidy to a food economy in the north. This year alone, we have $200 million supporting the evolution of nutrition north. We are concluding regional engagements at the end of the month with a food sovereignty summit. I look forward to working with my colleague to—”
“Mr. Speaker, the Crown corporation is listening to northern and indigenous peoples. The Crown corporation the member mentioned is going to ensure we are working with partners in the north and that they are also the problem-solvers of the issues they are dealing with.”
“Mr. Speaker, recently we have made some announcements, including one that I made in the Yukon on February 19, for an investment of $2.3 million. This is going to support First Kaska construction. It will ensure that this company has new equipment to upgrade manufacturing facilities. We are also investing in NGC Builders, where we will see new fabrication facilities. We are also investing in RAB Energy. This is a northern windows and doors company. It is indigenous-owned and indigenous-led. We will see the expansion of commercial aluminum operations to support northern builds. The impact here is that we are seeing support for northern and indigenous businesses like never before, because we have always taken a southern approach. This time we are ensuring that we are taking a northern approach as well.”
“Mr. Speaker, when we think about the investments that we are making, we are looking all across Canada. We are not focusing on any one region. We think about the work that we have done already, and we have tripled the Canada Infrastructure Bank for indigenous investments. We look at northern Quebec and northern Labrador, for example, and we have increased investment to $3 billion, because we are treating housing as critical infrastructure that will strengthen communities for generations. We are also looking at skilled trades apprenticeship. We are looking at training-while-building models. We are looking at certification pathways, and this applies to Canadians across Canada, including Quebec.”
“Mr. Speaker, as I said, housing in the north is a priority for the new government. In fact, through Build Canada Homes, as I mentioned earlier, we have signed an agreement, in principle, with Nunavut and Inuit partners to deliver 750 homes, which will be Inuit-led, delivered and built, including units delivered and managed by NTI. When we think about factory-built modular construction, that will also provide the opportunity to speed up timelines and create northern jobs, so those are also added value.”
“As Minister of Northern and Arctic Affairs, I see housing as foundational to everything else, including health, education, economic participation and community well-being. I also see it as a connection to sovereignty. Arctic sovereignty is not only about maps. It is about people: whether families can choose to stay where they grew up, workers can live where opportunities are and communities can thrive on lands for generations yet to come. (1605) The bill is an opportunity to match urgency with capacity and to replace delay with delivery. I urge all members of this House to support the bill. The north has waited far too long. With the legislation, we could help build a future where northern and indigenous families are no longer waiting for housing, but they are helping to shape it, they are building it and they are finally calling it home.”
“Importantly for Nunavut's short season, a portion will use factory-built components to reduce delays and deliver homes more predictably, and 25 of those homes will be delivered through an Inuit-led model, reflecting the Inuit Nunangat policy and the right of Inuit to design and deliver housing solutions that work for them and their communities. That is the kind of partnership this bill would make possible. It is practical, community-led and rooted in indigenous leadership and northern realities. It is the kind of partnership the House should be proud of. This bill also supports the government's broader housing agenda, which is grounded in partnership with first nations, Inuit and Métis partners, so that housing reflects indigenous priorities and builds long-term capacity.”
“Build Canada Homes would help scale off-site and modular construction, which are approaches that can improve speed and predictability when weather and short seasons make on-site building difficult. It would also help bundle projects so that smaller and remote communities are not left behind. It would back Canadian lumber, Canadian steel and Canadian workers; strengthen domestic supply chains; create good jobs; and build more of what we need here at home and in the north. We are not starting from zero. Since launching in September 2025, Build Canada Homes has already advanced six direct-build projects and secured partnerships representing more than 7,500 homes. Last month, Canada, Nunavut and NTI signed an agreement in principle to deliver 750 new homes across the territory, including public, affordable and supportive housing.”
“When timing slips in the north, it is not just a minor inconvenience; it can push a project into the next season and the cost increases significantly. The delays that this puts on families are exhausting. This is why the Build Canada Homes act matters. This legislation would transform Build Canada Homes into a Crown corporation, which would give it the independence and tools to build more homes faster and more efficiently. The bill would strengthen federal capacity to partner with northern indigenous communities, which can build faster and at scale. We want to ensure that we use public land more effectively and use modern construction methods that fit northern realities.”
“When families sleep at night, sometimes they are concerned about overcrowding. This can be exhausting when elders do not have a place to consider home as they are aging. They want to age on the lands that raised them. They want to see that children have space to study and dream and that communities can thrive. In the north and the Arctic, people have waited far too long for basic conditions most of us in the south take for granted. When we think about moving forward from an Inuit Nunangat perspective, more than half of Inuit live in crowded housing, and in Nunavut the rate is even higher. The realities of building in the north are unlike anywhere else in Canada. There are high construction, operation and maintenance costs; short building seasons; and supply chains that rely on sealift, winter roads and air.”
“Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support Bill C-20 , not only as the Minister of Northern and Arctic Affairs, but also as a first nations woman and the first to have this portfolio. However, this is not about me; it is about the communities of the north that really need to be the problem-solvers of the issues they are dealing with on a day-to-day basis, including housing. It is also about the communities I come from, Churchill—Keewatinook Aski. When we think about the generations of northern and indigenous women who have carried their families, languages, nations and communities through hardships and hope and we think about this moment, there is real meaning and opportunity in this bill. When we think about a house, it is more than four walls and a roof; it is the backbone of health, safety, opportunity and identity.”
“Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Acadie—Bathurst for his leadership in fighting for forestry workers. I fully agree that the forestry sector is essential to our country. Yesterday, the government announced the reopening of four programs to support the forestry sector, as well as funding to strengthen forestry companies in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. These programs will deliver $500 million to support innovation, market diversification and the competitiveness of our forestry companies. Our government will always stand for forestry workers in the face of American tariffs.”
“Mr. Speaker, Canadians living across the country are going to be benefiting from our new Canada groceries and essentials benefit. This includes people in northern and Arctic Canada. This means a family of four will receive $1,890 this year. This is significant in the north. This is in addition to increases in the child tax benefit, the national school food program and $10-a-day day care. We are taking steps to reduce the cost of living in the north and will continue to work with northerners to do so.”
“What we are seeing is early engagement, something that is being led by AGG, which is indigenous-owned. That is the path forward, working hand in hand with indigenous peoples, not sidestepping them.”
“Mr. Speaker, yes, the Port of Churchill in northern Manitoba is a huge opportunity for Manitoba and Canada to support our efforts to diversify our economy, but also to support national security. Churchill was previously a military site, so there is already established infrastructure there. We know it as the gateway to the north. Last week, there was an MOU signed between AGG, which is the Arctic Gateway Group, the Winnipeg Airports Authority and CentrePort Canada to create the type of ecosystem that is needed to support this very critical infrastructure. We will see land, air, road and rail come together like never before to ensure that we are utilizing the infrastructure we have in Manitoba. This is a good opportunity to identify that these processes are being led by indigenous stakeholders and rights holders in the north.”
“Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, there are already established regulatory requirements, which include environmental assessments. These are things we cannot override. It is really important that we understand the jurisdiction of the north, where 80% of the land mass is covered by modern treaties or settlement agreements. Those rules around regulations and environmental assessments are baked in. We want to make sure we are always honouring those processes.”
“Mr. Speaker, when we look at the reality in northern Canada, specifically Nunavut, the Nunavut agreement clearly states that it is a tripartite agreement between the federal government, the Government of Nunavut and NTI. We cannot change those processes. The Nunavut agreement clearly outlines the steps that have to be taken, in sequence, to move projects along, whether for resources or land. We cannot change that. We have to abide by it.”
“Communities know what they need better than anyone sitting in this House. If the opposition wants a serious debate about streamlining approvals and strengthening Canada's economic resilience, we will have that debate, but a motion that demands sweeping repeal while sidestepping section 35, modern treaties and UNDRIP obligations is not a plan for prosperity. It is a plan for instability. In closing, I will say plainly that sweeping calls to repeal laws without understanding northern realities risk repeating old mistakes, projects that moved fast and communities that paid the price. In the north, we do not have the luxury of political theatre. We build with care because we live with the consequences. Prosperity and reconciliation are not competing goals. They are inseparable and must be treated that way.”
“Support exists where policies strengthen indigenous economic sovereignty and reduce one-size-fits-all approaches. Opposition centres on any framework that prioritizes speed over consultation, indigenous decision-making, environmental stewardship and UNDRIP commitments. The choice is not development or rights. The choice is good development versus bad development. Indigenous leaders are not asking for their rights to be bypassed. They are asking for indigenous-led development, where decision-making, benefits and stewardship are shared and where consent is built from the start. That is the approach our government supports: getting to yes faster by building it right, with indigenous partners, with treaty-based governance, with strong environmental safeguards and with credible rules that stand up in court and stand up in communities.”
“Climate change has significant impacts on the daily lives of northerners, from being able to access seasonal food to wildfires, traditional hunting practices and food sources. Any plan that weakens environmental protection without a credible replacement does not make Canada stronger. It makes northern communities more vulnerable. (1215) I want to acknowledge something important. Many indigenous governments and northern leaders want approvals to move faster. They want projects that bring revenue, training and good jobs. They want fewer redundant steps and clearer timelines. That is a legitimate conversation. At the same time, however, many indigenous leaders and rights holders have been clear. Repealing assessment rules without a credible replacement risks weakening rights, consultation and public confidence.”
“They establish co-management systems and review processes that reflect indigenous jurisdiction and northern realities. Sweeping those aside without co-development would undermine stability, and it would invite the very outcome Canadians say they want to avoid, which is conflict, court challenges and delay. We also need to speak plainly about environmental stewardship. The Arctic is warming faster than the global average. Permafrost thaw, coastal erosion and changing ice conditions are already putting northern homes, roads and community infrastructure at risk. This is not ideology. It is reality happening in real time. This reality is what northerners see first-hand each and every day.”
