Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Oct. 17th, 2023

[Amanda Simon]

I should have gone into French. I apologize. I'm way too nervous, and I'm sure I'll stumble all over the place.

Again, land and getting land back is very difficult. Kanesatake is one example of this. After the events of 1990, we were a very well-publicized first nation that got land back. However, after 30 years, we're still in the process of adding that land through a proper land allotment process, so that we can properly use those lands. It's a long time. Here is the reality: It's been 30 years. I'm living proof to tell you that that is the reality on the ground.

What makes it a bit more interesting for Kanesatake is that we're not a reserve under the definition of the Indian Act. We're a territory. Therefore, we had to have special legislation issued for us in order to apply some of the rules and regulations getting us out of the Indian Act.

That said, our process is not any different from the ATR process. It's mirrored. However, I would like to say from a NALMA perspective, and as the chair for NALMA, representing NALMA here today, that we created an ATR unit to help with the capacity of first nations to be able to work through this arduous process and to find recommendations for all levels of governments—provincial, municipal and the feds—whereby we can diminish that time limit and have this distinct understanding of the first nation perspective when we're going through these processes.

If we all collaborate co-operatively, I think we can diminish those timelines while respecting all of the guidelines that are within the process to come to a successful and prosperous eventual process, so that first nations can use this land that was taken from them for so many years. Hopefully, we can establish new homes and will be able to have economic development and live prosperously.

Thank you.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you.

I'd like you to expand on that so we know what the impact is. We're talking about 30 years here, which is huge. You could say that this represents half a life. There are repercussions, and they affect several generations. Of course, some of them may not be directly observable. They may just as well be very present and predictable as indirect or underlying.

Could you tell us about the repercussions of taking so long to acquire or return land?

[Amanda Simon]

I will speak to what happened in Kanesatake, because it's very close to me.

When the events after 1990 happened and the land purchases began with the federal government, the 30 years resulted in Kanesatake having its land there but with no land allotment process. These lands were simply taken. We didn't have a land use plan to properly plan out a structured area where we could have social gatherings, our schools would be protected and so on and so forth.

Ultimately, unfortunately, what happened as well is that we have environmental concerns, because there was a dump that was created afterwards.

The result is huge. The impact is huge. These lands, some of them, became unusable because they now have to be remediated due to the environmental impacts that have happened in all this time that went by. Thirty years is a long time. We could have done a lot more, and I think that having a co-operative strategy with Indigenous Services Canada could probably support us so that this does not happen in other first nations.

We're trying to fix that now through the RIRSD table, and we're hoping that we're going to become somewhere where we can have a land allotment process, where we can address those environmental concerns and have those lands usable again for the Mohawks of Kanesatake.

Nia:wen. Thank you.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thank you.

Now we have Madam Idlout.

The floor is yours for six minutes.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

My first question is going to Stephen, and I want to welcome the other witnesses as well.

What we're hearing from you is very good to hear. I will ask you later.

I have two questions for Stephen.

The first one pertains to what you stated about Indian Oil and Gas Canada. There have been many conflicts that arose between these entities. Can you describe in detail what the problems are that are caused by Indian Oil and Gas Canada?

The second question is this: Do you have recommendations regarding Indian Oil and Gas Canada?

[Stephen Buffalo]

First, Indian Oil and Gas Canada is our regulatory body. It's different from the Alberta Energy Regulator and the Canada Energy Regulator. They were supposed to be our fiduciary trustee, as well. Some of the problems that stem from their lack of enforcement have turned into litigation against the Crown.

First nations struggle through this. One, we had to learn the oil and gas sector very fast. When oil and gas is happening and our provinces are making billions of dollars, first nations have the opportunity to take advantage of it. Of course, federal money is not enough to service our communities. You all know that. Our founding fathers learned the hard way. They set up an opportunity for first nations to be part of this sector and to benefit, as well, not only through royalties but also through jobs and services. It has been very successful despite some of the social pathologies that come from having too much money.

