Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government Act

An Act to give effect to a land claims and self-government agreement among the Tlicho, the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Government of Canada, to make related amendments to the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts

This bill was last introduced in the 38th Parliament, 1st Session, which ended in November 2005.

Sponsor

Andy Scott  Liberal

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

This enactment gives effect to the Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government Agreement and the Tlicho Tax Treatment Agreement. It includes related amendments to the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act and consequential amendments to a number of other Acts.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government ActGovernment Orders

October 29th, 2004 / 12:35 p.m.
See context

Conservative

John Duncan Conservative Vancouver Island North, BC

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-14 is a land claim and self-government agreement between the Tlicho, earlier known as the Dogrib, the government of the Northwest Territories and the Government of Canada. It makes amendments to the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act and consequential amendments to other acts. Because this is a land claim agreement as well as a self-government agreement, it is constitutionally protected. This enabling legislation also gives effect to the tax treatment agreement for the Tlicho.

The federal government has essentially been carving up the north since the 1980s. It did it through the creation of Nunavut, through the comprehensive Yukon Indian agreement for the 14 Yukon first nations, and it has done it in the western Arctic with the Gwich’in, the Inuvialuit, and the Sahtu land claim agreements in the Northwest Territories.

There are essentially two areas in the north not yet covered with a land claim after the Tlicho agreement. Those are the Akaitcho and Deh Cho in the Northwest Territories, bordering to the south and west of the Tlicho agreement we are talking about today. I hope that kind of puts a perspective on things for people who are listening.

We have an interesting scenario here. The former premier of the Northwest Territories, Stephen Kakfwi, prior to holding the premiership, held the aboriginal portfolio and even held it during his time as premier. He consistently supported a very strong aboriginal and northern ownership agenda.

Last year he suggested that the Northwest Territories would live under some form of aboriginal governance within five years. We have had a lot of land claim agreements, as I just portrayed, but we certainly have not had much in the way of aboriginal self-government agreements. This means that he is promoting an agenda that would lead to many new agreements. This agreement would be a forerunner of that.

The governance provisions in this agreement are obviously precedent setting and, one would imagine, very important for us to scrutinize because they have major implications for future negotiations. I think that is of great concern to us from the standpoint that this agreement has received very little scrutiny. There has been very little interest from the rest of the world. There is a lack of clarity in this agreement, such as the concerns about paramountcy.

There are paramountcy concerns in many of our aboriginal agreements, but this one is exacerbated by the fact that it is not just two sets of laws that are colliding, it is very often three sets of laws: those of the Northwest Territories, those of the federal government and those of, in this case, the Tlicho.

Therefore, without clarity this could lead to all kinds of collisions and jurisdictional disputes. There is no satisfaction in talking to the bureaucracy or anyone involved in these negotiations in terms of getting answers to specific questions when it comes to that issue.

I have some very real sympathy with the aspirations of the north and with the fact that the federal government has been an oppressive presence in many respects.

We know from the current situation that has been brought to light about the differences between Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia and the federal government over offshore revenues from oil and gas, for example, that there is every reason to believe that no Liberal federal government has ever wanted the provinces to control resource revenues or their own resources. That goes doubly so for the Northwest Territories and for Nunavut and Yukon.

I have some real sympathies to the reasons and the rationale for some of the expressions of using this land claim and self-government initiative to try and bring new expression to northern control over resources. I am not sure this vehicle is always the best way but it has been their only way.

Only last year, Jim Antoine, a very well known MLA in the Northwest Territories and the resources minister, stated that aboriginal governments would become allies in the territories' fight to win control over its resources and the associated royalties from the federal government. That is a validation of what I just said and a validation about the ongoing dispute, not just with the north, but with the provinces over control of their own resources, their own destiny and their problems with clawbacks and other arrangements whereby there is a disincentive to carry on enterprise and resource extraction.

The bill is rather compact but it would give force of law to the tripartite agreement of August 25, 2003, and that accords the agreement from 2003 paramountcy over the act itself. The act would bring into law these very complex provisions.

The Tlicho First Nation would have ownership of approximately 39,000 square kilometres of area north of Yellowknife and between Great Slave Lake and Great Bear Lake. Under the terms of Bill C-14, the first nation would also acquire participatory regulatory authority over a much larger area. The bill is unique in that it would give effect to the land claim and the self-government agreement.

The act and the agreement have been put before this Parliament on an all or nothing basis. The government, on the advice of the clerk and the House, has taken the position that Parliament lacks the capacity to amend the provisions of the agreement. For this reason, the legislation was introduced by way of a notice of ways and means motion.

What this is really telling us is that the federal government can negotiate essentially any agreement it so chooses in its area of expertise and can do so in a completely unchecked fashion.

We have great concerns about that. We and the other opposition parties expressed our concerns about the lack of any democratic check on the government's ability to sign on to the missile defence initiative, for example. We amended the throne speech so that a vote will be held in this place if the government decides to proceed with the missile defence initiative.

The government signs many other international treaties where the degree of scrutiny might be something we want to look at, but surely, when it comes to a domestic arrangement that will be constitutionally protected and that is something that is as complex as this agreement is, there must be some arrangement that allows for amendments to or checks on the fact that our bureaucracy, one department, one minister and the cabinet, can simply approve an agreement of this degree of seriousness.

I think there is a huge issue at stake and, I must say, I disagree with the position that the House has taken on this. I do not believe this contributes to democracy in any way. As a matter of fact, I believe it undercuts democracy. The very role that the House should be providing has been undercut by this decision.

The agreement gives 3,000 Tlicho people claims to subsurface resources, law-making authority and the power to tax, levy royalties and manage resources. The 39,000 square kilometres area is roughly half the size of New Brunswick. It is bounded on the north by the Sahtu, on the east by the Nunavut and on the south and west by the future Akaitcho and Deh Cho territories.

In order to negotiate this agreement, the negotiating costs for the Tlicho alone were $27 million. If we think about that, a group of 3,000 people spent $27 million just on their side alone negotiating this agreement and the House of Commons has no opportunity to change one sentence in that agreement. I do not know of any other jurisdiction that would accept this, but in any case, that is where we are. This is not a proud record. I would assume that all of the negotiating costs combined must be approaching $80 million.

I want to summarize some of the specifics of the agreement for the interest of our listeners. I think it is important that we know some of the non-self-government settlement provisions.

Two operating diamond mines in the Tlicho territory are specifically excluded from the land claim area but remain within the territory. Any future subsurface extraction on Tlicho lands would be subject to a Tlicho royalty regime.

Five years ago we were essentially a non-diamond producing nation. Now we are the third largest diamond producing nation on the globe and we have every reason to believe that we will become second in short order. There are lots of future expansions of diamond mining that will occur north of 60° and in northern Ontario, northern Saskatchewan and other jurisdictions.

Yes, the existing mines are excluded but for any future mines within the Tlicho it is quite realistic to assume that they will be on lands owned by the Tlicho. As it stands right now, under the Mackenzie Valley resource sharing agreement, the Tlicho get 10.5% of the first $2 million of mineral royalties received by the federal and territorial governments for subsurface resources within the five regions of the Mackenzie Valley and a further 2.1% after the $2 million figure is reached. This would bring in about $3.5 million a year to the Tlicho government from the whole basin.

The royalties from the existing diamond mines that are specifically excluded from the Tlicho lands contribute to that formula, which is also shared by the Shatu, the Gwich'in and others in the Mackenzie Valley region. The proposed route of the Mackenzie Valley pipeline would not traverse Tlicho lands and, therefore, is not an issue at this time.

The band is involved in hydro development and is likely to become self-sufficient and a net contributor to the grid for the Northwest Territories. The largest of the four Tlicho communities, Rae-Edzo, is located along the Fraser Highway and the Tlicho government is planning an all weather highway to link the other three communities, which are Lac la Martre, Snare Lake and Rae Lake. I must say that adding these kinds of infrastructures to the north are important and progressive and are all very good initiatives.

The taxation provisions of the agreement are a little unclear since there is no concluded taxation agreement between Canada and the Tlicho, although one is to be concluded. Once again, here we are enabling something that is yet to happen without any ability to amend anything.

Tlicho citizens would pay GST and income tax. Tlicho government corporations would not pay either tax when conducting business on Tlicho land. The Indian Act would no longer apply to Tlicho citizens and Tlicho lands would not be considered reserve lands. Tlicho citizens would have continued access to all federal programs for status and non-status Indians and Métis. The Tlicho government would receive taxes paid to the federal government from Tlicho residents. The Criminal Code would continue to apply.

This agreement has a $152 million cash settlement to be paid out over 15 years, and the Tlicho government will pay off its $27 million negotiating loan in its first six years. In addition, there is a one time payment of $5 million from the federal government to an economic development fund to be managed by the Tlicho government.

Although the agreement has received little attention in the Canadian media, it is certainly the most significant agreement concluded by the Canadian government in recent years, as I have explained. We have some issues with this agreement and I think they generally fall under several categories.

I will summarize my major concerns by talking about the jurisdictional confusion, the absence of finality that is not in the agreement and the fact that we are simply doing this in a vacuum. The whole agreement has been agreed to by a few individuals and is being rubber stamped because no other option is available to us as the Parliament of Canada.

Somehow we have to revisit how these initiatives are approached right from the beginning and ask what the long term ramifications will be of these precedent setting agreements that tend to create a jurisdictional lack of clarity between Tlicho or aboriginal law, territorial or provincial law and federal law.

Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government ActGovernment Orders

October 29th, 2004 / 10:45 a.m.
See context

Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca B.C.

Liberal

Keith Martin LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak to Bill C-14, which I do support.

Many of my hon. colleagues had much to say about this and I will not restate their points, but I will talk about it in the context of first nations, Inuit, Métis and northerners identity, self-sufficiency and treatment within Confederation. In my opinion the bill is more than appropriate and timely. It is absolutely essential.

Bill C-14 would enable the Tlicho to affect their environment and the changes in a better way because they are most familiar with their local conditions. At long last the Tlicho will be guaranteed representation on land, water and renewable resource boards and within community governments. They will have control over the land and resource management, aboriginal language and culture.

By exercising their inherent rights, the Tlicho will have the power to assume control over their resources once and for all. They gain the right to grant interests and licences and they gain the freedom to establish partnerships and conduct business according to their needs, while at the same time respecting interests that already exist. I think that is an essential point to the good question that was posed by the opposition that this bill respects the interests of groups that are already there.

The Tlicho have ably demonstrated that they can manage their affairs responsibly and, indeed, profitably. I urge hon. members here today to remember that the Tlicho are one of the most prosperous aboriginal communities in the north. They have proven to be both forward thinking and industrious. They constructed and now run an airport, take a lead role in the management of their schools and have built and operated both senior centres and a long term care facility.

They have proven to be able and fair negotiators, and have successfully negotiated delivery agreements on a number of matters and, in particular, in working with the Northwest Territories. They have signed a number of mutually beneficial agreements with private sector firms, chief among them the far reaching impact that the Ekati Diamond Mine deal has struck.

The Tlicho have long experience in devising and supporting fruitful partnerships and alliances, partly due to their sharing nature and partly because of their world view. They and their society understand that long term health and prosperity lies directly with their ability to cooperate with those around them.

