Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Feb. 20th, 2007

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

Yes.

Will the government agreement that you're getting ready to negotiate with the Naskapi and Inuit be similar to the one that the Cree negotiated with the Inuit?

[Michel Roy]

I can't really answer that question because the agreement between the Cree and the Inuit in the case of Kuujjuarapik was negotiated within the framework of the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement. It was negotiated as part of a land claims process.

The current negotiations with the Inuit are focussed strictly on self-government, on the right of the Inuit to administer the lands awarded to them under the agreement.

These particular negotiations do not deal with land claims, but rather with self-government.

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

In any case, I hope things are settled as soon as possible for them, because discussions have been dragging on for a number of years.

With respect to housing, according to a survey on aboriginal housing, there were 95,479 housing units on reserves in March of 2004. Of this total, 18,000 were in need of major repairs, while 5,200 needed to be replaced.

The community of Kawawachikamach north of Schefferville desperately needs housing right now, 20,000 units in fact.

Can you update us on this situation?

[Michel Roy]

As far as housing goes, Mr. Lévesque, the Cree have access to the same standard housing program.

I believe you heard from one of my colleagues last week and discussed with her housing and housing programs. The Cree have access to this very same program.

As for identifying the priorities of one community as compared to another, I don't have the details. However, the Cree regional administration has a responsibility or a role to play in each Cree community when it comes to securing funding for housing. However, the simple answer is that these communities have access to the department's regular program.

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

Do you have any current data on all of the Cree communities?

[Michel Roy]

Data on housing requirements?

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

Yes.

[Michel Roy]

I don't believe we have those numbers, but if you like, we can send this information to you later.

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

I'd like that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Madam Crowder.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for coming before the committee today.

I want to refer back to a couple of specifics in the report. On pages 4 and 5, in the introduction, the commissioners talked about there needing to be a “timely and comprehensive manner” in which disputes arising are resolved. It seems to me that part of what the commissioners were asking for was a dispute resolution process.

Then on page 12 in the document they talk about the fact that “During a presentation to the United Nations Seminar on Treaties, Agreements and Other Constructive Arrangements...” and so on, on December 15, Canada's representative said that

The first of the modern treaties, the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement...provides for a monitoring mechanism, namely the Cree-Naskapi Commission.

Later in the report, on page 38, which is where I want you to deal with it, they talk about the fact that

Following a representation from the Naskapi Nation, the Cree-Naskapi Commission decided to hold an inquiry pursuant to section 165 (1) (b) of the Cree-Naskapi (of Quebec) Act. However, representatives of the Department of Indian Affairs, by invoking section 167 of the Act, refused to come to a hearing of the Commission on this matter.

The legal department said they're “not authorized to inquire on the negotiation process in progress with the Inuit of Quebec on establishing a new form of government...”.

I guess the issue is that the commissioners have raised the issue around inadequate dispute resolution processes. The government, in making representation to the United Nations, seems to imply that the commission has some authority to look into these things. Then, when the commission brought forward an issue they wanted to examine, the department invoked section 167.

I wonder if you could talk about what that dispute resolution mechanism looks like, and why in this particular case section 167 was invoked.

[Michel Roy]

Thank you for the question.

If I look at the mandate of the commission, for us the commission clearly has a mandate of what we can call dispute resolution or monitoring of the implementation of the James Bay treaty, or la convention, as they call it. They have a clear mandate to monitor that. In that context, they can bring the parties together and make recommendations, just as they did in the report.

However, when we are dealing with negotiations, I would say that's a different beast, because we're not negotiating the implementation of the convention or the treaty right now. What we're negotiating with the Inuit is a new deal. It's the self-government component. It's a new relationship between the Inuit and the Government of Canada and the Government of Quebec, and through the negotiation process we will be developing the way of consulting and making sure the Naskapi and the Cree, for example, will have their say and will be consulted and can have an impact on what is being negotiated for the Inuit.

We don't see that the commission has a role, because the commission's role is really to monitor the implementation of the convention.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

I also understand that the government committed to providing additional information to the commission by the end of February 2006. What is the mechanism for dispute resolution? It's not just in this agreement. In the Yukon dispute resolution that has come up as an area of concern, it seems that once treaties are signed it's fine, but the devil is in the details of the implementation.

[Michel Roy]

Could you respond?