At the end of the day, the regulatory body did not serve us well. We have orphaned and abandoned wells where IOGC did not keep companies accountable. We have miscalculation of oil and gas royalties, which are held in Ottawa and being disputed. We seem to more or less deal with regulators and individuals who are paternalistic and who impose a lot of systemic racism, not only internally but on our community leaders. They're very difficult to deal with. For example, for the site reclamation program that was initiated, they had no data on any of the oil and gas wells in our communities, in terms of what is abandoned, orphaned or active.

In my view, it's a special operating agency for people who want a government pension. They do their time there and don't act in our best interest. Some of the suggestions.... It's been mandated since 1996 to have a first nations-led energy regulator. We're back in the red zone, so to speak—for lack of a better term—trying to find a way to change that system.

IRC will not decide for first nations how they want to regulate their lands. We're at the point where we have to ask those questions and where first nations have to make a decision and assert their jurisdiction, not only on their community lands but in their traditional territories of Treaty No. 6, Treaty No. 7 and Treaty No. 8 here in Alberta and Treaty No. 4 in Saskatchewan. They have to start making land laws for themselves and working with industry and the provincial governments, because if you do it federally it is proven that it fails.

Progress, going forward, is first nations asserting their own jurisdiction with their land laws. My hope is this leads to a better system, where resource revenue sharing is at the forefront and on the table for all first nations with the extraction of natural resources in this country. We are rich in natural resources. First nations should have a better say about part of it, because depending on Indian Affairs money through the Comprehensive Funding Agreement is never enough.

To your previous question, we don't have the resources to move things along. Some of us don't have the money. It's very hard. If we obtain land through a purchase and have it added to our reserve, there's no money there to help us move it forward or move it quickly. If a minister decides this is going to be reserve land, the bureaucrats in the system hold up the whole process. It takes just one person not agreeing with the mandate moving forward. It's very tough and difficult.

To move things more quickly, don't get that type of government involved—the internals of Indigenous Services Canada. Ultimately, we're at the point where we have to find different ways to not depend on the government for our success and prosperity, and to get out of poverty. That's my mandate—to get a lot of our communities out of poverty. Natural resources are abundant and all around us. We have to do a better job. It's absolutely about working with both governments—federally and provincially—and with industry.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

We're going to our next round, which will be five minutes.

First up, I have Mr. Schmale.

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

Thank you, Chair, and thank you to our witnesses, especially my geographical neighbours from Curve Lake. Thank you very much for attending.

We'll maybe start with you.

During our study on this topic and many, many others, we tended to hear the same thing over and over again about the slowness within the department, particularly the bureaucracy.

In our study for the non-insured health benefits, we heard that applications for claims are still done by fax machine. That's something I've brought up many times. Now, I'm just confirming that for any application that you make to the department, you're not using a fax machine. Is that correct?

[Amanda Simon]

That's correct.

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

It's very important to know, because you could say yes and it wouldn't surprise me.

Given that I think we're hitting 10,000 bureaucrats within the ISC department now and you're saying an application could take up to 30 years—and I appreciate what Mr. Buffalo said just a second ago—where do you think the logjam is? What is taking so long, and do you have some examples?

[Amanda Simon]

For me, in Kanesatake, you have to understand that we did not go through the ATR process. I need to be clear on that. Following the events of 1990, we didn't have to go through the ATR process. We just had to turn around and put together a land allotment process.

To speak to the ATR process and the holdup, I think it's the idea that there's not enough capacity, both with the federal government and the first nations, and of course the provincial government and the municipal government. All of them have to be involved, and they don't have enough capacity. They don't know enough about it, quite simply.

That's where NALMA comes in, trying to offer this capacity in a way that is easy to understand and having professionals there who can help out all levels of government, and the first nations mostly, so that the process can move forward a lot more easily.

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

Thank you, Ms. Simon.

[Albert Marshall Jr.]

