Thank you very much. Hopefully, you can hear me in the room. I know that there were a few issues.
Thank you very much for inviting me to say a few words in front of the committee today. I appreciate that.
My name is Grand Chief Joel Abram of the Association of Iroquois and Allied Indians in Ontario. I currently hold the portfolio of economic development within the Chiefs of Ontario for the province of Ontario.
I chair the chiefs committee on economic development. We've been focusing on a few different items there around the excise tax—casino, ATM and carbon taxes, but perhaps I can say a few words before that around economic reconciliation and about landholding and the tax base.
One of the areas I really want to talk about here is this: How does Canada hold fiduciary obligations for first nations? It is true the way Canada came to claim most of their land. Our first nations understanding of treaties is that they were out of sharing rather than out of surrender. However, the interpreters of those told first nations people one thing and government another.
We know that the doctrines of supremacy also influenced how Canada claimed not only legislative power over first nations but also had claims over land and those sorts of things. We know that those doctrines of superiority are based on racism from the 1400s coming from papal bulls. We think it's long past due that we started to unwind these things, that we decolonize and start to recognize first nations sovereignty and jurisdiction.
At our Chiefs of Ontario committee, we're focused on things like excise tax sharing and its possible feasibility. For instance, we have Grand River Enterprises, which pays hundreds of millions of dollars in excise taxes to the federal government, but the Six Nations community where that comes from doesn't really get those excise taxes back in any form from the federal government.
We have talked about focusing on the excise tax. That work has been ongoing. We did a legal feasibility study recommending that we move forward with a FACT tax-sharing framework mentioned in the federal budget. Also, we're exploring excise tax revenue-sharing options that could retain profits within communities, which could then be utilized for community needs, while the tax-collecting powers and responsibilities would remain with the Canada Revenue Agency.
We're also looking forward to participating in and providing input to see the federal FACT tax-sharing and framework creation. We also hope that the federal government's consultation framework for the creation of the FACT tax-sharing framework will include provincial government representatives as well to address FACT taxes remitted to the province.
Regardless of whether section 89 applies to the excise tax, it's up to the federal and provincial governments to create new revenue-sharing agreements with first nations leaders and communities to ensure that FACT tax profits are allotted to first nations communities' needs.
Around the casino and ATM taxes, from Bill C-92 and the recent Supreme Court decision around that, when Quebec challenged its legitimacy, we do know now that the federal government has the power to legislate even in areas where provinces have the mandate—for instance, in health. Bill C-92 was about child welfare, but the federal government did give jurisdiction over child welfare to first nations. They could do the same thing with regard to gaming. That's something that I think we should take a serious look at.
On the topic of casino taxes and ATM taxes, the problematic provincial cartel system, as we like to call it, hurts first nations gaming hosts from maximizing their profits.
The federal government can also provide partnership opportunities—