Bill C-47 (Historical)

Northern Jobs and Growth Act

An Act to enact the Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act and the Northwest Territories Surface Rights Board Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts

Part 1 enacts the Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act, which implements certain provisions of Articles 10 to 12 of the land claims agreement between the Inuit of the Nunavut Settlement Area and Her Majesty the Queen in right of Canada that was ratified, given effect and declared valid by the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement Act, which came into force on July 9, 1993.
Part 2 enacts the Northwest Territories Surface Rights Board Act, which implements provisions of certain land claim agreements. In particular, that Act establishes the Northwest Territories Surface Rights Board, whose purpose is to resolve matters in dispute relating to terms and conditions of access to lands and waters in the Northwest Territories and the compensation to be paid in respect of that access.

Opposition Motion—Aboriginal Canadians

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to speak to this motion, tabled by the hon. member for Nanaimo—Cowichan. I appreciate the working relationship that we have on the standing committee.

Our government's number one focus is on creating jobs, economic growth and long-term prosperity for all Canadians, aboriginal and non-aboriginal alike. We are seeing the results of this work. As the Prime Minister said yesterday, the global economy remains fragile but Canada has produced more than 900,000 net new jobs in recent years. This is no small feat in the current economic climate.

As we move forward in 2013, our focus remains the economy. We know that in continuing to develop, provide our children with access to good education, train for the job skills of tomorrow, reduce red tape and equip our businesses to succeed worldwide, this includes expanding opportunities for aboriginal peoples to fully participate in the economy. We know there are tremendous opportunities to promote and encourage greater aboriginal participation in the economy and we remain committed to working with willing partners to do exactly that. We are focused on removing barriers to economic development on reserve, helping aboriginal people develop the skills they need to enter the workforce and providing first nation communities and the regions they are located in with greater autonomy to manage their own land and resources.

We can all agree that increasing aboriginal participation in the economy is one of the most effective ways to improve the well-being and quality of life of aboriginal peoples in Canada. It is also vital to Canada's future economic prosperity.

Since the economic action plan was implemented in response to the global economic crisis, Canada has recovered almost all of the output and jobs lost during the recession. The number of jobs has gone up by more than 750,000 since July 2009, and it is now 260,000 higher than the peak reached before the recession, which represents the highest job growth among the G7 countries. These figures are very reassuring to Canadians, in light of the continuing economic uncertainty around the world.

Key to our economic strength is the continued participation of aboriginal peoples in the economy. The natural resource sector is an important case in point. Canada's natural resource sector employs close to 800,000 Canadians. The mining sector is the largest private employer of aboriginal people, who make up some 7.5% of its workforce. Aboriginal people represent 4.3% of the energy sector's workforce and 10% of the oil sands' workforce. The resource sectors also generate billions of dollars' worth of tax royalties and revenues annually to help pay for government programs and services.

Our resource strength is set to continue to expand well into the future. We currently estimate that over the next decade there will potentially be as many as 600 new projects, representing more than $650 billion in investments, across the country in resource development. Some of these will be taking place in northwestern Ontario in the great Kenora riding. These projects will create jobs across our region and throughout Canada and will continue to substantially improve our country's economic prosperity. In fact, the numbers continue to climb as new opportunities are identified.

Resource development is vitally important to aboriginal communities across Canada. Take, for example, Fort McKay First Nation in Alberta. It has the largest business relationship with oil sands producers of any first nation community. Fort McKay has gone from having a single janitorial contract in 1986 to running corporations with reported earnings in 2008 of over $120 million. Unemployment in the community is under 5%. It has a youth centre, a health clinic, and a new housing complex with a hundred homes rented to community members.

Prior to the development of diamond mines in the Northwest Territories, the Tlicho First Nation had small, local businesses in traditional pursuits. Today, it has far more diversified economic activity ranging from retailing to multi-million dollar mining service companies.

There are many more examples of our government partnering with aboriginal communities on resource development projects through the aboriginal business development program. The Kitsaki mining limited partnership is a $3 million commercial mining extraction equipment project for use in the operations of the open-pit and underground La Ronge gold mine project of Golden Band Resources in Saskatchewan. Our government contributed $1.1 million to this project.

Just last week, the minister was in British Columbia to announce new regulations under the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act that would allow for the Kitimat LNG liquefied natural gas facility on the Haisla First Nation's Bees Indian Reserve No. 6 to move forward. This natural gas facility will provide Canada's energy producers with a doorway to overseas markets, in addition to creating well-paying skilled jobs and economic opportunities for the Haisla First Nation and the entire northwestern region of British Columbia.

These economic development projects obviously have economic spinoffs for all sectors of the Canadian economy, and especially for first nations communities. That is why it is important for Canada to do what is necessary to attract international investments in the provinces and territories. This includes regulatory reform north and south of the 60th parallel.

Regulatory processes that are simplified and clearly laid out will give businesses the confidence they need to take advantage of economic opportunities and maximize the use of the resource sector to create jobs for Canadians across Canada, including aboriginal peoples, while still protecting the environment.

In 2009, the government fundamentally changed the way it does business with aboriginal peoples. Instead of promoting economic development using an outdated, ad hoc approach that we had seen used by prior governments, we are focused on forging strategic partnerships with willing partners and developing innovative ways to overcome the traditional structural barriers to economic opportunity in aboriginal communities.

This includes growing private sector partnerships and investment; strengthening aboriginal entrepreneurship; having small business centres on reserves, including isolated and remote first nation communities; developing the aboriginal labour force through skills and trade investments in HRSDC; and enhancing the value of aboriginal assets.

Through this approach, our government is working with its partners to ensure that aboriginal peoples benefit from the same job, income and wealth creation opportunities as other Canadians.

