Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 17th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you very much.

It is now Mr. Lévesque's turn; he has the floor for five minutes.

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

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I would like to give you a bit of context about my region because I am from the other coast of Canada, very close to where my colleague Mr. Russell is from.

In my riding, within the first nations community, there are groups such as the Cree, who are part of the Grand Council of the Crees but who also have ties with the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador. The Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador has ties with the grand chief of the Assembly of First Nations.

Do you function in the same way?

My question is for Grand Chief Carvill.

[Grand Chief Andy Carvill]

Thank you.

In large part, we do function along those lines. There are, however, some first nations that are not members of CYFN.

We try to represent the members as best we can on various issues. The direction comes from the people in the communities as well as from the chiefs, the leaders of those communities.

But again, there are some members we do not represent. We do not speak on their behalf.

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

Mr. Johnston, your community appears to be quite well structured. From time to time, resource development projects or public utility projects are carried out in your communities. Have you been able to negotiate job placement priority for the members of your community?

[Chief Peter Johnston]

Yes. We are given the ability through chapter 22 of our self-government agreements. It does allow us the privilege, in regard to traditional territories, of having priority over that. However, in order to incorporate it, it has to be the will of the government of the day.

We struggle from time to time just to be relevant as a government in the Yukon, let alone a government within our own traditional area. We are sometimes overlooked in regard to opportunities that come forward, in regard to million-dollar projects. We have to fight against the current, if you will, not only to be recognized but also to be part of the opportunity.

I relate it back to the government of the day. It's all in their will to include us. Unfortunately, outside of having a government-to-government protocol that identifies this--which we think is irrelevant at this time because we do have self-government agreements that allow us the opportunity--basically, it's the will of the government. And if it is onside in regard to building partnerships, opportunities will come.

However, the present-day successes we've had, even dating back to the last 15 years of self-government, have been very minimal due to the fact that...just the recognition of being a self-government, let alone having the opportunities to engage in investment within our own community. So we are well ahead of ourselves, I guess, in the sense of providing opportunities to our citizens, but it's been on our dollar.

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

If I understand correctly, you need to strengthen the agreements you have signed, agreements that suggest you have authority. Not only do you need to feel that you have authority, but you also need to be able to use it. I wonder if Mr. Mills feels the same, even though he said there are very few unemployed people in his community.

Mr. Carvill might be able to give us a better idea. Are the people in your communities open to shifting, as other Canadians have done, from cultural activities in order to meet the requirements of job opportunities in industrial, mining and other sectors?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Could you please make your answer brief?

[Grand Chief Andy Carvill]

I believe a lot of our members are moving in those areas with respect to change. You asked if they are ready to change from more cultural activities into various sectors, various economic opportunities, that come into our area. They are adaptable to the change while at the same time maintaining a lot of their traditional beliefs and culture.

However, it is difficult. A lot of my colleagues have spoken about it, and I'll touch on it as well. A large part of the difficulty around economic development, as Chief Johnston said, is the recognition of first nations governance and implementation. The lack of implementation policy, as I think Victoria mentioned, is undermining our agreements.

We're part of the LCAC, Land Claims Agreement Coalition. We've had various meetings, and we have presented an implementation policy for the Government of Canada's review. It hasn't to this point in time gone anywhere, which is unfortunate.

It's not just us in the Yukon. It's those with modern treaties who have these difficulties around the implementation of our agreements, the agreements we entered into that we felt would give us the tools to make a difference in our communities.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you very much.

Chief Johnston, do you have something to add?

[Chief Peter Johnston]

Yes, I'd like to add to Chief Carvill's statement.

We, as first nations, need to have a balance with regard to economic development. We've come from a traditional background, a cultural background, and we realize we need to have our tradition on one side and the contemporary on the other. However, we do need to keep in our minds that we are part of the land, the water. That is who we are as first nations people. When we talk about economic development, it's not about giving it all up. We have to think many generations down the road with regard to success.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Okay.

Thank you very much, Mr. Lévesque.

Now we welcome, Mr. Bevington.

I'm glad you could join us after probably an early morning or late night flight—one or the other. It's great to have you here, Dennis.

We're on track for five minutes, and then we'll go to Mr. Rickford.

Mr. Bevington, five minutes.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

I am glad to be here in the Yukon, and I welcome the delegations. Coming from the Northwest Territories, of course, I look for similarities and differences in what's happening in the territories and how we can take advantage of those understandings to advance us all.

You've experienced a fair degree of devolution in this territory, and I heard some comments about that. I'd like to get a sense of where you feel this devolution has to go in order to provide satisfaction in terms of self-government arrangements, to understand the problems or the solutions that can come with the devolution process.

