Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on May 13th, 2021

[Chief Reginald Bellerose]

We have had community meetings. People have come in. I will best answer it this way: There's a high level of fear.

In our community, people never even used to lock their doors. The keys were in the cars. After the shootings and these activities, now people are taking their keys out. They are locking their doors. That's a big shift at the community level. The people who give direction have to do something better.

That consultation.... But it's not specific. I will best answer that by saying, “We want to feel safer.”

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Are there any comments?

Go ahead, Ms. Doss-Cody.

[Deborah Doss-Cody]

It's legislation. With regard to taxation and regeneration, a lot of communities in the province of British Columbia are non-treaty, so the communities are very small. They don't have resources like a municipality, which can draw on taxation funds to sustain and contribute to their police agencies. The indigenous communities don't have that.

We're reliant on the 52-48 funding. It's 52% from the federal government and 48% from the provincial government. The indigenous communities should have a choice as to whether they want to have indigenous policing or to enter into tripartite agreements with the RCMP, with the existing police services.

Legislation is key, and becoming an essential service is key so that we can sustain our police services so that we can provide the safety if the communities choose. We do have communities knocking on our door and asking, “How do we get you and police services like you in our communities? How did you do it?” Those are the questions that we're being presented with by outside communities in the province of B.C.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Mr. Browne also had his hand up, Jamie. Is that okay?

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Absolutely, yes.

[Murray Browne]

I have two quick comments.

On the resource side, Canada's mandate in treaty is to take away funding from first nations. It might be a surprise to you, but it takes away tax exemptions. It allows B.C. to remove property transfer tax. Canada imposes a 50% own-source revenue penalty on first nations that generate revenue. There's a real problem on the treaty side with regard to allowing first nations to generate revenues. That's part of the issue, but just on treaty.

Definitely, we need funding. Definitely, we need essential services to be built into legislation and tripartite agreements. Right now, the RCMP tell me that they cannot write enforcement of first nations treaty or land code laws into tripartite policing agreements. I'm hoping that we can get to legislation and also to encouragement and direction to the RCMP on those.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

You have another minute, Jamie.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Can I just build on that for a second? Let's talk about the ability for first nations communities, especially those under treaty, that have to, I guess, see revenue sources leave for other jurisdictions, specifically Ottawa.

Have there been any ongoing conversations with the government to fix that? It seems like that would be a big piece to solving some—not all, but some—of these funding issues.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Does anyone have a quick answer to that?

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I think that was Mr. Browne.

[Murray Browne]

Yes. Thank you.

Yes, there have been discussions, but unfortunately the Department of Finance is right up there with DFO in terms of being anti-reconciliation.

There has been some movement. We have tables across the country on the section 87 tax exemption. The OSR, own-source revenue, policy is on hold, but we still have major problems with modern treaties in B.C. taking away from revenues. Putting those back won't resolve all the issues, but it would sure help.

Just as an example, B.C., with Canada's support, took away property transfer tax. That's a million dollars a year for many communities. That money could have gone to services.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Thanks very much.

Mr. Battiste, you have five minutes.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question is for Mr. Arcand-Paul.

It's always good to see a member of the Indigenous Bar Association here. It's a great organization.

Before I was a member of Parliament, at one point I was a senior adviser for the Eskasoni First Nation community, which I live in today. I saw numerous levels of bylaws on everything from dogs to removal of junk to removal of drug dealers and banning them from the reserve.

When we're talking about enforcing bylaws, is there more clarity on which laws should be enforced by the local enforcement, whether it be RCMP, provincial police or local police?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Who would like that?

[Brooks Arcand-Paul]

Was the question directed to me?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Yes, you can have it.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Yes.

[Brooks Arcand-Paul]

Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

As you can appreciate, the bylaw-making powers within the Indian Act are pretty narrow. There are about 22 abilities for a nation to make those decisions. When we're looking at enforcement, it's going to be at a myriad of levels. Those nations that are close to municipalities will need to work with the municipal police force. There are nations out in northern Alberta that may need to work with the RCMP detachment. Also, it may be up to their own policing or peace officer program as to whichever system is applied.