On average, we have created or contributed over $45 million annually to support aboriginal business development, aboriginal participation in large-scale energy and resource development projects and improved access to capital for aboriginal business development opportunities.

We are also working with aboriginal peoples to remove the structural barriers that are holding them back from fully participating in the economy. For example, just this past month the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development announced that eight more first nations will soon be operating or developing their land codes under the First Nations Land Management Act. These eight first nations joined the 18 first nations that were added last January, bringing the total number of first nations benefiting from this regime to 69 first nation communities. This regime gives first nations freedom from the 34 land-related sections under the Indian Act, and provides them with greater autonomy by taking the minister out of the equation and giving them back control over their reserve lands and its resources. More specifically, first nations can now determine how they want to develop, protect, and use their own land on reserve.

The benefits of this regime are clear. First nations operating with their own land codes are successfully taking advantage of more and more economic development opportunities because they are able to operate at the speed of business. Imagine that.

For example, Whitecap Dakota First Nation in Saskatchewan has been operating under the First Nations Land Management Act since 2004. Since that time, over 700 jobs have been created in the community and currently generate approximately $90 million in revenue annually. It is incredible.

Last spring, Bill C-38 amended the FNLMA to enable first nations operating under the act to further unlock the economic development potential of their reserve lands. These amendments simplified the process of developing their own land codes, further removing the legislative barriers that were preventing or delaying first nations from taking full advantage of the benefits of assuming full responsibility for their lands under FNLMA.

More recently, as part of Bill C-45, the Jobs and Growth Act, 2012, our government introduced amendments to the land designation provisions of the Indian Act that will allow first nations to more quickly pursue economic development opportunities through leasing portions of the reserve land while retaining full ownership of their lands. These amendments respond to many first nations who have expressed frustration at the cumbersome and time-consuming process that existed previously and which had negatively impacted their ability to attract and retain investors at the speed of business.

Unfortunately, there has been a lot of misinformation spread in the media and in the first nation communities as to what these amendments involve. I want to reiterate that these amendments have nothing to do with land surrender. They have to do with the leasing of land for economic development purposes through a decision-making process that takes place in first nation communities by their citizens and their government. It really is as simple as that.

Our government is working with our aboriginal partners as well as with the provincial and territorial governments and the private sector to increase aboriginal participation in key sectors of the Canadian economy.

For example, in 2010, we launched the strategic partnerships initiative, which helps aboriginal Canadians take advantage of complex, market-driven opportunities for resource development, particularly in priority economic sectors such as forestry, fisheries, mining, energy and agriculture.

To this day the initiative has supported more than 60 aboriginal communities and some of the largest resource development opportunities across Canada, including the Ring of Fire in northern Ontario and the Lower Churchill energy project in Atlantic Canada.

However, we are not only focused on resource projects south of 60. We also know that Canada's north is home to world-class natural resources, representing tremendous economic potential.

During his trip to the north this past August, the Prime Minister stated that our government is committed to ensuring that northerners benefit from the tremendous reserves of natural resource found in their region. For the benefits to flow, it is necessary to get resource projects up and running in an effective, responsible and sustainable way, to put agreements in place with territorial governments and first nations to ensure that revenues generated by these initiatives are to their direct benefit and stay where they belong, up in the north.

To this end, our government has taken significant steps to reduce red tape and streamline regulatory requirements in the north. We introduced Bill C-47, the northern jobs and growth act, in the House of Commons on November 6, 2012. This bill is currently before committee and if passed into law will increase certainty and help create a better climate for private sector investment and development across the territories. The bill includes the Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act and the Northwest Territories Surface Rights Board Act. It also includes amendments related to the Yukon Surface Rights Board Act.

These measures fulfill outstanding legislative obligations under the Nunavut land claim agreement, as well as the Gwich'in and Sahtu land claim agreements. They also respond to calls from aboriginal groups, government and the private sector for improvements to regulatory processes in the north.

Improving the regulatory regimes for the abundant natural resources in the north could help Canada prosper and could create billions of jobs for decades. The meaningful action we are taking in the Northern Jobs and Growth Act will help release this potential.

Our government will continue to develop Canada's abundant natural resources to benefit Canadians, including aboriginal peoples. We have a vision of a future in which the aboriginal peoples are autonomous and prosperous, manage their own activities and make a significant contribution to the well-being of the entire country.

Our government continues to take concrete steps to build the conditions necessary for aboriginal communities to participate more fully in Canada's economy.

In closing, we remain committed to working with willing partners to improve the long-term prosperity, health and sustainability of aboriginal people, their communities and all Canadians.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Joliette.

The motion before us reads:

That the House, recognizing the broad-based demand for action, call on the government to make the improvement of economic outcomes of First Nations, Inuit and Métis a central focus of Budget 2013, and to commit to action on treaty implementation and full and meaningful consultation on legislation that affects the rights of Aboriginal Canadians, as required by domestic and international law.

I want to take some time to focus on the Northwest Territories, which is a singularly unique area of Canada where we have settled and unsettled claims. We found the best way to improve the economic situation of our indigenous people in the Northwest Territories is to settle land resources and self-government claims.

In the parts of the Northwest Territories where the claims have been settled, people have increased prosperity and the private sector, which wants to invest there, has certainty in the regulatory process. That is very clear. The opposite is true for those areas of the Northwest Territories, which still have unsettled claims.

In testimony before the members of aboriginal affairs and northern development committee during hearings in Yellowknife on Bill C-47, the N.W.T. and Nunavut Mining Associations and the N.W.T. Chamber of Commerce both stressed the value of having settled claims.

There are some examples of how settled claims can improve the economic situation of first nations people, Inuit people, and I will speak to two of them.

