Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on March 1st, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Good afternoon, everyone.

I'll begin by saying that we are gathered on the Anishinabe Algonquin unceded traditional territory for this meeting.

Welcome to the seventh meeting of the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs.

We are meeting to conclude our study on barriers to indigenous economic development.

Today, we have two 45-minute panels, with time at the end to consider drafting instructions and committee business.

On the first panel, we have Robert Louie, chairman of the First Nations Lands Advisory Board; Tina Rasmussen, corporate development officer, Meadow Lake Tribal Council Industrial Investments; and Stephen Buffalo, from the Indian Resource Council.

I know that you're familiar with all the rules regarding health measures. I won't repeat them. I also know that you're familiar with the procedure. This is our seventh meeting, so I won't repeat that either.

We'll begin.

I will give the microphone to Mr. Robert Louie to make some introductory remarks.

Mr. Louie, you have five minutes.

[Chief Robert Louie, Chairman, First Nations Lands Advisory Board, As an Individual]

Thank you.

Good afternoon, honourable members of the standing committee.

My name is Robert Louie. I'm speaking to you today as the chairman of the Lands Advisory Board, representing the framework agreement on first nations land management across Canada.

We work with first nations across Canada to implement self-governance and to do away with a large portion of the Indian Act. Our first nation communities pass land codes and take over jurisdictional control of land management.

For the most part, the land code and self-governing process has been extremely successful. We have many first nation success stories in economic development; however, there remain barriers that need to be overcome for self-governance and economic development to properly occur and to gain full momentum.

I will speak to five of these barriers.

First, there is confusion over the framework agreement and the legislation. The framework agreement was a 1996 government-to-government agreement entered into between first nations and Canada that sets out the principles for land management self-governance to occur.

In 1999, the government passed the legislation, and the intent therein was to simply ratify the framework agreement. Unfortunately, government drafters either put in extra wording or omitted wording contained in the framework agreement. This has consistently caused confusion and clarity interpretation differences to this day. We have worked with government to draft replacement legislation and expect it to be tabled in Parliament relatively soon. Once the legislation is tabled, we ask for all-party support to approve it.

Second, there are enforcement issues. While the federal government has recognized the authority of first nations to enact their own laws, there is no federal co-operation to enforce them. This includes federal and provincial court adjudication and prosecution. Government has not to this date fully directed the enforcement authorities to enforce first nation laws. This needs to be remedied. The RCMP has refused to enforce first nation laws, which has frustrated many first nation communities. Court adjudication and prosecution of first nation laws have been unnecessarily absent.

We have had meetings with various provincial attorneys general, parliamentary standing committees and relevant federal ministers; however, this process has been moving along very slowly. Toothless law does not support business or investment. Any recommendations you may make in your report to speed this process up would be sincerely appreciated.

Third, we have land registry issues. The existing Indian lands registry system, including the first nations land registry regulations, is outdated and needs a major upgrade. It is a deeds-based registry that doesn't formally guarantee ownership. There is a lack of consistent document standards and cadastral data that backs land tenure. This, in turn, limits capital and borrowing options and prevents title insurance options.

We have been working in partnership with the B.C. Land Title and Survey Authority for more than a year to establish a modern and independent first nation-operated land registry system that will remedy this situation. We are seeking the support of Canada for this proposal.

Fourth, there are Indian Act legacy issues. There is a huge backlog of outstanding cadastral data and survey uncertainties that need to be resolved. There is a large number of contaminated sites on reserves that require remediation. There are outstanding wills and estates issues going back many decades that need to be resolved. We need significant government attention and investment to resolve these outstanding barriers to economic prosperity.

The last issue is additions to reserves. Many first nations have lands that are waiting to be added back to their reserves. The additions to reserves process has been mired in complicated, decades-long, expensive and unnecessary policy. This needs to change quickly in a major way so that first nations can generate much-needed revenue. Hundreds of millions of dollars in untapped economic development opportunity have been lost.

This concludes my presentation.

Thank you, honourable members, for allowing me to speak.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mr. Louie.

