Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on April 21st, 2016

[Romeo Saganash, NDP, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

On that final point with respect to the decision belonging to cabinet, how do you reconcile that position with what the Supreme Court has been telling us since Delgamuukw in 1987 about consenting aboriginal peoples, repeated in 2004 in the Haida Nation case, in which the Supreme Court talked about the full consent of aboriginal peoples with regard to developing projects, and again repeated in 2014 in the Tsilhqot'in case? In nine paragraphs the Supreme Court talks about the consent. In 11 paragraphs it talks about full control of land and resources, and in two paragraphs it talks about the aboriginal group being responsible to determine the land use. What is the thinking right now in your department about that notion of consent?

Cathy mentioned the free, prior, and informed consent that we find in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, but don't you think that the notion of consent is already part of Canadian law?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I think you're right. I think the judgments of the Supreme Court of Canada ought to be what guides government decision-making on the issue of meaningful consent, and that is what will be used to guide the way we go about the very important process of redoubling the capacity of the government to assess and meaningfully consult with indigenous peoples. We understand what the constitutional obligations are. We understand what the latest Supreme Court judgment says, and we will be using that as our guide.

[Romeo Saganash, NDP, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

I want to hear the minister on what he means by the Canadian definition of free, prior, and informed consent. I find that interesting. A couple of years ago about 100 scholars and legal experts signed a letter in which they firmly claimed that the UN declaration is consistent with the Constitution and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in this country.

Do you agree?

[The Chair, Liberal, Andy Fillmore]

Romeo, we're right out of time. We're over time, in fact. My apologies.

The next question to Gary Anandasangaree.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Thank you, Minister, for joining us this afternoon.

I wanted to ask you a couple of questions on the environmental assessment process. With respect to the interim approach that we have in place, what kind of feedback are you getting from indigenous leaders and communities on whether they trust the process and whether they have confidence that this is at least on the right track towards gaining the confidence of the public and particularly of the indigenous communities?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I don't really want to give a partisan answer to that question, but I may have to give an answer that some could interpret as partisan.

I will say that many indigenous leaders have said to us they welcome the new spirit of reconciliation and of meaningful engagement with aboriginal communities that is coming from this government, and the tone that has been set by the Prime Minister.

I think the environment is a healthy one—certainly a healthier one—and so we have a better opportunity now to get to the very important and complex business of defining the nation-to-nation relationship between the Government of Canada and indigenous peoples. We have a better chance now than we have had in a very long time to be respectful of those cultural practices that are so important as we make decisions on major resource projects. We have an opportunity now that we haven't had in a very long time to understand that economic growth and environmental sustainability and respect for indigenous culture are at a point in Canada at which none of those elements can move forward without the other.

So I would say that overall I find the climate to be hopeful and respectful.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Minister, I recognize that we are in a partisan environment, but my question certainly wasn't attempting to be partisan.

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Well, better you than me.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Just moving on to the permanent environmental process that we're in the process of defining, what type of input do you have? Is there an advisory board? Can you walk us through the different strands making up this consultation process that will eventually lead towards a more permanent environmental assessment process?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Yes, and I welcome the question, because it gives me a chance to say that we're opening up the important reform of the National Energy Board and of environmental assessments in Canada generally speaking, to what we hope is a robust and important Canadian chat about them. We will be announcing the process that will lead to permanent reform in the next while. It will be within this mandate that those announcements are made and perhaps some decisions taken.

But I would ask the committee for its opinion—not at the moment, but to start thinking about it—about what the relationship should be between the regulator and the government. Should the regulator have the last word on major projects, or should the cabinet have the last word, and under what circumstances? What should the composition of the National Energy Board be to accommodate the diversity of the nation itself?

Members may know that we are committed to adding several more temporary members to the National Energy Board as the energy east pipeline review makes its way through the regulatory process. We know it's important that through the appointment of new temporary members to the board, indigenous background issues be important. We know that bilingualism is important.