“It would change how decisions are made, whose voices count and whether treaty-based government is treated as a foundation or as an afterthought. The north and Arctic are not theoretical. I represent Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, home to first nations, Inuit and Métis communities who live every day with the consequences of decisions that are made in the House. When we talk about economic sovereignty, I ask colleagues to pause and truly listen. In the north, sovereignty is not a slogan. It is indigenous nations deciding what happens on their lands. It is protecting waters that sustain food security. It is development done with communities and not to them. That is why blanket repeal is so dangerous. In northern regions, modern treaties and land claim agreements are not optional. They are constitutionally protected.”
“There is also no clarity on whether or how the Conservatives believe Canada will continue to honour UNDRIP, which Parliament has affirmed in law and set a framework to advance at the federal level. Here are the questions that northern and indigenous communities deserve answered: Where does indigenous consent sit in the Conservative plan? From the text of the motion, it appears as if that consent has not been considered. Does UNDRIP still apply, even when it is inconvenient? This proposal is highly relevant to northern and Arctic affairs, because it would fundamentally reshape the way resources develop and environmental protections and economic policy operate in indigenous and northern territories.”
“Any approach to development that treats indigenous rights as obstacles to be swept aside is not sovereignty. It is a step backwards to decisions made far away and consequences carried for generations. Any repeal of law that affects indigenous lands, waters and rights must be done in full partnership with indigenous peoples, consistent with section 35, the duty to consult and Canada's commitment under the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This motion is striking not only for what it proposes to repeal, but for what it refuses to answer. There is no clarity on how indigenous consent fits into the plan, and it raises a serious question. If key frameworks are stripped away, how do we avoid weakening consultation in practice, and how do we prevent years of uncertainty and litigation?”
“Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Burlington North—Milton West . Hello. Tansi . Aaniin . Boozhoo . Kwe kwe . Ullukkut . The Conservatives propose a Canada sovereignty act, which calls for a sweeping repeal of federal measures, including the Impact Assessment Act , the Oil Tanker Moratorium Act , carbon pricing for industry, the oil and gas emissions cap and other regulations, all in the name of economic sovereignty. Canadians want a strong economy. Northerners want jobs, infrastructure and opportunity. Indigenous peoples want development that advances self-determination and long-term prosperity. However, sovereignty in Canada is not built by erasing obligations; it is built by honouring them. Section 35 of the Constitution Act is not a talking point; it is a binding law.”
“Mr. Speaker, for the first time in generations, we are making historic investments in housing and infrastructure across the north, building homes, roads and community facilities. We are investing in clean energy, better Internet and stronger transportation links, all in partnership with indigenous communities. Bill C-4 would deliver tax cuts, GST housing credits and enhanced benefits so families can heat their homes and feed their children. This is generational change for the north.”
“Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is from Manitoba. If he were listening to Manitobans, he would hear that Manitobans are happy with what our government is doing. We are seeing $10-a-day child care for northern Arctic communities. We are also seeing the national school food program. We are seeing investments in housing and infrastructure like never before. We are seeing the child tax benefits supported with increases, GST housing credits and enhanced benefits for families so that they can heat their homes. The member opposite needs to get on board.”
“Mr. Speaker, our new government is delivering on its commitments. We are dedicating $2.3 billion to urban, rural and northern homes. We are also partnering to deliver over 700 new homes and fast-tracking them. We are also building on 450 additional homes that will start in the next few years. In the Northwest Territories, we are funding 150 social homes, and in Whitehorse, we are funding 100 new affordable homes. This is just the beginning, because we are delivering on the 3,000 homes by 2030.”
“Mr. Speaker, that member opposite is from my home community. If he was talking to Manitobans, he would know that they want $10-a-day day care. They want the school food program. They want investments in housing and infrastructure. If he was talking to Manitobans, he would know that Manitobans support our budget, so he should be supporting our budget as well. These are generational investments like never before. He needs to get onside.”
“Mr. Speaker, this week, the Assembly of First Nations met in Ottawa, and many of us here were at the table with it. That shows we are moving along together with first nations. We are backing indigenous-led growth and solutions. That is why more than half of CanNor's economic activity is indigenous-led. We are creating hundreds of jobs right now, like those at First Kaska Construction in Yukon. Our government is also ensuring that section 35 of the Constitution is fully respected. We are ensuring that first nations are not just consulted, but are co-owners of major projects—”
“Mr. Speaker, the member is from Manitoba and we need to recognize that Manitobans want to vote for this budget. They want to for the port of Churchill. They want us to build, protect and empower the north. This is the first time we are seeing these types of investments in generations. I encourage the member to get on board and vote for them to ensure we make the national school food program permanent.”
“Mr. Speaker, budget 2025 makes historic investments with the new $1 billion Arctic infrastructure fund. This is designed to strengthen airports, seaports and all-season roads, which are critical lifelines for search and rescue. By improving northern transportation and communications infrastructure, the budget directly enhances the safety of the north. It is ensuring faster response times and better coordination when emergencies occur on land, sea or ice. These are the investments that reflect our commitment to equity, reconciliation and protecting the lives in Canada's north.”