Thank you, Chair.
Thank you to the chiefs for attending this morning.
Chief Bearspaw, I have stayed at your resort, and it was very fine indeed. Thank you.
I want to go where Mr. Russell went, on this fiduciary duty, because I think it's key to what we're looking at here.
I received a letter, which was sent on February 19, talking about an amendment to Bill C-5 that would confer powers to first nations that are currently done on their behalf by IOGC. This would include applying to the cancellation of oil and gas leases due to non-payment of royalties or in cases of non-compliance with terms and conditions of a lease.
When IOGC officials appeared before the committee on March 3, the committee heard that first nations were consulted and involved in the decision-making process leading to the cancellation of a lease. As recently as November 28, they proceeded to cancel a lease. We had chiefs and councils involved in every step with IOGC before the final decision on cancellation, but the decision remained with IOGC acting as a manager or regulator--a trustee.
We heard last week from IOGC that they do not have a mandate from their membership of chiefs and councils to entertain any changes that would have the potential to alter the fiduciary relationship, duties, and responsibilities of the crown. Since that February 19 letter, we now seem to have an altered position from yours. You're now seeking an amendment that would empower the first nation to direct the minister to cancel the lease. It now appears you're suggesting the decision to cancel would belong to the first nation, yet the responsibility and consequences of that decision would remain with the minister.
I think we need some clarification. Are you suggesting that first nations be given the unilateral decision to cancel the lease with no responsibilities or consequences? That is my first question.
Second, if that is indeed what you were seeking, then why would you not pursue it under the umbrella of the First Nations Oil and Gas and Moneys Management Act rather than under this legislation?