In the private sector their agreements have resulted in a wealth of economic and social benefits, including jobs and training opportunities. The resulting economic activity in Tlicho communities supports a wide range of social services. Indeed, when we consider this agreement, it springs from a group of communities working together in the spirit of collaboration. It is no surprise that Bill C-14 itself is the result of extensive and fruitful collaboration by many groups.

I am aware, though, that sometimes the results of public consultation have been criticized and overstated. In fact, we all know that sometimes consultation and collaboration have been far less than successful and merely an exercise of having a lot of meetings. However that was not the case in this set of negotiations that have resulted in Bill C-14.

The consultation process, in short, was exemplary. First, it was conducted as the combined efforts of the Tlicho, the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Government of Canada. This coherent tripartite approach ensured proper representation of all three levels of government from the beginning and, by unanimous agreement, the process was refined so that we have the formal agreement we have now.

Open house sessions were held in four Tlicho communities, as well as Yellowknife, and feedback was listened to and incorporated. What is important is that the public at large was informed about this process and had opportunities to have input all the way along.

In the summer of 2002, when the Government of Canada announced the withdrawal of 39,000 square kilometres of land that would eventually become Tlicho land, widespread public consultation occurred again with interest groups and representations from all three governments were brought to bear.

Another public information session occurred in September of that year when it was decided that further consultations were necessary to ensure that the public was completely informed and had ample time to discuss and respond to all these proposals. The chief negotiators had set up a three month information exchange period with interest groups so that questions would be asked and answers would be forthcoming.

It is worth noting that during these exchange periods, tangential discussions between the Tlicho and the Akaitcho Treaty 8 Dene gained considerable momentum. To their credit, the Tlicho were diligent negotiators. During these information exchange periods, in which the Tlicho agreement was hammered out, it was refined in a number of areas as a result of these negotiations so that by March 2003 the ratification process was formerly commenced.

This is a remarkable achievement of public consultation. It makes clear the intention of the local aboriginal people to be heard and respected. High public turnouts attested to this fact. Moreover, wide public consultation occurred throughout this process. People throughout the north had their views heard, respected and incorporated. That was been important. Some concerns had been expressed by members about the process.

The Tlicho are clearly ready to fulfill their obligation. They have been working toward this agreement for more than decade. They have staged hundreds of consultation sessions and have secured the support of a range of public and private sector groups. Now the Tlicho are ready to establish and maintain a democratic government. This is very important. I think it will address a number of the questions that will come from the opposition.

The Tlicho are ready to establish and maintain a democratic government within the constitutional framework of Canada. Their government will respect Canadian law, fully recognizing that the Tlicho, as are Canadians everywhere, will be subject to federal laws and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

My colleague on the other side asked a very legitimate question about the issue of who would be in control and which law would be of paramount importance. It is the laws of Canada. I can reference specifically within the agreement. Chapter 7 has very specific references as to which laws are paramount within the context of any conflicts that may occur between what is in the agreement for the Tlicho people and other levels of government. Article 7.7.2 explicitly states that the federal legislation will prevail over Tlicho legislation where there is any conflict. I hope this will answer the member's question specifically.

Many of us have had the opportunity to work with aboriginal people. We have seen what occurs in aboriginal communities. We have seen the devastation within some aboriginal communities, which has been wrought for such a long time. We have seen the pain, suffering, the social dislocations which have occurred and the terrible social parameters that occur with aboriginal people both on and off reserve.

Domestically, I know we are committed to change the historical problems that have occurred with aboriginal people and change the horrible social parameters in some communities, such as unemployment, substance abuse, the lack of skills training, fetal alcohol syndrome, dislocated communities, communities where they desperately need and want to work with non-aboriginal communities to ensure that together we can enjoy the fruits of our wonderful country.

We on this side are committed to doing this. I have no doubt that members on all sides want to work with aboriginal communities to change those parameters, to rectify those problems and ensure that aboriginal people will be able to teach us the strengths of their cultures and their communities. Together we will learn about each other and will enrich each other. Together we will have a stronger country. Together we are a stronger people. Together we are culturally enforced. Together we will improve the social welfare of the people and societies of which we are part. I know that we are committed to that goal.

Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government ActGovernment Orders

October 29th, 2004 / 10:40 a.m.
See context

Conservative

James Rajotte Conservative Edmonton—Leduc, AB

Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite made some very good points in terms of needing to have some certainty on a lot of these investment issues so that when companies do go in and make the large capital investments, they do have that certainty throughout a time period.

This week I was at the Energy Council dinner where they honoured Nellie Cournoyer from the north for all of her actions and what she has done to really bring prosperity to the north.

One of the questions I do want to ask my colleague is on the issue of jurisdiction. Which level of government has jurisdiction? One of the things we found in our reading of the legislation was that it is a little confusing over which jurisdiction is paramount. Is it the provincial government, the federal government, the agreement itself or Tlicho law?

Could the hon. member identify which level of government has paramountcy in terms of jurisdiction? Could he point to either the agreement or Bill C-14 legislation where it identifies which level of government is paramount.

Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government ActGovernment Orders

October 29th, 2004 / 10:35 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Michael John Savage Liberal Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my hon. colleague from Esquimalt--Juan de Fuca.

It is a special honour for me to rise today and encourage my hon. colleagues to support Bill C-14, the Tlicho land claims and self-government act. The act would make possible boundless improvements in the lives of the Tlicho people. It would serve throughout Canada and around the world as an example of visionary advancement of the principles of ethical fairness, social encouragement, and legislative support for aboriginal communities. Moreover, it would most assuredly have a positive and sustained effect on Canada's economy as a whole.

In the modern age, the keys to the long term business success of a corporation and the keys to economic prosperity of a whole society are in many ways similar. The requisites are creativity, honesty, hard work, persistence, and now above all else, effective partnerships.

Buyers need sellers, retailers need wholesalers, distributors need manufacturers, and producers need suppliers of raw materials. In the development of social economic structures the pattern of interdependence is the same. Communities need support, individuals need encouragement, leaders need wise counsel and organizations need allies.

Before any of this can happen local communities need the full understanding and support of provincial and territorial authorities. All levels of government need the clarity of well considered legislation from which they can seek, build and sustain the partnerships that will lead to prosperity.

In my opinion, Bill C-14 would provide the Tlicho people with the tools they need to establish new and effective partnerships. The Tlicho have already demonstrated a remarkable ability to negotiate mutually beneficial agreements with private companies. Consider for example the resourceful approach the Tlicho took to two of the diamond mining projects now underway in the Northwest Territories. Before the projects went ahead impact benefit agreements were completed that guaranteed valuable benefits for Tlicho communities. These agreements made with Diavik and BHP Billiton respectively have generated jobs for the Tlicho people, service contracts for Tlicho owned companies, and post-secondary scholarships for Tlicho youth.

The Tlicho have recognized that most mines are productive only for a finite period and that once this time elapses many of the well negotiated jobs and contracts will then dry up. To maximize the potential long term benefits associated with diamond mines on their traditional territory, the Tlicho people sought the help of a business partner. Several years ago the Tlicho began an association with ATCO Frontec, a logistics firm that follows a unique and successful business model based on collaboration with aboriginal groups.

Beginning in the late 1980s, ATCO established a series of partnerships with aboriginal groups across the north. As an example, the Uqsuq Corporation, which stores and distributes fuel, is jointly owned with the Inuit Development Corporation of Nunavut.

The Inuit of Labrador are partners with ATCO in Torngait, a company that provides support services to a range of industries. In B.C., the Northwest Territories and Yukon, Northwest Tel operates and maintains microwave towers thanks to agreements ATCO has made with several aboriginal development corporations.

Each one of these partnerships with ATCO is based on a similar business model, one that stresses the building of capacity within aboriginal communities. While contacts may come and go, industrial and business capacity has an enduring market value that can be adapted to suit new opportunities.

This capacity based business model appealed to the Dogrib Treaty 11 Council which then partnered with ATCO Frontec to create Tli Cho Logistics. The business model is pretty simple. The Tlicho own 51% of Tli Cho Logistics and ATCO Frontec controls 49%. The company provides a range of services to the Diavik diamond mine and to the remediation project underway at the Colomac gold mine. Today more than 130 people work for Tli Cho Logistics, 50 of whom are members of the Dogrib Rae band.

When the company was founded five years ago ATCO handled nearly all the company's administrative and managerial work while the unskilled jobs went to the Tlicho people. During the past few years however ATCO has helped the Tlicho acquire the skills needed to manage and to administer that company.

This incremental transfer of technical skills is why the Tlicho were and continue to be keen to partner with companies like ATCO Frontec. Tlicho leaders recognize that management skills acquired on mining projects can be readily applied to other ventures as well. In other words, the Tlicho will be better able to initiate, to manage and to operate other projects as a result of experience gained from these diamond mines. This, my hon. colleagues, represents community capacity building in its purest form, and all Canadians stand to benefit from it and should be proud of it.

When Canadians want to do business they must make and seek investment. These days attracting investment is tricky. Investors everywhere have been burned. They look for security, for solidity and for mitigated risk. In short, they look now more for a secure return on investment rather than a large or perhaps uncertain quick return on investment. Managing risk is often now the act of avoiding it altogether.

Now look at the challenges facing the first nations, the Inuit, the Métis and northern communities attempting to attract the financing necessary to move a business ahead in their communities. These communities are often frozen in their progress by factors such as limited access to venture capital, a shortage of private sector partners and a lack of infrastructure. In this environment, what security can they offer investors? What factors must be addressed? What conditions must be changed to show investors that those who are in charge are ready, willing and able to make the kind of business decisions that generate results? This, I believe, is where Bill C-14 shines through.

Today land claims and self-government agreements are opening up the business environment by finally clarifying the ownership of resources. In the north, one of the world's greatest storehouses of natural resources, first nations, Inuit, Métis and northerners play a major role in growing the local and Canadian economies.

With such certainty affirmed by law, aboriginal groups, such as the Tlicho, can move resolutely, creating businesses. Instead of going cap in hand to investors, they can say, “Something big is about to happen, are you in or are you out?”.

I believe many Canadians have not yet appreciated the tremendous impact that first nations, Inuit, Métis and northerners will have on our national economy in the decades to come. Theirs is a community of communities where the population is rapidly growing, a sure sign of economic potential. The Conference Board of Canada has been warning Canadian corporations to “ignore the economic potential of aboriginal people at their own risk”.

With Bill C-14 we can give one group the certainty it needs to push ahead and to make its mark. This is a positive step in improving our nation's health. Our legislation must give people the tools they need to press ahead. The ability, the drive and the opportunity are there. With Bill C-14 and others like it, we can at last make sure that the certainty is there.

We have before us an opportunity to send a clear and powerful message to first nations, Inuit, Métis and northerners across our country, that the Government of Canada is ready to remove the remaining barriers to economic development in aboriginal communities. I urge my hon. colleagues to support Bill C-14.

Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government ActGovernment Orders

October 29th, 2004 / 10:15 a.m.
See context

Bloc

André Bellavance Bloc Richmond—Arthabaska, QC

Mr. Speaker, today we are dealing with Bill C-14, an act to give effect to a land claims and self-government agreement among the Tlicho, the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Government of Canada, to make related amendments to the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, or the Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government Act.

We in the Bloc Québécois are in favour of this bill, as we were moreover of Bill C-31, which died on the Order Paper but has now returned as the bill we are discussing today, Bill C-14.

