Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Oct. 21st, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Colleagues, I call today's meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 124 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs.

As always, I want to start by recognizing that we are gathered on the ancestral and unceded territories of the Algonquin Anishinabe peoples and to express gratitude that we're able to do the important work of this committee on lands that they've stewarded since time immemorial.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, June 19, 2024, the committee is commencing consideration of Bill S-16, an act respecting the recognition of the Haida Nation and the Council of the Haida Nation.

Before going any further, I want to deal with a quick part of committee business, and that's approving the budgets both for this study and for the meeting that we're going to have next week with the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations. These budgets were circulated in advance.

I just want to confirm that everybody is in favour of approving these budgets.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Okay. Seeing no opposition to that, we'll consider those approved.

With that, let's go right into our first panel.

I'd like to welcome our witness in our first panel today, Jason Alsop, president of the Council of the Haida Nation.

Thank you so much for travelling this far to be here today with us in Ottawa to provide some testimony on this.

We're going to start by giving you the opportunity to give a five-minute opening statement, after which we'll go into some questions from different parties.

At this point, I'll turn the floor over to you to give a five-minute opening statement.

[Jason Alsop, President, Council of the Haida Nation]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good people and good members of the indigenous and northern affairs committee, haawa—thank you—for making the time for me to join as a witness today. I am grateful to the committee for making room to hear our testimony today. I know you're dealing with a lot of important business, so I'm really grateful for everybody's co-operation on this.

I'm here to speak on behalf of the Council of the Haida Nation, as its elected president, to Bill S-16, the Haida Nation recognition act, and its importance to the Haida Nation. It's hard to cover it all in five minutes, but I hope I can impart to you the historical significance of this legislation in terms of the relationship between the Haida Nation and Canada, which is reflective of the relationship between indigenous people and Canada.

Our people, the Haida Nation, are the inherent title and rights holders of Haida Gwaii and the surrounding waters, which are defined as Haida territories in our constitution. A lot of this legislation is about recognizing the Haida Nation constitution, which is our self-government determined by the Haida people.

Right from the first early contact between the Haida Nation and Canadian officials, which is documented as early as 1913, the royal commission came to Haida Gwaii to speak about the reserves and reserve boundaries. Our people very tactfully avoided a discussion about reserves and were sure to express that all of Haida Gwaii is Haida territory. That's the discussion and the relationship between the Haida Nation and Canada when it comes to discussing our affairs.

As many in this room know, there's been a darker history in that relationship between indigenous people and Canada. In the early 1900s, our people were hiring lawyers and looking to settle and come to a government-to-government relationship among our peoples. There was a period then—the blackout period between 1927 and the 1950s—when we weren't allowed to hire lawyers to represent our interests when it came to our land.

Despite that, our people carried forward, maintaining our hereditary system and our culture, while at the same time adapting to the new ways of the western world. As things changed and there was more room for this discussion, our people came together—50 years ago, in 1974—and formed the Council of the Haida Nation to represent all of the Haida Nation when it comes to government-to-government discussions about the land of Haida Gwaii and the oceans.

The Council of the Haida Nation has evolved to adopt a constitution, which recognizes that the Haida Nation collectively holds aboriginal inherent title to all of Haida Gwaii. It vests the governing power into the Council of the Haida Nation, which is an elected body, so we've adapted to a democratic model that has representation in Skidegate, Old Massett and our populations in Vancouver and Prince Rupert, and it elects a president and a vice-president nationally.

It also determines our citizenship process. Everybody of Haida ancestry is recognized as a Haida citizen. This act formalizes what has already been the relationship between the Haida Nation and Canada for 50 years. We've been speaking with one voice.

As the Haida Nation, we've entered into agreements. The Gwaii Haanas Agreement is held up as an example of how indigenous and Crown governments can work together. There's the Gwaii Haanas Marine Agreement. We work in the ocean, in SG̲áan K̲ínghlas-Bowie Seamount, together with the Province of British Columbia through the Kunst'aa guu—Kunst'aayah reconciliation protocol. There is the “Rising Tide” Haida title lands agreement. This work that we're discussing here came out of the “Changing Tide” reconciliation framework agreement, signed in August 2021.