One is the Inuvialuit. The Inuvialuit were the first to settle their claims in the Northwest Territories. They did a very good job of it in 1984, with excellent claim settlement. They took over large pieces of their traditional territory. They got surface and subsurface rights in the oil-rich Mackenzie Delta and the Beaufort Sea area. They were in a position to take advantage of resource development, resource exploration in that area, and they have built an amazing Inuvialuit Development Corporation, which owns outfits like Canadian North Aviation. Members may have flown on it themselves. It owns the Northern Transportation Company Limited. It has investments and opportunities for Inuvialuit people throughout the Northwest Territories, at all levels of employment.

It is through this settlement that the Inuvialuit were to get their heads into economic development, rather than spending their time trying to fight with the federal government over land claim settlements.

We could talk about the Tlicho government, settled under the Liberal government in 2004. Its land extends through diamond-rich areas of the Northwest Territories. It has rights to large areas of land, surface, subsurface. It has opportunities on that land. What has it done with them? It has created the Tlicho Development Corporation. That development corporation, in less than 10 years, has gross revenue in excess of $130 million, employing 800 people.

This is the kind of effort that could be made by first nations when they achieve control over traditional lands and territories, not when they are stuck on reserves, not when they do not have the opportunity to participate fully in the resource economy.

However, this is not the case in the areas of the Northwest Territories that do not have settled claims. In the Dehcho and the Akaitcho regions, both incredibly rich areas of the Northwest Territories, the Dehcho with its gas deposits, the Akaitcho once again with mining and great opportunities as well, negotiations on land claims are stalled. They have been stalled with the government for many years.

Much of the fault lies with the federal government through actions like continually changing negotiators, never giving negotiators the ability to make decisions, revisiting areas which have been agreed to in negotiations and changing negotiation mandates. These are all things that completely obfuscate the system.

In these two regions there is much uncertainty. The investment is difficult. Now there are brave companies, and I speak of Avalon as one company that is going through the environment assessment process. It won awards for its ability to talk to the first nations in those regions and to bring them into the process themselves.

We see industry taking over the role of government in providing the authority to first nations to make decisions on their land. That is what it takes in unsettled areas.

Chief Roy Fabian of the K'atl'odeeche First Nation recently told the aboriginal affairs committee the following during hearings on Bill C-47 on the Surface Rights Board Act:

This legislation is a serious matter that strikes at the heart of Treaty 8 and jeopardizes our attempt at reconciliation with Canada. The legislation appears to be an attempt to circumvent our land claims process and undermine our authority over our lands.

...I want to make it clear that this Bill, if passed, will not be recognized as valid law on Katlodeeche territory. If the federal government attempts to impose this legislation on our Treaty land then we will consider our legal options to oppose this legislation and resist every attempt to grant an access order on our land.

Where does that leave industry? Where does that leave certainty? Where are we going with that? That is not working, is it?

Chief Fabian highlights a key element in current federal-aboriginal relations, namely that federal action or inaction is causing a rising sense of dissatisfaction among Canada's first nations, its aboriginal people, leading to movements like Idle No More. It is leading directly there. It is leading to a movement that we can all get behind: we should not all be idle on this issue. We should not be obfuscating. We should not be trying to make this a harder thing to accomplish, to get land claims settled in this country.

Canada's aboriginal people are no longer content to just sit patiently while Ottawa gets around to finally addressing their concerns. They are idle no more. Congratulations to first nations. Congratulations should come from all Canadians. We are glad they are idle no more. We are glad they are standing up for their rights. We are glad they are standing up for the land and the environment. These are things that have to be done. They are not getting done by the government. First nations can provide the leadership.

Canada's first nations want full settlement of their claims on traditional territories and will not wait while federal negotiators play games. They will be idle no more when it comes to getting these claims settled.

Canada's aboriginal people want to be treated fairly. They want to build the economies of their communities and regions. They are not opposed to development. I have shown that. They want to be full partners in development have a say in how it occurs. However because of delays by the federal government, they are no longer willing to wait.

Canadians should get behind them. Let us all be idle no more when it comes to first nation issues.

[John Duncan, Conservative, Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to speak to the motion by the member for Nanaimo—Cowichan. The member's motion calls for improved economic outcomes for first nations, Inuit and Métis, and a commitment on treaty implementation and meaningful consultation on legislation with aboriginal peoples in Canada.

I am proud of our government's record on improving the lives of aboriginal people in Canada. Since 2006, our government has made unprecedented investments that will make a concrete difference in the lives of aboriginal people, including skills training, housing on reserves, potable water, schools, treaty rights, protection of the rights of women and the resolution of land claims.

For example, we have built over 30 new schools on reserve and renovated more than 200 others. We have invested in a major way in safe drinking water systems. We have built over 10,000 new homes and renovated thousands more. We have increased funding for child and family services by 25%. We have legislated that the Canadian Human Rights Act will apply to first nation individuals living on reserves. This was a glaring discriminatory provision in the Canadian Human Rights Act, which we reversed, over the objections of the opposition.

We introduced legislation to improve the accountability of first nation governments to their people. We introduced legislation to create an open and transparent elections process, necessary for economic development. We have settled over 80 outstanding land claims, many of which had been languishing for 20 years in the hopper. We have invested in over 700 projects, linking aboriginals across Canada with job training and counselling services.

I have had a long history with first nations and have seen a lot of change over the years. I am very encouraged to see firsthand many examples of strong first nation leadership driving very positive change.

Aboriginal peoples represent the fastest growing population in Canada. Given the country's labour shortages and the proximity of first nation communities to resource development projects, there is a tremendous economic opportunity before us. That is why we have consistently invested in measures to improve aboriginal participation in the economy.

Like economic action plan 2012, economic action plan 2013 will be focused on jobs and opportunities for all Canadians, including first nations, Inuit and Métis.