I have had the honour of meeting with representatives of the Tlicho nation, on October 6 and then again yesterday, along with the Bloc Québécois critic for Indian and northern affairs, the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent. I would draw to hon. members' attention that this gentleman is the first aboriginal person from Quebec to sit in this Parliament. He was a negotiator for the aboriginal peoples for many years. I will not let his age slip. I dated myself yesterday, but I will not do the same to him. I will merely say he was an aboriginal negotiator for many years and is very familiar with the issues. As native elders pass down their wisdom to the younger members of their community, he is passing his knowledge on to me, and I am very grateful to him. It is a pleasure to work with him on this.

The Tlicho who met with us have, moreover, honoured him with the name Barbe blanche. I have not yet been given a name, nor do I yet have a white beard, but I am sure it will not be long until I do.

We also received a letter from grand chief Joe Rabesca on October 22 thanking us for the way the Bloc Québécois has backed his people's claims.

I will just provide some of the background of this bill. The Tlicho agreement comes out of the failure of negotiations with the Dene and Métis nations, a process that ended in 1990. Negotiations with the Tlicho nation resumed in 1994 and concluded in 2003 with the signing of the Tlicho agreement. In this field, patience is a must. The Tlicho have been patient, and I think their patience will soon be rewarded.

On June 26 and 27, 2003, the Tlicho voted 84% in favour of the agreement. It was not a close vote for a referendum, but I will say that we would have unquestioningly accepted the result even if it had been 50% plus 1.

Thus, the passage of Bill C-14 is the final step in recognizing the land claims and self-government of the Tlicho people.

With respect to the terms of the agreement, just to remind the House what it is about, the agreement will give the Tlicho the largest contiguous block of land belonging to a first nation in Canada and will set up new forms of self-government for the Tlicho. The agreement will clarify the rights, titles and obligations of the Tlicho nation. The agreement does not interfere—and this is important—with ancestral or treaty rights of other aboriginal groups. The Tlicho government will own a territory of almost 40,000 square kilometres and it will receive slightly more than $150 million over 14 years. It will have specific legislative jurisdiction over its land and over Tlicho citizens, including those not living on Tlicho land. The most important point in this bill is that the agreement gives the Tlicho nation the tools it needs to achieve financial self-sufficiency, to protect its way of life and to improve its economic growth and the well-being of the whole community. Those principles and values are very dear to us.

The Tlicho have been waiting for 14 months now, since the agreement was signed, for self-government. The Bloc Québécois is 100% in favour of the right to self-government for the aboriginal peoples, their right to govern themselves autonomously. The agreement before us is an excellent example of self-government.

Since it first arrived on the federal political scene, the Bloc Québécois has recognized aboriginal peoples as distinct peoples. We think that aboriginal peoples have a right to their languages, their cultures and their traditions.

Aboriginal peoples unquestionably have the right to decide how to develop their own identity. Therefore, we endorse most of the recommendations of the Erasmus-Dussault royal commission on aboriginal peoples. They called for an approach to the concept of self-government based on the recognition of aboriginal governments as a level of government with jurisdiction over governance and the welfare of their people. We feel that this agreement reflects this approach.

In Quebec, if I can make a comparison, we have long been advocating this type of agreement, in which mutual respect is paramount. As early as 1985, René Lévesque and the Parti Québécois government in office at the time recognized Quebec's aboriginal nations. The Quebec people recognizes that diversity is not a threat, but an asset.

In Quebec, the year 2002 was also a turning point in this regard. It was once again a sovereignist government—what a coincidence—the PQ government of Bernard Landry, which signed the peace of the braves agreement and the joint agreement. The peace of the braves was signed on February 7, 2002, by then Quebec premier Bernard Landry, and the Grand Chief of the Grand Council of the Crees, Ted Moses.

This historic 50-year agreement marks the beginning of a new era in relations between Quebec and the Cree. The agreement concerns the establishment of a new relationship between the two nations. It provides, I should point out, for greater empowerment for the Cree regarding their economic and community development and for hydro development projects in James Bay. It also provides for the harmonization of forest activities with traditional Cree activities.

What a fine example of nation to nation negotiations. Soon, a sovereign Quebec will also be negotiating nation to nation with Canada, and the earlier the better. During the last election campaign, the Bloc Québécois reminded the federal government that the peace of the braves agreement was the example to follow. The Cree nation deserves as much consideration as the Tlicho nation. The peace of the braves has demonstrated that major development projects have to be negotiated with mutual interests in mind. The Bloc Québécois supports the first nations in their fight for emancipation. That is why we are asking Ottawa to follow this example to negotiate a similar agreement with the Cree.

As for the joint agreement, in 2002, the Parti Québécois government of Bernard Landry signed with the Inuit of Nunavik a 25-year agreement to accelerate economic and community development in Northern Quebec. This joint agreement enables the Inuit to assume responsibilities in economic and community development formerly held by the Government of Quebec.

This agreement is opening up bright new horizons by accelerating hydro development in Nunavik, promoting more control for the Inuit over their economic and community development, simplifying and increasing the efficiency of the financing for the Kativik regional administration and northern villages, and providing funding for priority projects.

To conclude, there are two historic agreements, both signed by a sovereignist government. Those who believe that we, sovereignists, want to close borders do not know what we are about. Those who believe that we do not treat our minorities right do not know what we are about. A sovereign Quebec will work in partnership with other peoples.

I reiterate the Bloc Québécois' support for the principle of self-government for aboriginal peoples. This agreement actualizes the right of the Tlicho to govern themselves. I might add that the Tlicho nation clearly indicated its desire to self-govern, and we support this democratic desire.

Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government ActGovernment Orders

October 29th, 2004 / 10 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Roger Valley Liberal Kenora, ON

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in the House to speak about honouring traditions and building prosperity. I rise in support of Bill C-14, the Tlicho land claims and self-government act. The legislation brings into effect an agreement that respects more than 1,000 years of history and lays the groundwork for Tlicho prosperity well into the future.

The history of the Tlicho is a story of a people who have met successive challenges thanks to a set of ancient principles handed down from generation to generation. These principles help the Tlicho decide when to act and when to react, when to drive change and when to adapt to it. By applying these principles, the Tlicho made wise decisions that allowed them to prosper in a modern world, while ensuring the survival of their people, their language and their culture.

These same principles inform the agreement at the heart of the legislation before us, an agreement that will have a positive impact on the quality of life in Tlicho communities because it is rooted in their rich history and honours the way they have lived for generations.

For centuries, the Tlicho were a nomadic people who occupied and used vast stretches of land in the Mackenzie River and Great Bear and Great Slave Lakes. Their ancestors tracked migrating herds of caribou, fished in waters according to age old patterns, trapped and hunted different species according to the seasons.

It should come as no surprise that the primary Tlicho principle is a respect for the natural environment, for the land, the flora and the fauna that thrive on it. It can be difficult for us to appreciate just how deeply the land resonates through the Tlicho culture. More than a source of sustenance, the land also provides spiritual guidance and shapes Tlicho language and art.

Respect for the land guided the Tlicho in their initial dealings with southerners. In 1921, as oil and gas exploration accelerated in the north, Chief Monfwi signed Treaty 11 on behalf of the Tlicho people, who were then known as the Dogrib. The chief traced the traditional lands of his people on a map and the boundaries he described are nearly identical to the ones included in the Tlicho agreement. In fact, when modern negotiators sought to finalize the boundaries for today's agreement, they turned to Tlicho elders for assistance. Their elders based their input on traditional knowledge of the routes travelled regularly by their ancestors.

The agreement at the heart of Bill C-14 will give Tlicho effective control over 39,000 square kilometres of land, almost 20% of their traditional territory. To ensure that the lands can be used in an effective, sustainable and equitable manner, the agreement enables the Tlicho to participate in several boards that will make resource management decisions in their area.

The second guiding principle at the heart of the Tlicho philosophy and the agreement is to act for the common good. Survival in a harsh environment of the north requires collaboration. The interests of the community are to be respected before those of the individual.

In the modern era, this principle has been evident in the Tlicho's approach to education and social services. The Tlicho moved swiftly and effectively to establish schools, for instance, when it became apparent that their traditional way of life was going to be threatened.

In the 1960s, the Tlicho recognized that a proposed pipeline through the Mackenzie Valley could have serious effects on their culture. The chief at the time was Jimmy Bruneau. He insisted that his people learn to blend northern and southern cultures and study the aboriginal and non-aboriginal traditions. This vision became known as a need to “be strong like two people”, a phrase that later became the mission statement for the Chief Jimmy Bruneau school.

The school opened in 1971 and it still teaches a curriculum that balances ideas from the north and the south, from aboriginal and non-aboriginal perspectives. Today, the Dogrib community services board, Canada's first aboriginal school board, operates five schools. An average of 20 students earn high school diplomas every year.

Modern Tlicho leaders believe that access to higher education is crucial to their people's ability to design and implement the policies that can ensure survival of their culture, their language and their traditions. As a result, the Tlicho invested heavily in post-secondary education. When impact benefit agreements were negotiated with mining companies, Diavik and BHP Billiton, the Tlicho insisted both include contributions to a scholarship fund. The Tlicho also intend to put sizable portion of payments they receive from the agreement toward this scholarship fund.

Today the fund supports more than 130 Tlicho who are pursuing post-secondary education. Once they graduate, these people will likely return to serve their communities as teachers, doctors and tradespeople. Their academic success will provide living proof of the Tlicho principles to the next generation.

The Tlicho principle of common good is the central theme of this legislation before us today. Effective self-government, for instance, enhances the Tlicho's ability to improve their communities. The Tlicho government will be able to enact laws to protect culture, language and deliver the social services and manage the resources.

Bill C-14 also incorporates two other Tlicho principles: recognition and representation. Each of the four Tlicho community governments established under the legislation will be run by a chief and a council comprised of a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 12 members. All will be democratically elected. At least half of each council must be comprised of Tlicho citizens. All community residents of legal age can qualify to vote for councillors, although only Tlicho citizens will be eligible to vote for the chief.

The constitution, already ratified by the Tlicho, outlines rules and responsibilities of government and protects the rights and freedoms of those who reside on Tlicho lands. Non-Tlicho citizens, for instance, may be appointed or elected to serve on Tlicho institutions. The constitution also ensures that the Tlicho government is politically and financially accountable to the citizens that it represents. All laws enacted by the Tlicho government are subject to legal challenges.

The final principle I would like to address involves respect for the people. The Tlicho believe that every resident must be accountable to contribute to the community in some way. This is part of the reason the Tlicho negotiators organized dozens of town hall meetings during the negotiations that led up to the agreement. They wanted to ensure that everyone had the opportunity to be heard.

Furthermore, to prepare people for success in the new economy, the Tlicho established a development corporation in 1978. Rather than focus exclusively on making a profit, the corporation's primary goal was to train and employ Tlicho people.

The wisdom of this approach is evident today. There are now two Tlicho holding companies operating several businesses in multiple economic sectors. A logistics company provides services to mining projects and a trucking firm transports goods across this vast region.

The Tlicho also own a local motel and a sporting goods store in Yellowknife. These businesses provide training opportunities and work experience, and give every Tlicho citizen a chance to contribute to their communities.

The Tlicho agreement is a modern expression of the age old principles that have enabled an ancient people to adapt and to change. This agreement has already earned the support of the Tlicho, of the territorial legislature in Yellowknife and now it is our turn in the House. I am convinced that a careful examination of Bill C-14 will lead my hon. colleagues to support it enthusiastically.