We've been carrying forward through successive ministers—beginning with Minister Bennett and Minister Miller, and now with Minister Anandasangaree—to reach the Nang K̲’uula-Nang K̲’úulaas Recognition Agreement, which outlined what's in the legislation before you today.

There's a lot more I could say, and I think it will come out in the questions, but I do want to emphasize the importance of this for the Haida Nation in our continued relationship with B.C. and Canada. B.C. already passed legislation to this effect in May 2023. It's important to have this mirroring legislation for both governments, to have this clarity, to just formally have this legalized through your House.

We continue doing this work of reconciliation that the Haida Nation's Haida language holders have translated as Gud ad T'alang HIGang.gulxa Tll Yahda, which is “People working together to make it right”. It's not only important for the Haida Nation. I think it's also important for Canada and others to see an example and a model of how indigenous people have adapted to our present reality and have formed a constitution that identifies our own citizenship and that also weaves together our democratically elected governing body with our village and band council governments—which also appoint members to sit on the council—and a hereditary chiefs council that also guides the work of the council and the nation. It's something to be held up and looked to as a way of, again, trying to navigate our hereditary, inherent title and rights with aboriginal title and to bring clarity for everybody as we navigate working together to continue to make things right in this country.

I'm happy to be here today in person, and again, haawa for making the time.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Alsop.

With that, we're going to jump into our first round of questioning, starting with the Conservative Party.

Mr. Zimmer, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, President Alsop. It's a pleasure to have you here once again.

We have heard from many witnesses at committee about how important economic reconciliation is to reconciliation. I'm just going to reference an article from The Globe and Mail first, and then I'll ask you my question.

The article is titled “B.C. formally recognizes Haida Nation’s Aboriginal title to Haida Gwaii”. It says:

The agreement includes a commitment from the Haida to leave privately owned lands unchanged and under B.C. authority. Governance over the existing Crown land tenures and protected areas will now be negotiated in a process that must reconcile Haida and provincial law.

It also says:

The agreement, which has been approved by the Haida Nation and will be enshrined in provincial legislation, says that Aboriginal title will not affect anyone's private property, nor local government jurisdiction and bylaws on Haida Gwaii. It also says public services including highways, airports, ferry terminals, health care and schools will not be affected. Residents will continue to receive municipal services and pay property taxes in the same way they do today.

I have two more paragraphs.

A leading expert in Indigenous law in Canada, Thomas Isaac of Cassels Brock & Blackwell LLP, said the agreement creates more confusion for landowners on Haida Gwaii than the lingering uncertainty of the pending title case.

“The Crown is recognizing Aboriginal title over every square inch of Haida Gwaii. What we know from Supreme Court of Canada case law is that Aboriginal title is the exclusive right to land. At the same time, fee simple, privately owned land is the exclusive right to land. You can't have two exclusive rights to a single part of land”

It's good to have you here again, Mr. President. You brought it up earlier to bring clarity to this agreement, and you can. Can you speak to private property owners' concerns that the Haida agreement has provisions that include a recognition of Haida title over fee simple lands?

[Jason Alsop]

Haawa, Mr. Zimmer.

Yes, I think it's unique. It is a unique arrangement. In the “Rising Tide” Haida Title Lands Agreement between the Haida Nation and the province, Haida aboriginal title is recognized throughout the land, so it does exist underneath the fee simple interests that are held by individuals.

Actually, Tom Isaac and I went to a law conference. He presented. Many lawyers pressed him, you know, and had this important discussion for everybody around his comments. He backed off, in a sense. He acknowledged that a sovereign nation, the Haida Nation, under our governance and our law-making authority, can consent to provincial jurisdiction. That's what we did when it comes to fee simple lands: They remain under provincial jurisdiction. It is compatible.

