Thank you.
Good morning, Chairman Richards and honourable members of the committee.
Just briefly, I was introduced, of course and you heard my name as Austin Bear. I'm the chief of the Muskoday Cree nation, Treaty 6, in what is now the province of Saskatchewan. Our community is only a few kilometres from the city of Prince Albert.
Thank you, Mr. Chair and the committee, for inviting our organization here this morning and this opportunity to share the activities, the developments of first nations across the country.
On behalf of the First Nations Lands Advisory Board, I want to thank you sincerely for the opportunity to speak to you today about the Framework Agreement on First Nations Land Management and our experiences with vastly improved access to capital. As the majority, if not all, first nations communities can attest to, the Indian Act has been most devastating to our communities economically, culturally, and socially. At the root of this dysfunctional piece of legislation is the complete lack of recognition and respect for first nations as governments, governments that are certainly capable of competent decision-making.
Add to this a complete lack of land certainty, serious environmental legacy issues, unclear survey fabric and boundary issues, a land registry that isn't backed by formal regulation, and an inefficient system of bureaucracy, based on a 100-year-old statute. It becomes quite easy to see why the situation creates many problems.
My colleagues and I are part of a growing group of first nations who, in the 1990s, had enough of federal government dependency and waiting around for things to get better. We negotiated and signed an agreement with Canada in 1996 that would provide us with some greatly needed relief from some of the most offensive and paternalistic sections of the Indian Act.
The framework agreement is, first, a recognition that our communities are governments with legislative and management authorities over our lands and resources. Land, as you will likely know, is inextricably linked to our cultures and our identities. The framework agreement is an expression of the inherent right of self-government. We believe that the authority of government flows from the Creator, not the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs.
While this might seem to be a mundane attribute, it is considered to be a basic respect, which is the core of our government systems. It lies at the base of our cultures. As a primary tenet of the framework agreement, it has translated to concrete, measurable, and proven advances for our communities over life under the shadow of the Indian Act.
Economic development and increased access to capital have been major benefits to many of our signatory first nations. For a community that has decided to opt into the framework agreement, decisions can be made in a matter of days and weeks, as opposed to months, years, or never, under the Indian Act. This means the virtual elimination of unnecessary land transaction costs defined in time and other tangible expenses. It also reduces or eliminates countless missed opportunities due to these same delays.
Clear legal status and capacity of first nations governments to acquire and hold property, to borrow and contract, to expend and invest money, and to be a party to legal proceedings: first nations under the Indian Act do not hold these clear rights. This discourages lenders and other financing partners.
A land registry that is regulation backed, paperless, electronic, and provides for instant registration, we developed this in cooperation with key representatives from the finance community as well as the Government of Canada. Not only have key financial institutions taken notice of these improvements, but so have third party investors and the insurance industry. For the first time it is possible to get title insurance on reserve lands. All of these attributes were made possible without having to risk the loss of our reserve lands.
The KPMG consulting firm has concluded three separate studies of first nations that are operating under their land codes and has found that framework agreement first nations are able to complete transactions more efficiently than Canada. Framework agreement first nations can do the job for less cost than Canada. Framework agreement first nations are increasing the average annual number of land transactions by a 9% rate as opposed to transactions by first nations under the Indian Act, which are decreasing on an average of 1%.
The framework agreement provides better circumstances for first nations to improve their land governance systems and processes, such as governance and decision-making, and the facilitation of market opportunities. Also, the framework agreement is impacting economic development efforts on reserve lands. The framework agreement has contributed to first nations' increasing the number of businesses on reserves, with most new businesses being first nation member-owned businesses, which shows increased entrepreneurial activity.
The framework agreement first nations are expanding their business development to new and/or different industry areas with new partners. Framework agreement first nations are beginning to see a shift in the quality of jobs available on reserve by providing jobs that require higher levels of education and specialized training. Over the past while, at least 2,000 jobs have been created by first nations people in first nations communities.
Framework agreement first nations have experienced increasing internal and external investment in their communities, $101 million in investment approximately, as identified by a sample of only 17 framework agreement first nations. Additionally, this investment occurred in more areas than before: hard and soft infrastructure, business regeneration, and growth and new businesses.
It is worth noting that all of these benefits have also meant tremendous ongoing work and the overcoming of significant challenges, but not one first nation that has implemented the framework agreement has indicated that they would like to give up and go back to the Indian Act, not a single one of the 54 or 55 operational first nations, nor the 112 signatories to the framework agreement.
Of course, we would be happy to answer any questions.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you, committee members.