Business of the HouseOral Question Period

October 28th, 2004 / 3 p.m.
See context

Hamilton East—Stoney Creek Ontario

Liberal

Tony Valeri LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, this afternoon we will continue with the allotted day.

Tomorrow and the first part of next week, the order of legislation will be second reading of Bill C-14, the Tlicho governance agreement, and reference before second reading of Bill C-13, the DNA data bank bill.

We will then proceed to the reference before second reading of Bill C-15, respecting the convention on migratory birds and second reading of Bill C-9, respecting a regional development agency in Quebec.

We would then turn to the reference before second reading of bills to be introduced early next week dealing with the Competition Act, first nations fiscal institutions, Telefilm, certain controlled substances, and an amendment to the Criminal Code with respect to impaired driving.

I will be discussing with the other parties the exact order of these bills. We would hope, by the end of the week, that we would be in a position to deal with report stage and third reading of Bill C-4, respecting aircraft equipment.

Next Thursday will be an allotted day.

On Tuesday evening there will be a take note debate on the compensation for victims of hepatitis C.

With respect to the specific question asked by the hon. member across the way, certainly it will be very forthcoming in the near future and I am sure we will also have a discussion among House leaders.

Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government ActGovernment Orders

October 27th, 2004 / 6:15 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Stockwell Day Conservative Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC

Madam Speaker, I congratulate the member for Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River for his tremendous presentation.

I think all of us in the House will agree that his youthfulness will not be a detriment but in fact an asset to him, as will the fact that he has a large population of aboriginal people within his constituency for whom he has a heart and with whom he has lived in close proximity. As he brings this experience plus his legal understanding to bear, we will all learn from what he has to offer.

The record in the House clearly shows that the Conservative Party of Canada has in the past supported, not just the notion of self-government agreements but self-government agreements themselves. I would refer to our not too distant past when we endorsed and encouraged other members in the House to support the West Bank agreement. We are also on record as wanting to proceed with caution in any type of legislation, not just self-government legislation but any type of legislation.

I would like to read the first phrase of Bill C-14. It is sobering force to realize what we are talking about. It is quite simple in how the bill is brought forward. If passed the bill will give effect to a lands claim and self-government agreement. A claim, in and of itself, does not mean that all the attributes of that claim should have full force, whether it is a claim of an individual citizen, a province, the federal government or aboriginal group. If the bill is passed everything they claim will become reality. That is why we need to approach this in a sobering fashion.

I congratulate the people who worked on the self-government agreement. We congratulate the notion of raising one's own revenues and the notion of hydro power development, and that the Tlicho people would one day even see self-sufficiency on their own lands and to actually at some point be able to add into the electrical grid in the Northwest Territories. Those things are all very commendable.

I congratulate the writers of the bill, which is relatively simple. It has 14 sections. It can be managed in terms of trying to get our heads around it and trying to grasp it.

However there are problems that must be addressed, such as the fact that there is no finality to this particular deal. If other self-government agreements were to take place that appeared, in the eyes of the Tlicho people, to be more generous, however they might want to define it or for which this particular bill provides, then the whole thing could open up again. They would automatically assume unto themselves elements that may be more generous in other acts which could follow this one. That could lead to a devastating economic spiral and a precedent that I say we should not countenance in terms of this type of legislation. The aspect that there is no finality to this agreement is extremely problematic.

The question of international jurisdiction is one that cannot be ignored. There cannot be any question about who has international jurisdiction in our country.

Our Constitution is very clear. We have areas of federal, provincial and individual jurisdiction. Our Constitution is quite clear and yet we still have problems.

As we saw yesterday and again today, the disagreement between the Prime Minister of Canada and the Premier of Newfoundland is linked to only one provision of the Constitution, the only dealing with equalization. The problem however is so serious that it put a stop to a first ministers meeting. All of that because of one small provision in our Constitution.

Therefore, we do not need another level of government meddling in foreign affairs.

International relations have become very complex. In fact, we are now in a dispute with another European country, which is claiming one of our islands in northern Canada, and we have yet to resolve this issue.

Can you imagine the problem with a bill like this that is vague about foreign affairs!

It is too big a risk to have a cloud hanging over an area as important as international jurisdiction. In, supposedly, some of the simplest areas of demarcation between federal and provincial jurisdictions, we already see great complexities, discussions that rage on by the hour and by the days and weeks in this House between the provinces and the federal government. To suggest that we should put another level of jurisdiction into this constitutional morass is simply untenable.

I have nothing against the good people who want to see this agreement go ahead. I am pleased that this agreement removes much of the jurisdiction of the Indian Act. We are all agreed that the act no longer serves and it can even be questioned whether it ever did truly served the aboriginal people.

There are positives here but the negatives are too big to ignore. I want to see the Tlicho people move on to prosperity, to independent living and to acquire their aspirations. We all want to see that happen.

Whether we are talking about prosperity or about poverty, those two conditions do not exist by accident. Prosperity happens to an individual or to a group of people when certain principles are applied. Poverty reigns when certain principles are not followed. We want to see the principles that have been applied to Canadians applied to these people because over the years Canadians, relatively speaking, to the rest of the world we have prosperity.

Certainly we are not free of problems but compared to the rest of the world we are a prosperous country. That did not happen just by accident. We do not have to feel guilty about that. Certain principles were in place that allowed individuals to move ahead, to be innovative, to pursue an education, to pursue enterprise, to become innovative and to actually create wealth for themselves.

We want to see the same principles applied here, which is why we have concerns with some of the elements in the bill. We would like to work with the government to see those addressed so that the aspirations of these good people can be achieved.

Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government ActGovernment Orders

October 27th, 2004 / 6 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Jeremy Harrison Conservative Churchill River, SK

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the hon. member for Okanagan—Coquihalla.

I rise today to speak to Bill C-14, the Tlicho treaty. Madam Speaker, as this is my maiden speech in the House of Commons, I hope you will indulge me as I pay tribute to my constituents and my riding of Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River.

Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River covers more than half the geographic area of Saskatchewan, approximately 58% of the province's land mass. It is an enormous area, slightly larger than the country of Germany and a bit smaller than the country of France. I would like to sincerely thank the constituents of Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River and give them my commitment that I will do the very best job that I can on their behalf in Ottawa.

It is difficult to determine exactly, but I think my riding contains more first nations than any other riding in the country. There are over 30 first nations in my riding. It is also difficult to determine such things, but with over 60% of my riding's population being of aboriginal descent, I represent if not the most, then close to the most number of people of aboriginal descent of any member of Parliament.

I grew up in northern Saskatchewan. My home community is Meadow Lake. Many of my closest friends are aboriginal. As a law student my primary area of study was on the law surrounding first nations legal issues. I believe my background and experiences have given me some insights to allow me to speak to this issue with at least some understanding, based on practical experience and theoretical knowledge as well.

Before delving into the nuts and bolts of the treaty, I think it prudent to first give some background and context to the agreement that is before the House. Bill C-14 ratifies the Tlicho agreement signed August 25, 2003 between the Tlicho and the governments of Canada and the Northwest Territories.

The bill will give the Tlicho people ownership of approximately 39,000 square kilometres between Great Slave Lake and Great Bear Lake in the Northwest Territories. Under the terms of the bill the Tlicho also acquire participatory regulatory authority over a much larger area. The bill is unique in that it is both a comprehensive land claim settlement and a self-government agreement. The agreement is precedent setting in both respects and will guide future claim settlements and self-government provisions across the north.

It should be noted as well that although the act itself is relatively short, it would bring into force the tripartite agreement of August 25, 2003 and would accord this agreement paramountcy over the act itself. In other words, approval of the act would bring into law the very complex provisions set out in the 208 page agreement, as well as the shorter tax treatment agreement.

My hon. colleague from Calgary Centre-North has already pointed out in a very able way the general reasons behind my party's opposition to the bill. Generally speaking, our concerns arise from the impact that the agreement would have on general issues of governance, more specifically on the country's ability to exercise our international sovereignty.

We are also wary that the agreement would erode federal constitutional jurisdiction in the north and unduly complicate federal jurisdiction with regard to international agreements entered into by Canada. In addition, important provisions of the agreement, most notably those pertaining to legislative concurrency, paramountcy and jurisdictional conflict are internally contradictory and in many ways indecipherable.

I also have concerns that the agreement gives the Tlicho constitution a superior position in law to that of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Tlicho constitution is intended to be consistent with the charter, but a close reading shows that the citizens or persons to whom Tlicho laws apply will have rights and freedoms “no less than those set out in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms”, a position of legal superiority.

Another area of concern I have with this treaty is the absence of finality. One of the points the agreement attempts to stress is that the agreement is indeed a final agreement, but article 27.6.1 shows that this is actually not the case. This article provides that the Tlicho would receive equivalent benefits to those granted in the future to any other aboriginal group in the Northwest Territories, whether by land claims agreements, self-government agreement, tax power exemption or legislation. This agreement is not really a final agreement at all.

I also have concerns about the remarkable provisions in the agreement dealing with international matters. Article 2.9 of the agreement states that it does not limit the authority for the Tlicho to enter into “international, national, interprovincial and interterritorial agreements”. This makes it clear, by implication, that the Tlicho government has the authority to enter into international agreements, an almost unprecedented situation for a non-state actor in any nation on the planet.

Further to this, article 7.13.2 of the agreement states as follows:

Prior to consenting to be bound by an international treaty that may affect a right of the Tlicho Government, the Tlicho First Nation or a Tlicho Citizen, flowing from the Agreement, the Government of Canada shall provide an opportunity for the Tlicho Government to make its views known with respect to the international treaty either separately or through a forum.

This provision in essence creates a duty in law to consult. What is not made clear is what would happen if the Tlicho government made a determination that it is not in support of the relevant international treaty. Will the government be forced to make changes to the international agreement? This is a question to which there is no clear answer in the treaty. No clear answer has been provided by the government as well.

A further area of concern to me is with regard to the issues of jurisdictional confusion engendered by the agreement.

The act is clear in making the provisions of the agreement paramount over the act itself and over many regulations passed under the act. Unfortunately, the agreement itself appears to be internally contradictory, resulting in confusion regarding the concurrent and paramount authority of the Government of Canada, the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Tlicho government.

The agreement addresses these interjurisdictional issues in at least three places and prescribes three distinct paramountcy provisions. Articles 7.7.2 through 7.7.4 prescribe the following hierarchy of authority: one, federal legislation of general application; two, territorial legislation implementing Canadian international agreements; three, Tlicho laws; four, territorial legislation of general application; and five, specific federal legislation.

In other words, Tlicho laws prevail over territorial laws and also over federal laws of specific application passed by this House, thereby rendering legislation passed by Parliament subordinate to laws passed by the Tlicho.

Article 2.8.3 introduces yet another concept of paramountcy in that it makes the settlement legislation paramount over the provisions of any other legislation or Tlicho laws. Yet the definition of settlement legislation refers to both territorial legislation and federal legislation.

In this hierarchy, the agreement is paramount over federal settlement legislation, territorial settlement legislation and Tlicho laws, creating a situation of apparent inconsistency with articles 7.7.2 and 7.7.4.

A third legislative hierarchy is prescribed in article 2.10.7 that applies in the event of arbitration. This provision indicates the following hierarchy: one, federal laws of overriding national importance; two, federal laws implementing international agreement obligations; three, other federal legislation; four, territorial legislation implementing international Canadian obligations; five, Tlicho laws; six, other territorial legislation.