[Terry Sewell]

The question of dispute resolution is a thorny one in the implementation of land claim agreements. We are discovering the tool kit is pretty small in the formal agreements. We seem to have arbitration as the one tool, and it's a great big tool that doesn't work for a lot of the day-to-day issues that arise. So what we're trying to do is when we deal with the self-government components of agreements and build the self-government structure—and Monsieur Roy has been speaking about the work with the Makivik folks in Nunavut—the idea is to build into that some mechanisms whereby we can grapple with disputes. For instance, in the case of our discussions with the Cree, we're looking at putting in place a mechanism of senior officials who would be represented by our ADM at that body. They would meet on a regular basis, perhaps two or three times a year, as a place to take disagreements and a place to resolve and grapple with issues that are arising.

You're putting your finger right on a very difficult point in the land claim agreement implementation business, and we need to find ways to introduce dispute resolution at an earlier stage than taking it to arbitration or taking it to a commission level. We're exploring new ways of doing that.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

In the development of this discussion, how have first nations and Inuit peoples been involved in the discussions around developing the tools?

[Terry Sewell]

The primary way is when we're dealing with a group on a particular self-government arrangement, so with the Inuit of northern Quebec, we would have been talking about dispute resolution as part of their governance.

In the case when we're not dealing with negotiation of a new self-government arrangement, in a case of some longstanding comprehensive claims, we need to explore, in partnership with the other parties, ways of developing trust essentially because the root of solving disputes is for parties to trust each other and be willing to work together on thorny issues. We haven't got that one nailed at this stage of the game, and it's an area of continuing work for us across the claims.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

You have about 40 seconds.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

The issue of trust is an important one. This document identifies some level of distrust, and the commissioner talked about the fact that there had been 10 ministers over 20 years and he sent us a note saying that it actually was 11 ministers over 20 years, which is an average tenure of 1.8 years per minister. There is a feeling that it's not the minister, and it's not this particular minister, but any minister who's running the department. It's the bureaucracy, so there is a level of distrust around how that's unfolding.

We have probably 10 seconds. I don't know if you can comment on that.

[Terry Sewell]

What I would say is that land claim agreements have a lot of expectations built in. There are expectations on all sides, and when those expectations don't line up you end up with a disagreement and, potentially, disputes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Mr. Albrecht, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for appearing today.

I'm happy to hear now, for the second time, that in comparison to the 1986 situation for Cree and Naskapi people, many of them now find themselves in improved situations as it relates to education, health, and economic enterprise. Certainly I think we need to keep building on any successes that we've had and use those as models for other areas where improvements can be made.

One of the focuses of the report last time was the housing crisis. We've received the summary of the Cree proposal to resolve the housing crisis. In this report by Chief Billy Diamond, he outlines a number of the shortfalls in terms of good-quality housing and points to the widening gap in the availability of good housing. There are a number of specifics mentioned, but as I read the report it seemed to me that there's a big problem with CMHC involvement. In fact, on page five of his report, his proposal, he says: “One can only conclude that the CMHC program, in its present state, is more of a problem than a solution to the Cree housing crisis.”

I'm just wondering what your take is. I know that you're not from CMHC, so I may be putting you in an awkward position. This concerns me, if this is a situation that we're actually making worse by a social solution that CMHC is mandated to provide and yet it appears like we're making a problem worse. Could you comment on that at all?

[Michel Roy]

It's difficult for us to comment on that aspect of your question. The Cree have access to the housing program, just like any first nation. However, the Cree have the advantage of having a land claim settled for 30 years. Things are getting better for them. It's acknowledged.

We are right now negotiating an implementation agreement with the Cree and we are hoping to build a new relationship with the Cree based on trust and provide the Cree with the tools they need to take action and take decisions in relation to their priorities. I think that will probably be the--

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

I certainly concur that economic development initiatives are important to helping address the long-term problems here. All through this report by the Cree Nation, they continue to refer to ways they could get out from under CMHC involvement. I think it's an area that maybe we should take a closer look at.

On a slightly different point, on page 11 of their report they also talk about economic initiatives that may be able to be implemented on the ground in northern communities. It suggests the establishment of a full-scale prefabrication plant to service the Cree markets, and markets of northern Quebec, northern Ontario, and Nunavut will be investigated.

I guess I would like to know about the progress. Is there anything being done on that front at all?

[Michel Roy]

Unfortunately, I have no information. We don't have any information on that. I'm sorry about that.