I have one example. There's a reserve in my community, Bear River, in our province of Nova Scotia. They had a 30-year ATR file open. The reason it was extended again was that the province reissued mine permits to companies on proposed ATR.

There's no collaboration, as Amanda just mentioned, between the province, the municipalities and the feds. It seems like it's more the first nation and the feds, and the province somewhat.

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

Do you see, maybe even within the departments, that turnover is a problem too? Someone might leave. They get accustomed to the file, then they're out and you're starting something new. That seems to be an issue.

[Albert Marshall Jr.]

That's the big thing too within the department. There's a huge turnover.

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

I appreciate your knowledge on this, too. I think that's a key point of what you two are doing.

I don't know whether there could be a designated person, or maybe some background or experience to help out with that in a more stable position. I know people are free to move, but at the same time I think this is hindering the process. Is it institutional knowledge? I don't know what you'd call it.

[Albert Marshall Jr.]

I think it's more at this level. I think this is where the problem is. As you just mentioned, it's the turnover of staff repeatedly, and then you have to re-educate everybody.

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

You have to start from scratch.

Did you want to quickly chime in, Ms. Simon? I saw you reaching for the microphone.

[Amanda Simon]

Obviously the federal government has a lot of turnover, but if it was able to implement a way to transfer that knowledge in a quicker fashion, that turnover could still happen. That transfer of knowledge, which is essential to moving these ATR processes forward, could happen. I'm sure there's a way this transfer of knowledge could happen.

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

Okay, thank you.

Mr. Buffalo, I have about 30 seconds. Did you want to comment on any of that? I know I had a whole bunch of other questions for you.

[Stephen Buffalo]

For sure, I agree 100% that the municipalities, the provinces...no one is on the same page. Again, we lack the resources to get things together, and we're always waiting for someone to step forward.

There's a lot of corporate value to lands that we obtain, but to have them accessed through the process of ATR.... Then again, the bureaucracy is unbelievable. I've gone through four ADMs in the time I've been in my capacity with the Indian Resource Council. That being said, I don't know what to do there.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

That's the end of that five minutes.

We'll go to Mr. Powlowski next for five minutes.

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

My riding is Thunder Bay—Rainy River. There is the Fort William First Nation, which is Robinson-Superior Treaty, and then on the west side, they're all Treaty 3.

Some of the communities are doing fairly well economically. Some of them have had recent flood land settlement agreements and have gotten a fair bit of money.

If they want to add land, they have to go through the ATR process—“ATR” is add to reserves. Is there a question when you're adding land as to whether you do it by formally adding to the reserve? Because the reserve land is still held in trust by the Crown, you don't actually have fee simple ownership of the land. I don't know if I have this right, but is it possible, and isn't it an alternative, that the band could set up a corporation? Then the corporation owns the land, so that you actually own the fee simple.

How does that work in terms of the technicalities? What have different first nations done in terms of how they add by formally adding to the reserve? If you add to the reserve, do you have to...? Does that require an act of government to formally add to the reserve? Maybe you could walk us through some of that technical aspect, because I'm still trying to comprehend how you do this.

[Amanda Simon]

First nations don't necessarily have to do the process of additions to reserve, but often they take that route because they lack the land base. They need to provide housing for their first nations, and they need to provide economic development for their first nations.

Those first nations.... I'll give you an example of a first nation that opts to have fee simple land under its ownership, and yes, through an organization, so that it can hold this fee simple land. It's been very important for first nations in B.C., who in fact opt to have a corporation and have their fee simple land because it offers them a financial edge. They can now turn around and borrow money based on their fee simple lands, because, as many of you here know, you cannot put reserve lands up for collateral. Therefore, you have limited opportunities financially and economically.

You're not forced to do an ATR process, but often the first nation is, because of its current situation on the ground—at the grassroots. Those first nations with more resources, like those in B.C., have the opportunity to take that, to opt in, saying, “I'll open a corporation and I'll have fee simple lands, because I can probably turn around and generate a very big income by doing that.”