Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Oct. 22nd, 2012

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

All right, that's fine.

[Joseph Richard Quesnel]

Yes, I do believe in a government-to-government relationship, but the way you're phrasing it, it's not as simple as that. We have subsection 91(24). We have the Indian Act. It's not as easy as you're making it when we're talking about first nations governments.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Okay. Phyllis.

[Phyllis Sutherland]

Yes, I believe in a relationship, with a lot of work still going on.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Fundamentally, this bill is telling first nations governments how to disclose information. That's not the case with provinces, territories. They have made their own rules. In fact, if you look at Quebec, public sector salaries are considered personal information; they're not disclosed. In Ontario they only disclose the salaries of those who earn more than $100,000. In British Columbia it's anyone earning over $75,000. Governments make their own choices about how information is handled.

Do you think first nations have any rights in making the choices about how the information about their financial matters is handled?

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Mr. Bevington, you didn't indicate who you wanted that question to go to and your time is up. I don't know if there's somebody you wanted to direct that to.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Fair enough. I'm coming back.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Okay. I'll come back to you.

We'll turn now to Mr. Wilks for the second seven minutes.

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

And thank you to the witnesses for coming today.

So far, I've been quite pleased with the dialogue we've had on Bill C-27. All of the groups that have come forward have come with ideas and suggestions for this committee. That's what they are: ideas and suggestions.

The input we have received so far has promoted and fostered a good working relationship with a number of these groups, and everyone here is passionate about Bill C-27. That said, Mr. Chair, my questions will be directed toward Mr. Craig. I have a couple here, so we'll try to get through them in the seven minutes.

I wonder if you could explain to the committee how organizations such as yours can help first nations members access the financial information of their elected officials and why this legislation is important.

[Colin Craig]

Right now, bands are required to give this information to grassroots band members. What I heard from many different grassroots band members was that they would ask their chiefs and councillors for information, such as how much their elected officials were making, whether or not it was the whole audit document, and all kinds of other stuff, and quite often they would be met with a brick wall. They wouldn't get the information.

Then they would go to their local office of the Department of Aboriginal and Northern Development and ask for the information, and they'd be told to go back to their bands for the information. In fact, when I talked to a government spokesperson, I said the problem was that they were putting people in a situation where they were having to chase their tails. They were never getting the answer.

So what happens? They're saying band members have this right. Do they ultimately give them the information? The spokesperson said yes, ultimately, they will give them the information. If we set up a website and tell band members they have the right to this information, but they can't get it from their local band office.... I wanted to know who they should talk to in the federal government. They said it should go to the national allegations and complaints office. I asked what language...we worked through the whole process so that we could eventually set up a website to tell band members exactly how they could get it. Still, sometimes it would take a while before they could get the information.

It shouldn't be an arduous task for band members to get it. Making it a routine disclosure to put this information on the Internet is actually in keeping with what provincial and federal politicians across this country have. With a few mouse clicks I can find out how much every single member of Parliament in the room is being paid. So can everyone else. It's perfectly reasonable to expect reserve politicians to have their pay disclosed as well.

That was one of the ways we've been able to help band members get this information.

One of the other things we've heard from taxpayers, as I mentioned, is that they'd like to know how public funds are being spent on reserves.

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Thank you.

My second question is directed to all four of you, if we have time. It's a three-phase question.

First of all, what benefits do you see for first nations leaders from disclosing their salaries and expenses? Second, what benefits do you see for the first nations members from receiving that information? And third, what benefits do you see for all Canadians from having first nations make their financial statements available?

If I could hear from you, that would be great, starting with Mr. Craig, or whoever's ready.

[Colin Craig]

I'll start with the question about benefits to leaders. I want to stress again that we have never once said that we believe all leaders on reserves are filling their pockets with money and hiding the information from their band members—far from it.

In fact, I met with a chief from a northern community in Manitoba. He wanted to meet with me. We sat down and we talked. He said, “Here's my pay information.” He had no problem with disclosing it. He is open with his community and so forth. I think putting this information online would help leaders like him and many others who are very open and accountable, because it would remove that shadow that has been cast on many aboriginal leaders. I think that's one way how it would help them.

For band members, of course, it would let them know more about how funds are being spent in their community. It's the same thing that the average Canadian living off reserve wants: they want to know how their tax dollars are being spent.

It will help the grassroots understand what their leadership is doing with the money. If they see that their leaders are all making exorbitant sums of money, then they'll think twice about re-electing them. We've seen that in a couple of cases now since we've exposed what has been happening. In two communities in the Maritimes—I believe both were in Nova Scotia—the Annapolis Valley First Nation and the Glooscap reserve, once the salaries were disclosed, there was widespread change in terms of the elected officials there. I think that's one way it can help the grassroots.

