Natural Resources Committee on Oct. 17th, 2011

[Janet King]

If I may, as well, this belongs in my colleague's realm of responsibility.

[Sara Filbee]

Thanks very much.

The responsibility for oil and gas on first nations lands lies with Indian Oil and Gas Canada.

As some of the folks in the room might know, we have been engaged in bringing up to date the Indian Oil and Gas Act. It was brought through about a year or so ago, and we're now engaged in working on the regulations. One of the problems is that this particular piece of legislation was significantly outdated in terms of the enforcement abilities, even lack of audits, and so on. So it was very difficult for Indian Oil and Gas Canada to ensure that it was fulfilling its fiduciary obligations to the first nations for whom it was the regulator.

For example, some of the new federal regulations will be targeted at reclamation, remediation, abandonment of oil and gas sites, and also better enforcement capabilities. Currently, under the old act, the only enforcement ability is to actually stop the lease and terminate everything, which, if it's a more minor violation, becomes a bit of an overreaction, so it basically is not available. Going forward there will be more graduated types of responses. As I say, we're still working through the details of the new regulations with the Indian Resource Council and with our experts, but it will be a much more up-to-date piece of legislation.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

What's the process, then, to have those changes made? Can you just go through that quickly?

[Sara Filbee]

The act was brought though by the House, but it was not proclaimed. It will be proclaimed when the regulations are completed.

We are working with the Indian Resource Council to develop the issues. This means heavy engagement by the first nations in terms of the issues that are important to them and identifying them with significant use of technical experts with respect to the details. As you can imagine, it's a highly complex area and there's just an awful lot.... We're talking about books and books and books of background information. So it's a very time-intensive process.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

It would be similar, then, to off-reserve requirements?

[Sara Filbee]

The challenge is that on federal reserve lands the provincial requirements don't apply. This will incorporate, by reference, provincial regulations where appropriate. One of the problems in attracting investors is a reserve system that is vastly different from that which exists in the neighbouring province's lands. When the regulatory system is not up to date or competitive, we say you could effectively “sterilize” the lands of their value. So we're trying to remedy that problem.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Anderson.

Mr. Trost.

[Bradley Trost, Conservative, Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Someone noted that one of the benefits that accrues to northerners through development is to work with local businesses. Now here's the question that arises from that: how does one work with and encourage local business while still finding best value for dollar? How are the two elements integrated? If it is best value for dollar with local businesses on projects, they'd naturally get it. So how do you balance between the two?

[Mitch Bloom]

In certain ways, northern economic development is not like southern economic development. There is always the ability to work with local people as the job force. But to work with local businesses as a business force is an incredible advantage from an economic perspective, both for the businesses and the companies that are relying on their services. I don't think they're mutually exclusive choices. The ability to work with those northern businesses offers the potential of a good financial return.

[Bradley Trost, Conservative, Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK]

I've worked up north, too, and I know sometimes that's true, though it may not always be quite as representative. But if that's automatically true, why would there need to be any sort of preference, or is there any preference for local aboriginal or local northern businesses? Is it all across-the-board lowest bid, best-quality product, or is there some sort of preferential program in place?

[Mitch Bloom]

Earlier, one of us spoke of the impact benefit agreements. When projects go forward in the north, often on aboriginal lands, you have to sign an agreement with the landholder. It's our intention and desire to see that development works its way through the community, and to see a trickle-down or spillover effect.

Moreover, the development in the rest of Canada is vital to this. Major labour needs, skilled labour, and large equipment used for development in the north are coming from all across this country.

But there is a real incentive to try to work locally. There's actually an economic incentive as well.

[Bradley Trost, Conservative, Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK]

That will do.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

We go now to Mr. Saganash.

[Romeo Saganash, NDP, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and my thanks to the witnesses today for their testimony.

First of all, I have a general question. Given the constitutional realities of today, especially related to the duty to consult, everyone realizes, finally, that the future of Canada is in its north. I'm pretty happy about that. Given that new context of political and legal realities, and we can add to that the new social and environmental realities, what types of adjustments have INAC and now AANDC put in place to take into consideration the new reality up north?

Second, I'd like to hear from you on the impact of the 2% cap on funding, especially as it relates to education. This is a question that's directly related to human resources up north. What impact has this 2% cap on funding had, particularly as it relates to education, on resource and economic development up north?

Also, because I wasn't satisfied with the answers you provided to my colleague, Mr. Gravelle, about the duty to consult, how do you analyze your role with respect to the duty to consult the other departments and the fiduciary responsibility of the Government of Canada toward aboriginal peoples?

Finally, you mentioned that you are aware of a list of projects being proposed in your region of responsibility. Is it possible to have that list for the benefit of this committee?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Ms. King, go ahead, please.

[Janet King]

I'll start at the end and work backwards.

Certainly we'll provide you with a list of projects that represent our knowledge at this point in time. We'd be glad to provide that.

On duty to consult, I may just add a point, and then I'll let Sara complete the answer.

With respect to our role with other government departments, it's in neither my area of responsibility nor Sara's, but our department has elaborated a broad guide on duty to consult. It's fairly detailed, and it assists all other departments to know what's required in terms of moving through appropriate duty to consult. That's a very tangible contribution we've made. The group that has that knowledge is also available to advise and inform any other department that is engaged in a duty to consult as well. So we work very closely with them to remind and inform them of the need, the best practices, and the best processes in terms of duty to consult.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Ms. Filbee, go ahead.

[Sara Filbee]

I can't add anything, over and above what Janet has added, to my response. The agency that is responsible, in this case CEAA, for making the determination has the obligation to look into the duty to consult and to enforce that. All we can do is provide resources and advice, and they take it from there.

You may wish to address your questions to them with respect to that particular case.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Ms. King, do you have something to add? Go ahead.

[Janet King]

I can go further up the questions.

The second question you posed was on the impact of the 2% gap in funding for education. Could you be precise about that 2%...just to be clear?

[Romeo Saganash, NDP, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

It's in funding in general.

[Janet King]

It's in funding in general.

I do need to say that education in the north is funded territorially. We do not fund. It's not part of our mandate to fund education in the north, so it has no impact in our case.

And I'm sorry, I'm saying “north”. My responsibility is in the three northern territories. So if you're referring to “north” as being south of 60°, we would need to pursue that. Is that what you meant?

[Romeo Saganash, NDP, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Would it be fair to assume that, whether it's under your responsibility or the responsibility of the territorial government, any cap on funding, whether in education or other areas, has an impact on aboriginal communities and their capacity to participate in the economic development in the region?

[Janet King]

It's outside my expertise to comment knowledgeably on the 2% gap in funding or on any impact. I can repeat what my colleague Mitch indicated, that broadly it is understood that education in the north is going to be quite important to build the capacity, the skills, and the engagement of northerners to participate effectively in northern resource development.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you, Mr. Saganash.

Mr. McGuinty, go ahead for up to five minutes, please.