Government Operations Committee on Dec. 5th, 2024

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I call this meeting to order.

Good morning, everyone. Welcome to meeting number 158 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates.

Before we get to our opening statements, we're having some IT problems again. We'll do our in-person opening statements while IT tries to fix the problems. If the problems can't be fixed, we'll have to stick with only Mr. MacDonald and our in-person folks and Mr. Hickes for questions. We'll try to get it worked out.

We'll start with you, Dr. Jaime. Welcome to OGGO.

The floor is yours for five minutes. Thank you for your patience.

[Dr. Angela Jaime, Vice-Provost, Indigenous Engagement, University of Saskatchewan]

Thank you for the invite today. As the chair said, my name is Dr. Angela Jaime. I'm the vice-provost for indigenous engagement at the University of Saskatchewan.

I'm here to share with you today the University of Saskatchewan's deybwewin-taapwaywin-tapwewin indigenous truth policy. This policy, the first in Canada at any post-secondary institution, is for indigenous membership and citizenship verification of documentation.

USask has nearly 28,000 students. Nearly 4,000 of those students are indigenous. Our policy's purpose is to protect indigenous-specific space, space designed and designated for indigenous people. Our core value of the policy is principles over personalities.

The policy is about verification documentation that will be required for all incoming assertions of indigenous membership and citizenship by members of the university community where the claim may result in a material advantage or where the absence of verification would be otherwise contrary to the principles recognized in this policy

Our policy is not about identity. We don't use the terminology anywhere in the policy. This is about who claims you. The university is also not the adjudicator of what documentation to accept. It is the inherent sovereign right of indigenous people to determine their own membership. We listen to the indigenous governments to tell us what documentation they want us to accept from their members or citizens. We follow the Inuit, Métis and first nations people of Canada.

Any student or employee of the university seeking a material advantage is required to proceed through our verification process. Our in-house designed portal system collects the information and stores the documentation for review and verification. Our policy is part of a larger intention to decolonize the institution through our indigenous strategy ohpahotân-oohpaahotaan, or let's fly up together. We are committed to ensuring indigenous space and resources going to indigenous people. We've spent the last several years working to indigenize the university, and this is part of that—to create safe and accountable spaces for all indigenous people.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Obed, go ahead for five minutes, please.

[Natan Obed, President, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami]

Nakurmiik. Thank you. I really appreciate being able to speak here this morning.

I'm the president of Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami. ITK is the national representational organization for the Inuit of Canada. All Inuit in Canada have concluded modern treaties with Canada. The Inuit treaty organizations are the Nunatsiavut Government, Makivvik, Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated and the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation.

Our homeland, Inuit Nunangat, comprises over 75% of Canada's shoreline and over 36% of Canada's land mass. The social and economic disparities between Inuit in Inuit Nunangat and Canadians residing in the south are nearly as vast as this territory.

The dramatic expansion of procurement opportunities for Inuit is one of the key elements of reducing these disparities. Canada is an arctic state and requires robust infrastructure, labour markets and business climates in order to ensure Canada's Arctic is secure and prosperous.

Canada and Canada's allies should support an indigenous procurement policy that will enable Inuit, Inuit treaty organizations and Inuit businesses to contribute to the business climate reforms, enhanced labour market measures, and shifts in civilian and defence procurement policy to ensure a continued and growing Canadian ability to work in the Canadian Arctic. Inuit interests are Canada's interests within Inuit Nunangat.

Our shared interests are our strength, and by working together we can make Canada a stronger, safer and more secure country. Our work on procurement has most recently been developed through the Inuit-Crown Partnership Committee. In 2016, Inuit and the Crown signed the Inuit Nunangat declaration in Iqaluit, Nunavut. This declaration establishes the Inuit-Crown Partnership Committee, which is a vehicle for representatives of the Crown and Inuit leadership to identify shared priorities for action, to create work plans and to work together on time-bound and whole-of-government deliverables to achieve our shared goals.

