Evidence of meeting #9 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 treaties.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Treaties and Aboriginal Government, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
To reduce it after...?
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Over the course of negotiations, have you seen it happen where the land and resources quantum has been reduced?
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Treaties and Aboriginal Government, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
That would be a new one. We'd have to look at the particulars. It may certainly be a situation where there is a desire for more land and less desire for capital transfer, but to me that doesn't sound like negotiations.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
My understanding is that it has happened within the Métis claim that's being negotiated now in the Northwest Territories.
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Treaties and Aboriginal Government, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
That the offer is lower than...?
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
The offer that was on the table in previous years has been reduced.
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Treaties and Aboriginal Government, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Now, that may be associated with some kind of a driver such as the population covered--
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Treaties and Aboriginal Government, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
There may be some technical things, but normally, no, we don't--
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Normally it would not happen this way. Is there a policy that says once you put an offer on the table you're going to stick with that offer and you're not going to go back on it? Is there any...?
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Treaties and Aboriginal Government, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Perry, I don't know if you've run into any of these circumstances.
Director General, Policy Development and Coordination, Treaties and Aboriginal Government, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
I'm afraid I don't know the specific circumstances, but in terms of Canada's overall approach to negotiations, that sounds as if it would be running against the honour of the crown in terms of negotiations. So I--
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Okay. I'll take your answer back, but this is not what happens.
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Treaties and Aboriginal Government, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
But if it's in the context.... We know this table quite well; I can certainly follow up on my side and find out. Again, we have to be careful what we can share with you in terms of confidential negotiations.
But that's unusual.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
With the case of the Acho Dene Koe, this is something B.C. is holding up. Is the federal government actively pursuing British Columbia to get to the table on this?
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Treaties and Aboriginal Government, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Yes. We're continuing our work. I think we're completing a study to be able to bring this to a head, if I remember well.
Jim?
Associate Director General, Negotiations - West, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
I'm afraid I'm not familiar enough with the specifics of that case to advise on that.
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Treaties and Aboriginal Government, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
A traditional land use study is being completed. Once that is completed, certainly we will want to engage actively with B.C. to bring them to the table, because we're prepared to negotiate but we need our other partner.
October 27th, 2011 / 12:50 p.m.
Conservative
Bernard Trottier Conservative Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, guests, for coming today and speaking with us.
I'm especially heartened by your earlier comments about where first nations have self-government, there are far better outcomes with respect to education, employment, and the labour force. You've probably looked at a number of other measures. You said that both qualitatively and quantitatively you've looked at these things, and there is a definite improvement in all those kinds of quality-of-life outcomes.
Where would you say are the best prospects in terms of future treaties or self-governance agreements? Are there political, cultural, historic, legal, or economic factors that are driving those better prospects versus others?
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Treaties and Aboriginal Government, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
That's a good question. As I said before, we have about a hundred negotiating tables on the go right now, so staying on top of each one of them and measuring progress is a bit of a challenge.
We've had recently some good successes. I mentioned the minister's signing of the Sliammon final agreement, so that's one that could be very quickly brought to the next stage, which would involve coming to the House for legislation. We have Yale, as I mentioned earlier on, where the legislation is basically ready to go, and we're looking for the signal that the House wants to see it.
We've just reviewed an agreement on education with the Mi'kmaq of Nova Scotia. This has been in effect I think over 15 years now. It is a sectoral education agreement and is one where we now have sufficient evidence to determine that the first nations covered by that agreement have better education outcomes than the average Nova Scotian. You can see that with empowerment and a certain amount of time, the impacts are really huge there. That's one.
Recently, the minister signed an umbrella agreement with the premier of New Brunswick over the Mi'kmaq Maliseet negotiations there.
We also have the prospect of our first agreement in the Prairies for self-government. We have two that are kind of racing to the finish line.
We have the Blood Tribe in Alberta, which has been responsible for its own child and family services in a delegated model for a number of years. We now have a self-government agreement whereby they will take that over on an ongoing basis as a government responsibility. We've already initialled the final agreement, so we're waiting to bring that forward for eventual introduction in the House.
We also have the Sioux Valley first nation in Manitoba, which is the first comprehensive self-government agreement in the Prairies covering all areas of jurisdiction. This is a Dakota-Lakota community, which historically has a different relationship under the historic treaty process, so we're really proud to have been able to find an opportunity there.
Recently we initialled the agreement for the Labrador Innu land claim, a huge portion of the country that's currently not covered by a land claim.There are a lot of economic development initiatives there in terms of the hydro projects and, of course, two communities that have struggled in recent years have made huge progress over the last four or five years and see the treaty as their way to be able to leapfrog a lot of development into the 21st century.
Those are some examples. There are a few others that are going on. I get a little excited, but--
Conservative
Bernard Trottier Conservative Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON
Obviously there's some enthusiasm and optimism there, and if you look at the success stories, and you compare it to some agreements where there's less progress being made, what would you say are the contributing factors? What's driving success versus lack of success?
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Treaties and Aboriginal Government, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
We see a number of factors. There are some pretty fundamental differences at the table that haven't been worked out. Land and capital transfer quantum is a huge one. In some cases, the first nation does not agree with the basis on which we determined the transfer and wants to have amounts of land or cash that are out of proportion with those of other agreements we've signed in neighbouring communities.
Sometimes it's the land selection model that people can't agree on, that is, how lands will be selected. Only a small portion of the overall settlement land can be selected. For example, in the case of Yale, it's 1.9% of the overall settlement area that's actually selected to be owned by the first nation. They have some specific views on where they want to select lands, and we have some views on what they can or can't do in land selection.
The issue of self-sufficiency coming out of a treaty, a self-government agreement, is fundamental. This means that the first nation has to accept a change in taxation regime and that there will be some fiscal responsibilities they have to take on. Over a transition period, they need to be able to put some of their own revenue toward the cost of their services. It's a fundamental principle that in some cases can lead to a breakdown.
The issue of certainty can also cause a breakdown. Quite often it's not between us and the first nation; it's about how much risk the province is prepared to take with a certainty model that might be a bit more favourable toward the first nation. People are still comfortable with the concept of extinguishing rights, even though we don't want to pursue that kind of model. We have to make sure our provincial colleagues are in step with us.
Then there are the elections, the political instability that we sometimes have to face in first nations. You may have a chief and council who are pro-treaty. Maybe you were making a lot of progress. Then, all of a sudden, you're in an election and a different leadership is elected. They might not necessarily be against treaty, but they have to come to the conclusion that all the work that's been done is valid and that they want to continue. In some cases, they decide that the way it was done is not the way they want to proceed.
Also, of course, you have human factors. At any negotiation, human elements come into play. Sometimes things go sideways and you have to intervene. You have to change the negotiator. You have to bring them back on track. There are all kinds of factors.
