Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Dec. 13th, 2023

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

I'm not seeing unanimous consent, which means, then, that we will....

I need to consult on something, so we're going to suspend just so I can get some technical advice.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

I call the meeting back to order.

There's been some good discussion on clause 13. Mr. Schmale, I think you or Ms. Idlout wanted to make a statement.

I'll turn the floor to Mr. Schmale.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Yes. Thank you, Chair.

I can try, and if I miss anything, maybe Ms. Idlout can pick it up where I left off or pick up on what I failed to address.

Because we are running short on time, through you and your team, Chair, when we return in February—or whenever we come back for our first meeting—could we potentially have some officials from the finance department? Specifically, could we have officials who have expertise in the area of taxation on Métis settlements, for example?

Could we have them at committee? It's not for testimony. Please don't misunderstand what I'm trying to do here. It's just to answer a few questions about the taxation piece, which we didn't really touch on.

Mr. Viersen reminded me that there is a piece in this legislation at the end—it was explained to me off-line by officials—about the Yale First Nation Final Agreement Act. It probably wouldn't be a bad idea to get additional clarification on that. We could have officials ready for us when we get back in February.

Does that make sense? Hopefully, I addressed what Ms. Idlout was getting at as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thank you for that.

Next on my list, I have Mr. Battiste.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

I want to start off by apologizing to my colleagues and saying I didn't mean to make you feel like we were pressuring you or rushing this when I talked about the Métis elders we might lose. I know we're all trying to get this done.

I think our team, the people we have here, are prepared to answer the questions sufficiently. If asked about both this tax agreement and the Yale agreement, they could give the answers. I'll ask them at this time if they're prepared to answer some of these questions that are out there.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

If the officials are willing to speak to those two issues, please do.

[Michael Schintz]

We want to make sure we make the point that for many of the coordinating amendments, the team here is certainly able to answer questions about the effect, intent and substance. The Yale First Nation amendment is an example of that. If it's helpful, I'll turn to Ms. Redmond in a moment, who can provide an overview of what that provision is and does.

We are coordinating with our colleagues at Finance Canada. While we can speak to the tax treatment agreement provision and what that means for the governments this legislation will ultimately recognize, we are not experts on the tax treatment of the Métis settlements, so we will coordinate with our officials at Finance Canada and be in touch with the clerk.

Having said that, I'm happy to turn it over to Ms. Redmond, who can speak at the very least to the Yale First Nation coordinating amendment. Similarly, I think it's fair to say—and Ms. Redmond will correct me if I'm wrong—that we believe we're more than prepared to speak to a number of the coordinating amendments in the Privacy Act and other provisions, which are quite standard.

We didn't want to give the impression that there's a need to line up a host of experts who aren't here today. That was the point we wanted to make.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Ms. Redmond, I'll invite you to weigh in on this.

[Julia Redmond]

Sure.

As I've said, we're happy to answer questions about all the of the stuff that appears in general provisions and coordinating amendments.

The point I want to make clear about the coordinating amendments, including for the Yale First Nation, the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act, is that these are all very simple technical amendments, and it's a matter of adding the Métis governments to a list. There are explanatory notes that come with the text of the bill as well, and they have the headings of those provisions that these lists are in.

It basically includes these Métis governments as an “aboriginal government”. You'll see within that list, if you pull up one of those acts, a list of existing aboriginal governments. This simply says that these Métis governments are aboriginal governments for the purposes of those acts, including those related to the Yale First Nation.

That is simply a technical matter of sequencing. That is not in force. It's just a matter of ensuring that they're not missed as the Métis governments get added. It has no impact on the Yale First Nation or anyone else. All of these are simply technical amendments that add the Métis governments to a list.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thank you.

Colleagues, looking at the time, I see we are at the end of our meeting.

I know we have put in a lot of effort on this so far. What I heard our officials say is that between now and when we resume, throughout the month of January, if there are other discussions they need to have, they will be able to speak to questions that are relevant to clauses 13 and 14 and beyond, as they have been doing in getting us to this point.

We're not going to be able to go any further given that we're out of time.

Before we end the meeting today, I want to bring to everyone's attention that this will be the last meeting we'll have with Vanessa Davies, our clerk. She's moving on to another assignment. I'd like to give her a big thank you for her commitment to our committee.

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear!

[The Clerk, Ms. Vanessa Davies]

Thank you. I'm going to the table research branch.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

She's going onward and upward.

We've been very fortunate to have Ms. Davies with us.

I'd also like to take the opportunity to wish everyone a very merry Christmas and happy holidays. Best wishes for 2024.

We don't know what our time slot will be for the new year. As soon as we get that, we will be returning.

The intention is to suspend. We'll be carrying forward the meeting until we conclude the deliberations on Bill C-53. When we suspend versus adjourn, it means that we won't be sending out new notices with rooms and all of those good things. You'll get an email letting you know where we'll be, so watch for that. I will do my best to touch base with everybody before we come back to make sure you know where we are on what day. Also, talk to your whips.