The general scheme of article 7.7.1 is that the Tlicho government has the power to enact laws that are concurrent with those of the Government of Canada and the Government of the Northwest territories.

The problem, which I think is very apparent on a close reading of this agreement, is that there seem to be multiple definitions of how to determine paramountcy in the event of conflict.

For these reasons, I will be voting against the bill.

Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government ActGovernment Orders

October 27th, 2004 / 5:35 p.m.
See context

London West Ontario

Liberal

Sue Barnes LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians

Madam Speaker, I am truly honoured to voice my support for Bill C-14, the Tlicho land claims and self-government act.

This legislation will establish a new and respectful relationship between Canada and the Tlicho. I am also confident that the agreement this bill brings into force will foster economic and social development in the Tlicho communities, which are progressive communities.

I visited them in the north over a year ago. I met with leaders and saw some of the development. I also visited some of the diamond mines. On the human resources development aspect, we have an increase of aboriginal skills in the workforce which is good for all people in Canada and the economy of one of our northern territories.

The Tlicho are Dene people who live in four communities to the north and west of Yellowknife. They are an ancient people who have thrived in the north's harsh climate through a mix of adaptation, determination and cooperation.

For more than 10 years the Tlicho have been involved in a comprehensive process of negotiation and consultation. We know that this process is one that is not always easy, but it is a testament to the three parties involved that they have come before this House looking for the final ratification by one of the parties.

The agreement at the core of Bill C-14 is the fruit of a long and important process. I think the level of the debate here is important. We need to help those who are seeking answers, but at the same time I am very confident that we have those answers.

This legislation comes at an auspicious time in Canada's history. Clearly, there is a new will among government leaders to resolve longstanding aboriginal issues. To address these issues effectively, the Prime Minister has restructured the top echelons of government, establishing a Privy Council Office secretariat and a cabinet committee, as well as appointing a parliamentary secretary, all devoted to the aboriginal affairs portfolio. Certainly this Parliament, this House and the other place, continue to be charged with this very important work.

A few months ago Ottawa hosted the historic Canada-Aboriginal Peoples Round Table. During the round table, representatives of dozens of governments, agencies and organizations from across Canada held focused and productive discussions. The success of these discussions inspired the parties to continue to collaborate on a range of aboriginal issues at several sectoral tables.

To track progress made on the issues, the Prime Minister pledged to introduce an annual report card in Parliament. I think this is another measurement. It is not Parliament, but it is another parallel process which has the ability to include many people, many experts from the aboriginal community.

While we recognize that aboriginal issues such as housing, health and economic development are complex and multifaceted, the government's overarching goal is clear. The goal is to ensure that aboriginal peoples are able to participate fully and equally in Canadian society.

Accessing the mainstream economy, for instance, has long been difficult for many aboriginal communities. These communities face significant obstacles, such as underdeveloped infrastructure, limited access to venture capital and a lack of entrepreneurial expertise. Delivering effective social services and providing relevant education have also been challenging.

Some of these communities have met that challenge and will continue and actually do better in the future.

Nevertheless, in recent years, a growing number of aboriginal communities have found innovative ways of overcoming these obstacles. Generally, their solutions involve partnerships with governments, private business and other communities.

For example, the Tlicho have leveraged a series of partnerships to make their communities more prosperous, progressive and sustainable. Today the Tlicho operate numerous joint ventures in a range of economic sectors. They run their own schools and deliver social services through an agreement with the Government of the Northwest Territories.

I remember my colleague asking a question about the Government of the Northwest Territories and whether this language was one that was used. I believe it is used. In fact, it is one of the seven or eight languages that are officially used in the Government of the Northwest Territories.

The Government of the Northwest Territories unanimously ratified this agreement. I remember being there over a year ago and talking to some members of that territorial government. They were encouraged and excited about the prosperity and economic development that this would bring to their region.

Now we are here. They want to strike a new deal with the people of Canada, a deal that will put them once again firmly in control of their own destiny. For centuries the Tlicho were a self-sufficient people in charge of their own affairs. Given the remote location of their communities, there was little contact with southerners. All of that changed though when plans got underway to develop oil and gas reserves in the north.

Recognizing that their traditional lifestyle was threatened, the Tlicho chiefs embarked on an ambitious project to help their people face an uncertain future. Instead of fearing the unknown, the Tlicho have seen an opportunity to better understand both the culture of the north and that of the south. This new philosophy has inspired Chief Jimmy Bruneau to coin a phrase describing the Tlicho people as being as strong as two peoples.

These were not just words. In the early 1970s a Tlicho school was built in the village of Rae to teach a bicultural curriculum. Lessons were based on both aboriginal and non-aboriginal traditions. A few years later the Tlicho took another progressive step by establishing a development company to sponsor private businesses. Rather than focus on profits, these businesses trained and employed Tlicho people. We have to celebrate the innovation, the thoughtfulness and the planning that this type of step brought to a community.

Twenty years later when diamonds were discovered on traditional Tlicho lands, the wisdom of Chief Bruneau's approach quickly became apparent. Seeing the diamond mines as a valuable opportunity for the Tlicho, they drew on the bicultural education of their students and the entrepreneurial expertise they had acquired through band owned companies to make the development of this resource work for them.

So, the Tlicho negotiated with the Diavik and BHP Billiton mining companies impact and benefit agreements providing for access to jobs, contracts, training programs and scholarships.

The Tlicho people have also invested in sustaining their vision of being a modern people who remain rooted in their traditions. Revenues from Diavik and BHP Billiton have been invested in Tlicho communities, in youth groups, in sports programs, in beautification projects and physical infrastructure.

Alongside these progressive ventures, they have continued to support traditional activities such as trails of our ancestors, an annual 10 day canoe trip. The trip, led by the Tlicho elders, involves up to 200 participants each year. People of all ages paddle and camp together on traditional waterways and lands. They fish and hunt together, renewing their age old connection to the land that is now providing for them in new ways.

Bill C-14 honours this connection by granting the Tlicho people ownership and control of their traditional lands. The legislation before us represents a momentous opportunity not only for the Tlicho but also for Canada. It will effectively give the Tlicho people access to the resources they need to sustain their communities. Bill C-14 is also an opportunity for the government to send a clear message to aboriginal people across the country that we are serious about working with them to support their vision of a better future for their families and their communities.

Clearly, finalizing land claims and self-government agreements represent major strides toward these goals. These agreements enable aboriginal communities to contribute to the economy in ways that honour their traditions, languages and cultures. For evidence of the value of these agreements we need look no further than Nunavut or the Nisga'a nation.

I said earlier in the House that I was involved in the Nisga'a nation agreement. It was the first embedded agreement of self-government and land claims. This is the second. It really is an honour and a special moment to be a participant in both of these. There have been other agreements, but I feel that we are creating history in this chamber. These are not words; these are not picking apart the legalities. These agreements are building a country. They are a vision of the future that engages in partnership with respect, cooperation and compromise.

The Tlicho people did not get everything they wanted in this agreement. Perhaps they did not get everything that Canada or the territory originally put on the table. Agreements like this are real negotiations after education and consultation. Compromises are made over time. At the end of the day, this agreement, with all of its vast boundaries, has overlapping agreements that were done in a manner with which all the neighbours are happy. That is not true of every agreement that has been brought before the House. This is a vast boundary and to my knowledge all the neighbours are happy.

Those negotiations were done in good faith. We can talk about that process and implementation in this chamber. Like an international treaty, this is a ratification process. These negotiations with the Tlicho were done in good faith and with clean hands. The Government of Canada has laid these negotiations before this chamber. The Tlicho people voted in their communities with an outstanding outcome. It was better than the outcome of my election and probably better than the election of some other people in this place. It was a true representation and ratified by the people most affected.

The respected financial services firm of Grant Thornton conducted a thorough review of recent developments in British Columbia: agreements in principle, court decisions and government policies. The study concluded that treaties deliver a large net positive financial and economic benefit for all residents of British Columbia.

We could probably extrapolate that. When certainty is given through agreements, economic ability to move forward is also given because of the consequences of not really knowing a boundary, a resource, the process of government, the people we are dealing with, or who has the jurisdiction. These tables have been put into an agreement which has been ratified two ways now. We are the third party here.

We are in a special position. We will debate the bill in this chamber, but then it will move to committee. I, as parliamentary secretary, together with members of our government will help other people who have concerns to understand. Sometimes at the end of the day, maybe that understanding will not be there. However, we will make our best effort to push for that understanding because it is in the best interests of Canadians to move these ratifications forward and to complete our task.

It should come as no surprise that there is only one economy and the more aboriginal people who participate in and contribute to the economy, the better off all Canadians will be.

The Tlicho people have been preparing to implement this agreement for up to 10 years. They have completed related accords with their aboriginal neighbours, secured the support of the territorial legislature in Yellowknife, and drafted and ratified a constitution. They have demonstrated a remarkable ability to negotiate mutually beneficial deals with partners from both the private and public sectors. It is now our turn to recognize these considerable accomplishments by establishing in law this new and respectful relationship with the Tlicho.

I sincerely urge all of my hon. colleagues to support Bill C-14. There will be time for them to make inquiries. There will be a way that we can strive to provide the answers they seek. However, I hope we all do this in the good faith that is needed to take this forward for the benefit of all Canadians.

Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government ActGovernment Orders

October 27th, 2004 / 5:05 p.m.
See context

NDP

Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB

Madam Speaker, it is a great pleasure to rise on behalf of the New Democratic Party to speak to Bill C-14. I am especially pleased to represent my party in voicing our views on the bill because it deals with a fundamental issue that is very dear to my heart, and that is the eventual emancipation of the aboriginal people.

The bill would give force and effect to an agreement that was laboriously negotiated among the parties to deal with the self-governance and land claims of the Tlicho people in the Northwest Territories. I am heartened today to hear the views of my colleague from the Bloc Quebecois and the views shared by my colleagues in the Liberal Party as they speak in favour of the bill and in favour of the House of Commons recognizing the legitimate aspirations and goals of freedom and self-governance of these people.

Let there be no doubt that the Tlicho people meet all the tests of being recognized, not only as a nation but as a people. They have a language, a rich culture, heritage and tradition. They had and have land and a land base that pre-dates Confederation and pre-dates European contact on this continent by not only hundreds of years but by millenniums.

I am pleased to voice the views of the New Democratic Party that the bill should have speedy passage through the House of Commons at this stage and be sent to committee where I hope it also gets favourable treatment.

However I was disappointed to hear some of the views and criticisms put forward by the representative of the official opposition, the member for Calgary Centre-North. I feel like I am having déjà vu because one of the proudest moments of my career as a member of Parliament to date was being able to advocate and speak on behalf of the Nisga'a deal, which was the only other contemporary or modern day treaty signed in recent history that dealt with self-governance and a land base.

It was our pleasure to see that bill through. It was one of the proudest moments of my career to stand and vote in favour of that bill but we also had to stand 472 extra times because the Reform Party of the day opposed self-governance for aboriginal people. The Reform Party of the day opposed the right to self-determination for aboriginal people. The Reform Party and later the Alliance Party did everything it could to block the Nisga'a deal, mostly using political mischief by moving 472 amendments to the bill which were clearly designed to block, delay and stall.

I am disappointed to see a repeat of this in that we are getting opposition to what should be a unanimously accepted bill. I am not convinced that we as members of the House of Commons should even have a right, frankly, to interfere with the passage of the bill. The bill was negotiated between the Tlicho people, the Government of the Northwest Territories and federal government representatives, and the agreement has been struck.