[Grand Chief Andy Carvill]

Thank you. I have a brief comment on devolution. Some of the chiefs have spoken about it at great length and the fact that devolution can be wonderful too. But again, as Chief Johnston commented, that is provided we can work together. As governments, we need to be able to work together.

The care of the lands being devolved to the Yukon government may work fine for us in theory. We've talked about how it can work, but unfortunately we're not there yet. We continue to try to move to where we can sit down with the government to look at a relationship that allows us to be more involved with the issues that involve land and the resources on that land.

The way we thought devolution was going to work was more along the lines of partnerships and collaboration. We continue to try to move the bar in that area.

The care of the lands being devolved to YTG.... They're agents acting on behalf of the crown. Not to be too repetitive, one fine example is the court case we just attended in Ottawa, the Little Salmon/Carmacks case, which was on lands and accommodation consultation. I think if devolution were working the way we had intended it to originally, we could avoid these instances.

Thank you.

[Chief Peter Johnston]

Just to reflect on Grand Chief Carvill's comments, opportunity for success is going to come through partnerships. The first nations are here for the long haul. We have been here for generations. We continue not only to invest in our territory, but also to be key role players in regard to moving things forward. In terms of the economy of the Yukon, for the last 15 years we've provided that stabilization through our agreements, which allow three levels of government to cooperate and to work together. And there are opportunities, I believe, if we're building strong partnerships built on respect.

On accountability, we are one of the most accountable governments in the world in terms of the reporting processes and the obligations that we have signed on for in regard to our responsibilities; however, we are sometimes not taken quite seriously in terms of what we can accomplish. We are in a small territory that represents 30,000 people. There are well over a billion dollars being pumped into this territory; however, we are still going hat in hand in regard to a lot of these opportunities, which are not being provided straightforwardly to the first nations.

We want to be key players here. We want to be accountable. We want to create a legacy, not only for our first nations people, but on behalf of first nations across Canada, and, more importantly, with Yukoners in general.

Thank you. Gunalcheesh.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Is there another comment on that?

[Stephen Mills]

Thank you, Mr. Bevington.

I have a couple of things.

One thing that's occurred with regard to devolution is that it's clarified, in some cases, the responsibility for management of some resources. The problem is that it has also made it a bit unclear where the line is between some of the existing federal departments and the territorial government and first nations. A good example of that is that there's some crossover between the responsibilities of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Transport Canada, and Natural Resources Canada. I think the issue here is that there is still some uncertainty as to who in fact has regulatory control on certain actions that take place in the Yukon. I'm not saying that all should be devolved to the territorial government; I'm saying there needs to be more clarity as to the relationship between the federal and territorial governments and the first nations. I think that's a legacy of the devolution to date.

The other side I would just point out is that it has made governments that are responsible for regulation also the governments that are promoting certain activities. It's a tough hat to wear when the hat is both the promoter's as well as the regulator's.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bevington and witnesses.

Now we'll go to Mr. Rickford, for five minutes.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the witnesses.

I'm going to direct most of my questions to Grand Chief Carvill.

I'd just like to make an opening comment about the uniqueness of some of the rounds of funding that have come out of Canada's economic action plan that have, for the first time in some instances, very much included first nations. I'm thinking of the recreational infrastructure program and the community adjustment fund. I can say that in the Kenora riding there was more than equal distribution, identifying that the success of the riding really depends on the full participation and integration of the first nations community in the economic development model that emerges from the region. That's objective feedback that I've been getting from more than 42 first nations that reside in my riding, and three treaties of adhesion, including Nishnawbe Aski Nation and Treaty 3.

I very much respect the work you have in terms of gaining consensus with all of the first nations in the Yukon. I want to just flesh out some issues you raised. I don't want to quote you per se, but it seems to me there was a concern that funds were primarily flowing through the Yukon government and perhaps municipalities, which might suggest a policy disconnect between first nations and this territorial government. One of the observations I would have made in the last round is that there were not any senior bureaucrats from first nations. I know there is certain and absolute value in self-government, but I also know that the participation of first nations people in senior bureaucratic levels can be an essential way of shoring up some of those policy disconnects when you're dealing with a region.

I'm wondering if you work closely with any of the levels of government to do things like secondments, where people from some of the first nations communities can go into senior bureaucratic positions. What kinds of consultation exercises might you engage in? When I say consultation, I'm not necessarily referring to the lawful ones that you're dealing with now, that the courts are dealing with, and other partnerships. Take a few minutes just to expound and perhaps share your thoughts on some of those ideas.