It will be the government saying to Canadians, let's hear what you think the environmental assessment process should look like for the next generation of Canadians. This is not a precooked set of ideas. This is a sincere and open consultation and engagement with Canadians, and the principles are fundamental and they are important.

The interim process is clear, through the principles we have announced; the timelines are predictable, which is what proponents are looking for; and the future look of the process is something we will engage Canadians in through, I hope, important conversations and discussions.

[Gary Anandasangaree, Liberal, Scarborough—Rouge Park, ON]

Thank you, minister.

Just going back to the nation-to-nation relationship, do you see in areas in which we have defined it previously—in previous arrangements or previous natural resource projects—a marked difference in getting resources to market in those areas in comparison with, obviously, the hard work that needs to be done in establishing new relationships? If so, what economic benefits can we expect from entrenching those nation-to-nation relationships in a formalized manner?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Well we know how important natural resources are to the Canadian economy—1.8 million jobs. We know that the natural resource sector accounts for about 20% of the country's gross domestic product. We know that economic opportunity is very promising in the energy sector in Canada.

I've had the pleasure of talking to investors internationally about their view of the Canadian economy, and particularly the energy sector within it. They remind us that commodity prices are low, but that doesn't just affect the Canadian energy sector, that affects the sectors internationally. We are not immune to this, nor can the government control it.

There is a movement towards major investment in renewable energy and clean growth. You'll know from our budget that we're making significant investments in electric vehicle demonstration, charging stations, and in natural resource technologies through innovation.

I think it's important to say that we have a lot of faith in the innovation and the genius of Canadian entrepreneurs, and especially in resource-rich provinces, where already we have seen the impact of innovation in clean growth and clean technology. The potential is impressive.

I would say that we have a better understanding now than maybe we have ever had in Canada that this potential and those benefits have to be shared with indigenous communities and indigenous people. Our chances now to get the balance right between reliance on conventional sources of energy while we invest in a transition period, maybe in some measure to be financed by conventional sources of revenue, is the way forward.

The way forward will not happen without the partnership and participation of indigenous people.

[The Chair, Liberal, Andy Fillmore]

Thank you.

We're moving to the five-minute round of questions now, and the first question is for David Yurdiga.

[David Yurdiga, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Minister Carr, thank you for coming in today. It's much appreciated.

On April 14, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that tens of thousands of Métis and non-status Indians are now the responsibility of the federal government. How will this affect your mandate when consulting with all indigenous groups, and is the government in the process of identifying Métis and non-status groups or organizations?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

We understand the importance of the Supreme Court judgment.

I'm a Manitoban, and have for a very long time had an understanding and an appreciation for the Métis nation. I know that this Supreme Court judgment is impactful. However, I also want to say that we have been consulting with Métis people and Métis communities all the way through, even before the Supreme Court judgment. The full impact of what that judgment means is not known yet to the government and to Canadians, but as we move through the meaningful consultation process with these projects, we will continue to be very conscious and mindful of our obligations to consult with the Métis nation.

It's a very important judgment, an historic judgment. We understand its importance, and we continue to take very seriously the obligations of the Government of Canada to meaningfully consult with Métis people and the Métis nation.

[David Yurdiga, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Thank you for that answer.

What I'm concerned about is the urban indigenous people. They really don't have a voice, so how are we going to reach out to them to get their input on what they feel the development of this resource is going to be?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I think we also should be clear that we are consulting and engaging not only with Métis and first nations people, but all Canadians. When we do our meaningful round of talking to Canadians, that invitation will not be confined to any community or any group. It will be a wide open invitation for Canadians to comment on resource projects that affect us as Canadians, and affect communities where people live.

For those who feel as if they don't have a voice, I would encourage them to participate. We believe that all Canadian voices that have an interest in weighing in on these subjects should be heard.

[David Yurdiga, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

We're trying to reach out to these urban indigenous people. One of the groups that has been very successful in bringing in Métis and non-status Indians is the native friendship centres. They're doing an excellent job of looking after the needs of the people who are not remote, yet are urban. That's just a comment I would like to make.

