Madam Chair and honourable members, I'm Chief Ernie Crey. I'm the Chief of the Cheam First Nation in the Fraser Valley of British Columbia, but I appear before you today as the indigenous co-chair of the Indigenous Advisory and Monitoring Committee for the Trans Mountain Pipelines and Marine Shipping. Appearing with me is Tim Dickson of the JFK Law Corporation, who is legal counsel for the indigenous members of the committee.
We have provided a written submission, which we hope you will read and consider carefully. Today, we will make some broader oral submissions, and then we would welcome any questions you may have.
Turning to our recommendations in brief, we are making two recommendations with respect to Bill C-69. Mr. Dickson will speak to them more fully in a moment, but I will briefly state our recommendations.
The first concerns the provisions of the impact assessment act and the Canadian energy regulator act that allow for the delegation of authority to indigenous governing bodies. Our view is that the definition of which bodies may receive delegated authority is too restrictive and will, in many cases, defeat the objective of advancing reconciliation and indigenous involvement in the regulation of major projects.
Our second recommendation concerns ensuring that enough time is provided to form indigenous committees effectively.
As I said, Mr. Dickson will address these points in more detail in a moment.
First, I want to provide an overview of the committee, how it was formed, and what it is doing presently.
The committee was formed in response to a letter that Chief Aaron Sam and I wrote in June 2016, which was supported by representatives of over 60 indigenous communities, where we called for the establishment of an indigenous oversight committee to monitor and regulate the pipelines and marine shipping.
The federal government took up that suggestion, and when it approved the TMX project, it committed to co-developing an oversight committee with affected indigenous communities, and it approved a significant level of funding for it. Many of you might recall the amount. It was nearly $65 million over five years.
The terms of reference were negotiated and ratified in the six months that followed the announcement. We were formally established in July 2017. In my experience with these kinds of bodies, and I have a lot of experience with these kinds of bodies, that is extremely fast, a point I'll address more fully in a moment.
The committee is comprised of up to 13 indigenous members and six members from the federal government and National Energy Board. The NRCan member is the government co-chair. The indigenous members, which form what we call the indigenous caucus, seek to represent the interests of the 117 affected indigenous nations and communities. They do not formally and directly represent those nations; however, there are just too many affected nations to allow that to happen. Rather, the indigenous members are selected by the nations in particular regions to sit on the committee, and they seek to represent indigenous interests and perspectives broadly.
Related to that point, the terms of reference make clear that the committee does not replace nor reduce the government's duty to consult indigenous nations, and participation with the committee is without prejudice to a nation's position on pipelines.
The committee's main roles are to monitor the pipelines and marine shipping to make sure the rules and conditions are being followed, to give advice to government in the development and application of those rules and conditions, and to provide funding to communities for projects related to the pipelines and marine shipping, for example, spill preparation and response.
The committee aspires to having a more direct role in the regulation of pipelines and marine shipping in the future.
The indigenous nations want to see the committee be a forum for shared decision-making in respect of the pipelines, where government and indigenous nations can together regulate the pipelines and marine shipping to better ensure the protection of the environment and aboriginal title and rights. In our terms of reference at proposed section 14, the government committed to looking for ways to deepen indigenous involvement in regulation. Indeed, that direction for future involvement is part of why we're here today.
Last, the committee operates by consensus, except that the caucus, that is, the indigenous caucus, can formally give advice to government on its own where the government members are unable to sign on to it.
We have seen a great deal of success at the committee. Among other things, we have seen that it is possible to operate from consensus even where there are very different perspectives on the pipeline. Our committee not only has both government and indigenous members; the indigenous members come from nations that support the TMX and nations that oppose it—indeed, nations that are leading the charge to have the Federal Court of Appeal overturn the approval. Those folks are on this committee.
I want to mention a few points on why I think this kind of constructive consensus building is possible at the committee and why the committee has received a great deal of support among affected indigenous nations.
First, the committee's role is not about whether the pipelines should be—