[Grand Chief Andy Carvill]

I'll take a couple of minutes, if I may. I think these are questions that Chief Johnston and some others in the communities dealing with these issues around capacity matters are better to answer. I can just give you a quick CYFN perspective.

First, when you talk about funds, and funds being delivered or coming into the Yukon government, and then you tie that into policy and how it affects first nations governments, we are able to sit down with the Yukon government and work on some of the funds that have come in from the federal government to the Yukon.

One example goes back a couple of years. It's northern housing allocation. We were very appreciative of the fact that this kind of money came north to assist us with our lack of housing in the communities. However, we had to go into a long, drawn-out process negotiating these funds with the Yukon government. At first there was some miscommunication. We were under the understanding that a lot of these funds—the concept came out of the Kelowna accord—were to be funds for first nations. Then it changed along the way and we got mixed messages saying, yes, it was first nations funds, and then it changed to, well, it's northern housing funding.

Anyway, when we're talking about funding coming north, a large portion of it goes to the Yukon government. We're beyond that now. The first nations governments are very capable of taking care of these funds. They don't need the Yukon government to be acting like a big brother and doling out these funds or sitting down to negotiate with first nations governments as to how these funds can be accessed and then you report back to the Yukon government.

I think Chief Johnston spoke quite eloquently about that earlier with respect to first nations accountability. We're the most accountable governments around, yet we're still having to answer, I guess you could say, to the Yukon government. And it's just not right. As I said, there are first nations governments, and the chiefs have said that we need to start removing that barrier, getting more funds to the people in the communities, where it makes more of an impact on the ground, instead of going through the various lines of bureaucracy.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We are out of time there, but does anyone else want to chime in on that?

[Chief Peter Johnston]

Okay. I'll talk quickly.

We do have a representative service plan, which is an agreement between first nations and the government with regard to capacity building, where we're not only able to second government officials into our communities and into our governments to assist, but we're also able to take our citizens and bring them into the larger government to get the abilities there.

However, it comes back to the will of the government. They're not pushing these opportunities forward, and they are not making a big campaign, in a sense, to bring these opportunities to the communities. So everything we have to do is always above and beyond what we're currently doing. We do suffer from a lack of annual funding coming to the government, which causes us to be overworked to a certain degree, but if we had adequate funding, then the capacity issues and everything else that comes with that would I think be a mirage in that sense. Not only would we be able to fulfill our requirements for self-government, but we'd have educated citizens within those positions of government also.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Chief.

Mr. Wilson, very briefly if you can. We are really well over time here.

Go ahead, Mr. Wilson.

[Gary Wilson]

I'll just use an example of the Infrastructure Canada and the Building Canada funds over the last couple of years. Because we're self-governing first nations, we don't have access to the Indian and Northern Affairs funding for first nations infrastructure. So when Infrastructure Canada came to the Yukon to negotiate the Building Canada funds, first nations weren't included, yet those are the funds we have to utilize to build infrastructure in our communities.

Supposedly there was a process put in play in order to create a business plan that would reflect our needs. That, frankly, didn't happen, because all of a sudden we had a depression on our doorstep and we had to get the money out the door. Now we don't have any real access to any infrastructure dollars in our community. We have a hospital being built in our community, a sewage treatment plant being built in our community, some housing being built in our community, and a new college being built in our community. I can tell you that the first nations are involved in one of those projects because we brought the right team to the table, not because government came to us, asking us how we could participate.

So not to put a fine point on this, but a very blunt and direct point, in lots of ways, although the land claims are there and they exist to make it work in partnership, you have to have the will of the territorial government.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We're allowing a little more room here. Let's carry on.

Thank you, Mr. Rickford and witnesses.

Let's carry on now with Mr. Russell.

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Thank you.

It seems like the more witnesses we hear, the more colour comes into the picture, if I can use that phraseology. You hear about the non-harmonization of the environmental assessment process from the Yukon government. It's a model in forward thinking that is, at least to some extent, replicated across the country. But I hear a little different nuance when I listen to some of the witnesses in front of us. I get a sense that there's an urban-rural divide, an aboriginal and non-aboriginal divide, within the Yukon itself. I think that's something that we have to be cognizant of as a committee.

Have the witnesses endorsed recommendations that have been made through the Land Claims Agreement Coalition? If we're looking for ways to make recommendations, some of this work has been done through the Land Claims Agreement Coalition, and I've met with them. Could we look to their report and their recommendations for some guidance if we wanted to make recommendations from this committee? Would that sit well with the witnesses?