Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Sept. 25th, 2017

[Morgan Chapman]

My understanding is that this could then go to tribunal. I believe that, in recent months, the specific claims branch has been talking about coming up with a different process, but again, I think it would have to go back to being legislated, because right now the mechanism.... I could be speaking out of turn, so I apologize if I don't have my understanding of that part of the policy 100% on point, but I don't believe there is much avenue for a first nation to refute that.

A lot of the feedback I am hearing from our communities is that, before any valuation offer is made, we should be going right to a negotiation table as soon as outstanding legal obligation is found on the part of Canada. Until you actually have the opportunity to speak and discuss what Canada is finding, why they're coming up with that valuation, and what it actually means in practical terms to the first nation.... You heard a couple of the other communities say that Canada needs to come and put boots on the ground in the communities to actually see the impact of those claims, because they're coming back as very nominal issues, when in actuality you have communities that are divided by highways, industrial development, or whatever other options. The NNTC representatives spoke about the railroads this morning. You don't understand those impacts on a community until you're there, boots on the ground, and can see them. It's the same for our community. You don't understand the impact those changes and rulings have.

[TJ Harvey, Liberal, Tobique—Mactaquac, NB]

Thank you.

Lastly, Chief Cootes, just before my time is up, because now I'm running short, I just wanted to reflect on something you said during your speech. I can't remember the exact words, but it was around the idea that the first nation communities are somehow responsible for funding their portion of an agreement to a problem they didn't create, dating back hundreds of years to injustices that were done against the first nation. I just wanted to say that I had never heard it put quite that way. The way you put it definitely gave me a bit of insight into it, so I wanted to thank you for that.

[The Chair, Liberal, MaryAnn Mihychuk]

The questioning now moves to MP McLeod.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

This is a very simple thing. We've heard a couple of times today that it is very expensive and time-consuming to go to Ottawa to have these discussions. Certainly, I live that regularly. Does the government make technology easily available? In this day of Skype conversations that you can record and see people.... I can appreciate that telephone conversations aren't very satisfying, but is that something that you have ever approached and asked the government to do? Are they receptive to those conversations happening by using technology? It's a silly question, but I've heard about this a few times today regarding B.C.

[Morgan Chapman]

I can speak very generally to that. A lot of our communities don't always have access to the high-speed Internet that you would need to actually facilitate that type of meeting.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

I appreciate that.

[Morgan Chapman]

That is a big barrier, when you talk about bringing technology into the discussion.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

It was just a thought because I've heard so many people talk about the very onerous requirements, and I agree that having a conversation can be better.

Chief Cootes, you concluded in 2011. What year did you start?

[Chief Charlie Cootes]

We started talking about treaty negotiations in about 1992, as B.C. presented this morning, in an organization called the First Nations Summit, but it started previously in the congress. Then we started in Nuu-chah-nulth later on in the 1990s, and we went so far with 14 nations. Eventually, two drifted off and we were left with 12 nations.

When it came time for the agreement in principle to be voted upon, six first nations voted in favour of the agreement in principle and six first nations opposed it. As a result we were in a dilemma and went into limbo for two or three years before a number of our leaders of those nations who voted yes got together and approached the government to restart negotiations. They had a few conditions. We met those conditions, and we started renegotiating the Maa-nulth treaty.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

On the total loan component, do you remember what the dollars and the percentage of your final settlement ended up being?

[Chief Charlie Cootes]

For Maa-nulth, our total loan exceeded $20 million to conclude the treaty. Looking at some of the court cases on single issues today, they can reach $20 million and more. We negotiated 26 chapters of individual things to come to an agreement, so I think we used our funding really wisely to cover a broad base of things over which we have jurisdiction, partial jurisdiction or complete jurisdiction. I think that's the great thing about our treaty.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

When some of your communities decided not to proceed, I presume you had significant challenges with overlap issues. Did those end up getting dealt with before a final agreement, or is that still a process that's happening?

[Chief Charlie Cootes]

We dealt with them as best we could. We've had a challenge, and it's since been resolved in one of our nations. It didn't alter anything for Maa-nulth. The treaty had profound impacts when we went from the big table to the small table. I don't know if you're interested in the detail, but in families you have intermarriages between nations and there was fighting in the homes, there were impacts on the schools and all those things when our nations separated and we started our own treaty tables. The treaty caused a lot of things that we have had to overcome. That's why it's a piece that is very necessary in our lives to deal with, to protect, because it has done great things for our Maa-nulth nations. It has its hang-ups and its problems, but those are in an area of a 10-year review and we're trying to make better after the first 10-year review meeting.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC]

I think it would be interesting, but perhaps too detailed for what we're doing today, but if out of your original group you have a number that are in treaty and aren't dealing with talking to...six months...of the department making decisions that should have been easy and simple. When you talk about data, are the communities saying you moved ahead and they didn't? Have you ever talked with the other partners in terms of saying what's good and what's bad?

[Chief Charlie Cootes]

Yes, we do communicate. Most of our communications are with other nations around British Columbia. We go and meet and present and talk about treaties with nations that invite us to come and talk about our treaty. It's lesser among our group, but there are noticeable differences between how we do business. We still collectively meet as 14 nations to carry out our tribal council business.

I'll leave it there, because it's a long story.

[The Chair, Liberal, MaryAnn Mihychuk]

That concludes our time for today. Thank you for coming out and sharing your thoughts with us. I encourage you to submit other briefs if you wish. To everyone who presented, meegwetch; thank you very much.

That concludes the public hearing session of today's meeting of the standing committee. I'd ask the committee to stay for a short informal discussion.