The bill we are passing today would simply give force and effect to an agreement that has already been made. Therefore it would be an extension of the paternalism that has plagued aboriginal people for any of us here today to start cracking open this agreement to say that we should not be allowing Indians this much land or this much money. That is not our place. It is not for a bunch of white guys in suits to make those rulings.

This has been a long process of very sensitive and delicate negotiations. Agreements were ratified in a laborious and comprehensive way of all the four communities within the traditional area of the Tlicho people. At this point in time they simply need the recognition and the enabling legislation for that agreement to be manifest in full force and effect in the traditional territory of the Tlicho people

It seems to me that Tom Flanagan is still writing aboriginal policy for the Canadian Alliance Party. Progressive Conservatives must be rolling over in their collective graves, if that party is in fact dead, to hear the opposition being put toward the bill today. It is sad.

The mindset among those who are opposed to the emancipation of aboriginal people is a mindset that is found in the title of the book by Mel Smith, a senior advisor on aboriginal affairs for the Canadian Alliance, called Our Home or Native Land . In the book he challenges the whole idea of any kind of a land claim by stating that it would create a third order of government that would somehow have primacy over federal government laws. That is complete fearmongering and we heard 20 minutes of that fearmongering today.

The Canadian Alliance would have us believe that somehow this modern day treaty would have primacy on international affairs, that this new first nation would actually be out there representing themselves and having primacy over the federal government. All of that is carefully pointed out in the bill, if anyone would take the time to read the actual contents. There is no question which order of government has primacy. There is no question what relatively minor local bylaws and things the Tlicho people will have authority over.

The taxation rights that are within the bill are what is possibly the most meaningful financial component of the bill. Because taxation is a spending matter, the bill has to be preceded by a ways and means motion. That is parliamentary procedure. There is nothing sinister about a ways and means motion introduced by a minister to precede spending matters. That is the way this place works.

I have had to sit here for seven years now and listen to some pretty extreme views from the Reform Party, then the Canadian Alliance Party, and now we are seeing fairly extreme views in opposition to the bill from the new incarnation, the Conservative Party. I remember the terrible view shared by the aboriginal affairs critic when I first arrived here, who said that living on an Indian reserve was like living on a south sea island being supported by a rich uncle. That was the enlightened viewpoint of the Canadian Alliance of that time.

Other people have said that just because we did not have Indian wars in this country does not mean that they are not a vanquished people, otherwise why would they live on those Godforsaken reserves we have put them on. We can look that up in Hansard . Those were the views shared by the Alliance members then and their views do not seem to be much more enlightened today.

I do not think anyone should be standing in the way of a self-government agreement that would actually see a people come out from underneath the tyranny of the Indian Act. We should be celebrating this in the House of Commons today, not finding ways to throw obstacles and barriers in the way.

I do not need to tell anyone that the Indian Act is outdated and paternalistic legislation that is unworthy of any modern democracy. Any time a group of people, such as the Tlicho and the Dogrib Treaty 11 territory, can find their way to come out from under that oppressive document, we should be celebrating that fact.

Those who are not steeped in the issue of aboriginal affairs probably are not aware that the Indian Act essentially strips people's rights away. I heard the hon. member for Calgary Centre-North say that we do not want to put in place a race based set of privileges, as if the Tlicho people will now have extra privileges that other white Canadians do not have. In actual fact, the obnoxious race based issue is the fact that the Indian Act is still dominating and controlling the lives of a million Canadians in the year 2004. That is the real tragedy and that is the race based issue that must be addressed.

We are satisfied that there has been a thorough and comprehensive education and then ratification process of all the parties involved in the land claim and self-government agreement. I know it was an exhaustive tour throughout the territory to reach every last resident within that territory for, first, education, then consultation and finally, ratification of the agreement as we see it today.

Let us not kid ourselves. There was a great deal of give and take in that negotiation process. I do not believe anybody got all that they wanted out of this package, such as is the nature of negotiations. There was a lot of compromise and cooperation.

The only thing we need to know is that all the players, all the people directly affected by this agreement, are comfortable with it. That includes the government of the Northwest Territories, the diamond mines that are resident in that area, owners of the resource properties there, the federal government negotiators and, most important, the representatives the Dogrib Treaty 11 Council.

We find no fault in the bill. We feel it is our duty and our obligation to take that information from the authorities who are directly affected by it and do everything we can to see speedy passage.

We have a window of opportunity here. This could be a very brief minority government. It would be an injustice and terribly unfair if we let this issue slide or if we somehow ground it to a halt to where it could not pass within the timeframe. We might be back in election as early as February or March of next year, God forbid. This is what we are told. That gives us very few sitting days to see Bill C-14 get through this stage in the House of Commons, committee, third reading, Senate, et cetera. We all know that whole process is fraught with pitfalls when there is political mischief afoot.

We are happy that the Nisga'a people saw social justice within their time. That was a century-long negotiating process where the Nisga'a people first took their grievances down to the parliament buildings in Victoria in a dugout canoe and were turned away at the door of the legislature.

It was a very emotional process, for me at least, as we went through the steps in this House. They were welcomed into the House of Commons by most of the political parties here. The whole process was welcomed and the final treaty was in fact ratified.

These modern-day treaties are difficult to put together because they contain two components, as has been rightfully pointed out. It is not just a land claim. It is a self-governance agreement. With that comes the richness of the idea of self-determination and a recognition of a whole people, the language and culture, the right to make laws and to chart their own destiny. That is what is really exciting and really heartening about this whole process.

Without going into a great deal of technical details, I do not think it is necessary to know what the intentions of the NDP caucus will be in association with the bill. We are satisfied that it meets the tests for which we would look. It is a deal that has been driven by the people it affects and there has been natural justice involved in the consultation and the ratification process. The people have spoken and I believe it is up to us to honour the message they send to us. This is an idea whose time has come and we want to see it recognized and implemented in this session of Parliament.

The bill has the support of the NDP caucus.

Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government ActGovernment Orders

October 27th, 2004 / 4:45 p.m.
See context

Bloc

Bernard Cleary Bloc Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to Bill C-14, an act to give effect to a land claims and self-government agreement among the Tlicho, the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Government of Canada, to make related amendments to the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, acts which are affected by the content of this new social contract.

Before I get to the heart of the matter, I would like to say that I had the pleasure of welcoming the grand chief of the Tlicho nation, Joe Rabesca, to my parliamentary office. With him were his chief negotiator and members of his council. The grand chief explained to me that the Tlicho people had been waiting for 14 months—ever since the agreement was signed—to close this chapter of their history.

He explained with conviction that the Tlicho people want to continue making progress toward Tlicho self-government. I could see in the grand chief's eyes that same spark of pride that I have seen so often in the eyes of many of Quebec's aboriginal chiefs, as a negotiator for the first nations, looking at the reality of their new social contract, after 10 years of difficult negotiations involving the Tlicho First Nation, the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Government of Canada.

The Tlicho agreement spells out land claims, recognizes and protects harvesting rights, establishes self-government and provides for the necessary funding. I want to assure grand chief Rabesca that—here in the House or in the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs, Northern Development and Natural Resources—the Bloc Québécois will support this agreement with all its energy and will make certain that the federal legislation is fully consistent with the agreement. The Tlicho people deserve such support.

The Bloc Québécois is completely in favour of this bill to implement the final agreement on the Tlicho. There are three main reasons for this position.

First, the Bloc Québécois is firmly committed to the idea of the first nations' right to self-government, and this agreement gives effect to that right. For this reason alone, we would have to support the underlying principle of this treaty.

Second, 84% of eligible voters were in favour of the Tlicho agreement in a referendum. The sovereignists can hardly oppose it.

Third, this agreement is an excellent example of self-government.

More generally speaking, the Bloc Québécois is concerned about aboriginal claims for self-government. It acknowledges the aboriginal peoples as distinct peoples with a right to their own cultures, languages, customs and traditions, as well as the right to direct the development of their own identity.

In a word, what we want for Quebeckers we also want for aboriginal peoples.

Bill C-14 is the last stepping stone in giving effect to the tripartite agreement that has been signed. The Tlicho are a people native to Canada whose ancestral lands are in the Northwest Territories. There are some 3,000 members of the Tlicho first nation, which was previously known as the Dogrib.

The Tlicho live on land located between Great Slave Lake and Great Bear Lake, in the heart of the Northwest Territories.

This is the first combined land claim and self-government agreement of its kind in the Northwest Territories.

The Tlicho agreement will bring certainty with respect to the rights, titles and obligations of the Tlicho, who have agreed not to exercise or assert any rights other than Treaty 11 rights and those set out in this agreement.

The Tlicho government will own a 39,000 square kilometre block of land, adjacent to or surrounding the four Tlicho communities, including sub-surface resources.

The Tlicho government will receive about $152 million over 14 years, as well as an annual share of resource royalties from development in the Mackenzie Valley.

Title to most land within the new community limits will be transferred to the Tlicho community governments. Third party interests with legal tenure will be protected.

The Tlicho government will have prescribed law-making powers on Tlicho lands and over Tlicho citizens off Tlicho lands. There will be a public community government in each Tlicho community established by territorial legislation.

A community government will have the power to enact laws relating to standard municipal matters. Subject to certain limitations, Tlicho citizens will have harvesting rights throughout the entire region at all times of the year.

A renewable resources board will be established to manage wildlife in Wekeezhii. The Tlicho government will be the custodian of heritage resources on Tlicho lands.

In consultation with government, the Tlicho government can name or rename lakes, rivers, mountains, and other geographic features and locations wholly within Tlicho lands, or in Tlicho communities, and that new name will be recognized as the official name.

The agreement gives the Tlicho the tools to achieve financial independence. The agreement also gives them more power to protect their lifestyle, stimulate economic growth and improve the welfare of their community.

Given the nature of the bill to give effect to the Tlicho agreement, it seems that the role of Parliament is to debate, and accept or reject, the bill. We need not amend this bill. It was duly endorsed by the three parties that negotiated it. In our view, amending this bill would be a show of paternalism that we want no part of.

We wish to reiterate that the Bloc Québécois endorses the key recommendations of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, which set out an approach to self-government built on the recognition of Aboriginal governments as a level of government with jurisdiction over questions concerning governance and the welfare of their people.

The entire report was based on recognition of the aboriginal peoples as independent nations occupying a unique place within Canada.

Congratulations to the Tlicho and good luck.

Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government ActGovernment Orders

October 27th, 2004 / 4:10 p.m.
See context

Conservative

Jim Prentice Conservative Calgary North Centre, AB

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to speak to Bill C-14, the Tlicho land claims and self-government act.

I would like at the outset to join my colleague in welcoming the Tlicho dignitaries to the House today. They are indeed a strong community with strong leadership. The questions of which I will speak in my comments relate less to the future direction of the Tlicho and more to the future direction of the government.

As the hon. members opposite are aware, I have a lengthy history in the country as an outspoken advocate in the resolution of both specific and comprehensive claims. In particular, as a private citizen and legal counsel, I served as the negotiator on the tripartite settlement of the Sturgeon Lake treaty land entitlement claim and more recently as a commissioner at the Indian Claims Commission, where I served as co-chair for almost 10 years.