Finding ways to ensure that first nations can benefit from resource development is a priority. It is good for first nations, for Canada, for our Métis and for our Inuit. Our government is investing in measures that will help ensure that first nations are well-positioned to take advantage of these and other economic opportunities. For example, our government has invested in over 700 initiatives to link aboriginal people with job training, mentoring and other supports. We also invest more than $400 million annually in direct funding for aboriginal skills development and training.

My department's major projects and investment funds initiative has also contributed over $22 million to support aboriginal participation in 87 energy and resource projects, such as hydro, mining, renewable energy and forestry. These contributions have helped create over 400 jobs and levered just over $307 million from public and private debt and equity financing sources.

In addition to these investments, our government has worked to modernize legislation to allow first nations and aboriginal organizations to operate at the speed of business. Last year, our government introduced Bill C-27, the first nations financial transparency act to allow first nations community members access to the same basic financial information about their government and their elected officials available to all other Canadians.

More specifically, the bill would require first nation elected officials to publish their statements of remuneration and expenses as well as their audited consolidated financial statements. The bill would provide community members with the information required to make informed decisions about their leadership and to provide investors with the confidence they need to enter into financial partnerships with first nations.

Now that the legislation is before the Senate committee, we hope to see it passed into law very soon.

The first nations financial transparency act was driven by grassroots first nation members who were calling for greater accountability from their governments. Many of these people have suffered retribution, including intimidation and verbal and physical abuse, for having spoken in support of greater transparency and accountability.

Another important legislative initiative that would foster jobs and economic growth is Bill C-47, the northern jobs and growth act, which includes the Nunavut planning and project assessment act and the Northwest Territories surface rights board act, along with related amendments to the Yukon Surface Rights Board Act. Together, these measures would fulfill outstanding obligations under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, as well as the Gwich'in and Sahtu land claims agreements, and respond to calls for measures to streamline and improve regulatory processes in the north. The bill is currently being studied by the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.

Amendments to the land designation sections of the Indian Act that comprised a portion of Bill C-45 would also create economic opportunities. These amendments would speed up the process for leasing lands for economic development purposes, while allowing first nations to maintain full ownership of their lands. As a result, it would provide greater flexibility for first nations to act on time-sensitive economic development opportunities. These amendments responded directly to first nations who had expressed frustration to me, to the standing committee and to other members with the overly complex and lengthy process of designating land, which was an impediment to investment opportunities.

I quote from Chief Shane Gottfriedson, chief of the Tk'emlúps Indian Band in British Columbia, speaking about these changes to the land designation process in Bill C-45. “[Before the changes] it was just horrific for us to try and do any sort of business within our territory”.

Chief Reginald Bellerose of the Muskowekwan First Nation in Saskatchewan also spoke in favour of the changes: “[Muskowekwan First Nation] recognizes the positive steps the federal government has made to assist First Nation communities to operate in a more efficient and commercial manner. Specifically, Bill C-45 provides for a more efficient land designation vote process”.

We have heard from first nations that they want to be able to move at the speed of business and we continue to work with willing partners to remove economic barriers to the success of first nation communities as they seek out opportunities to generate wealth for their communities and their members.

If further proof was needed that legislative action can speed economic development, I would like to point to my announcement just last week on new regulations under the First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act that will allow the Kitimat natural gas facility on the Haisla First Nation's Bees Indian Reserve No. 6 to move forward. The Kitimat LNG facility will provide Canada's energy producers with a doorway to overseas markets. It will create well-paying jobs and economic growth opportunities for the Haisla First Nation and the entire northwest region of British Columbia.

We have also invested in modernizing the land management regimes for first nations so that they can unlock the potential of their lands and natural resources. This past month I announced that eight more first nations will soon be operating under the First Nations Land Management Act. These first nations have chosen freedom from 34 land-related sections of the Indian Act, which were holding them back from achieving their full economic potential. They now have power over their own reserve lands and resources so that they can take advantage of economic activities without wading through bureaucratic red tape.

This is in addition to 18 other first nations that I announced last January, making a total of 69 first nations that can now develop their own land codes, which will allow them to more quickly and effectively pursue economic opportunities and create jobs. Through these initiatives we are putting in place the building blocks for future success. These foundational pieces will help prepare communities to take advantage of new economic opportunities available to them.

We are a business-like government. We like to obtain concrete results. We are making unprecedented investments in the spirit of partnership and we recognize historical grievances. This is why we have settled outstanding land claims that have been long languishing.

The government is committed to continue building on the progress we have made to improve living conditions for first nations and to create jobs and economic opportunities in their communities. Specifically, we are committed to expediting comprehensive claims and treaty implementation. We all recognize that while much progress has been made, more work remains to be done. We are taking steps to improve land claim and self-government negotiation processes. This includes identifying alternatives to negotiations that meet the interests of the parties as well as practical measures to make sure that first nations are ready and able to fully engage and participate in the process.

In some cases there are alternatives to comprehensive claims and we are good with that. For example, the Haisla, the Squamish First Nation and Westbank First Nation are not specifically interested in pursuing treaties. They realize there are other measures that can and have been put in place, which are expediting the conditions for economic prosperity for their communities. We are also involved currently in self-government negotiations on a number of historic treaties. An example of that is the Sioux Valley Dakota First Nation in Manitoba, where we anticipate imminently the conclusion of self-government negotiations.

There is a clear link between the strength of the relationship and the economic prosperity of first nations and all Canadians. Protection of aboriginal treaty rights and consultations with aboriginals are enshrined in our laws, which have been passed by this Parliament. This government fully respects our duty to consult. That is why we have conducted more than 5,000 consultations annually. As minister, I have visited over 50 first nation communities since 2010 and I have had hundreds of productive meetings with first nation chiefs, councillors and community members across Canada.

This government also undertook unprecedented consultations on Bill S-8, the safe drinking water for first nations act. We are currently in the midst of intensive consultations with first nation leaders, teachers, students and educators in the development of a first nation education act. I would like to highlight some of the important work that has been done on the development of a first nation education act.

