Evidence of meeting #57 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 inuit.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
Colleagues, we're going to call this meeting to order.
This is the 57th meeting of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development. Today we are continuing our review of Bill C-47.
We are pleased to have with us representatives from the Qikiqtani Inuit Association. We have Ms. Eegeesiak and Mr. MacIsaac. Thanks so much for being here.
We'll turn it over to you for an opening statement, and then we'll have questions from the respective parties.
Thanks again for being here.
Josie Okalik Eegeesiak President, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
[Witness speaks in Inuktitut]
On behalf of the Qikiqtani Inuit Association, thank you for the invitation to speak to you today.
I'm here with Bernie MacIsaac, our director of lands at QIA, and our executive assistant, Hannah Uniuqsaraq.
QIA is one of the three regional Inuit associations that along with the leadership of Nunavut Tunnagavik make up the board of directors of NTI. NTI is accountable to all Inuit of Nunavut. QIA represents over 14,000 Inuit in 13 communities. We're the largest region in Nunavut. Our region includes Canada's most northern community of Grise Fiord, located on the south end of Ellesmere Island, and extends to Nunavut's southernmost community of Sanikiluaq in Hudson Bay.
One of our main responsibilities is to protect and promote the rights of Inuit established under the Inuit Land Claims Agreement. We are celebrating the 20th anniversary of the land claims this year. You're welcome to come and celebrate with us on July 9, anywhere in Nunavut.
The Nunavut Land Claims Agreement was established to provide certainty and clarity of rights to ownership and use of lands and resources, and clarity of rights for Inuit to participate in decision-making considering the use, management, and conservation of land, water, and resources, including the offshore. The NLCA was also established to provide Inuit with wildlife harvesting rights and rights to participate in decision-making concerning wildlife. It was established to provide Inuit with financial compensation as a means of participating in economic opportunities, and also to encourage self-reliance in the cultural and social well-being of Inuit.
QIA, our organization, alone holds private title to over 150,000 square kilometres of land, with special rights to the water that is located on or flows through these lands. Through implementation of the NLCA, we are responsible for the management of these lands, waters, and resources. All Inuit of our region rely on these lands as well as the marine environment for food. Our very well-being, and indeed the future existence of Inuit, relies on the responsible and sustainable use of all land, water, wildlife, and resources.
The bill before you today arises directly from the new land claims agreement, and as such sets forth the powers and functions of the resource management bodies created under the agreement. In this case it is the Inuit Planning Commission and the Nunavut Impact Review Board. The development of the Nunavut Lands Claims Agreement was guided by the spirit of consensus. Consensus is a core principle of any culture. The spirit of consensus also guided the creation of the Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act.
Inuit, as represented by NTI, worked alongside the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development and the Government of Nunavut to develop this bill. Both the Nunavut Planning Commission and the Nunavut Impact Review Board were included as technical advisors on the working group that formulated this bill. The strength of this legislation is a result of that collaboration.
A great deal of time has passed since the working group last met to discuss the draft legislation. During this time, careful consideration was given to the draft to ensure that it closely reflects the rights and benefits that are constitutionally protected under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement. As such, NTI has put forward a submission proposing enhancements to this committee, which, in our view, will bring clarity to the bill and will strengthen it by ensuring that it is properly aligned with the agreement. We encourage the committee to consider these improvements in the same spirit and goodwill that guided its development.
The Nunavut settlement area covers 1.9 million square kilometres of land, fresh water, and marine areas. This accounts for 20% of Canada.
The Nunavut Planning Commission is currently developing the Nunavut land use plan. This single land use plan will guide and direct resource use and development for the entire area. Never before, anywhere in the world, has a land use plan been developed for such a vast area rich in culture and renewable and non-renewable resources. This plan, along with the new legislation, will greatly enhance the regulatory process.
The level of development activity in Nunavut is increasing, putting pressure on the already limited financial resources of these agencies. New responsibilities have been assigned to both the NPC and NIRB.
Funding allocated to these public agencies under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement did not envision these additional responsibilities, new responsibilities that are being added to a mandate that already requires these institutions of public government to protect and promote the existing and future well-being of the residents and communities of the Nunavut settlement area while taking into account the interests of all Canadians.
An underfunded regulatory process will be slow, unresponsive, and as a result will discourage investment. It is important to Inuit and all Canadians that certainty exists in the rules that govern land use planning and environmental assessment, with the highest expectations met and the highest standards used.
We believe that the Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act provides this opportunity, an opportunity that should not be missed.
Thank you very much for this opportunity.
Bernie is acting as my technical advisor, should you have any technical questions for QIA.
Quyanainni.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
Thank you so much.
We'll begin our first round of questioning with Mr. Bevington for seven minutes.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It's interesting how this bill was presented to us in the beginning as something for which there wasn't really a requirement for much amendment. Now we've had NTI, NIRB, the NWT and Nunavut Chamber of Mines, and you speaking to quite a number of amendments that need to take place with the bill.