I have been an outspoken advocate on the resolution of claims such as this and I have advocated institutional reform that would see claims resolved through an independent claims tribunal, which has the requisite independence from the federal crown. Through all that time, for nearly 20 years, I have advocated the resolution of claims, but I have also always advocated settlements which are founded on Canada's best long term interests, as well as the best interests of the aboriginal communities concerned.

I regret to say I am unable to support Bill C-14 in its current form. I do not believe that this legislation and the agreement which it brings into law, which is an aboriginal rights agreement pursuant to section 35 of the Canadian Constitution, have been fully negotiated and properly considered from Canada's point of view. The agreement gives rise to a constitutionally protected right. It does not amend the Canadian Constitution, but it does change it in the sense that it gives rise to a section 35 protected right.

I acknowledge that there are many aspects of the Tlicho agreement which are sound and represent a useful step forward in the negotiation of self-government arrangements. Indeed, this arrangement is unique. It is the first of its kind combining a comprehensive land claim with a self-government arrangement.

I would also say that I make no criticism of the lands and resources which have been allocated to the Tlicho under the agreement. I regard the agreement as a generous one. In that respect it will provide the Tlicho with the resources, both financial and otherwise, to build a partnership and a future in our federation.

Unfortunately, these positive aspects of the agreement are lost within a legislative scheme that raises serious national issues. Generally speaking, our concerns arise from the impact which the agreement will have on the governance of the country and the fact that it compromises to some degree Canada's capacity to exercise its international sovereignty.

Our opposition to the agreement is based upon our concerns that the approval of the agreement will impede the future governance of Canada. Furthermore, the passage of the agreement will create a precedent which will significantly erode federal constitutional jurisdiction in the north and also complicate Canada's international authority. In addition, important provisions of the agreement, most notably those pertaining to legislative paramountcy and concurrency and jurisdictional conflict, are internally contradictory and ultimately not decipherable in the agreement itself.

The agreement is the culmination of two separate negotiations. The first is the negotiation of the comprehensive claim which has been carried out pursuant to the federal government's comprehensive claims policy of 1986. In this respect the agreement has some similarities to the Nisga'a agreement. The second is the negotiation of the self-government arrangements which are based upon the 1995 inherent rights policy of the government. In this respect the agreement tracks the Westbank agreement.

The act gives the force of law to the tripartite agreement of August 25, 2003 and it accords that agreement paramountcy over the act itself and over any regulations which are passed pursuant to the act.

It is noteworthy and worth mentioning that the manner in which the agreement and the act have been placed before this Parliament are in effect by way of a notice of ways and means motion. This places Parliament and the House in the difficult position where it is an either all or nothing proposition, either the House effectively approves the legislation adopting the entire 208 page agreement or does not. There is no opportunity for the House to engage in a constructive amendment process.

Although the bill has received little public attention it is almost certainly the most significant such agreement considered by the Canadian government in recent years. The effect of the agreement is to create a third order of aboriginal government with concurrent but paramount authority, jurisdiction over the federal Crown in relation to matters affecting the Tlicho.

Moreover, the resultant Tlicho state is governed by a Tlicho constitution which is arguably paramount to the Canadian charter on the very terms of the constitution itself. The agreement also appears to acknowledge or perhaps confer some degree of international authority upon the Tlicho government. There are a number of provisions in the agreement that I would submit are flawed and debatable from a Canadian public policy perspective.

I will restrict my comments to four reasons why the agreement, as drafted, is damaging to the long term interests of Canada. First, I will refer to the absence of finality; second, to incursions upon Canada's international autonomy; third, jurisdictional confusion; and fourth, confusion surrounding the application of the charter as a primary instrument of Canadian law.

On the absence of finality, the agreement is a generous one in terms of lands, moneys and resources which are provided. It is worth noting that, as my friend said, the Tlicho lands will comprise as I understand it, the largest contiguous block of first nation owned land in Canada.

Unfortunately, as one who has negotiated specific claims, I am having some trouble understanding what concessions Canada has received in return for this.

Chapter 27.6.1 of the agreement provides that the Tlicho will also receive equivalent benefits to those granted in the future to any other aboriginal group in the Northwest Territories, whether by land claims agreement, self-government agreement, tax power exemption or legislation. In other words, the Tlicho agreement is clearly not a final agreement in the same sense that the Nisga'a agreement could be said to be a final agreement.

With respect to incursions upon Canada's international autonomy, the agreement contains several remarkable sections relating to international matters. I would point out for the benefit of the House that what is remarkable about those provisions is that they are a violation of the federal government's own policy relating to the negotiation of comprehensive claims. That policy states that powers relating to Canadian sovereignty are non-negotiable when the government is negotiating comprehensive claims, self-government arrangements.

Chapter 2.9 of the agreement states that it does not limit the authority of the Tlicho to enter into any international, national, interprovincial or interterritorial agreement which suggests by implication that the Tlicho government does have some authority to enter into such agreements. The agreement, moreover, contains the following remarkable provision which is self-explanatory. I refer to chapter 7.13.2:

Prior to consenting to be bound by an international treaty that may affect a right of the Tlicho Government, the Tlicho First Nation or a Tlicho Citizen, flowing from the Agreement, the Government of Canada shall provide an opportunity for the Tlicho Government to make its views known with respect to the international treaty eitherseparately or through a forum.

The agreement carries on in chapter 7.13.4, “to provide for an arbitration mechanism between the Government of Canada and the Tlicho government in respect of international legal obligations and disputes relating thereto”.

Furthermore, the Government of Canada is obligated under chapter 7.13.5 to consult with the Tlicho government before taking positions before an international tribunal in circumstances where the Tlicho government has taken action giving rise to an international legal controversy.

The clear implication of this is that the very jurisdiction that the federal government on its own principles said is non-negotiable has been negotiated and to some degree compromised. So, from the perspective of Canada, this agreement has compromised the international sovereignty of this country.

With respect to jurisdictional confusion, the provisions of the agreement relating to the future governance of this part of the Northwest Territories are, I would submit, poorly drafted and, in several respects, contradictory.

The intent or the effect of the agreement seems to have been to create a new order of aboriginal government with concurrent, although paramount, authority over the federal Crown in relation to matters concerning the Tlicho. The bill is very clear in making the provisions of the agreement paramount over the statute and over any regulations passed under the statute.

Unfortunately, the agreement itself is not internally consistent. It is contradictory, resulting in confusion regarding the concurrent and the paramount authority of the Government of Canada, the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Tlicho government.

The agreement addresses these interjurisdictional issues in at least three different places and prescribes three different distinct concepts of paramountcy. First, in chapters 7.7.2 through to 7.7.4, there is a hierarchy of authority which essentially flows as follows: first, federal legislation of general application; second, territorial legislation implementing Canada's international agreements; third, Tlicho law; fourth, territorial legislation of general application; and fifth, specific federal legislation relating to the Tlicho.

Yet, in chapter 2.8.3, there is a separate concept of paramountcy in that it makes the settlement legislation paramount over the provisions of any other legislation or the Tlicho laws. Yet the definition of settlement legislation in the statute refers to both territorial legislation and federal legislation.

In other words, this provision seems to create quite a differently hierarchy; namely, the following: first, the agreement; second, federal settlement legislation, which is presumably this bill; third, territorial settlement legislation; and fourth, other legislation for Tlicho laws. This is arguably inconsistent with the concepts outlined in chapters 7.7.2 through to 7.7.4.

Third, in chapter 2.10.7, there is yet another legislative hierarchy which applies in the event of an arbitration relating to jurisdiction or power, and it is entirely different. It outlines the following hierarchy: first, federal laws of overriding national importance; second, federal laws implementing international agreement obligations; third, other federal legislation; fourth, territorial legislation implementing Canada's international obligations; fifth, Tlicho laws; and sixth, other territorial legislation.

Certainly, the general scheme of the legislation is that the powers of the Tlicho government to enact laws are concurrent with those of the Government of Canada and the Government of the Northwest Territories.

The difficulty, from the provisions I have just outlined, is determining how and when the legislation of the Government of Canada is paramount, and how and when the legislation of the Tlicho government is paramount because there are multiple definitions that apply in the event of conflict. This will not be a good situation in the future as we determine who is responsible for what areas of activity.

Fourth, concerns the application of the charter and, frankly, the adoption of governance structures which may be inconsistent with the charter. The overall scheme created by the bill, the agreement and the Tlicho constitution appears to have implications for the application of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to Tlicho citizens. Although both the agreement and the Tlicho constitution speak of consistency with the charter, they do not say that they are bound by the charter.

It is noteworthy that the Tlicho constitution itself is very clear, in chapter 3.1, that the Tlicho constitution, not the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is the Tlicho nation's highest law. That is clearly expressed in the Tlicho constitution.

Frankly, the entire legislative scheme is quite unclear as to the constitutional relationship between the Constitution Act of Canada, the charter and the Tlicho constitution.

It creates a category of Canadians called Tlicho citizens, and prescribes an electoral system where only Tlicho citizens may be elected as the chief of the Tlicho community government. In addition, at least 50% of the elected councillors must be Tlicho citizens. To be a Tlicho citizen, one must be properly enrolled and registered, as I understand it, as a status Indian of Canada. The agreement clearly creates a segregated, racially based electoral system which does raise charter implications.

The Conservative Party believes that self-government must occur within the context of the Constitution of Canada. To ensure fairness and equality, the principles of the charter must apply to all Canadian citizens. Other claims such as the Nisga'a are very clear in stating that the charter binds the aboriginal self-government which is created. This document lacks that clarity.

Let me ensure that the record is clear as to my position. The future settlement of outstanding comprehensive claims must be pursued on the basis of a clear framework which balances the rights of aboriginal Canadians with those of the Canadian nation as a whole and, in particular, negotiated settlements must balance the economic and social needs of aboriginal Canadians with Canada's need for certainty and finality of terms.

Self-government agreements must reflect Canada's need for both efficacy and practicality in our institutional structure and constitutional harmony so as not to impede the future governance of Canada.

In our view the agreement has not been adequately considered from this perspective of Canada's overriding federal and international workability. In our view the agreement fails to satisfactorily balance the economic and social needs of the Tlicho on the one hand with Canada's need for certainty, finality of terms and constitutional workability on the other.

We would emphasize that this agreement has not been properly considered in that respect and that it is not in the best interests of Canada to approve a document which is contradictory on its very face, and which exacerbates the jurisdictional confusion in the north and potentially erodes Canada's federal authority and international autonomy.

The way in which the government has placed this statute, with the agreement attached, before Parliament precludes this honourable House from addressing in any significant way the issues which I have dealt with in my comments, real issues of legal significance. The House of Commons lacks the capacity in any meaningful way to address those issues because of the way in which the legislation has been brought forward.

Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government ActGovernment Orders

October 27th, 2004 / 3:45 p.m.
See context

Western Arctic Northwest Territories

Liberal

Ethel Blondin-Andrew LiberalMinister of State (Northern Development)

moved that Bill C-14, an act to give effect to a land claims and self-government agreement among the Tlicho, the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Government of Canada, to make related amendments to the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am proud today to affirm my support for Bill C-14 at second reading and for the Tlicho agreement at the heart of this proposed legislation.

I, and the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, share the same commitment and sentiments toward having this bill expeditiously passed through the House and on to the Senate. We are very committed to getting this through the whole process as quickly as we can.