In economic action plan 2012, our government committed to work with willing partners to establish a first nation education act that will establish the structures and standards to support strong and accountable education systems on reserve. Through intense consultations, we have committed to work with willing partners to have the legislation in place by September 2014. We are determined to follow through on this commitment.

First nation students are the only children in Canada whose education system is not governed by legislation. Our government, unlike previous governments, is committed to bringing forward such legislation. The legislation would provide the modern framework necessary to build standards and structures, strengthen governance and accountability, and provide the mechanism for stable, predictable and sustainable funding.

I would like to add that, as recently as yesterday, I met with the first nation education steering committee in British Columbia. We have other examples, such as Mi’kmaw Kina’matnewey in Nova Scotia, where these parameters are already in place. An important part of our consultation is to meet with first nation authorities that have already done much work in this area and are obtaining results of the kind that are setting a great example.

We are making other investments. We have also invested an additional $100 million over three years to help ensure readiness for the new education system to be put in place by September 2014. We committed an incremental $175 million, on top of the $200 million that we spend on an annual basis, to new school projects. It is unfortunate that the member who brought forward today's motion chose to vote against these investments in first nation education.

This past December I announced the launch of intensive face-to-face consultation with first nation parents, students, leaders, educators and others on the initiative. The first in a series of sessions began in Halifax last week. The second session will be in Saskatoon next week.

I want to state very clearly that there is no legislation drafted. The purpose of these ongoing consultations is to get views and feedback so that legislation can be drafted. The input gathered during consultations will help shape the drafting of the legislation. Once drafted, the proposed legislation will be shared with every first nation across Canada, as well as with provincial governments and other stakeholders for feedback.

Modern land claims and self-government agreements can also provide a path to self-sufficiency and unlock economic opportunities. We are working in partnership with first nations on a new results-based approach to treaty and self-government negotiations to achieve more treaties in less time so that aboriginal communities can begin to unlock economic opportunities that can be realized through treaties.

Under the new approach, our government will focus its resources on tables with the greatest potential for success to bring treaties to fruition. The chief commissioner of the B.C. Treaty Commission is strongly supportive of our new approach, saying that she is encouraged our government is accelerating progress. We have heard first nations' concerns and we are delivering necessary change. It is also clear that there are options to the treaty process. Our goal is to achieve treaties where we can and to develop options to treaties where we cannot.

I will conclude by saying that moving forward will take time and dedicated effort from all parties. We are fully committed to taking further steps along this journey. We will continue to focus on real structural reforms and increasing the effectiveness of long-term investments.

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

In your view, can you explain the importance of the land use plans in helping to ensure environmental protections? I noted in your comments that you said well-being relies on sustainable use. Working from that, obviously ensuring environmental protection is of utmost importance to your group. Do you see any of those issues within Bill C-47? For the most part, do you concur with all of the environmental uses that are moving forward with Bill C-47?

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks for coming here today.

With regard to Bill C-47, we had heard from the government in Nunavut that they support the bill in its current form and they consider that it offers improvements to the land use planning and impact assessment process.

Would you agree with this? If so, why? If not, why not?

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

I just have a couple of questions, Elizabeth, going back to what we heard earlier in this process, in December of last year.

Representatives of the Government of Nunavut told this committee that Bill C-47 would contribute to devolution discussions by providing what I believe they said was “an effective regulatory system”, and that the process of drafting Bill C-47 demonstrated a collaborative effort between levels of government and organizations, which is also a necessary component of devolution.

In your view, Elizabeth, does or would Bill C-47 support northern governance and devolution, broadly speaking? Do you have a comment on that either way?

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Okay.

Ryan and Elizabeth, the reason I'm asking this question is that when you take a look at the parts of Bill C-47, and of course we heard this loud and clear in our visit to the territories, the concern from industry was that there were different circumstances prevailing for different development projects. That raised a myriad of challenges, with issues ranging from investor confidence to environmental regulations or processes, if you will, to who was participating in whatever circumstances were prevailing. That's the reason I'm asking that question.

Do you feel that the piece affecting Nunavut addresses this environmental piece adequately in that regard?

Does this satisfy the test for you, Elizabeth, in terms of it being a streamlined process that's clear to everybody, fair to everybody?

I see a nod.

[Elizabeth Copland, Chair, Nunavut Impact Review Board]

Thank you.

Ublaahatsiatkut. Good morning.

Thank you for this opportunity to appear before you on behalf of the Nunavut Impact Review Board. My name is Elizabeth Copland. I am the chairperson. With me today is Ryan Barry. He is our executive director. We also have our legal counsel, Catherine Emrick, here with us this morning.

We have provided the committee with a written brief setting out the details of our recommended amendments to part 1 of Bill C-47, the proposed Nunavut planning and project assessment act. Knowing that your time is limited, the focus of my opening statement will be to provide you with additional context and insight into the board's work and our recommendations.

I live in the hamlet of Arviat in Nunavut. As a member of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement transition team, I have been involved with impact assessment in Nunavut since 1994. I have served several terms with the Nunavut Impact Review Board over 14 years as a nominee of the Government of Canada. On the nomination of my fellow board members, I was recently appointed chairperson for a three-year team.

I have also chaired four public hearings for the Nunavut Impact Review Board, including those for the Jericho diamond mine, the Doris North and Meadowbank gold mines, situated in the Baker Lake area, and most recently the review of Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation's Mary River project.

Mr. Barry lives in the Kitikmeot region of Cambridge Bay. Our head office is also located in Cambridge Bay. Ryan has been employed with the board for the last six years, leading numerous impact assessments, representing the board through many forums, and since 2011 serving as the NIRB's executive director. We have a team of 18 administrative professional staff, who are essential to the board's task of carrying out impact assessments for the entire Nunavut settlement area.

