Foreign Affairs Committee on Oct. 9th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Thank you.

MP Mario Simard is next. You have two and a half minutes.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to follow up on what you said about prioritizing infrastructure projects. You talked about transportation, telecommunications and energy infrastructure in your opening remarks.

As far as you know, has the government or an expert like yourself done an assessment and identified those infrastructure projects that should be prioritized in the north?

Presumably, there would be some sort of underlying logic. For instance, energy-related infrastructure would probably be built before telecommunications infrastructure.

I'm curious as to whether you have such an assessment, one that lays out the way forward in terms of the infrastructure that should be built.

[Jessica M. Shadian]

I would say that transportation, energy and telecommunications need to be thought through together. Again, I feel like I'm saying the same thing over, but to figure that out we need to map it out. We know, we've heard and we can continue to listen to and get more information from northerners themselves about the infrastructure they need, because it's always evolving. We need to identify specifically.... We do have a sense of what we need in terms of building out our economic infrastructure. We know, perhaps quite well, what we need on the defence end.

Then the prioritization comes. If we can look at it on a map that's overlaid, then you can understand why, if you build something here, it requires this much energy, these kinds of telecommunications and this much water. Until we create some sort of ability to look at everything and then make a plan from there...and then this is where we ask, “What are the one or two projects that we start, or three, at the same time?”

That's also how we're going to open up and unlock private capital. When you bring private capital in, then it becomes.... You have indigenous equity, but they can't shoulder the whole burden of any of these projects on their own. The federal government will be a player in all of this, in different areas, but, again, they can't bear the burden of the projects all on their own. We're going to need financing, private capital.

Countries all around the world have infrastructure strategies. It's a report. It's put together and it creates a strategy for how they're going to go about mapping out what goes first, when and where, and how this attracts capital. We just need to put it all together.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you, Ms. Shadian.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Dr. Shadian, for your testimony today and for appearing on this important study.

That concludes the first half of the meeting. The meeting is suspended.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Order.

I will start by welcoming our witness for the second hour, from the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, the president, Natan Obed.

Welcome and thank you for joining us today for this important study.

I now invite you, President Obed, to make an opening statement of up to five minutes.

[Natan Obed, President, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami]

Nakurmiik.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'm Natan Obed. I'm the president of Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami. It's great to be here with all of you today.

I'm the president of our national Inuit representational organization, and our work is directed by our four Inuit land claim regions, our treaty rights holding members, including the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation, Nunavut Tunngavik, Makivvik and the Nunatsiavut Government.

Inuit treaty organizations also advance our priorities internationally through the Inuit Circumpolar Council, the international NGO that represents Inuit across Inuit Nunaat, which is our term for the international Inuit homeland encompassing parts of Chukotka in Russia, Alaska, Canada and Greenland.

Herb Nakimayak, the interim president for ICC Canada, addressed you last week, and I hope to build on his remarks to you.

Inuit are the foremost experts on the Arctic, and Canada would not be an Arctic state without us. Our homeland, Inuit Nunangat, encompasses 40% of Canada's land mass and 72% of its coastline. We either comanage the entirety of that space or own it outright. Our most recent research in partnership with NRCan shows that we also hold 32% of Canada's freshwater resources within our homeland.

ITK has consistently advocated for Canada to fulfill its potential as a powerful Arctic state internationally by recognizing the region's enormous growth opportunities and making the investments needed to bring it into the rest of the country. Our homeland is the least-developed Arctic territory among the eight Arctic states, despite its enormous potential for economic growth and its growing importance as a geopolitically strategic region.

For example, Canada is the only Arctic state without a university in its Arctic territory. We experience the highest cost of living in North America due to the lack of federal investment in transportation and related infrastructure, and our people are at greater risk than other Canadians and other Arctic populations of experiencing poverty and human rights violations because of the profound gaps that exist in health, education and other essential services.

It's also important to note that our mother tongue, Inuktut, while it is an official language in the Northwest Territories, in Nunavut and of the Nunatsiavut Government, is not considered an official language by the Government of Canada. Therefore, within one of our 13 jurisdictions, provinces and territories in the country, we have an 85% majority population who has absolutely no right to receive essential services delivered from the federal government in its mother tongue. It is a gap that is profound and one that we hope to change.