In terms of Canadians, as I mentioned before, we've talked with a lot of taxpayers and people off reserve who are saying that they want to know how funds are being spent in reserve communities, because they've heard of all kinds of examples of misuse and abuse over the years. They have heard from people like Phyllis and from many others who come forward and cry out for help. They want to know how public funds are being spent and which communities are doing good things and how they can support them.

[John Graham]

I won't repeat a lot of what Mr. Craig said, but I'll just add a few points on own-source revenue, which I mentioned in my last point. I think there is a clear tendency, where discretionary funding is involved—in the federal government, that would primarily be in the area of economic development and perhaps major capital projects such as schools, water, and the like—that those funds probably disproportionately go to high-performing first nations, because they have the capacity, the moxie, and the relationships to access that money.

The poorer first nations I think tend to be the ones that have the least capacity to access those funds, so having better information on own-source revenue I think will help at least some leaders indicate that the first nations that are probably most in need of new and better financing are not getting it. I think there is a skewing of the financing towards the high-capacity first nations, which clearly is something that I think, from a public policy point of view, you want to question.

I think the other issue in terms of Canadians as a whole has to do with getting a better picture on how first nations are actually funded. Own-source revenue is increasing fairly dramatically, I believe. I've never seen a really good study indicating what percentage own-source revenue is of total revenues, but clearly it is increasing rapidly and will increase rapidly.

I think for all Canadians it's in everybody's best interests to have a sense of just what this own-source revenue is, how it's increasing, and who's getting it. Then the question becomes, for high-performing first nations with own-source revenue, should we be treating them like provinces? Should fiscal transfers from the federal government take into account own-source revenue? My view would be yes, eventually.

I think this kind of debate...knowing that we have better information on own-source revenue, we can have a much better public debate on just those very difficult issues.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you, Mr. Graham.

We'll turn to Ms. Murray now, for seven minutes.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Thank you.

Thanks for being here to present to the committee.

I spent 25 years building a business from small to medium-sized, so I'm very interested in the issue of own-source revenue. The concern that I know some first nations have expressed is that it would challenge their competitiveness to have the kind of disclosure that's contemplated. In British Columbia, there are first nations that have investments in resorts, wineries, forestry, construction, and road building, in all sorts of industries that are extremely competitive.

Can you, Mr. Graham, see a potential situation in which the disclosure of the information on the own-source revenue might give a competitive disadvantage to a first nation in terms of competing for some work?

[John Graham]

This comes down to what the level of transparency is here.

I think the bill is meant to have a fairly high level of information in terms of own-source revenue. I cannot see a real problem for the business, such as a winery, if your financial statements indicate either total revenue or perhaps net revenue for what that business is accumulating. If you were to give information on its various product lines, that's another story, but I don't think the bill contemplates that kind of micro, fine-level information that would be of real advantage to a competitor.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

It seems that the minister made a general statement that this wouldn't disclose proprietary information. However, how is that being defined? In my view, if you track a business's expenditures on marketing, and it changes, you could tell by a dynamic analysis of the consolidated statement what this company is perhaps planning to do, where they have focused their investments. From my perspective, it would be very concerning.

I would ask a question of Mr. Quesnel.

You have done some very extensive consultation to hear from first nations in the Prairies, you were saying—was it 3,000 or 30,000?

[Joseph Richard Quesnel]

There were 3,000 respondents and 32 individual first nations communities.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Okay. Now we have a bill that has just widened the scope of what it's expecting, with no consultation, as far as I understand.

Of the 3,000, how many of those members of the first nations communities were consulted about what might compromise the competitive position of the band's free enterprise activities?

Can you answer?

The way I want to put it is how does one increase accountability by doing something that was completely untransparent, with no consultation? Is consultation not part of accountability?

[Joseph Richard Quesnel]

Are you talking about this bill in particular?

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Yes.

[Joseph Richard Quesnel]

As far as I know, there have been other witnesses; there have been other first nations. No bill proceeds directly right from the grassroots, unless we're talking about some kind of citizens' initiative or something.

As I was saying, we don't have the well-funded lobby groups that speak for citizens. You're starting to see with the Peguis Accountability Coalition, the Treaty 3 Grassroots Citizens Coalition, or back when the First Nations Governance Act was being introduced, with Leona Freed starting the First Nations Accountability Coalition.... But those groups don't get the funding. They can't send their representatives out here. The closest thing we have is asking people directly if they think they should disclose.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Thank you. I appreciate that.

What I'm hearing is that you don't feel it is that important because people can speak to the bill after it's out there, and consulting on how it's actually put together isn't such a priority. I'm sorry—

[Joseph Richard Quesnel]

That's not what I said.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

I don't mean to cut you off. I just have another question.