As a result of the efforts and commitment of my fellow board members and staff, the board has a strong reputation among all stakeholders for achieving timely, credible, efficient, and thorough assessments of proposed major development projects in Nunavut. It is with this experience and perspective that we bring our recommendations to you today.

As we discuss in our brief, Nunavut is unique, with a sparse population living in small communities widely scattered across two million square kilometres accessible only by air and by ship or water. Inuit have occupied the region for thousands of years and form almost 85% of the current population. Inuktitut is spoken by 80% of the population.

Many Inuit rely on their lands and waters to fulfill their basic needs. Many who have experienced resource-based development in their community know that eventually it leaves, and they will not trade what is necessary to sustain and protect their ability to live off their land and waters for economic development. This shapes their views of development.

The process of impact assessment as enshrined in the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement and carried out by the Nunavut Impact Review Board is essential to developing a community's understanding of the potential for significant impacts from development, the opportunities for managing impacts through terms and conditions under which a project will be approved, including requirements for ongoing monitoring, adaptive management, and a commitment to full reclamation. All of these elements are necessary in order for development to proceed in a responsible manner.

As we talk about striving to provide industry with increased certainty and timelines and improving the efficiency and effectiveness of our assessment process, it is also important to acknowledge that the opportunity for members of affected communities to access the impact assessment process is an important element in providing certainty to project proponents.

I think it is fair to say that project proponents would prefer to participate in the Nunavut Impact Review Board's assessment process rather than be forced to address concerns through the courts.

This is one main reason we are recommending that the statute provide for a participant funding program. In the long run it is likely more cost-effective to provide for a participant funding program and thereby reduce the potential for legal challenges down the road. Without participant funding the Nunavut Impact Review Board's reviews also become more costly for the Government of Canada as it can take much longer and require considerably more board resources to accommodate unfunded participants.

The lack of a participant funding program in the proposed statute also creates a disparity in public access to impact assessment in Nunavut and in the jurisdictions in Canada where the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act applies. For example, during the NIRB's review of the Mary River iron ore project, no participant funding was made available despite there being about 18 communities identified as being potentially impacted by this project. In contrast, on January 16 of this year the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency announced it is making available $81,600 to support public participation in the federal environmental assessment of the Fire Lake North iron ore project located in Quebec.

As noted in our brief, based on Natural Resources Canada's statistics, in 2012 Nunavut placed fourth in Canada for mineral exploration and deposit appraisals expenditures, behind Ontario, Quebec, and B.C., and far ahead of the NWT and Yukon.

In a recent information session on improvements to northern regulatory regimes, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada reported that the 2011 growth in gross domestic product for Nunavut was 7.7%, with Yukon growing at 5.6%, Canada overall at 2.6%, and the Northwest Territories shrinking by about 5.5%. Based on these numbers, it appears that we are doing something right in Nunavut.

An important difference between resource management models in the NWT, Yukon, and Nunavut is that the Nunavut system is a simple integrated resource management system for land use planning, impact assessment, and land and water licensing. The scope of the Nunavut Impact Review Board's jurisdiction is also unique. It includes the assessment of both environmental and socio-economic impacts. The board conducts screenings and reviews as well as oversees the monitoring of approved projects.

A significant part of the board's written brief addresses the need to ready the system. There are three aspects to this.

First, with the level of development that we are currently experiencing in Nunavut, the Nunavut Impact Review Board's core capacity is already stretched to the breaking point. The NIRB's funding levels were originally set in 1992 and have not been formally re-evaluated since that time. Nunavut's regulatory system has been proven to work and NUPPAA, the Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act, may further improve its efficiencies. However, investment is needed to ensure the assessments of development projects are not delayed because of insufficient regulatory capacity. Although mineral resource development currently drives the Nunavut economy and makes up the NIRB's workload, the territory's first hydro project is coming to the Nunavut Impact Review Board for assessment next month. Oil and gas development and nuclear power projects are likely not far behind.

Another unique aspect of the Nunavut regulatory system is that the NIRB will conduct the screenings and reviews of these projects with the National Energy Board and Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission carrying out licensing responsibilities only.

We work cooperatively with these federal bodies, but further development of core capacity within our organization is still required. This is regardless of changes that will occur when NUPPAA comes into force.

The second aspect of the need for resources to develop the one-window system is contemplated in the statute. We know that the Nunavut Planning Commission has written to the committee setting out its funding needs for this, but it is also important that the other resource co-management boards, the Nunavut Impact Review Board and the Nunavut Water Board, be engaged in the design of the system. On a project-by-project basis our assessment and licensing processes are significantly more technical and our information needs are greater than those of the conformity determinations being carried out by the planning commissions. It is important that this one-window system be designed to meet our needs.

The third aspect is the need for resources to develop the capacity to administer and respond to the new requirements in NUPPAA. These include: extensive new requirements to meet access to information obligations beyond those set out in the Privacy Act; to translate lengthy and highly technical documents into three languages, for which corresponding terms in Inuktitut might not be available, work that only a very small handful of translators are qualified to carry out; and to comply with new public registry requirements.

Overall the highly prescriptive nature of NUPPAA as it is proposed removes much of the board's discretion on process and thus will require considerably more resources. Accordingly, the board was reassured to read Minister Duncan's testimony before this committee on December 10, 2012. His acknowledgement of the crucial nature of the work of the boards in Nunavut and the obvious need for more funding and his understanding that we're facing greater levels of activity resulting in greater needs are important.

We look forward to the opportunity to discuss the board's needs directly with the minister and his representatives as the necessary resources—people, systems, and finances—must be in place prior to NUPPAA coming into force in order to achieve the goal of a more efficient and effective regulatory system.