With this decision, how will this affect the natural resource industry? Will our consulting have to be wider based?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

As I said a moment ago, we have been consulting, where appropriate, when there are projects that travel across traditional Métis nation territory. We have been consulting and we will continue to consult. The Government of Canada over time will assess the implications of the decision on the Government of Canada's responsibilities.

Meanwhile we are doing what we have been doing, even before the judgment, and that we believe it is our obligation to do. We will be mindful of this decision and mindful of our responsibilities. As well, I think it's important to say that we have to let the process play itself out. The government has asked for more time to do its own meaningful consulting with indigenous groups, after which it will be the responsibility of the Government of Canada to make a decision and to tell the Canadian people on what basis the decision was made. We've already established a platform through those principles.

Ultimately we will be judged and held accountable by the people of Canada, not only for the decision we make but the way in which we make it and for the reasons we advance that led to it. I think we're being responsible and open in how our decision will be guided, for which we will ultimately be held responsible.

[The Chair, Liberal, Andy Fillmore]

We're out of time on that one. Thank you.

The next question goes to Matt DeCourcey, please.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and Mr. Minister.

I want just for a moment to speak to the experience thus far in the riding I represent, Fredericton, where there are two first nations. The commitments and actions thus far in a nation-to-nation rebuilding atmosphere have allowed me and my office to work with the two first nations and leadership in the community on educational matters, on health improvement, and on early childhood development. I would stress that it's important that the commitment to a respectful nation-to-nation relationship remain in all areas of the government, so that in areas of social justice matters and educational attainment we can continue to do that work.

I was struck by your comments on the dual importance of respecting land, air, water, and the environment as well as allowing indigenous Canadians to partake in the economic opportunities available through the natural resource sector. You touched on this a little bit in answering Gary's question, but I'm wondering what opportunities and challenges you see currently in moving ahead with ensuring that indigenous Canadians are partaking in those opportunities.

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I think the opportunities are boundless, really constrained by very little, and they're motivated by goodwill and understanding that these opportunities have to be shared. I think proponents are understanding that.

I think the understanding is not even across sectors. It's not even across projects, However, the trend line is clear: proponents know that trusting relationships will be the platform upon which these projects will be built, really, and that we have to have a deeper understanding than we've had so far in Canada about those relationships, which aren't ephemeral. They're not Monday-to-Friday. They're over years, over many years. They are, with what we hope to be this new spirit of goodwill and reconciliation, generational.

I think opportunities abound, not only in the traditional sectors but also in renewables, in clean growth, in clean technology. There is an opportunity for indigenous peoples to fully participate in what those opportunities have to offer, not only in the oil and gas sector but also in forestry and mining. We have seen already that Canada in many ways leads the world in both those sectors, both for their sustainable practices and also in the partnerships they have developed over time with indigenous communities.

Just in the last day or two, I've been meeting with people from the forestry sector. I'm so impressed with how they understand how we have to move together. There's also a sustainable development focus from the mining association and within the mining industry in Canada. I had the pleasure of speaking at the prospector and developer association meeting in Toronto. Colleagues, they had 23,000 delegates from around the world. They came to Toronto because Toronto is seen as the financial centre of the mining industry globally. Canada was also showcased for some of its sustainable mining practices.

They also are very serious about developing these permanent and trusting relationships with indigenous communities. We have a lot to learn from those who have been at it a while. Canadians and proponents of projects would be well served to have a look at those best practices and deepen their own commitment to making sure that their practices too are informed by that understanding and that reality of Canada, that these relationships matter and they're ongoing.

[Matt DeCourcey, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Could you maybe comment on how some of the budgetary allocations that you have will start that process, and speak about some of the programs or policies being put in place by Natural Resources Canada to ensure that indigenous Canadians are able to take part in the present and future opportunities available through the natural resource sector?

[Jim Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

There are two buckets, one in the allocation to Natural Resources Canada, and the other in the allocation to Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, which combined will represent a very impressive investment from both of these departments towards that common objective.

[The Chair, Liberal, Andy Fillmore]

Thank you.

The next question goes to Arnold Viersen.