Nothing in our agreement as it's outlined derogates or takes away from those fee simple interests. In fact, others have argued it actually enhances it in the British Columbia situation, where there aren't treaties in a lot of British Columbia and there's uncertainty from a legal perspective on interests that were given out in an environment without treaty that are liabilities of the Crown, from a legal perspective.

That work, though, didn't come overnight. It's the culmination of working with our friends and neighbours on Haida Gwaii through protocol agreements we've had with each of the municipal governments. Our intention in pursuing our aboriginal title interest is not to remove people from their homes or disrupt their communities. In fact, it's to bring greater clarity in how we're going to continue to evolve our relationships. The agreement reflects that work. I think for us it's a creative path forward.

I also have to recognize that this discussion about fee simple interests isn't just between the Haida and British Columbians and Canadians and settlers. There are a lot of Haida people who own fee simple lands as well. A lot of people, through the Indian Act, were not allowed to live on the reservations and, over time, purchased homes in municipal communities and rural areas.

It was a creative way to provide certainty for everybody in this complex landscape that we're all operating in.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Thank you.

I know that my time is about 30 seconds.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

You have 40 seconds.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

The concerns around that from the residents of Haida Gwaii who are not Haida people are the concerns around private ownership. Can you reassure them that it will be respected, as it seems like the premier has done and as you have said? For clarity purposes, as a final statement, can you say that their private ownership is going to be maintained?

[Jason Alsop]

Yes, the Haida Nation has already come to an agreement with the province around that, consenting to provincial jurisdiction. I should clarify that those concerns did not come from Haida Gwaii. People of Haida Gwaii were not raising concerns in the media or vocally. Those came from outside of Haida Gwaii.

In fact, interestingly enough, when the legislation went through and the press releases came out, there was even support from the forest tenure holders and fishing lodge owners who operate on Haida Gwaii for this work going forward, and they were congratulating both governments on the achievement.

I think a lot of the fears were projected from outside of Haida Gwaii, but it does provide something for others to look to in how we wrestle with this challenge of how aboriginal titles and fee simple interests coexist.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Thank you, President Alsop.

Thank you, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Zimmer.

Moving on, our next six-minute round will go to Mr. Hanley.

The floor is yours.

[Brendan Hanley, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Thank you very much.

Thanks for appearing here, and congratulations, because this is a significant step. You really eloquently described some of the long history in getting to this point.

I'm interested in the impact of negotiating an agreement when there was no pre-existing territory. Coming from the Yukon, I represent a territory where we have 11 modern treaty first nations—11 out of 14—but this is really a different process of reaching an agreement. I wonder if you could talk about the importance or the impact of an agreement and how it differs from a modern treaty.

[Jason Alsop]

For the Haida Nation, over the history of the different processes, we have examined our options in working together with B.C. and Canada on land and aboriginal titles. The Haida Nation found that the modern treaty process, as it had been designed, didn't meet our interests, because we live on an island. We're isolated. We have no overlapping territory, and it's just the Haida Nation on the island. There's a long history, going back well over 14,000 years, of occupying and using all of the island. Much of the process before us, when it came to treaty, was designed around the extinguishment of part of our land in exchange for cash, and giving up some of our land in that process. That extinguishment component was unacceptable to our people.

We've moved forward on Gud ad T'alang HIGang.gulxa Tll Yahda, our reconciliation process, working government to government in a way we believe is more flexible and capable of evolving to meet the needs as the environment and political landscapes change.

We rejected the treaty process. A lot of it was around the need to spell out every single detail and word, work out everything, and look to ratify it. You've seen in many places that a lot of work goes into it, but you get to the end and things have changed a lot. The extinguishment and the process as designed just didn't fit our position and our needs. We've moved on this other path here of working government to government through reconciliation.

[Brendan Hanley, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Thank you. That's very helpful.

