Evidence of meeting #71 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 indian.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
We've also heard evidence that some first nations do not have up-to-date websites. I suspect that option should be made available to allow that condition to be satisfied. Would you agree with that?
Chief, Westbank First Nation, and Chairman, First Nations Lands Advisory Board
I think so. Yes.
Conservative
Leah George-Wilson Director, British Columbia, First Nations Lands Advisory Board
Thank you.
I would like to respectfully point out that there are a number of first nations that don't have Internet, so having a provision that requires them to do something they don't have the capacity to do wouldn't be useful.
Conservative
Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Right, and that's why I'm suggesting making it optional as opposed to publishing in all three—the website, the First Nations Gazette, and a newspaper of general circulation. If you made it one out of three, that might be a more reasonable option. I'm assuming you would agree with that.
Director, British Columbia, First Nations Lands Advisory Board
I understand what you're saying, and I understand the question to Chief Louie. If you made this small change, would he be supportive? He's already said he's not supportive of the changes that have been suggested.
Conservative
Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
No, I'm not soliciting support for the entire legislation. I'm just trying to zero in on the publication bylaw issue, if you understand my question.
Director, British Columbia, First Nations Lands Advisory Board
Yes, I understand your question. Pardon me, but speaking as an individual who's lived under the Indian Act and who hasn't had the benefit of self-government or a treaty, I can tell you that talking about changes to the Indian Act in this way, with the very little consultation that has been done, is difficult.
Conservative
Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Thank you for that.
With respect to the First Nations Land Management Act, Chief Louie, you said there were 72 signatories.
Chief, Westbank First Nation, and Chairman, First Nations Lands Advisory Board
Yes.
Conservative
Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
There are 39 prepared agreements and 68 first nations on the waiting list.
Chief, Westbank First Nation, and Chairman, First Nations Lands Advisory Board
That's correct.
Conservative
Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
One of the suggestions you made in your opening comments was to allow the other four-fifths that are not signatories to the framework agreement to become signatories.
Chief, Westbank First Nation, and Chairman, First Nations Lands Advisory Board
That's correct.
Conservative
Chief, Westbank First Nation, and Chairman, First Nations Lands Advisory Board
That's correct.
Conservative
Chief, Westbank First Nation, and Chairman, First Nations Lands Advisory Board
That's correct.
Conservative
Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
Do you have any information regarding the first nations that are neither signatories nor on the waiting list? How many of those, either in raw numbers or as a percentage, want to be covered by the Land Management Act?
Chief, Westbank First Nation, and Chairman, First Nations Lands Advisory Board
We haven't gone out and solicited first nations across Canada. The first nations are coming to us, to government, to say they want to be involved. One out of five first nations are either involved or want to be involved. I know that as chairman of the Lands Advisory Board, I'm receiving continual calls, continual inquiries, and those numbers keep growing. They've grown exponentially over time.
In speaking with first nations that haven't yet considered this option, I believe the time will come when first nations will need to all be self-governing. I don't think it is something that won't happen; I think it must happen.
Conservative
Brent Rathgeber Conservative Edmonton—St. Albert, AB
I agree with you that those who manage their own resources have enjoyed prosperity not enjoyed by others.
Why would a first nation not want to be subject to the First Nations Land Management Act? I know you're very much in favour of it.
Chief, Westbank First Nation, and Chairman, First Nations Lands Advisory Board
That's correct. I suppose you have capacity issues. You have far northern, remote issues. I think those are factors. I know you may not have full councils that are 100% in support of changes. Because of divisions in chiefs and councils in their own governments, there isn't consensus. I believe those are issues as well.
I believe that the intent and the need of first nations is to have a process that empowers them. It's a matter of getting there, and I believe that will happen and must happen in the years to come.
Conservative
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
There's so much to say and so much to do.
My history was in municipal government in the Northwest Territories. I was a mayor. I was president of the Northwest Territories Association of Communities. I remember when the Government of the Northwest Territories wanted to change municipal ordinances. I remember the process, and the respectful process they had to engage in to do that.
I sit here at this table and I wonder what is going on. We were creatures of the territorial government. Municipal governments are creatures of territorial government; they don't have constitutional status in this country. Yet the process was four or five years long. There was enormous consultation, with each community being addressed individually. The associations were asked to present in front of the legislative assembly. I did that myself on those issues.
I look at this and I wonder what is going on in this country.
You are governments. You have treaties with Canada. This is a process, a private member's bill brought forward by a well-intentioned individual, where the communities are being affected. You're taking away their...it's as simple as saying the right to legislate intoxicants on reserves. That alone should have gone to every single community for comment, because every single reserve may have a position on that.
I'm flabbergasted, the more I deal with this process. That's why I asked, what is the process? How do we go to treaty implementation? How do we actually come to grips with the relationship? I throw that out to you as the last question on the order paper I think on this particular bill. We're going to begin clause-by-clause after that.
That's where I'm at right now in my mind, so I'd appreciate your comments.
