Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on April 23rd, 2009

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Yes, I understand that, but we have three different levels here. I guess I'm trying to look at it in a bigger picture and asking whether we should not be sharing that information. Or alternately, why wouldn't we do a three party audit to get all the facts all together for everybody at the same time and come to the same kind of conclusions?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

A brief response.

[Sheila Fraser]

I can just say that we consulted with, of course, provincial authorities when we did this audit, as we consulted with first nations. But of course the choice of audits is up to each jurisdiction, and this was a narrower, more focused follow-up audit of the previous recommendations.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Mr. Clarke and Mr. Payne.

Mr. Lemay, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

I'm going to try to be briefer than that, Mr. Chairman.

During the discussions on land claims, did you hear any remarks about the establishment of reserve lands in a national park?

[Sheila Fraser]

No, we're not aware of that.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Okay.

Let's go now to Mr. Duncan.

[John Duncan, Conservative, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Thank you. I wanted to follow up on my last set of questions.

You indicated the department supported first nations in Saskatchewan in addressing third party claims, but not first nations in Manitoba. From what I heard you say, you said that was based on conversations with first nations and with a conversation with departmental officials in Saskatchewan. I did not hear you say the department in Manitoba said they did not support first nations in addressing third party claims. I'm just wondering if that is definitely the case, and if not, then you're basing your evidence on outside interest.

I just found that statement to be very---

[Sheila Fraser]

Perhaps, Mr. Chair, I wasn't clear. I understood the question to be how did we know they were doing this in Saskatchewan.

But we did have discussions with officials in Manitoba and we also obtained evidence through a file review. What we say in our reports is not just based on conversations; it's also having documented evidence. We saw that in Saskatchewan they were doing this and we saw that in Manitoba they were not, and they confirmed that with us. The committee may not be aware that as part of our process in all these audits we provide draft reports to the department in the whole audit process. At the end of the audit, the department confirms to us that the facts are correct. So the department has confirmed to us in writing that they agree with what we have presented in the report.

[John Duncan, Conservative, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Thank you for the clarification.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Mr. Duncan.

I'm going to use the remaining slot for a follow-up question, Madam Fraser.

You mentioned that you're looking at possibly doing an audit on the issue of northern economic development. This would be of some interest to our committee because we're in the stages of trying to scope down a direction that will be meaningful for this committee's considerations as well. I wonder if you could give us an indication of what the timing or the scope of that committee might be.

[Sheila Fraser]

We are planning to table the audit in May 2010. I can ask Mr. Campbell to give you the scope. If you have any suggestions, we would be more than happy to consider them as well.

[Ronnie Campbell]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As the Auditor General says, we're planning to report in May 2010. We're looking specifically at the Northwest Territories because we need to scope it in some manageable way. The Auditor General is also the auditor of the territories, so our territorial audit team is going to be doing some work on the actions of the territorial government.

Frank's team, under my direction, is going to be looking at what the federal government has done to prepare for economic development in the north. We're looking at the settlement of land claims, going back to the Berger commission, where Justice Berger had recommended settlement of land claims before development really got going. So we're going to look at action going back a fair bit in time. We're also going to look at the establishment of a regulatory framework. It looks as if one is in place. As the other member has brought out, the McCrank report is raising questions about how well that's working. We're also going to ask questions about what both governments have done in relation to building capacity so that the people who live in those communities are in a position to take advantage of development as and when it happens.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you. That's going to be helpful.

We'll finish up there. If there are a few remaining questions, we can go for maybe three minutes or so.

Ms. Crowder.

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

When you looked in 2003--and I think you've also identified this subsequently, about the dispute resolution mechanisms that were in place for Nunavut and Gwich'in--in your view, has there been any effort to improve those dispute resolution mechanisms?

[Sheila Fraser]

Unfortunately we have not done a follow-up specifically of that, though we are considering a pretty extensive follow-up for the spring of 2011. That could be an issue we would look at then.

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

On devolution with the transfer of federal responsibilities to Yukon, I know you had suggested in the past that there was some review and that lessons learned were applied, but my understanding is that there are also some challenges at this point in terms of the agreement between the first nations and the Yukon government and what the federal government outlined in terms of how some of those transfers should be used in light of first nations self-governance. Have you looked at any of that?

[Sheila Fraser]

No, we have not.

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

Are there any plans on looking at that?

[Sheila Fraser]

Not in the immediate future; perhaps down the road.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Ms. Crowder.

I think Mr. Russell has a brief question also.

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

It's similar to some questions that have already been asked, Mr. Chair. And I want to thank you.

On comprehensive land claims, even since you've done your report there have been new ones signed—I mean the Nisga'a, the Nunatsiavut agreement that was in Labrador—and we often get into this debate within Canada. We sign all these agreements with native people. They say, you know, we pump the money out the door—this is what some people say—and we don't get a tangible result, when they look at it. And many times it's because of the obligations of the crown that haven't been fulfilled. Even since 2005 in Nunatsiavut, which I'm familiar with in Labrador, there are already complaints about the lack of implementation, the slow dribble of funds to deliver services, and things of this nature.

Because there are so many departments involved, have you made recommendations about how to improve the efficiency of the implementation of these land claims agreements? There's going to be a big conference here in May that talks about this. Something more must be done, because this criticism will inevitably fall back on aboriginal people, and this cycle continues when really the crown is not living up to its own obligations, in my view.

[Sheila Fraser]

Certainly when we looked at the Inuvialuit, which is more than 25 years ago, at that point there was no implementation plan even produced. Now, I believe that has changed since and there is a plan. We have not assessed, though, how good those plans are, how much attention is paid, and even if there is a plan, how it is managed after the fact. We haven't really done that in any of the newer claims. That's certainly something the office could look at.

One of the big issues as well, which members mentioned, is the coordination with other departments. That came up as well in the Inuvialuit one, where commitments were being made and the departments that would have to implement them weren't even really aware.

So it's around the planning of implementation, then how it is actually carried out, whether there are the required resources dedicated to doing this, and some sort of process of evaluation at regular points in time to see if things are going as they should be or whether corrective action needs to be taken.