This leads me to the challenges associated with the lack of timely appointments of board members. All of the Nunavut institutions of public government are routinely without a full complement of board members and have had to put contingency plans in place due to the potential for lack of quorum. The Nunavut Impact Review Board has been in a position of not being able to make important decisions because of a lack of quorum.

We appreciate that NUPPAA will allow the board to appoint panels, which may make quorums easier to maintain, but it is not the only mechanism that could be implemented. We hope that you are able to help by supporting our recommendation that more should be done to address this ongoing and chronic problem.

My remarks today do not touch on all of the recommendations in the board's written submission.

I will close with a request to consider these detailed recommendations, including the board's support for many of these submitted to the committee by Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, along with our concerns with two of these recommendations directly related to the board's mandate.

In closing, I want to express the board's sincere appreciation to this committee for your time and to our dedicated colleagues from the Government of Nunavut, the Government of Canada, Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, and the Nunavut Planning Commission. We look forward to working together to implement the final bill approved by Parliament.

Matna. Thank you.

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development

[Gordon O'Connor, Conservative, Minister of State and Chief Government Whip]

Mr. Speaker, I seek the unanimous consent of the House for the following travel motion. I move:

That, in relation to its study on Bill C-47, An Act to enact the Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act and the Northwest Territories Surface Rights Board Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts, seven members of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development be authorized to travel to Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, in January 2013, and that the necessary staff accompany the Committee.

[Laurie A. Henderson]

The issue of the Yukon Surface Rights Board amendments in Bill C-47 is totally unrelated to what the Yukon government has advanced in its bill with respect to amendments to the Oil and Gas Act. The Yukon government has indicated that it has undertaken and will, in all respects, continue to undertake and implement all those consultation requirements with first nations as required by law.

[Laurie A. Henderson, Managing Counsel, Legal Services Branch, Department of Justice, Government of Yukon]

Thank you.

Thank you for providing the Yukon government the opportunity to comment on these changes.

By way of background, I will note for you that the Yukon Surface Rights Board Act has its origins in the Umbrella Final Agreement and the 11 Yukon first nation final agreements that have been signed into effect by the Government of Canada, the Yukon government, and 11 Yukon first nations.

Chapter 8 of these agreements established the framework for the Surface Rights Board legislation, and the Yukon Surface Rights Board Act came into force on February 14, 1995. Additional responsibilities of the board are established in other pieces of legislation, including two Yukon statutes: the Quartz Mining Act and the Placer Mining Act.

The amendments to the Yukon Surface Rights Board Act that are contained in Bill C-47 have been under discussion for some time. The Yukon government was first contacted about the amendments in the fall of 2011 by officials from Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.

In January of 2012 there was a meeting between federal officials and Yukon government representatives to discuss the proposed changes. That meeting was followed up a number of months later in August with a letter, wherein the federal government was actually seeking views on the specific changes that are now in the bill.

In September of this year, Yukon advised those federal officials that it had no substantive comments on the proposed changes. That continues to be the case today; the Yukon supports the changes and believes they will make board operations more efficient and cost-effective.

Two of the changes in Bill C-47, particularly the amendment of section 10 and the amendment of section 11, which authorize a member whose term has been terminated or expired to continue to act as a member until a decision has been made on the matter before the board, will ensure efficiency in resolving disputes. Without this provision—and we have certainly run into this situation with other boards and committees in the Yukon—if a member's term does expire or is terminated prior to rendering a decision, the hearing may have to be restarted, and that obviously would incur additional costs for both the proponents and the board officials. The Yukon government sees this change as quite positive, and it is welcomed.

The third change in Bill C-47 involves the amendment to section 23 of the Yukon Surface Rights Board Act. This one requires the auditor of the board to audit the accounts, financial statements, and financial transactions of the board each year and to report on the same to the board and the minister. In the Yukon's view, this change again will help ensure financial accountability and transparency in the board's financial management. As it does for the other amendments, the Yukon supports this change and sees it as an improvement over the past arrangement, whereby the financial statements were actually audited by the Auditor General of Canada.

In conclusion, we would like to reaffirm the Yukon government's support for these three changes. Thank you for the opportunity to appear today.

[John Duncan, Conservative, Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development]

Thank you very much once again.

As you all know, Canada's north is home to world-class reserves of natural resources representing tremendous economic opportunities for northerners and for all Canadians. Since forming government in 2006 our government has consistently demonstrated its commitment to equipping northerners with the tools they need to take advantage of those opportunities. I cannot emphasize enough how important Bill C-47 will be in allowing northerners to unlock these opportunities. Bill C-47 fulfills the Government of Canada's last legislative obligations flowing from negotiated land claims in both Nunavut and the Northwest Territories, and proposes mechanisms to improve regulatory processes, encourage investment, and allow resources to be developed in a sustainable manner. This will lead to jobs and benefits for future generations of Canadians.

I understand my officials were here on Monday last week to speak to some of the technical elements of Bill C-47, but their appearance was cut short due to votes. They're here again with me today and can answer some of your more technical questions. I understand they'll be coming again before committee soon.

The first part of this bill is the Nunavut planning and project assessment act. This bill sets out clear, consistent, reliable, regulatory processes that the people of Nunavut can use to manage development of their land and resources that will promote economic development by boosting investor confidence. Not only does this bill implement Canada's legislative obligations under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, it also fills existing gaps in the Nunavut regime for project approval. These improvements are not just necessary, they are urgent. They are needed in order to put in place a state-of-the-art planning and assessment regime to meet the surging tide of resource development opportunity in Nunavut.