First, I would like to offer my sincere thanks and heartfelt congratulations to the Tlicho people for achieving this monumental and historic agreement. The product of more than a decade of consultations and negotiations, the agreement between the Tlicho and the governments of Canada and the Northwest Territories was signed more than a year ago.

There are people responsible for realizing this agreement and they bear mentioning: the Grand Chief, Joe Rabesca, along with his chiefs from the various communities in the Tlicho territory; both his negotiating teams, including Mr. John B. Zoe, who is the chief negotiator, as well as Eddy Erasmus, and James Washie, the self-government specialist.

It is the first time that we are embedding a self-government agreement within the body of a claim. It is the second time actually, but it is the first time in the Northwest Territories. This is the work of those individuals, as well as Ted Blondin, who has worked on numerous claims, and the elders that accompany them generally.

Everything is done on a consensus basis and there is seldom a period when the elders are not there along the whole way of the process. Elders like Alexis Arrowmaker, who is the former chief and is well known to many politicians across the country. They have been there to support the negotiator and chiefs along the way.

There have been many such elders. They are not all with us today. It would be remiss for me not to recognize the legal team of Rick Salter, Art Pape, and Rick's son Colin Salter. They have dedicated themselves to providing the best legal advice that is available to the Dogrib team to come up with the most innovative document that addresses so many complicated issues.

The agreement is the product of a comprehensive and collaborative negotiation process among the Tlicho, Canada and the Northwest Territories. This agreement has already been ratified by the territorial legislature in Yellowknife and by the Tlicho. Furthermore, a comprehensive implementation plan is ready, and the Tlicho have already drafted and ratified a constitution.

It would be remiss of me not to say that I am particularly proud, since we have members of the team here today. In particular, we have Mr. Ted Blondin and Bertha Rabesca, who is the first Dogrib lawyer who was called to the bar in recent months. We are very proud of her and the work they have both done. We have them here today with us and we know that others are watching. We are grateful to them for the work that they have done.

Prior to finalizing the agreement, the Tlicho took responsibility for negotiating overlapping agreements with their aboriginal neighbours. These agreements have helped to clarify the boundaries of traditional lands and have improved relationships among aboriginal peoples in the north.

Enacting this legislation will send a clear and positive message across the country that Canada is committed to establishing a new relationship with aboriginal peoples based on mutual respect and recognition.

When Bill C-14 becomes law, some 3,000 Tlicho people will have the power to protect their way of life and control their land, resources and lives.

Under the Tlicho agreement, the Tlicho government will be created. I think it will be recreated because I always felt that the Tlicho always had their own way of governing themselves. Through it, the Tlicho people will own a 39,000 square kilometre block of land between Great Slave Lake and Great Bear Lake, the largest single block of first nations owned land in Canada.

The Tlicho government will receive about $150 million over 15 years. This will be used as a type of investment fund to promote social, cultural, educational and economic development in the area, as well as an annual share of resource royalties that the government receives from the development in the Mackenzie Valley.

Significantly, Bill C-14 would take the Tlicho people out from under the jurisdiction of the Indian Act. However, all federal legislation of general application, such as the Criminal Code, would continue to apply. Like all Canadians, the Tlicho would also be subject to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as they are now.

The Tlicho constitution outlines the roles and responsibilities of the Tlicho government and protects the democratic rights and freedoms of all those who reside on Tlicho lands. Non-Tlicho residents, for instance, may be appointed or elected to serve on Tlicho institutions. This says a lot about democracy in Tlicho territory within Canada.

The constitution also ensures that the government is politically and financially accountable to its constituents and that all laws that are enacted are open to legal challenges. Furthermore, the constitution enables anyone affected by Tlicho social programs to participate in decision making processes concerning the management and the delivery of that program.

The Tlicho government would replace four local band councils and the treaty No. 11 council now in the region. Tlicho legislative bodies would regulate daily life and have powers such as tax collection.

When the bill becomes law, the Tlicho will play a greater role in the management of land, water and other resources in most of their traditional territory.

The agreement would enable the Tlicho to exercise greater control over a variety of matters affecting their lives, including education, social services and economic development. Under the terms of the agreement, democratically elected Tlicho community governments would decide on matters related to zoning, business licensing and dozens of other local matters.

Although I am not a member of the Tlicho, I am Dene, I have worked closely and diligently with them over the years as a member of Parliament. It thrills me to see the Tlicho people who have entered into a new phase and giving full expression of their longstanding and historical aspiration for self-government and self-sufficiency, while demonstrating the greatest care and respect for their culture. Bill C-14 would help the Tlicho preserve a priceless heritage.

To succeed in an increasingly complex and rapidly changing economy, northerners must first acquire the broad base of knowledge needed to learn and apply advanced skills. I am convinced that the surest way to instill this knowledge is to hire qualified educators, teach relative curricula and maintain a nurturing environment. Bill C-14 would enable the Tlicho to do all these activities.

The Tlicho have long appreciated the importance of education. For centuries, succeeding generations of elders have passed on the skills and traditions of their ancestors. This profound respect for learning has also enabled the Tlicho to adapt swiftly and survive in a harsh climate and an unforgiving landscape.

When Canadian companies first began to investigate the feasibility of constructing a pipeline along the Mackenzie Valley, Tlicho leaders recognized the project would have a dramatic impact on the way of life of the Dene people. The grand chief at the time said that the people would become strong like two people if they went forward, that they would learn to blend elements of northern and southern cultures and take advantage of new technologies and emerging opportunities.

More than three decades ago, Tlicho Chief Jimmy Bruneau called for new schools in his communities to teach a curriculum that balanced aboriginal and non-aboriginal traditions. In 1971 the Chief Jimmy Bruneau School opened in the Tlicho community of Rae-Edzo. These are a people who have always been progressive, who have always looked at the opportunities and have always found a way to go forward with those opportunities.

Within a few years, Canada's first aboriginal school board had assumed control of primary education in all four Tlicho communities. A regional secondary school was added in 1992 and, true to Tlicho tradition, adults can attend the same classes as children. As a result, the number of adult students has climbed steadily.

The Tlicho-controlled schools have had a significant and positive impact on their communities. Thirty-three years ago only a handful of Tlicho had ever graduated from high school. Today there is a significant increase in the number of high school graduates, while dozens of others pursue degrees and diplomas at colleges and universities across Canada.

The Tlicho understand that classroom education plays a vital role in the survival of their culture and the sustainability of their communities. Education enables them to participate fully in the economy and to develop the professionalism, expertise and leadership needed to realize their full potential.

These investments in bicultural education have paid off handsomely in recent years. The Tlicho indeed have become very strong.

Let us consider for a moment the nature of the agreements that the Tlicho secured with multinational corporations. They have secured with Diavik and BHP Billiton, two diamond mining companies that operate near the Tlicho communities. Right in the impact area is where the Tlicho communities are located. Tlicho negotiators ensured that the benefits will continue to flow long after the mines have closed.

The agreements ensure that the Tlicho receive payments into a scholarship fund and that the companies invest in social and recreational programs. The agreements also grant the Tlicho numerous employment and contract opportunities. To take full advantage of these opportunities, the Tlicho established several band owned companies and founded partnerships with several aboriginal and non-aboriginal groups.

One of these partnerships, I & D Management Services, is a consortium of Inuit and Dene groups. The company is a human resource agency and currently supplies more than 100 employees, including 50 aboriginals, to mine projects in the north. While these jobs are important to the short term health of northern communities, of greater significance is the expertise acquired by I & D Management Services. With this expertise, the company will be well placed to provide services to future projects.

The Tlicho have long been keen to collaborate on projects that benefit their people and respect the environment. A run of the river hydro generating station, for instance, was established years ago on the Snare River. The project, a joint venture with Northwest Territories Power Corporation, supplies 7% of the territory's capacity.

In another instance, this one with the private firm of ATCO Frontec, also enables the Tlicho to acquire the expertise needed to initiate and participate in future projects. The two partners established a new company, Tli Cho Logistics, to provide services to northern mines. Today more than 130 people, including approximately 50 Tlicho, work for Tli Cho Logistics. These numbers may have shifted but they are what we are working with today.

The partnership deal is relatively simple yet uniquely advantageous to both parties. The Tlicho own 51% of Tli Cho Logistics while ATCO Frontec controls 49%. During the first few years, ATCO handled nearly all of the new company's administrative and managerial work. Unskilled jobs went to Tlicho people. During the past few years, though, ATCO has helped the Tlicho acquire the skills needed to manage and administer the company.

This incremental transfer of technical skills benefits both parties. ATCO Frontec gets significant interest in a company likely to generate profits for many years to come. The Tlicho acquire expertise and experience that can readily be applied to other ventures.

Bill C-14 would ensure that the Tlicho can expand their model of building community capacity through partnership and education. The bill would grant them the land, legal status and financial resources they need to realize their full potential.

To make the most of this agreement though, the Tlicho must develop a professional class of managers, lawyers, doctors and teachers, and I think they are doing that. They will also need a whole array of other technical expertise. Rather than hire professionals from outside their community the Tlicho are determined to train, develop and employ their own people.

Today the Tlicho support many of their people in post-secondary institutions. In recent years a growing number of Tlicho have returned to their communities, eager to put their training and their diplomas and degrees to work. Drawing from Tlicho culture and their formal studies, current and future graduates will assume leadership positions in their communities and will pass on age old lessons to a new generation of young people.

I would like to highlight the hard work of Mrs. Bertha Rabesca who has worked tirelessly on the Tlicho agreement and is the very first Tlicho person to obtain a law degree. I am very proud of her and congratulate her on leading the way for her people in this regard.

Today is a day to celebrate. We have miles to go on this legislation. We have a lot of work to do collectively in the House. I say to my colleagues in the House that this is an innovative piece of work. This is what the real Canada is all about. It is about allowing people to do for themselves and empowering people with a document that they have helped to build and that they have designed. Let this be the way forward for others.

The Akaitcho chiefs from the Northwest Territories were here today to celebrate with the Tlicho. They also are in the process of negotiating land claims. I would like to see the day when not only the Akaitcho but the Deh Cho First Nations, on whose land 40% of the pipeline will go through, along with the Saulteaux, will see a day such as this for themselves. Our wish for the whole territory is that we complete the agenda of all the claims that are in progress and also the self-government agreements.

Bill C-14 would grant some 3,500 people the power to protect their ancient traditions and control their land, resources and communities. I urge my hon. colleagues to support me and to celebrate with me the work that the Tlicho have done on the way forward for Canada.

Business of the HouseOral Question Period

October 21st, 2004 / 3:05 p.m.
See context

Hamilton East—Stoney Creek Ontario

Liberal

Tony Valeri LiberalLeader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, we will continue this afternoon with the debate on the Conservative opposition day motion.

On Friday we will debate a motion of reference before second reading of Bill C-10, the mental disorder legislation. We will then turn to a motion of reference before second reading of Bill C-12, the Quarantine Act amendments. We will then resume this debate commencing on Tuesday and follow it with second reading of Bill C-7, the parks reorganization, and Bill C-8, the public service human resources agency bill.

We would then turn to second reading of Bill C-14, the Tlicho legislation. This will be followed by reference before second reading of Bill C-13, the DNA bill, followed by Bill C-9, the Quebec regional development bill.

Next Thursday will be an allotted day.

On Monday, instead of a normal sitting of the House, there will be an address to both Houses by President Fox of Mexico. This will take place at 2:15 p.m.

With respect to my hon. friend's last question, that legislation will be coming forward in due course.