One of our shared priorities is procurement and involves representatives of Inuit treaty organizations, as well as federal officials from Indigenous Services Canada, Public Services and Procurement Canada, Employment and Social Development Canada, Treasury Board Secretariat, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, Natural Resources Canada, CanNor and other regional development agencies.

Much of this work involves work to support the transformative indigenous procurement strategy. Much of our work has been focused on developing definitions for Inuit businesses. Each Inuit treaty organization has already developed definitions of an Inuit business. In some cases, the definition of an Inuit business is related to section 35 treaty rights, so both Inuit and the Government of Canada have experience in applying them.

Together, the working group developed a definition of an Inuit business outside Inuit Nunangat and revised procurement guidance and policies to increase Inuit participation in federal procurement. This guidance includes directing procurement officers to refer to the regional Inuit business firm registries when verifying who is an Inuit business. This is in line with Inuit self-determination, a fundamental part of economic reconciliation.

Guidance also includes providing targeted advance notice of procurements within Inuit Nunangat to allow Inuit businesses and firms to prepare a bid. At the same time, Inuit and Canada are finalizing definitions for an Inuit business. Canada has been working on the outsourcing of the indigenous business directory to a third party indigenous organization. Indigenous Services Canada seeks to outsource this by March 31, 2025. ITK is not in favour of outsourcing the indigenous business directory. Inuit have a relationship with the Crown and not with a third party. Outsourcing may undermine this relationship and the work that has been achieved through the Inuit-Crown partnership process.

Nakurmiik.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much, Mr. Obed.

Mr. Irngaut, we'll give you a try again. I may have to interrupt you, but why don't we go ahead and see if the interpretation will work.

Go ahead, sir.

[Paul Irngaut, Vice-President, Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated]

Qujannamiik. Thank you.

Good morning, honourable Chairperson and members.

My name is Paul Irngaut. I'm the vice-president of Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, commonly known as NTI—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I apologize. The interpretation is not working. We're not going to be able to proceed with you. I guess any questions for your organization we'll give to Mr. Hickes, and we'll perhaps see if we can get you sorted out and bring you back at a future time.

Mr. Sergerie, we're going to try you again. I may have to interrupt you, too, but go ahead.

[Dave Sergerie, Strategic Projects Coordinator, First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Economic Development Commission]

Good morning. Kwe.

My name is Dave Sergerie, Anishinabe from Timiskaming First Nation. I work on FNQL's Economic Development Commission in support of 43 first nations communities in Quebec.

Thank you for having me again today.

First nations businesses and entrepreneurs are—

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Pardon me, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Let me interrupt you for a moment, sir.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Unfortunately, the interpreter is signalling that the sound quality is not good enough for interpretation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Mr. Sergerie, I apologize. We're going to have to try perhaps a third time. Maybe it'll be third time lucky. We're not going to be able to proceed with you today. I apologize. Thank you, though.

I apologize for the IT issues. We'll chat among ourselves and see if we can find time to bring these witnesses back.

Colleagues, we'll start our first round with Mr. Genuis.

Go ahead for six minutes, please.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Mr. Obed, it's good to see you. Thank you for coming. I don't think we've ever met, but I think I've probably seen you on a few flights, now that I think of it, because I imagine you fly through Edmonton.

You have told The Globe and Mail that the current standards for the indigenous business directory are far too inclusive. I found this quote to be interesting:

We are now living in an era where there are tremendous opportunities to be had for qualifying as a First Nations, Inuit and Métis business.... There are many actors in this country who want to take advantage of that.

What I understand you to be saying is that, if you have a self-identification model, you're going to have unscrupulous people who are going to self-identify in whatever way they determine to be in their interest to self-identify. That's why it's so important that we don't just have a sort of self-identification model for programs.

I wonder if you want to comment on that. Maybe just share your thoughts on this kind of self-identification model that we've been seeing in a lot of different places.

