Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Feb. 25th, 2008

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

You mentioned that you thought a number of amendments to the bill needed to be in place to have this bill meet the needs of British Columbia. Can you talk about some specifics around that—I don't mean the language around it, but the specifics about what would need to be included in order to have your organization's support? Of course, this is very general.

[Jody Woods]

I think first that all reserve creation claims must be accepted for review and have access to the tribunal; that there must be no cap on the claims that are considered and that have access to it; and that the issues surrounding conflict of interest must be truly dealt with through the consultation with first nations in B.C. and through their power to make binding recommendations about who sits on that tribunal.

Probably one of the key issues would be increased proportional resourcing to cover the costs of research, submission, negotiation, and access to the tribunal of claims. As I said, there are 65% of the claims in the backlog, 45% of the claims in the system, and—we were talking about this earlier today—we anticipate a high number of new claims. Also, there are a pretty high number of claims sitting stagnant right now without research funding. All of those are going to need the appropriate proportional resources to be advanced and to be dealt with meaningfully.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

One of the other points the officials made when they came before the committee a couple of weeks back was that the philosophy was that a significant number of claims would not actually go to the tribunal; that there would be negotiation, that there would be this funnelling of claims so that smaller numbers would go to the tribunal. Could you comment on whether you would see this negotiating process as a possible solution, and what problems you might see with it? You have approximately a minute.

[Jody Woods]

I think some of the remedies the minister was discussing in his testimony had to do with grouping claims and with joint research. As Ms. Abbott was saying earlier, the general idea of grouping claims is very logical. I think it can move a lot of claims through quickly.

There are still some problems with it. There may be claims that are of similar nature in fact but of different nature in impact. They may not actually fit as easily as they would appear to.

The other was joint research. Generally the idea of joint research is okay. We've pursued this a bit in the past in B.C. We've never actually been able to make it work. We've had, for instance, just some very basic research concerns about access to documents, the wait times we have, and the fact that this situation creates a not-so-level playing field.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Thank you, Ms. Woods.

Mr. Bruinooge.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I've never heard such balanced questions out of the member for Cowichan in my life. It's quite interesting to hear. You should be in the chair more often, maybe.

I will first start by thanking the members for coming before us today, travelling all the way from B.C. I'll just start off with a question and a point of clarification.

I want to ask whether you are aware of the fact that the Minister of Indian Affairs sent a letter to the BCAFN regional chief, Mr. Shawn Atleo, in relation to how reserve creation claims would be included in this process and would be eligible to go before the tribunal. If you weren't aware of that, then I guess I'm bringing it to your attention. But if you were aware of it, then how does it change your opinion? Or is your opinion still the same about reserve creations being eligible?

[Jody Woods]

We are aware of the letter. Unless it's legislated, it comes off as another assurance. I can give you an example.

Since that letter was sent, the Okanagan Indian Band also received a letter from the minister in which he informed them that he was backing out of negotiations on their commonage claim. He cited Weyweykum as the reason. Because the claim is over $150 million, it doesn't have access to the tribunal. There is no recourse in the process for this.

So the assurances in the letter seem a bit empty. I think that unless it's legislated, unless it's embedded, there's no guarantee for first nations in B.C. that this will happen.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Well, based on the information I've been provided, the reserve creation is eligible and is legislated within this bill, so I'm not sure that what you're suggesting is the case.

[Jody Woods]

Except that it was just rejected; it was a reserve creation claim that was rejected and now has no recourse within the current system.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

But the tribunal is not up and running yet. Once it is, when this bill, hopefully, passes, then the legislation will be in place, and the tribunal will see the eligibility of these things that you're calling for. My point is, and perhaps I'm not making it in the easiest way, that I feel that concern is maintained within the context of Bill C-30.

But perhaps we'll move on from there. One question I want to ask, and I guess it is more along the lines of consultation in general, is this. You mentioned a few moments ago in response to one of Madam Crowder's questions that you felt that binding recommendations in relation to who the judge would be should also come, I think you mentioned, from a representative from British Columbia. Is that what you said?

[Debbie Abbott]

Yes.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

I guess my question for you would be: how do you imagine we would be able to incorporate binding recommendations from all the different regions for the selection of these individuals? It seems to me to be a process that wouldn't come to a conclusion.

[Debbie Abbott]

I'm not sure for the rest of the regions, but I would see there being an opportunity to work through the First Nations Leadership Council, which is comprised of the three political groups within British Columbia.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Well, the process as it's currently set up is that the minister will be working hand in hand with the AFN's national chief, as he has for this entire bill. This bill was co-authored by the AFN at every step and has been endorsed by that organization. Of course, there was a political accord signed off as well.

So my question would be, is our ongoing work and consultation with the AFN legitimate in terms of being able to proceed with this bill? Based on my understanding, the AFN has told us as a government and this House of Commons that they have undertaken consultation and basically checked off that box in terms of all the things they had to do before they could sign off on this bill. Are you agreeing that the AFN was able to enter into this legitimately with the Government of Canada?

[Debbie Abbott]

The point I really want to highlight is that B.C. needs to be directly consulted.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Are you saying that, based on your information, British Columbia wasn't consulted by the AFN?

[Jody Woods]

What we found was that the political accord was presented, and this—what we're experiencing right now—I understand to be some sort of consultative process.

What we're saying is that B.C. communities need to be directly consulted, given the large number of claims in the system that come from B.C. Given the history of the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs in advocating for specific claims reform, B.C. needs to be directly involved in this entire process.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

You have just 15 more seconds.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Chief Atleo was the B.C. Assembly of First Nations regional chief and was also a co-author, a co-chair of this process. Does that represent consultation in terms of British Columbia being at the table?

[Debbie Abbott]

The challenge was quite simply that they were bound not to discuss publicly what was in the process and what the final decision was. So we have no real sense of the input that was required.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Jean Crowder]

Thank you, Ms. Abbott.

We will now go to the five-minute round, and we'll be alternating on either side of the table here.

Ms. Karetak-Lindell.

[Nancy Karetak-Lindell, Liberal, Nunavut, NU]

Thank you, Chair.

And thank you for appearing before our committee.

Just to go further on the consultation questions that Mr. Bruinooge started out with, we're never quite on the same side when we talk about consultation. I always feel there needs to be better consultation when we're drafting legislation and that it needs to be a true partnership, not just token, as I've seen it in the last little while.

From your answers, I'm getting the feeling that you don't feel there was enough in-depth consultation, and I know you're nodding. What do you think should have been the process to get input, especially British Columbia's, as you say, because of the numbers of claims there? I know it's very difficult also to make one legislation that is going to serve everyone to the same extent, because we have a very large country, and situations in different parts of Canada can be very different. From your point of view from a province where the claims are very different from those in other parts of the country, what do you need to see to feel that this legislation is going to serve the best interests of the first nations in B.C.?

[Debbie Abbott]

Very quickly, I really feel there needs to be a tour of the communities. The region is very diversified and there needs to be a tour of the claims research units as well. As an example, in my community, Lytton, we have approximately 55 small reserves. So when you come from a community with those kinds of complexities, to really get to understand our issues, we would really encourage a tour of the communities to see the challenges.

[Nancy Karetak-Lindell, Liberal, Nunavut, NU]

So you feel, then, that there wasn't enough consultation to draft this legislation the way it is.

[Debbie Abbott]

Yes.