When it comes to enforcement, we're asking all levels to be able to enforce. We will need to work with not just federal or provincial levels but with all levels of government. We're finding on the ground that this is a lot easier to do with our neighbours, because they understand the realities and they understand what exactly we need. In those cases that you heard about today, there are issues with drug problems and with folks who are not leaving their nation. It means working on those items, like the banishment that you talked about, MP Battiste.

We really do need to get to the bottom of being able to enforce it. What mechanism that is will depend on each nation. We have a very big country with a lot of different experiences and a lot of different communities that are at different levels. We need to address each one individually as it comes about.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

Yes, and I agree with you, Brooks, on that.

One of the things I'm hearing about from the chiefs is the inadequacy of expanding powers within the Indian Act. With all the treaties and all of the different jurisdictions, I have heard Indigenous Bar Association members in presentations talk about having a treaty or inherent right attorney general to help guide the current Attorney General to navigate some of these to ensure....

The bottom line is that people on reserve in indigenous communities want to feel safe and they want to know that their laws to keep themselves safe will not only be enforced but will be prosecuted. What kind of mechanism do we need on this?

You have about two minutes. Can you expand on what you see as being needed for us to be able to find solutions to this challenge?

[Brooks Arcand-Paul]

Yes. Thank you again for the question, MP Battiste.

That is one good recommendation. It is one start to it. What we do recognize is that we have the framework. We have the Public Prosecution Service to be able to do so. We need to make those amendments to legislation. They're willing partners. You heard from Mr. Richstone a few days ago. He recommended that they be given the ability to do so. Having a treaty or an indigenous attorney general who would help advise would be a really good implementation.

What we also need to look at is getting justices onto the bench. Our top bench is currently without one. If we're going to be implementing indigenous laws and allowing these mechanisms to be exercised in our federation, we need to have those people represented on these benches. It's very important that we also look at that. It does reflect the society in which we live. Let's work on that.

It was a great suggestion to move forward. We also already have frameworks that we can use to move forward. The legislation just needs to be amended to reflect that ability to do so.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

I only have 30 seconds, so as a final piece, there is also $24 million in the recent budget to develop legislation and initiatives to address systemic racism and barriers to the criminal justice system. Do you think the Indigenous Bar Association would be one of the organizations that would help create recommendations on legislation and on how we can do better in this area?

[Brooks Arcand-Paul]

We would be more than happy to help.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Thank you for that. That is a succinct but profound answer.

That takes us to Madam Bérubé for two and a half minutes.

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question is for Mr. Arcand-Paul.

Public Safety Canada and the Minister of Indigenous Services Canada are talking about co-developing a legislative framework to recognize first nations policing as an essential service.

Can you tell me why a legislative framework is needed to ensure that first nations policing has the essential service status?

[Brooks Arcand-Paul]

Thank you for the question, MP Bérubé.

I advocate very strongly the removal of paternalistic legislation. We don't need more legislation; we need more ability to do what we need to do on the ground. You see programs like those in Akwesasne. You see the Tsuut'ina down south here in Alberta, where we have indigenous policing on the ground. We don't need further legislative befoulment to be able to do so. We have the ability to put our own legislation in place.

We are the third level of government in this country. We are partners in Confederation. We have just as much ability to make decisions on our own. When we hear that the minister is looking to make more legislation, similar to what's happening with other areas of authority, I'm just going to say very broadly that we aren't asking for this to happen.

On the ground and in the community, no one is asking for the federal government to continue wading into our inherent right to govern ourselves. The mechanism for government to be able to fund it or make those changes is within your channels. You shouldn't be coming down to the level of the grassroots community to implement these measures. We just need the dollars to do it, and we can do it.