[Natan Obed]

There are many sides to this.

For jurisdictions like municipalities, provinces, territories and the federal government, which have had an ambition for a certain percentage of procurement that is indigenous procurement, there's an incentive to meet that target. For those who wish to fraudulently take advantage of this particular space, there is an opportunity to find a way to be an indigenous business, to then take advantage of that material advantage, as Angela has described.

First nations, Inuit and Métis who have secured section 35 status have created constructive arrangements, whether they be modern treaties or other arrangements, with the Government of Canada and often have economic development considerations within them. They are now competing with another class. They are now competing with another class of, I would say, bad actors within this space that governments have been unwilling to hold to account.

We need to go back into the relationship between.... For our case, for Inuit, we've gone through 40 to 50 years of treaty-making with the Government of Canada. We have worked with you to compromise and create structures that we now are demanding the Government of Canada abide by. We didn't ever anticipate that our Inuit businesses would be in competition with newly formed indigenous collectives that don't have section 35 status and just assert that they are an indigenous collective and then, all of a sudden, are eligible to bid on opportunities alongside the structures that we've created.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I think you made an important point there. There is a perverse incentive on the part of businesses to pretend to be indigenous to take advantage of these opportunities. However, there's also a perverse incentive on the side of the government and other entities that are trying to say they've met a target. By having an overly permissive standard that, in reality, includes non-indigenous businesses in the category of indigenous, they can trumpet having met some kind of a target, which in reality they haven't met. I think we do see a lot of that from this government, a desire to show success that is beyond that merited by the evidence.

I want to ask you about enforcement as well. There's the issue of what the review standard is and who qualifies, but there's also the issue of enforcement. We found that, for subcontracting, for example, there are clear rules. If you're benefiting from that indigenous procurement opportunity, you can't subcontract exclusively to non-indigenous businesses. A third of your subcontracts have to be indigenous as well, yet there's no tracking of subcontracting.

There seems to be a complete lack of enforcement around that subcontract rule, which allows a bait and switch as well, a promise that there are going to be subcontracts to certain companies that then are not there. Do you have reflections on the enforcement around some of these rules and the extent to which that's part of the problem?

[Natan Obed]

Yes. It also touches on the position of Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami that the enforcement should not be given to a third party external to government. The federal government has the tools to enforce. Third parties often do not. They don't have the legislative base. They don't have the resources. Often they don't have the general terms and conditions from government to do that particular work.

If we want to be real about ensuring that indigenous peoples benefit from these indigenous incentives—the entire structure, why this exists at all, is based on inequity and based on the rights of indigenous peoples to participate—we need enforcement, recourse and remedy for those who wish to take advantage of these systems or do not qualify for them. What we've pushed for at ITK is a very clear definition of who Inuit are. We've created an Inuit Nunangat policy. It was adopted by the Government of Canada in April 2022. It clearly defines within it who Inuit in Canada are. We've already done that through our treaties as well. We continue to work with government to try to have every corner of the federal system understand who Inuit are, and who is in and who is outside of that catchment.

Unfortunately, in the research community and also in the procurement community, the guidelines about who is eligible often are far too inclusive and are at odds with the Inuit Nunangat policy.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Sousa, go ahead, please.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you for being here as witnesses. I'm sorry that those who are virtual can't participate. This is an important discussion we're having.

Mr. Obed, you spoke about the vastness from the far north to here on the southern border, let's call it, of economic disparity as well, consequently, and hence the whole purpose of trying to put forward a procurement strategy that engages, promotes and enables greater success for indigenous people. I'm not going to get into how you define who is indigenous or not. I think you've clearly stated that you have a sense of what it should be, in your mind. I'm looking at what has happened in the past where under previous governments there was very little procurement and engagement in strategic initiatives to promote indigenous businesses.