Ms. Rasmussen, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Tina Rasmussen, Corporate Development and Administration Officer, Meadow Lake Tribal Council Industrial Investments]

Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for the opportunity to appear today on behalf of the nine nations of the Meadow Lake Tribal Council and our economic development corporation, MLTC Industrial Investments.

As introduced, my name is Tina Rasmussen. I'm corporate development officer for MLTC. I am a proud member of the Flying Dust First Nation, and I am coming to you today from Treaty No. 6 territory.

You may ask why MLTC Industrial Investments would be on the same stage as some of these very important indigenous organizations. I think MLTC Industrial Investments is a very good example of a “boots on the ground” company that is attempting to move our nine first nations forward in terms of economic development.

MLTC Industrial Investments exists to create successful economic development through business investment and development that will generate wealth, employment and training opportunity while improving the health and prosperity of our shareholders, the nine nations of the Meadow Lake Tribal Council.

Coincidentally, our particular tribal council not only has nine member nations, but we hail from three different treaty territories: Treaty No. 6, Treaty No. 8 and Treaty No. 10.

I'll talk today about some of the positive things that have been happening in government and some of the things that we think can be moved forward even more to improve and remove barriers to facilitation of indigenous economic development—in effect, create a better support system and a way to help level the economic playing field for our country, for indigenous people to be able to participate at a level equal to that of other companies and other communities in this country.

First, with respect to federal funding, we feel that by implementing the following outcomes we can improve a number of things for first nations' economic development in Canada. We hope that the government will maintain the current funding carve-outs nationally for indigenous-owned projects. All federal funding for economic development activities across the domains, whether it's infrastructure, renewable energy or natural resources, should maintain a special minimum 10% carve-out reserved for indigenous businesses only, specially identified, and this carve-out should not exclude any indigenous business from accessing larger-source or multiple-source funding.

Second, we'd hope that the government would maintain enhanced grant contribution levels to indigenous-owned projects. We've put forward the most recent NRCan SREPs project funding, where there was a specific $100-million set-aside for indigenous projects, where the indigenous communities were able to access up to 75% grant funding. Just to show you the great need out there, the $1-billion funding pool was expended in less than a year. I believe, if my figures are correct, that around $260 million of that was expended to indigenous projects. That is a remarkable way to help indigenous economic development move forward.

Third, we'd like to see the creation of access to streamlined business start-up funding. It takes much effort from business concept initiation to fully developed, shovel-ready projects. It would be helpful if federal funding programs provided better support for the early-stage costs of project development: legal, accounting, engineering and miscellaneous expenses. Often, in order to access any kind of funding, the project has to be shovel-ready, and in many instances the first nations are not in the best position to be prepared to get that application to that point and to have the funding available to expend all of that revenue to get it to that point.

With respect to federal financing, we'd hope that the government would consider implementing the following. First is to maintain access to sizable financing or term loans with limited security. An example might be to ensure that there is financing support to indigenous businesses through term loans of $1 million to $5 million, where there is limited security and financing is difficult to achieve. It is often very expensive when you're going out into the regular market, especially when you're trying to lift new business opportunities off the ground.

We're hoping that the committee will recommend to government as well to expand the First Nations Finance Authority mandate to include first nations tribal council and economic development corporations. I think the tide is changing so that many first nations are moving the political side of things away from the business side of things and allowing a lot more business development to happen through their economic development corporations. However, as we currently understand, the FNFA is not accessible for tribal councils or economic development corporations. Everything has to be run specifically through the individual first nation band.

Another area that we feel is a barrier—

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Ms. Rasmussen, I'm going to have to ask you to wrap it up now.

[Tina Rasmussen]

Okay.

With respect to federal procurement practices, we encourage you to simplify the access for indigenous business to procurement opportunities. It's very cumbersome as it currently exists.

The last one is to firmly promote free trade for indigenous-owned businesses throughout the Americas, consistent with indigenous peoples' past history of widespread free trade systems. We have seen that individual small businesses, which most first nation communities have, are not considered in these larger free trade issues.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Ms. Rasmussen.

Mr. Buffalo, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Stephen Buffalo, President and Chief Executive Officer, Indian Resource Council Inc.]

