Evidence of meeting #18 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was coalition.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
LaVar Payne Conservative Medicine Hat, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
My questions are through you to the witnesses. First of all, I'd like to thank you all for coming out here today. I know it's a big effort. It's important that we hear your voices.
As I understand it, in May 2010, the government announced an action plan to improve northern regulatory regimes, which certainly had three objectives: a more efficient process; enhanced environmental monitoring through implementation of the NWT; and impact monitoring of the Nunavut general monitoring program. And it would reflect an aboriginal voice. How is this contributing to the fulfilment of land claims agreement obligations and the creation of a more efficient regulatory regime in the north?
It's open to anyone who would like to answer.
11:55 a.m.
Grand Chief, Council of Yukon First Nations, Land Claims Agreements Coalition
For the Yukon region, the Government of Canada has not shared that document with us. We've heard about it. Our organization has not received a copy of it. We know about it. For us, it is the implementation of our agreements that we follow.
Our expectation is that the federal government will meet its obligations in the agreements. We use our agreements on a daily basis. When we come up against an issue or whatever, it just seems that they never have time to hear about it. I'm pleased that we have the opportunity to come before you today to speak about some of these issues with you. I know they say they're implementing the agreements, but they are not doing a very good job of fulfilling all of the tasks within.
11:55 a.m.
Director of Implementation, Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., Land Claims Agreements Coalition
In the case of NGMP, as I mentioned earlier, it's at a very early stage. They're still going through the research stage of what the priorities should be and where they start. So the NGMP—Nunavut general monitoring plan—still hasn't made a big difference at this stage. It's still just revamping, because the funding didn't actually come through until the fall of 2010.
11:55 a.m.
Alastair Campbell Senior Policy Advisor, Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., Land Claims Agreements Coalition
There was a review that was done for, at the time, the Minister of Indian Affairs, which was completed in 2009, and headed up by Mr. McCrank on northern regulatory process. The vast bulk of that was focused on the Northwest Territories, so I will not comment on that.
In terms of Nunavut, he basically thought the Nunavut system was working reasonably well. He did recommend amendments to the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement that in fact happened prior to his report being published. He also recommended the enactment of legislation that is being developed now, and the clarification of....
Yes, one of the issues he recommended that required the amendment of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement was to clarify the responsibilities of the Nunavut Impact Review Board as against the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. That certainly happened, or the legislation I guess will happen soon, we hope.
I guess a lot of the problem here is the time that it has taken from when things get decided to when they get implemented. The Nunavut general monitoring program should have been done not long after the agreement was started, but it's 2010 before it gets going. Even with what are called IPGs, institutions of public government, basically the impact review boards—Mr. Kunuk referred to the fact that there were recommendations by a conciliator, Thomas Berger, on closing the gap and agreeing on funding for these boards. I think the agreement was actually reached on the amounts of money in 2006, but it's 2008 before it begins to flow.
There are just generally problems of lag and delay. So, yes, it's true, as the minister said, things are happening, but things are happening that should have happened years ago, and there are other things that should be happening that aren't happening.
Noon
Conservative
Noon
NDP
Kennedy Stewart NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for your presentations today.
I represent Burnaby—Douglas in British Columbia, and it's the heart of Coast Salish territory there. So I have many discussions and regular meetings with Tsleil-Waututh Chief Justin George, and also with Leah George-Wilson, who is the current co-chair of the B.C. summit. So my perspective on this is from the British Columbia perspective.
I'm also a member of another committee, which is natural resources, and although I'm just subbing here today for Carol Hughes, the discussions that we're having in that committee echo what we are hearing here—that the major barriers to investment in the north seem to be issues of clouded title and unresolved treaty or land claims obligations. We're finding on that committee—we've heard from many first nations, Inuit groups, and companies interested in investing—that until these things move along, we're going to have significant barriers to any kind of investment. So I really appreciate you coming here and giving us concrete ideas of how we can move ahead with that.
My direct interest is in settling B.C. treaties. I have talked to a number of first nations groups there that are extremely frustrated with the process, and it doesn't sound like it gets much better after agreements are signed. So I'm just wondering—and this is asking you to perhaps share some of your discussions you've had with other nations—whether your experiences with the slow implementation of land claims deals has perhaps put a chill on other first nations that are interested in resolving their treaties. Has the government's failure to honour commitments had major negative impacts on your communities, and is it also having ripple effects in other communities?
I just leave that open. Perhaps the grand chief can start, and maybe over to Mr. McKay.
Thank you.
Noon
Grand Chief, Council of Yukon First Nations, Land Claims Agreements Coalition
For our region, we have three first nations that do not have signed agreements. They are watching our lack of progress in the implementation of our land claims and our self-government agreements, and it's not very encouraging for them to go forward. They are trying to look over what our issues are, and until some of them are resolved, they're not encouraged to go to the table at this point at all.
Noon
Chair, Nisga'a Nation, and Coalition Co-chair, Land Claims Agreements Coalition
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
And I thank you for the question.