That has been happening now. It may be that there's a lack of consistency in terms of how it is defined, given what we're trying to achieve, but we are achieving more. I appreciate your talking about enforcement, because then it begs the question of who should be the enforcer. On the one hand, you don't want government determining who should be indigenous, and yet on the other hand, you want the government to enforce the indigenous aspects of procurement. We have to be sensitive about how we proceed in a way that facilitates a collaborative engagement with members of the communities. When I consider where it's been to where it's going, I'm encouraged by it. Can we do better? Absolutely.

Can you give us a sense, then, of your engagement with government when it comes to this matter versus the private sector? Are you involved in private sector procurement? I know you're concerned about other RFPs or other bids that may or may not include members of the indigenous community, and we need to protect that. At the same time, you want to bid on contracts with the private sector who are not indigenous specifically.

Can you comment on that?

[Natan Obed]

Thanks for those questions.

To one of your points, like it or not, the federal government has been in the business of working with first nations, Inuit and Métis to define who indigenous peoples are in this country. Our modern treaty process, which was spurred in the 1970s through the Government of Canada-led negotiations protocols or frameworks or guidelines, demanded that we create land use and occupancy studies and that we then negotiate provisions around beneficiary status.

These agreements are shared between Inuit and the Government of Canada. It is the business of the Government of Canada to work with indigenous peoples on creating status, which is why, then, we hold government to account for the negotiations that were concluded and the constitutionally protected agreements we have that include beneficiary status for all Inuit in this country through the four treaty organizations.

We want to lean on all that hard work in the way we undertake how Inuit participate within Canada's economy and in the procurement for federal contracts. Inuit have relations with many different private sector industries. Again, we lean on our modern treaties and our land claim agreements, especially for large-scale natural resource extraction projects, where we—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Mr. Obed, I'm sorry. I have to interrupt for a second. I've paused the clock.

The bells are ringing. Can we have UC that we'll continue with our witnesses and then vote virtually? We'll suspend for about five minutes to do that.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Wonderful. Thanks very much, everyone.

Please go ahead, Mr. Obed.

[Natan Obed]

We have structures in place to ensure that at the subnational level—Nunavut Tunngavik hopefully will be able to answer this as well—for private sector opportunities each of our treaty organizations has a positive relationship with these sectors and can benefit as much as they possibly can from these opportunities. At ITK we focus more on the federal government. We are a national organization. That's what I'm more comfortable speaking about.

[Charles Sousa, Liberal, Mississauga—Lakeshore, ON]

Thank you for that.

I do appreciate the work you do in regard to some of those major projects, especially up in the Arctic, where there's an issue of sovereignty. There's an issue of defence. There are other competing nations that are trying to also infiltrate in some of those projects where the indigenous people are playing a major role with private sector mining companies and so forth. I commend you for those.

You talked about the need to do this right in order to promote your success. You talked about the fact that there's a lot of opportunity we need to tap into as we go forward. Are the processes that have been put in place facilitating that ability?

I'm just comparing it with what it's been in the past. Very little was done by previous governments to where it is now. We need to do a lot of things to improve upon it. Can you comment on where it's been and where it's going?

[Natan Obed]

I can think of the example of the north warning contract. It was operated with an Inuit joint venture for a number of years. Then it was passed to Raytheon, a U.S. company. The north warning contract provides support for all of the DEW Line sites across Canada's Arctic, across a number of latitudes. It is a joint American-Canadian project and dates back to the Cold War era. Inuit are now operating that contract again. We were very pleased to be awarded that contract in the last couple of years.

I think in that scenario, if we'd had a structured relationship for procurement at the time when the defence contract went from an Inuit-controlled interest to an American-controlled interest, perhaps that wouldn't have happened. Perhaps there would have been more considerations in place for indigenous interests or indigenous businesses that just weren't formalized at that time.

There has been a lot of progress. We see more and more Inuit businesses who are wanting to work on federal contracts and who are mobilizing to do that with partners or by themselves.