Thank you, Chair and committee members, for the opportunity to speak today.

My name is Stephen Buffalo and I'm the president and CEO of the Indian Resource Council of Canada. Our organization represents over 130 first nations that produce or have a direct interest in the oil and gas industry. Our mandate is to advocate for federal policies that will improve and increase economic development opportunities for the first nations and their members.

We also play an oversight role with Indian Oil and Gas Canada, a federal special operating agency, to ensure that they fulfill their legal and fiduciary roles in the management and regulation of oil and gas resources. Right off the bat, I must say that Indian Oil and Gas Canada is doing a very bad job as a regulator and a fiduciary. In that sense, they are one of the major barriers to our economic development and energy development.

Our communities benefit from involvement in oil and gas. The relationship with mainstream industry has not always been perfect, but it's getting better. We are more involved in oil and gas jobs—in reclamation, such as the first nation site rehabilitation program, and in procurement—and in equity participation more than ever. There isn't another industry in the country that has engaged indigenous peoples as meaningfully in terms of scale of own-source revenue as oil and gas, and that's a fact. That's why it's so important to our economic development and self-determination that Canada has a healthy and competitive oil and gas sector.

However, it often feels as if Canada is trying to eliminate the sector, instead of supporting it: the overruns on TMX with indigenous groups wanting to buy it, the cancellation of Keystone XL, the cancellation of northern gateway, the tanker ban, the Impact Assessment Act in Bill C-69, the lack of LNG export capacity and the cancellation of the Teck Frontier mine.

We have lost tens of millions of dollars in royalties in the past decade due to the differential in price between Western Canadian Select and Brent Crude during the COVID-19 pandemic. These have directly harmed our communities, costing first nations millions in lost source revenue. Everyone on this committee knows that no communities can afford that.

The loss of own-source revenues and royalties is one thing, but on top of that, these missed opportunities have cost our people jobs and procurement opportunities that would probably number in the billions. If you look at the dependency of...federal funding under the Indian Act from 2010 to 2015, it rose from 33% to 36%. That has to change.

When you talk about economic development, that's what's important: getting our people well-paying jobs; getting first nations-owned businesses big contracts from trucking to catering to earth moving and reclamation, so they can grow their business and hire more people; and creating opportunities for entrepreneurs.

There's no sector—not solar panel installation, not tourism, not golf courses—that can replace the economic opportunity that oil and gas provides for first nations. The biggest barrier you can eliminate in indigenous economic development is to stop hampering or choking out the oil and gas sector. I note that the government is now considering a cap on emissions which, if not drafted properly, will in practice be a cap on production. Instead, I ask you to promote and encourage our involvement by making sure that first nations have access to the capital we need to be real partners in new projects. I know you've heard from others, and I know you'll hear...but that's an issue.

I am also the chair of the Alberta Indigenous Opportunities Corporation, which was created by the Government of Alberta to address some of the access to the capital challenge I mentioned. We've been able to provide many first nations the capital needed to participate in power plants, carbon capture facilities, pipelines and more. However, at the federal level, some people consider this government-backed loan to indigenous communities to get involved in these things to be a fossil fuel subsidy, which it is not.

If the federal government is truly committed to reconciliation and the principles of UNDRIP, it should be supportive in whatever kind of economic development we want to be a part of, regardless of the industry. The government shouldn't be picking and choosing for us. For our members and many other first nations, the oil and gas sector provides the best opportunity for economic well-being. It doesn't mean that we aren't interested in other sectors, nor that we don't want to be part of the net-zero economy. We can and should strike a balance between economic development and a net-zero economy.

I look forward to your questions. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you very much, Mr. Buffalo.

We will now proceed with the first round of questions.

Mr. Vidal, from the Conservatives, you have six minutes.

[Gary Vidal, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank all of our witnesses today.

I have six minutes, as the chair said. With so many questions and so little time, I'm going to try to be brief with my questions and try to get a few in here for all of you.

In earlier meetings, we heard testimony about indigenous procurement targets and some of the challenges.