One of the areas that piqued my interest was the Fisheries Resources Reconciliation Agreement. That's an agreement among you and seven other B.C. first nations, the Government of Canada and, I believe, the Great Bear Initiative Society. This is one of the components of the larger agreement. Could you comment on this resource agreement and what it means for community fisheries or for self-determination over fisheries?

[Jason Alsop]

The Fisheries Resources Reconciliation Agreement is a little different from this direct government-to-government, nation-to-nation work. It's the Haida Nation working with our allies in the Coastal First Nations on a regional scale.

The fisheries agreement provides three main things.

First, and very important to the nation, is a commitment from Canada, through the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, for collaborative governance when it comes to fisheries. It's something that is quite important, as we see the decline in many of the stocks over the years and we see practices we've disagreed with—including, currently, destructive bottom trawl fisheries that occur in Haida territories. The agreement has very strong language committing to transformative change when it comes to fisheries management and collaborative governance. We've set up a structure where we strive to work together with technical information, bringing in cultural and local knowledge and trying to come to consensus decisions, but still operating under each of our respective authorities. We may have disagreements, but we have dispute settlement mechanisms to work through those.

Second, it provides some commercial fishing opportunities through a trust to purchase access back from the market and bring it into the nations collectively through a commercial fishing company.

Third, it's to acquire access and bring it back to a community level to redistribute at smaller scales for community-based fisheries in order to stimulate local economies and access, somewhat as an interim measure. It's not based on fishing within our rights. It's a way to provide some economic opportunities on the ground in the short term, while we also build up a bigger, coast-wide commercial fishery that would be indigenous-owned by the seven nations.

[Brendan Hanley, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Hanley.

Mr. Lemire for six minutes.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Alsop, thank you for being here and congratulations. It's a great moment for your nation.

You spoke about reconciliation. What tools will Bill S-16 give you? What are the next steps for your nation? Do you feel that the bill is the product of a process in which the free, prior and informed consent of your nation was respected?

[Jason Alsop]

This bill is important. There is the recognition of the Haida Nation as the title and rights holders legally and formally through this. It signals that shift from the imposed Canadian governance through the Indian Act as the only means to represent your people to recognizing our constitution and our governance as self-determined by the Haida people from a grassroots level built up. It recognizes that in a strong way and clarifies again the relationship going forward.

On a more technical or practical level, it also provides the Council of the Haida Nation with the tools to properly interface with the western system as a government—like any other government—with the powers to enter into contracts, go to court, handle money and deal with the same taxation exemptions and abilities as other governments.

There's an important function there for the Council of the Haida Nation that up until now had to be fulfilled through operating under British Columbia's Societies Act. We had to arm as a British Columbia society to operate our government. It's been a conflict to have to come under a provincial, non-profit model while you're running your sovereign government.

It will help us move to operating solely under the Council of the Haida Nation and streamline our administration and financial affairs.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Do you also feel that the bill sets a precedent that will give other indigenous nations the opportunity to obtain greater independence and the recognition of their right to self-determination?

[Jason Alsop]

Each nation is on its own journey and has its own path. I hope it could be an example to look toward.

I think you see under the current system that there's support for tribal societies or amalgamations of a number of communities coming together, recognizing their true historical connections and family relations that were severed by the Indian Act when several different bands were created. There are large nations that once operated together more through their cultural system. I think it provides an example and something to look at.

I wouldn't prescribe to anybody how they should run their own affairs as a nation, but we're open to sharing our experience. Anything that helps bring strength to our inherent title and our collective interests and brings nations closer together is a positive thing. Again, we're happy to share our experience.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Do you feel that the federal government has always acted in good faith toward you?

[Jason Alsop]

I do, yes. We've worked closely with Minister Anandasangaree and Minister Miller on coming to the Nang K’uula-Nang K̲'úulaas Recognition Agreement. We've collaboratively developed the language of the agreement and been abreast of the legislative process as well. We've worked carefully together on the language to make sure that it meets the needs of both parties throughout this process.