Evidence of meeting #14 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 39th Parliament, 2nd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was tribunal.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Director, Nlaka'pamux Nation Tribal Council, Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs
I think it's all about the first nations' confidence in it.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
That's what I'm trying to get to the bottom of. What would make you more confident, then? Appointing somebody who is in the most independent venue as far as the court system is concerned and then having outside bodies other than the government making the appointments? I'm wondering what else, what additional safeguards, could possibly assure you that these folks are more independent?
I know that for some people there are concerns. I'm just wondering what your concerns are and how we might assure you that these folks and these judges in fact are the most independent.
I don't mind if either of you comment on it.
Director, Nlaka'pamux Nation Tribal Council, Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs
I guess basically if the first nations recommendations are held in the same regard as the government's....
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
Yes, and that's specifically what I am getting to the bottom of right now. The government is not involved in the process of making these appointments. There is the justice department, which makes this recommendation out of the Superior Court judge system. So already these are independent bodies, and then of course there is that partnership with the Assembly of First Nations.
Are you concerned about the impartiality of the Assembly of First Nations?
Research Director, Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs
No. We're concerned that the first nations recommendations are not binding on the process. The ultimate responsibility and power for that I guess would lie with the DOJ, and they can take or leave the AFN's recommendations.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
So you're more specifically concerned about the Department of Justice appointing a non-partial body from within the independent Superior Court justice system.
Research Director, Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs
That the appointment process isn't truly joint.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
I'll just move on to another issue that you seem to have concerns with, and that is with regard to reserve formation. I might just draw your attention to paragraph 14(c), and of course this is with regard to grounds for compensation. I know you had concerns with regard to reserve formation and the issues surrounding that. I'm wondering how you would amend paragraph 14(c) so that it more strongly addresses the concern you identified. It reads:
(c) a breach of a legal obligation arising from the Crown's provision of reserve lands, including unilateral undertakings that give rise to a fiduciary obligation at law
--and it goes on.
I'm just wondering if you could tell me how you feel we should change that so it addresses the issue you're concerned about--reserve formation--more clearly. Clearly it's in the legislation. I'm just wondering if there's something specific that you would add or subtract from that point to alleviate that concern more fully.
Again, I don't mind, Ms. Woods, if you comment directly--either one.
Director, Nlaka'pamux Nation Tribal Council, Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs
I don't have the bill in front of me, so I can't answer that question just now, but I really would like to take the opportunity, because it's a very critical issue for us.
Conservative
Chris Warkentin Conservative Peace River, AB
I certainly understand that, from what I read here. I would maybe direct you to this section for your further consideration. If there's something specifically that you would want added or changed in the wording, maybe you could forward it, because clearly that issue is addressed here in the legislation, and certainly we want people to—
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Jean Crowder
I want to come back to the appointment of the tribunal for a moment. It relates to a question I asked earlier around the political accord. In fact, the process that includes the Assembly of First Nations is actually in the political accord, not in the legislation.
The legislation talks about the fact that the Governor in Council shall establish a roster of 6 to 18 Superior Court judges to act as members of the tribunal. The political accord says of participation in appointments to the tribunal that “The National Chief will be engaged in the process for recommending members of the Tribunal in a manner which respects the confidentiality of that process”.
My question earlier had been about confidence in the political accord. What, in your view, would need to change around the political accord and/or the legislation in order to create the level of confidence that the Assembly of First Nations or first nations would be involved in actually making binding recommendations? What, in your view, has to change?
Director, Nlaka'pamux Nation Tribal Council, Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs
First of all, I don't know whether it's because of a case of lack of resources or limited resources, but there have been no real consultations with regard to the formation of the political accord.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Jean Crowder
That's the political accord itself. I mentioned as well that we've already had experience where political accords are not honoured. What do you think needs to happen? What would you recommend to strengthen that political accord so that you would have more confidence in a political accord? Is there something that needs to be included in it?
You talk about consultation, but I'm not sure you could actually build.... If you were going to build that consultation into a political accord, what would that look like?
Director, Nlaka'pamux Nation Tribal Council, Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs
I really feel there has to be a conversation with the communities in British Columbia. Once you achieve that, then you're beginning to build the trust, and trust is so very key, because these are very tough issues. I think that is the step that was overlooked very seriously and I think it still has to happen for there to be true support of the political accord.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Jean Crowder
I can't speak for others, but I was surprised to hear that you did not have the details of either the political accord or the consultation before they came forward. I'm not clear how your input is being represented, then.
Research Director, Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs
Neither are we in B.C. The bill and the political accord were presented as they were: as we see them, as you see them.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Jean Crowder
So the consultation was represented as the fact that there were some people from British Columbia who were on the working group?
Director, Nlaka'pamux Nation Tribal Council, Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs
Yes.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Jean Crowder
But they didn't have the ability, because of confidentiality agreements, to come forth and actually talk to you about what it was. So they were bound by an agreement that actually didn't allow them to speak to you?
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Jean Crowder
It's hard to think of that as consultation, when people are tasked with doing consultation but actually can't talk to you. That's a challenge.
I'm not quite done; I still have a minute.
I want to come back a bit. I really do only have a minute, but I'm still concerned about the fact that part of the success of this bill is being presented as the fact that claims will actually be negotiated in a speedier fashion so that they won't have to go to the tribunal. I'm still not clear that, just by saying this will happen, even if you group claims, it's actually going to speed up the process. We know British Columbia is significantly underresourced and is having a lot of challenges with this.
I wonder whether you could comment on that.
Research Director, Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs
We're actually not seeing that. What we've heard about is that there are going to be reasonable minimum standards for the acceptance of claims. What we've actually been hearing from communities—I haven't heard from any in B.C. yet—in Ontario is that with regard to claims that are being submitted to specific claims branch, some of them are actually not being accepted for review because these reasonable minimum standards that are supposed to be produced jointly are actually being imposed.
NDP