Ms. Rasmussen, I know from some of the prior meetings I have had with your organization, the Meadow Lake Tribal Council, that one of your businesses, Polar Oils, has been having some issues in getting through the procurement process. Would you mind briefly sharing that story and maybe offering a bit of a solution? I know you referred, in your comments, to some of the bureaucracy and the challenges. Could you maybe share that story quickly so we can learn something from that?

[Tina Rasmussen]

Yes.

MP Vidal is correct. We do have a company called Polar Oils. Polar Oils is a fuel wholesaling company. Right in our traditional territory, we have Cold Lake air force base and also the Primrose Lake Air Weapons Range. We have been unable to get through the bureaucracy with our company, Polar Oils, to register to be able to bid on the supply of fuel to any of those services that exist for the military in our traditional territory.

It's just so cumbersome that our management group does not have time to focus specifically on that. They cannot find their way through, or find the resources to find their way through, to get completely registered to be able to begin bidding. It's extremely cumbersome.

[Gary Vidal, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Thank you, Tina. I appreciate that. It's something we need to learn to make the system better.

I'm going to move on quickly, because we have two other great witnesses today.

Mr. Louie and Mr. Buffalo, I'm going to ask you each the same question and give you both a chance to answer it. It will be efficient that way.

In some of the material, and in the meetings I have had with you in the past, you both talked about the contaminated sites, the reclamation of those sites and what economic impacts that could have on many first nations across the country.

My question for each of you would simply be to expand a little bit on the impact that these sites and the reclamation of these sites could have on indigenous businesses—maybe in the short term through the process of reclaiming them, but secondly in the longer term from the benefits that would be achieved by those first nations to have access to that land as they try to raise capital and have future economic prosperity in their nations.

Mr. Buffalo, maybe you can go first, and then Mr. Louie would follow up answering the same question, please.

[Stephen Buffalo]

Thank you, MP Vidal. I appreciate the question.

In the territory I am from, Treaty 6 Samson Cree Nation, at Pigeon Lake we had a world-class oil field, the Bonnie Glen field. In that area, exploration started probably in the late sixties. Obviously, our community boundaries aren't getting any bigger. The oil and gas has come, and kind of gone, but the remnants are still there, so the reclamation is very important.

What is provided for us is an ability to start taking care of the land again. In the case of Pigeon Lake, when we can reclaim some of the land, then we can proceed with more housing projects. There could be some commercial opportunities as well, but for the most part we're eliminating the methane emissions from these old abandoned wells. I think that's very important and goes along with the government's issue on carbon.

It has been going very well. We had a training program for this site rehabilitation program. We put over 300 young people to work, and they are doing their part in cleaning the environment.

[Chief Robert Louie]

Thank you, Mr. Vidal, for your question.

Environmental contamination is a big issue for us, and I touched upon it briefly in the legacy aspect of the barriers.

First, with regard to our communities that have land codes, we have 103 operational land codes and 194 signatories that we deal with, and we're directly or indirectly dealing with 238 first nations, which represent about one-third of all first nations in Canada.

Many of our communities have environmental contamination issues that are preventing development. Not having clean water in some communities, sewage services, power energy problems—all of this is critical infrastructure. There are hundreds of millions of dollars of contamination to the sites that our communities can't develop. I know that a study in 2014, outdated now, estimated $2.6 billion in costs from environmental contamination. Right now in our communities alone, we have over 800 reserve parcels that are contaminated and have a direct effect. These 800 reserve parcels are distracting from the economic development potential that can happen and must happen.

We need cleanup. We need remediation, and we can't have people from off-site coming to try to contaminate further.

We need laws in place, and we need those laws recognized. We have the power to put environmental laws in place. What we need now is enforcement. That is a real, significant issue. If our communities say, “Hey, this site is being contaminated. It's costing us dollars and time and so forth”, we have the power to put in place environmental laws, but we're having problems with governments not helping us enforce them, provincially and federally.

It's a combined issue. It's costing the country and our communities hundreds of millions of dollars, and it's a serious barrier to economic development.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you very much, Mr. Vidal.

