Information & Ethics Committee on Nov. 23rd, 2022

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

That's correct. Give some of the examples of the specific claims that you're advancing as a national issue.

[Chief Judy Wilson]

Jody, can you do that? It's technical.

Thank you.

[Jody Woods]

Sure, it's no problem.

UBCIC houses one of the largest specific-claims research programs in Canada. We have about 220 claims on our work plan that are active from B.C. first nations, who provide us with the mandates.

B.C. is in a unique historical situation in that we don't have a lot of historical treaties here. Our claims usually don't relate to things like failure to fulfill treaty promises. They usually relate to the illegal alienation of lands or resources or the failure to protect or reserve lands or resources that should have been protected or reserved according to colonial law. That's one aspect of our work.

Another aspect of our work is claims reform advocacy. We use ATI processes in that work as well. With respect to accessing historical documents, it's the claims research.

Robyn, did you want to add anything?

[Robyn Laba]

No, I'm sorry. Go ahead.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I would like to continue along that line.

I would put to the committee that this particular and special nation-to-nation relationship provides a higher duty of care legally, quite frankly, than it does with the regular average citizen or non-citizen who might be applying to the government for bureaucratic information.

I'm wondering if you can talk about the first nations principles of ownership, control, access and possession—more commonly known as OCAP—and how federal access to information affects the ability of first nations to apply these principles in practice. Is that a legal or technical consideration that you all have to bring into play?

[Chief Judy Wilson]

That's definitely a question for Robyn.

[Robyn Laba]

Current federal legislation—and provincial legislation, for that matter—doesn't incorporate those principles in any way.

There have been discussions with the First Nations Information Governance Centre around trying to make those changes to federal legislation. These are changes that would actually recognize the self-determination of first nations in Canada. Along with that is the first nations' right to data sovereignty, which incorporates the principles that you mentioned.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I'm reflecting on the earlier comments of Mr. Larsen, who talked about this notion of risk versus a right, and the culture of the government. When I hear you reflect on how some of these departments consider the historical records by a business case, I find that language—I'll say, on the record—quite offensive when it comes to what's really at stake here in terms of justice, the pursuit of justice and ultimately the sovereignty of these nations in question and under legal action against the state.

Given all of the fanfare and congratulations this Liberal government heaped upon itself when it moved the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, I'm wondering if you could reflect on how some of the barriers you may have faced in your processes, nation to nation, might have prevented first nations from being able to use this information for redress mechanisms to obtain fairness.

[Robyn Laba]

Kukpi7, do you want to answer that?

[Chief Judy Wilson]

One comment would be to talk to the First Nations Information Governance Centre. As we're implementing the UN declaration both federally and within the province, it needs to also be implemented in the information act and all the different records. I think that's what the uniqueness of our presentation is today.

Jody, do you have any more to add on that?

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Kukpi7, could I ask you a follow-up question to that statement?

Have you been consulted provincially on that process? If you have, has the access to information issue been presented to our provincial counterparts in B.C.?

[Chief Judy Wilson]

We did a presentation to the province.... Was it last year, Jody? Do you remember when it was?

We do have the presentation. I'm not sure how far the province has gone with our presentation to them about the information act and privacy and ethics. It's been really slow going in regard to changes in legislation, but we have to continue to do what we do because there's such a backlog of specific claims both nationally and provincially. We have about 50% of that in our province. That's why we felt it was so important to be here today to make our presentations and our clarifications, a lot of which Jody and Robyn spoke to.

Does that help?

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Yes, and I want to thank you for availing yourselves here today. I appreciate that you've now had the opportunity to put this on the record. I'll just give you my commitment that, as we contemplate the final stages and draft, I'll make sure that your comments are adequately reflected in any final reports, given the serious and elevated nature of the claims.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Thank you, Mr. Green.

[Jody Woods]

It's a little backwards, but you were talking about contemplating and draft. Would you mind explaining the process?

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

At the end of a study, we draft recommendations. Your testimony has now been put on the record procedurally. Then, when the recommendations come out, I'm committing to you as a member that I will highlight and elevate these recommendations in my work to ensure that the federal government takes responsibility and ownership over their unfair dealings, quite frankly, in negotiations and in contemplation for the land claims.

[Jody Woods]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, John Brassard]

Okay, thank you.

I allowed a little extra time on that one because it was a fair question, Jody, and it needed a response from Mr. Green.

That concludes our first round of questioning.

We're now going to move into the five-minute rounds and the two-and-a-half minute questions.

I'm going to start with Mr. Kurek for five minutes.

Mr. Kurek, you have the floor.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I appreciate the expertise around the table, both in person and virtually.

Let me start by acknowledging and thanking you all for that expertise and the feedback here today.

As a practical matter, the testimony you provide, as Mr. Green mentioned, goes into our writing a report and making recommendations. Because we have limited time in this meeting, if there's anything further you would like to add—specific recommendations you maybe didn't have a chance to address during the course of the meeting—please feel free to send them to the committee, as that also gets considered.

I'm going to ask all four of our witnesses the same questions I've asked each panel.

There are two questions, and the first requires just a yes-or-no answer, and then I'll get into some more substantive items.

My question is, how important is a good, accessible access to information system for a modern democracy and everything that entails, including things like understanding our history, reconciliation and that sort of thing?

I'll start with Mr. Koltun—yes or no?

[Andrew Koltun]

Yes.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Okay.

Go ahead, Kukpi7 Wilson.

[Chief Judy Wilson]

Are you saying that, for a modern information system, there are substantive changes required?

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Yes, and how important a functioning system is for our democracy and for things like reconciliation.

[Chief Judy Wilson]

Yes.

I would also add the legal obligations, as we just mentioned in our last discussion, the inherent legal obligations Canada has. Above reconciliation, it's about relationships, but I think it's about the legal obligation too.

Thank you.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Thank you.

Next is Mr. Barnes.