As you know, sir, the Nisga’a treaty is the first modern land claims agreement in British Columbia. We don't want to be misunderstood here. Notwithstanding the challenges that we are encountering in implementing our treaty in a more effective and efficient way, we strongly believe in the value and the opportunities that are contained in our treaty. We feel that if we can convince Canada to work with us in producing a more effective way of implementing our land claims agreement, we will maximize those opportunities.
That is really what we wanted to say at this point, Mr. Chair.
Noon
NDP
Kennedy Stewart NDP Burnaby—Douglas, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Recently Premier Christy Clark has made some comments about moving away from the treaty process, moving into co-management perhaps as the only way for first nations in British Columbia. I'm just wondering if you have any reflections on those comments and whether they're helpful or whether they're perhaps not as helpful.
Again, I'll leave that open to whoever would like to comment.
12:05 p.m.
Chair, Nisga'a Nation, and Coalition Co-chair, Land Claims Agreements Coalition
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
From the Nisga’a Nation's perspective, we're glad we got our treaty. We're quite happy with it, thank you very much.
The premise of the treaty—as you all know, as the history of the Nisga’a land question is well documented—was to re-empower the Nisga’a Nation by replacing the Indian Act with self-government and other opportunities that would allow us to become self-determining once again. That's our perspective.
I obviously can't speak for other first nations, but we do on a regular basis share our experiences with other first nations, either those who are currently at the negotiating table in British Columbia to various extents or indeed those first nations who have recently achieved modern treaties and are looking to benefit from our experience in meeting the various challenges in implementing our treaty.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Clarke Conservative Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I thank the witnesses for coming in.
Being first nation, I'm very curious as to how these negotiations go. But first, five minutes isn't very much time, so I'm going to be keeping my questions fairly short.
I understand the Nisga’a government has recently passed an innovative suit for legislation that would hold the land in fee simple. Now there are four points to that. Can you break that down further and speak about the four pieces of legislation?
12:05 p.m.
Chair, Nisga'a Nation, and Coalition Co-chair, Land Claims Agreements Coalition
Thank you for the question.
Recently, in 2008, the Nisga’a Lisims Government enacted the Nisga’a Landholding Transition Act under Nisga’a laws. This will transform our current landholding system to move to individual fee simple ownership of residential properties. This is only possible for the Nisga’a because of our nation's ownership of our lands under our treaty and our ability to make laws. It comes at an enormous cost, and it is a very complex area for us to undertake.
Notwithstanding those points, we have a clear mandate. We had a clear mandate from our citizens to move in this direction, and that's where the impetus came from. While doing this, we've had limited financial support from Canada. The transformation of our residential properties to fee simple ownership is unprecedented in aboriginal communities, not only in Canada but indeed around the world. It represents, sir, major opportunities, and we strongly believe it needs the full support of all levels of government working in concert with the Nisga’a Lisims Government.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Clarke Conservative Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
From my notes here, there's the new Nisga'a Land Title Act, the Nisga'a Property Law Act, the Nisga'a Law and Equity Act, and the Nisga'a Partition of Property Act.
How many levels of government are working collaboratively from the first nations' standpoint? There's a regional government and the individual first nations governments as well. I'm going toward capacity. I'm wondering how many governments are working collaboratively toward this agreement.
12:05 p.m.
Chair, Nisga'a Nation, and Coalition Co-chair, Land Claims Agreements Coalition
An important point is that's the first we've heard of those pieces of legislation. The Nisga'a Landholding Transition Act was passed by our government in 2008. Right now we are working toward the administrative support necessary, the regime, and the regulatory regime to put that into effect.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Clarke Conservative Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
My question right now is on the levels of government, because I'm very short on time here. It's capacity-driven, correct? How many levels of government are working together from the first nations' standpoint? Is it the regional government and then the first nations government?
12:05 p.m.
Chair, Nisga'a Nation, and Coalition Co-chair, Land Claims Agreements Coalition
First of all, the senior government for our lands is the Nisga'a Lisims Government. It's the central government. Then we have four Nisga'a villages. Each of them has a village government, and they have jurisdiction over their village lands.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Clarke Conservative Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
Right.
How is this money allocated? You mentioned $10 million...or how much is allocated each year for these negotiations?
12:10 p.m.
Chair, Nisga'a Nation, and Coalition Co-chair, Land Claims Agreements Coalition
There were no negotiations. These are law-making powers that are opportunities within our treaty.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Clarke Conservative Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
How much money are you receiving to process this?
12:10 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Nisga'a Nation, Land Claims Agreements Coalition
I'll try to clarify.
The Landholding Transition Act was an initiative of the Nisga'a Nation to exercise its legal jurisdiction over its lands. It didn't require negotiations with other levels of government, say the federal or provincial government. So I'm not quite sure what—
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Clarke Conservative Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK
I'm just kind of curious. I see other negotiations taking place, and I see the Government of Canada providing funding. I'm just wondering how much money is funded to the Nisga'a.