This past summer, ITK published a paper outlining our vision for sovereignty, security and defence in the region. We discuss how Inuit contribute to Canada's sovereignty and security and how continued neglect of the region exposes the country to foreign interference and security threats. Our recommendations provided in the paper focus on, among other areas, the need for Canada to continue engaging in the Inuit-Crown partnership committee that was formed in 2017, which serves as a forum for Inuit and federal leaders to identify and advance shared priorities.

This model of diplomacy is unique to Canada among the Arctic states and facilitates substantive co-operation between indigenous people and the state, which is unparalleled in the Arctic and internationally. We also focus on the need for Canada to invest more in the health and well-being of our people to retain and support Inuit as the region's future and the most important resource.

In addition, we underscore the need for federal budgets to include Inuit-specific investments that enable Inuit treaty organizations to access funding that is intended to benefit our people as opposed to pan-indigenous allocations or those targeting provincial or territorial governments.

Finally, we emphasize the need for Canada to enact a broader vision for bringing Inuit Nunangat into the rest of the country. Canada's approach to the Arctic continues to be characterized by piecemeal investments that respond to the political priorities of the moment rather than the types of investments that have transformed other regions of the Arctic into prosperous regions with high standards of living.

I look forward to further discussions today.

Nakurmiik.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Thank you very much for your remarks, President Obed.

I will now open the floor for questions, beginning with MP Tamara Kronis.

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier—Gloucester, ON]

Chair, can we make sure we confirm the fact that we will have a special guest coming?

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Yes, I believe we have agreement among all members that we will include MP Idlout for five minutes at the end of all the members' questions.

Are we in agreement?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Excellent.

We will begin, as I said, with MP Tamara Kronis. You have six minutes.

[Tamara Kronis, Conservative, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Thank you so much, Chair.

Thank you very much, Natan, for your testimony. It was very interesting.

You mentioned that Canada's Arctic is the least developed of all the Arctic nations in the area. You gave a number of examples, like health care, education, defence and a number of other areas. You also outlined the need to include Inuit-specific investments in the budget.

I'm wondering what you think the top three infrastructure priorities should be.

[Natan Obed]

Thanks.

Through the Inuit-Crown partnership table, we have worked with the federal government to identify 79 projects over the next 10 years that total approximately $30 billion and would close the infrastructure deficit between Inuit and the rest of Canada, or our homeland and the rest of the country.

As an example, there's one deepwater port across our 51 communities. All of our communities are either at tidewater in a marine environment or in fresh water and adjacent to a marine environment.

In the conversations around nation-building projects, we have also identified a number of different key infrastructure deficits, such as the paving of airstrips in a number of our communities, which limit the ability for airlines to get goods and services out of our communities and to be able to fly in all types of weather. This ultimately drives up the prices that people pay to travel and of any goods and services that come into our communities.

Those are just two examples of the work we're trying to do to identify, articulate and, hopefully, solve the infrastructure crisis.

The other piece here is housing. Wherever you go across Inuit Nunangat, that's the first thing you'll hear. Inuit and all people who live in our homeland will say that we have a housing crisis. We have 52% overcrowding. In our pre-budget submission, we identified roughly 6,500 units that are needed in the next 10 years and over 4,500 units that either need to be improved or need funds for operation and maintenance, which will also cost approximately $8 billion.

This is the price of being an Arctic state and of the really troubled history of Inuit colonization in the area, which has led to these systemic barriers for us to be a part of this nation's economy and, generally, to be healthy and live fulfilling lives.

[Tamara Kronis, Conservative, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

You mentioned, and it's sort of obvious, that Inuit are the foremost experts on the Arctic. You talked a lot about what it means to be an Arctic state.

We, of course, have a government where all parties say they're committed to reconciliation. I'm wondering, from your perspective, what sovereignty means for Inuit communities. How might that differ from how the federal government sees it?

I'm also wondering if you could compare and contrast Canada's position with respect to the other countries, given the fact that you have this interface with them.

[Natan Obed]

Our modern treaties are really at the heart of the relationship the Inuit have with this country. In United Nations terms, it's our constructive arrangement. We are proud Canadians, but it isn't because of Canada's domination of us. It is because of our partnership in this day and age and our hopes moving forward that we can remain Canadians and that we can have constructive arrangements with this nation-state.

The challenges we face here in Canada are very different from in Greenland or in Alaska or Russia. We are very fortunate that we live in a nation-state with free speech, with rule of law and with a respect for indigenous peoples' rights. The UNDRIP legislation passed by the previous government underpins the section 35 rights we hold and the broad hope that we can implement our existing rights within the structure of federalism, but also in the provinces and territories in which we live.

