Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Feb. 8th, 2007

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

The only message is, if he demands a letter from an organization by a certain date, there should also be some, I would think, goodwill on his part to get back to the organization in a fairly decent timeframe. He wanted the letter by September 2006. He demanded it or else he was going to put the hammer down and make a decision one way or the other on the Labrador Métis Nation claim. He got a letter by 2006. I think it's incumbent upon him to answer.

I'll certainly give that message to him myself. I already have. But if you can carry it back through this venue, I would appreciate it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

We'll go to the government side. Mr. Albrecht.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to each of you for being here today.

I'm very pleased to see the optimism in your report where you say that momentum is building and must not be lost. I notice that optimism, and with the large number of dollars that all Canadians have invested, I'm sure they'll be glad to hear about that optimism as well.

I wonder if you could comment briefly on page 5 of the deck. I wasn't able to get to your briefings, although I have gone through them. You mention there on the second-last bullet about the Supreme Court decisions imposing on governments the obligations to consult. What are the parameters of what “consultation” means? How do we come to a point where we say consultation has occurred? Are there any guidelines on that at all?

[Michel Roy]

That's exactly what we are trying to define right now when we talk about going on with a process; we're now trying to define a process of consultation. We have to come to a conclusion about defining those parameters, about the definition of a conclusion, and then accommodation.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Mr. Chair, will we not get into the same question of perception, as Mr. Berthelette outlined, regarding the area of the evolving nature of treaties, as opposed to closed book, signed off? I'm just wondering how long will we consult about what “consultation” means.

[Michel Roy]

For now, in the context of treaty negotiation, since we don't have those guidelines we have some interim ways of consulting, or interim measures or guidelines. We are consulting with first nations and interested third parties in the context of treaty negotiations right now without a definition of what are the limits or the parameters. So we just do it right now the best that we can.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Okay, thank you.

I have another question to Mr. Goldie. On page 10 of the deck you mentioned there about redressing inequities and that tax exemptions cease to apply after a transition period. Is the transition period defined on a case-by-case basis, or is it clearly outlined?

[Jeff Goldie]

No, that's in place for all claims agreements that are reached across the country. For self claims and self-government agreements there is a standard phase-in period for transactional taxes and income taxes.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Could you identify what that is? What is that standard phase?

[Jeff Goldie]

It's eight years for transactional, twelve years for income tax.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Okay. I'll get the definitions later.

One last point, if I have time, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

You certainly do.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

One page 4 of Mr. Roy's comments today he talks about working with colleagues in other federal departments. I noted in the preamble to the Auditor General's report, in the foreword, rather, on page 1 she mentions that at the federal level, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada represents Canada in the B.C. treaty negotiations. Then she goes on to say that about 40 other federal departments and agencies provide assistance to INAC.

I'm wondering at what point the number of people or groups providing “assistance” becomes an obstacle, a barrier to having us move forward expeditiously in arriving at a conclusion. It would seem to me that the more groups we need to consult and work with, the more bogged down we become.

Could you comment on that? Are there any ways we could streamline this process by having some of these duties of negotiation subsumed under fewer than 40 groups?

[Michel Roy]

Thank you for the question.

Of course you have to think that when we are negotiating a treaty with a group, with a first nation, if we are dealing with fisheries issues, for example, the department doesn't have the expertise, so we have to refer to our colleagues from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to get their support, to get their input, to get their mandate. They would be providing a mandate. It's the same thing for taxation: we are not the finance department, so we have to refer to our colleagues from the finance department to get advice, to get the support that we need.

For us, there is no choice other than to refer to our colleagues, to work with them, to get their advice and support.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

I can certainly understand that this is a very complex issue. I think I'm having difficulty understanding how there can be 40. I can imagine 10, but 40 seems a large number.

[Michel Roy]

When they are referring to the 40 departments, it's the caucus, and it's to make sure that we have all of the departments onside. So we have a process in place to make sure that we are consulting with those departments and dealing with them.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

I think it just underlines what you said in your presentation, that it's complex and we can't expect immediate results, but if we can look for ways to streamline it, obviously we're all working to that end.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

There was also a comment by the Auditor General, and I quote from her report, that “departments and agencies supporting INAC in treaty negotiations do not always provide timely responses about their treaty positions”. So I think that's an important observation. I don't know if it's a case of the numbers, but it's maybe how timely they are with their positions. I think they all need to be sitting at the table, because they all have the interests of the Government of Canada, to make sure their positions are given in a timely fashion. I think that's important.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Chair, did you use up the last 30 seconds of my time?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

No, actually I didn't. Did you think I did?

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Yes, sure.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Mr. Lévesque, please.

[Yvon Lévesque, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Mr. Albrecht, I am sad to say that I do not share your optimism as to the speed at which we will see a final decision in this case. If we rely on Mr. Roy's report, there won't be a solution to the problem for at least another 140 years. Even my grandchildren won't be around to see that.

In paragraph 6 of Mr. Campbell's brief, it says that 40% of first nations are not currently involved in this process and that due to the resources they have, you can hardly make offers which are on a par with what they could get through other means.

I will ask you all my questions at once, because the chairman is watching me and he is not going to grant me an extra second to ask my questions.

Mr. Morales criticized you in the report. So did the Auditor General. Do you not have strategies? Because most of you are lawyers, you must be used to admissions being made before a case goes to trial, and you seek a number of these admissions to help speed up the process. I am wondering if this type of thing doesn't also exist in the department and the various other departments?

We may end up having to deal with costs in the order of $20 billion to $23 billion to finally settle this issue. It's all well and good to say that these nations will govern themselves, but they won't be able to survive under the weight of the debts they have contracted.

On the basis of all of this, given the criticism leveled at you and what is being done to develop strategies, etc., I am wondering how you feel about all of this.

Can you live with this?

[Michel Roy]

Thank you for your question. Incidentally, we're not all lawyers; I am not a lawyer.

It is true that deficiencies in the process have been pointed out to us. Mr. Morales expressed this here before this committee. The Auditor General also indicated a number of deficiencies to us. We're also aware of some of these deficiencies. We're not necessarily seeking to negotiate with everyone for 30 years and spend billion of dollars.

That's why we are trying to define other measures, other means. For example, we've developed what we call treaty-related measures. These are interim measures and they could eventually be part of a final treaty. At least, they allow for economic development on a territorial basis temporarily, even if the final treaty is not signed. Thus, the community or community groups can progress and proceed with the economic development of their region, even if the treaty isn't yet finalized.

We have the capacity to get things started or to introduce interim measures as we await a final treaty. Therefore, we develop ways of doing things to facilitate development, especially the economic development of communities, who do not have to wait for a final agreement as this requires negotiations that last several years because of the complexity of the process. This way, at least these communities can go forward.

So we're developing this type of thing and at the same time, together with our partners, we are prepared to examine an actual way of doing these things. We're trying to develop new ways of doing things that are less costly, that take less time, because we're also worried about the issue of costs and loans granted to communities that they then have to reimburse.