For now, thank you so much for the work. We're getting there. There's more work to do in the new year.

Safe travels.

We are suspended.

[The meeting was suspended at 5:32 p.m., Thursday, December 14, 2023]

[The meeting resumed at 11:06 a.m., Monday, January 29, 2024]

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Good morning, everyone. Welcome back. I call our meeting to order.

This is meeting number 92 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs.

We recognize that we're meeting on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe peoples.

Pursuant to the House order of reference adopted on June 21, 2023, and pursuant to the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, October 26, 2023, the committee is meeting to proceed with the clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-53, an act respecting the recognition of certain Métis governments in Alberta, Ontario and Saskatchewan.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. We have only members online today. They know how to run things remotely, so I'm going to skip over the rest of that part.

I would like to welcome some substitutes today. We have Monsieur Lemire from the Bloc, and Heath MacDonald and Jenica Atwin for the Liberals. Welcome.

I'd also like to welcome back our officials from the Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs. We have Michael Schintz, federal negotiations manager of negotiations—central for treaties and aboriginal government, and Blake McLaughlin, director general of negotiations—central for treaties and aboriginal government.

From the Department of Justice, we have Julia Redmond, legal counsel.

It's good to see that everybody's back here with us after Christmas and the holidays. Welcome back.

(On clause 13)

We'll now go through the continuation of Bill C-53. We're in clause-by-clause, and we left off with a discussion on clause 13.

I don't have anybody else on the speaking list. Does anybody want to speak to clause 13 before we move on?

Ms. Idlout, we'll go to you first.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik.

First of all, happy new year to everyone. Welcome back.

When we were discussing clause 13, I requested information, and we were told we would receive witnesses from a different department regarding the questions I had on clause 13.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thanks for that reminder, Ms. Idlout.

We had the discussion, and the officials indicated they would have the discussions with Finance over our time away and be prepared to discuss anything that was needed. I think the agreement was that we had the content experts here.

Perhaps we can resume with the officials. A bit of a discussion was going to happen with Finance. We could pick up with that and then move on to further debate on clause 13.

[Michael Schintz]

I'm happy to speak to that. We've been coordinating with our Finance Canada colleagues.

In the question, as I recall it, MP Idlout, what you were getting at was whether there was going to be a beneficial tax regime for the MNA in comparison to the Métis settlements as a result of the tax treatment agreement portion of the bill. We've had discussions with Finance Canada and the summary of those discussions is that the Métis settlements currently benefit from tax exemptions that the MNA does not. They are recognized as a government whereas.... The governments we're dealing with in this bill were established under not-for-profit legislation.

The two key ones are income tax exemptions and GST refunds, so the Métis settlements are already benefiting from that tax exemption regime. The MNA would be able to benefit from the same regime that the Métis settlements benefit from currently.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Thank you for that clarification.

Do I understand correctly, then, that if the Métis settlements in Alberta are already receiving this type of exemption, it is because of the recognition of the governance they have for their nation?

[Michael Schintz]

My understanding is that an application is made, in this case by the Métis settlements, to the CRA and/or Finance Canada to recognize them as a government and to give them those exemptions. Once you make that application, as my Finance colleagues have told me, those exemptions continue. You don't need to continue to apply for those exemptions. The settlements have been recognized as governments.

Of course, the settlements, somewhat uniquely, have land holdings, so there is some complexity to some of the tax exemptions. At the end of the day, the process is that they've applied for these exemptions, they've been granted these exemptions and they will continue to be granted these exemptions.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Mr. Viersen, I have you next.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question was just answered a bit. It's about the fact that the Métis settlements are land-based. I think that's an important key to note.

On these taxation agreements, are they just government-to-government taxation agreements, or do they go right down to the individual level? What is envisioned by these agreements? Why are they in the legislation? It's interesting to me that we've been trying to get land exemptions into this legislation and it's been said we don't need them, but then we see taxation agreement exemptions in the bill.

Could you address those two points?

[Michael Schintz]

Thank you, Mr. Viersen.

I'll start. Our counsel may have some comments to make.

The tax treatment agreement section of this bill is very much standard for the types of bills that implement final agreements or treaties. To your first question, this does not get down to the individual level. This is not about Métis individuals' taxation. This is about the government. This is about the principle that governments should not have to pay GST, for example. There is a GST refund. There are certain income tax exemptions under the Income Tax Act. The reason it's in the bill is that it's given force through the statute.

I don't know if Julia wants to make any comments with respect to that.

[Julia Redmond]

I would just add that this is a very common provision to have in this kind of legislation. You would have seen, for example, that in the Whitecap self-government act, which this committee would have seen a few months ago, the same provision was included. This is very standard for this type of implementing legislation to give the tax treatment agreements effect.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

This is standard, but the big concern everybody has is around the land. How come we can't put a land exemption in this bill, saying that this bill is not...? This is a tax agreement, and the next piece is.... We can talk about the next section later.