We immediately think about the implementation of those agreements as the first place we go when we talk about sovereignty and what it means to be Canadian Inuk. What will propel our positivity and optimism moving forward is our ability to live up to the agreements we've signed and include Inuit as partners in all manners of diplomacy, of governance and of nation building within our homeland.

[Tamara Kronis, Conservative, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

We had a good conversation with the witness we heard before you about AI and surveillance and data. Of course, the Arctic archipelago is changing, and it offers some interesting challenges. I had the opportunity a few weeks ago to see the vehicle traffic surveillance system in my own community of Nanaimo. The technological advances that are happening are incredible.

Can you give a sense of how Inuit traditional knowledge and local experience could be more effectively integrated into Canada's Arctic surveillance in order to make it better and purpose-built for your communities?

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Unfortunately, because of the time, I can only allow a brief response.

[Natan Obed]

Thank you.

First, we have the Canadian Rangers, who are hopefully going to be more integrated into the larger Canadian Forces.

Generally speaking, Inuit hunters and harvesters traverse the entirety of our homeland and are the eyes and ears on the ground for surveillance across our homeland. What we are observing and the concerns we see, whether it's with ship traffic or with any other non-Canadian presence in our homeland, are then a tangible link to the first level of defence we have within our country about how to respond to any foreign threats.

[The Chair, Liberal, Ahmed Hussen]

Thank you.

We'll go next to MP Robert Oliphant.

You have six minutes.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Obed, for joining us today. It's always a pleasure.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Apologies, Mr. Chair, but Mr. Oliphant's mike wasn't on. I'm thinking of the interpreters.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

I want to do three things: flatter you, ask for your comments and then push you.

Inuit Nunangat has benefited from your leadership for 10 years. Everyone is aware of it, and Canada has benefited as well. Canada is better when Inuit Nunangat is better, so thank you.

I want to talk about the concept of codevelopment. Our most recent Arctic strategy had at its core the principle of codevelopment. When we revised our Arctic foreign policy last year, we kept it.

What does that mean to you and to ITK, but also to the Inuit people and indigenous people writ large? Has there been a change in the 10 years you have been in your office?

[Natan Obed]

First, thank you for the flattery. I appreciate that.

It has been 10 years. I was just re-elected for my fourth term, and I'm quite pleased and honoured to represent Inuit here in our nation's capital and wherever my job takes me.

I've seen quite a bit over the last 10 years, and I have been working with the Government of Canada over that entire span to ensure that anything that this government considers in relation to Inuit is met with the policy, legislative and program expertise that we feel is necessary for implementing your jobs. Often, we come 95% of the way to the federal government in providing advice, clarity and cautionary tales about what happens when programs or legislation goes awry. Codevelopment is meant to enhance the ability for Inuit as rights holders to participate in the development of any program, policy or piece of legislation that explicitly affects our rights or our standing in Canada.

We've done it well and we've done it poorly. At its best, we have things like the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the provisions within, which were codeveloped with Inuit, first nations and Métis with an associated action plan. Now we have to get to work on its implementation.

In the Arctic foreign policy, there's a mention of action plan measure 52, which is cross-border mobilization for Inuit, especially from Greenland, Alaska and Canada, so that we can move across our homeland in a more seamless way, which would require the amendment of the immigration act. We haven't gotten to that piece yet, but successive ministers have talked hopefully about it.

Codevelopment in the space of, say, the Arctic policy can be a bit more frustrating. At the end of the day, if there isn't a budgetary link, or if there isn't ownership of the federal government of the entirety of its Arctic policy, then we are brought into conversations that end up with us restating our established positions and having expectations that, in many cases, government is unwilling or even disinterested in meeting on.

Provinces and territories had chapters and rights-holding peoples had chapters, so there is an Inuit chapter of the ANPF, the Arctic and northern policy framework. In it, we articulate the ambitions we have to grow a prosperous Inuit Nunangat. This even includes ensuring that the federal government defines the term “Inuit Nunangat” in legislation and in policy so that it can be used clearly and to the fullest extent.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

I wanted that one in there. I am going to interrupt you though, because I will never not say it and I encourage our government to.

Because we're the foreign affairs committee, I want to talk about the participation of Inuit and indigenous people, writ large, in foreign affairs fora. The Arctic Council has six permanent participants who sit in their own right at the table. When I go to the OAS, you're considered stakeholders; it's very different.

Can you help push us on the role that you see Inuit playing in foreign affairs and multilateral bodies, as well as engaging in a new way?