Mr. Powlowski, you have six minutes.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Hello. I'd like to welcome Robert Louie. We've spoken a few times. If I recall correctly, it was about the First Nations Land Management Act and the problem of enforcing that act and bylaws made under that act. I think we broadened that discussion. It wasn't just about enforcing bylaws made under the First Nations Land Management Act, but in general about the problems with enforcing laws in first nations communities.

Mr. Louie, perhaps you could talk a little bit more about your problems in enforcing that law and the bylaws made under that law, and the impact on businesses in first nations communities. Perhaps, if you'd like to expand that, on the problems of enforcing laws in general...on businesses in first nations communities.

[Chief Robert Louie]

Thank you very much, honourable member. This is a very good question.

The enforcement issue is a big issue. Let me put it this way. We have law-making powers. Government supported us becoming self-governing in our communities. Now, government can't just say, “Here are the law-making powers. We open this up for you.” We now need support for enforcement, and that support will help us to enforce our laws. Right now, the RCMP and provincial and other agencies are not stepping up to the plate.

Enforcement is a broad issue. You cannot have government—a successful government—toothless. You need a government that has powers that are backed up by courts. Right now, we have problems with the RCMP not backing up the laws that are being put forward, and they're significant laws, as well. They include trespass. They include private prosecution. They include community health matters related to COVID and things of that nature.

If the RCMP doesn't back up the laws, we have a problem. We have a problem with overall governance, because you cannot have a government that doesn't have the enforcement. You're going to miss out on economic development opportunities and all the other major things that happen. The stronger the government—particularly in law-making, with powers to a first nation to actually law-make and put jurisdiction and laws in place—the more comfort you're going to bring to those first nation communities, and support from financial banking institutions, investors and all that. It's a major problem.

I can give you all kinds of other examples that are happening throughout the country. Family courts in Ontario, for example, are refusing to apply land code laws when considering marital disputes. That stops land from being traded or dealt with, lessening our opportunities. We're seeing these issues arise, and it's a serious problem nationwide. We need government support.

We've started. We made overtures to this committee. We made overtures to the ministers and attorneys general. We are, in fact, working with various attorneys general. We have some pilot projects under way, but it's too slow. We need to get government serious enough to say, “Let's get enforcement in place, and let's support our communities.”

It's deterring other communities from wanting land codes because, if you have a law and the community finds out, “Well, gee whiz, how do we know we'll have enforcement?”, how do you get buy-in from community members? How do you get other first nations to want to participate? We know we can be successful with law-making, but we need enforcement backed up.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

I absolutely agree, and I think most businesses want certainty in terms of rule-making and enforcement. That's important for businesses.

I think—and I'm looking over at Gary—one recommendation coming out of our study on enforcing laws in indigenous communities is that the government should report back within a year, or a year and a half, to this committee on what the government has done with respect to this. Have you heard anything from the government in response to that requirement? Have there been any overtures from anyone in government talking to you about this issue?

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

We have about 50 seconds left.

[Chief Robert Louie]

It's very preliminary. We haven't really gotten down to the nitty-gritty of “let's make things happen”. It's slow. Bureaucracy is slow and we're having trouble getting the minister's response. Granted, there has been an election, and I think, perhaps, that's been part of the problem. Nonetheless, the one year hasn't been complied with as a recommendation. It needs attention. It needs attention desperately and it needs it now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

You have 20 seconds.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Mr. Buffalo, I'm sure you're aware of the conflict that's going on in Ukraine. The Prime Minister announced on February 28 that we'd no longer be bringing in crude oil from Russia—importing it. I know you work with indigenous communities that are involved with the supply of oil and gas. Can you help the Ukrainian community and bring us some oil and gas, for the sake of both Canada and Ukraine?

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Mr. Buffalo, you have about 30 seconds.

[Stephen Buffalo]

They're pushing hard for the advocacy to continue, obviously, and for having our place. As Chief Robert mentioned.... We have a special operating agency, Indian Oil and Gas Canada, and they don't work for us without regulation. The land is important to us. But, by all means, if we can find a way to work with the Government of Canada to do some exporting, that would be fantastic, not only for first nations, but for Canadians in general.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mr. Powlowski.

Ms. Gill, you have six minutes.