One of the interesting amendments that was proposed by NIRB was of course to establish a participant fund for those communities that would be controlled by NIRB, to allow proper consultation and proper development of community positions to take place on these issues. I think it is a very important amendment because it really speaks to the ability of a variety of communities to actually interact with these development proceedings.
What are your feelings on this type of amendment, which would provide that level of support to participants in environmental assessments?
President, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
Can we make it retroactive?
As you know, QIA has been participating in the environmental assessment of the Mary River Project for about five years now. Using our own limited resources, we established community committees to consult and ensure that Inuit participated in the assessment. We spent hundreds of thousands of dollars making sure that Inuit felt their views were being heard. Our participant fund would just add to the consultation that's required in development.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Okay. You're supporting NTI's position on amendments. Is that correct—on all the amendments they've put forward?
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
It's interesting that the Mary River Project was approved, what, a month ago?
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
They've come forward now with quite large changes to that project. Do you see that the NTI amendments on significant alterations to projects are important if you take this example of the Mary River development? Would that assist the communities in assuring them that when there's a significant change to a major resource project, their voice is going to be heard on those changes?
President, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
We've been assured by NIRB as well that there will be another assessment of the proposed changes Baffinland has put forward.
I don't know if you want to add anything, Bernie.
Bernie MacIsaac Director, Land Administration, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
Yes. On that project the proposed change was somewhat assessed. That particular alignment they used, or plan on using, was used in a previous bit of work that happened on that particular project.
I think your larger question is in regard to a project as a whole, if there are significant changes. It's very important that a project is fully assessed, and when it comes to the communities—and I think this goes to your participant funding question as well—there's a larger picture at play in our region, in that we really don't have the experience with development that, say, the other regions or other territories in the north would have. It seems that a lot of the very fundamental questions that communities have to consider when they consider even something as basic as whether they want development in their area are happening when a project is on the table. This adds a lot of pressure to that discussion within a community. I think it's human nature that people don't really like to make those decisions when that kind of pressure is upon them.
One of the agencies that is part of this bill is the Nunavut Planning Commission, and a lot of these very fundamental questions, hopefully, will be answered in the land use plan that the planning commission is undertaking now across the territory. They've actually commenced their consultations in the community just recently.
This is new stuff for a lot of people in these communities, and there has to be a way that they can actually participate. They actually have to feel some ownership of what's going on here in terms of this particular project, or any project, and they also have a lot of information and a lot of insight into what's going on around their community. People have to take that into account.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
You say the other territories have a lot of experience. Our experience is that significant alterations that take place after projects have been approved are actually very difficult to deal with. I can point you to the Ekati Mine assessment or the Diavik Mine assessment, where changes were made after the project was approved, and really the opportunity.... Of course, the determination of “significant” is what part of the project is being altered. When you alter one part, does that fall back on other parts, for instance the socio-economic benefits that might come from the project, the husbandry of the resource, those types of things?
I'm very curious to see who will decide the nature of the significant changes that come with an alteration like Mary River, after what you'll be looking at to assess. That's why a question to you is, do you support the idea that NTI has outlined for significant alterations, which gives more scope to various agencies to comment on significant alterations?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
Mr. Bevington, you've taken a minute and a half past your time, but we'll give some time for the witnesses to respond.
President, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
I don't quite know how to reply to that. I think it would have been a little bit more disturbing if Baffinland had gone from 3 million tonnes to 18 million tonnes, as previously proposed. Now they are going from 18 million tonnes to 3 million tonnes. That is kind of good news for Inuit. It's a phased approach that slows down the project a bit, so we'll have more time to ensure that Inuit are employed and trained and have the time to look at how the project is impacting the community and the environment. It would have been disturbing had they gone from 3 million to 18 million, as opposed to 18 million to 3 million, as a significant change.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
Thank you very much.
We'll turn now to Mr. Wilks for seven minutes.
Conservative
David Wilks Conservative Kootenay—Columbia, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks for coming here today.
With regard to Bill C-47, we had heard from the government in Nunavut that they support the bill in its current form and they consider that it offers improvements to the land use planning and impact assessment process.
Would you agree with this? If so, why? If not, why not?
President, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
As I said, QIA is part of the overall Inuit community with NTI, and we support the work of NTI that has gone into this bill.
I can't speak for the Government of Nunavut, which represents the residents of Nunavut.
Do you have any background on the GN's position?
Director, Land Administration, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
Not specifically. However, from a fundamental perspective, the amendments that were suggested by NTI were to better align this bill with the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement. As our president has mentioned, we live and breathe the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, but generally, yes, we support the bill, and we feel that these amendments aren't necessarily deal breakers in terms of passing it.
Conservative
David Wilks Conservative Kootenay—Columbia, BC
This bill establishes Inuit as a signatory to the land use plan, which is not a specific requirement of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement. Can you explain to the committee the significance of this?
President, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
The overall objective and mandate of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement is that Inuit participate in anything that happens in our territory or that affects our territory. It just adds to the agreement, that Inuit have to be consulted and participate and be included in policy development.
Conservative