The fact that the bill establishes the Nunavut Planning Commission as the single entry for project proponents will provide the clarity and certainty that has been called for and supported in various other jurisdictions across Canada, and will no doubt prove to be equally successful in Nunavut. For example, the bill assigns clear roles and responsibilities to the Nunavut Planning Commission, the Nunavut Impact Review Board, departments and agencies, responsible ministers, regulatory authorities, and project proponents. It allows the development and implementation of critical timelines for key decision points in the process, ensures that all parties to the process do not act until the appropriate approvals have been received, and establishes the critical inspection, enforcement, and monitoring regimes to backstop all decisions taken.

Mr. Chairman, there have been questions raised in the House of Commons about the adequacy of our consultations on this bill. Work on the Nunavut planning and project assessment act began in 2002, and the resulting bill before you today reflects almost a decade of negotiation and close consultation. This bill is a direct result of the government's strong partnership with the Government of Nunavut and Inuit leadership, as well as extensive consultation with the resource industries that will be affected. This bill, produced in partnership, includes valuable input from the Nunavut Legislative Working Group, a group of representatives from the federal government, the Government of Nunavut, and Nunavut Tunngavik Inc.

Representatives from the Nunavut Planning Commission and the Nunavut Impact Review Board also acted as advisers. Their technical expertise and experience were great assets to the working group.

Representatives of the mining and oil and gas industries also provided useful suggestions related to maximizing regulatory efficiency and avoiding duplication, achieving clarity and certainty through specific timelines, and consolidating roles and responsibilities among institutions of government.

Other groups raised additional concerns. Certain roles and responsibilities outlined in the draft bill required further clarification; monitoring and enforcement provisions needed to be strengthened; and questions over the bill's application to development projects that cross geographic boundaries and political jurisdictions called for further clarity.

I'm proud to say that these consultations have resulted in legislation that will truly serve the needs of the people of Nunavut today and in the future.

The second part of Bill C-47 will establish the Northwest Territories surface rights board. This fulfills obligations in the Northwest Territories under the Gwich'in Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement and the Sahtu Dene and Métis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement. Both agreements refer specifically to the need for a surface rights board.

The establishment of the board is also consistent with the terms and the spirit of the Inuvialuit Final Agreement and the Tlicho Land Claims and Self-Government Agreement, the other two comprehensive land claims in the Northwest Territories. The Tlicho agreement allows for the establishment of a surface rights board. The Inuvialuit Final Agreement specifies that any interim measures related to access across Inuvialuit lands to reach adjacent lands will be replaced when a law of general application, such as this bill, is enacted.

The board will, on application, make orders related to terms, conditions, and compensation only where they have been requested to do so and only after such rights have been previously issued. In so doing, this board will contribute to greater certainty and predictability for long-term economic growth and job creation in the territory.

I want to emphasize that this board does not, nor will it ever, issue any kind of right to surface or subsurface resources. To be absolutely clear, this board does not have any jurisdiction in the realm of resource development decision-making. This board does one thing only: if asked by one or both of the parties, it will settle disputes about access to land.

Consultations on the development of the Northwest Territories surface rights board act were also extensive. As I mentioned earlier, this bill responds to our last legislative obligation from the Gwich'in and Sahtu land claim agreements, and completes the regulatory regime that was originally envisioned in the Northwest Territories land claim agreements.

In total, over 35 consultation sessions were held with 13 aboriginal groups and governments, the Government of the Northwest Territories, and industry organizations. These sessions included groups within and outside settled land claims in the Northwest Territories, and groups outside of the Northwest Territories with transboundary claims. That was the comprehensive consultation, negotiation, and collaboration that went into developing the bill. That was the degree of partnership that went into putting together this very important legislation.

The bill before this committee today is a product that reflects the work, the opinions, and the positions of many interests and groups across two territories. All sides contributed to produce a bill that meets the needs of the people of Nunavut and the Northwest Territories.

As you can see, Bill C-47 responds to a chorus of other groups calling for action. Territorial governments have asked for better coordination and clearly defined time periods for project reviews. Resource companies have urged us to make the review process more streamlined and predictable. All Canadians want to make sure that promising opportunities will no longer be delayed or lost due to complex, unpredictable, and time-consuming regulatory processes. Bill C-47 will help make this a reality.

Thank you, Chair.

I look forward to the committee's review, and my officials and I will be pleased to respond to any questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Colleagues, we'll call the meeting back to order. I ask that committee members return to the table as we invite the minister to join us as well.

We have undertaken to have this meeting for some time. Minister, thank you for being patient with us as we rescheduled and made changes to our schedule. We appreciate your willingness to be flexible with us and to come back in less than a week. Thanks so much for joining us.

Colleagues, I want to make note of the fact that it is our practice to have these meetings in rooms where they can be televised. Unfortunately, because of a number of things, that didn't happen, but I do want to recognize, as chair, that it is certainly the practice we want to undertake going forward. We'll just make sure that happens next time, maybe when we have a little better schedule planning.

Again, thank you, Minister, for being here and for being willing to be flexible with our schedule.

We'll turn it over to you now on our ongoing study of Bill C-47 for which, Minister, you have agreed to appear and bring testimony. Certainly we appreciate that. We'll turn it over to you for 10 minutes and then we'll turn to committee members for questions.

[Jonathan Genest-Jourdain, NDP, Manicouagan, QC]

My question is about the Northwest Territories Surface Rights Board, the composition of which is established in Bill C-47.

Could you tell me your view of the actual involvement of Aboriginal groups and individuals in terms of appointments and the actual position provided for communities on the board?

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Like my colleagues, I was a bit surprised to receive your 32-page document and 13-page appendix in terms of amendments.

As you said in your testimony, the concern in the three party negotiations was that if there were an area of conflict, the Nunavut agreement would prevail.

Is the disagreement a matter of interpretation as to whether it conflicts with the Nunavut agreement? Did you see it when the drafters were finished with it and comment then? Do you believe that if push came to shove, certain parts of Bill C-47 would be struck down based on its inconsistency with the Nunavut agreement?