Evidence of meeting #76 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was lands.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
I would take it, then, that if you get the fee from a corporation and get the fee simple, that's a much faster process than the add-to-reserve process.
4:50 p.m.
Chair, National Aboriginal Lands Managers Association
It absolutely is. In the ATR process, there are three main components, and there are three phases. It would be nice if at some point Indigenous Services Canada, within those processes or those phases, would allow a little more flexibility from one phase to the other. It would speed up the process and still answer all the requirements of the process.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
The only thing stopping first nations from going the corporation route, the fee simple route, is lack of funds, and people are forced into the ATR process because they don't have the money to go the much faster route.
4:50 p.m.
Chair, National Aboriginal Lands Managers Association
Absolutely, and unfortunately that's the reality across the country. That's actually why NALMA is striving really hard. That's the reason they opened up an ATR unit: to help build capacity in this way and to work co-operatively with Indigenous Services Canada to improve the entire process.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
Now, are there advantages to the ATR? If you add to the reserve, then you have the benefits of not paying tax, for example. Is that right? How important is that? How attractive is that? How much does that influence a first nation community's decision to go through the ATR or through a corporation? Are the tax benefits minimal compared to the headache of having to go through the process?
4:55 p.m.
Chair, National Aboriginal Lands Managers Association
I think that when a first nation decides to go through the ATR process, they're very well aware of the decision they make. One of the first things they have to do is submit a BCR to the department, whereby the leadership of that first nation have made their decision. Obviously, they've made that decision because they feel they have to.
Oftentimes, the whole idea of taxation really doesn't hit the ground running for first nations. Unfortunately, it's always about being able to have more land so that our first nations people, our membership at large, can live and prosper and, quite simply, just have a place to build homes and some kind of infrastructure. That's the reality on the ground.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John Aldag
Thank you. We're out of time.
Welcome, Ms. Bérubé. You have five minutes.
October 17th, 2023 / 4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Sylvie Bérubé Bloc Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC
My question is for Ms. Simon and Mr. Marshall.
What form should land restitution take? You explained a little earlier that there were government mazes and that the process was long. There are a lot of changes in government, and you don't necessarily get the answers you need.
What form should the restitution of your land take? What exactly does this mean for you?
4:55 p.m.
Chair, National Aboriginal Lands Managers Association
The process is a lengthy process but I think the restitution of land is a co-operative engagement between the first nations, the federal government, the provincial government and the municipality. If everybody had this willingness to work together, the restitution of land can be a prosperous, healthy and wealthy process. Unfortunately, we haven't seen that in the past. Unfortunately, these processes have been marred with stoppages and bureaucratic difficulties.
If everybody understood their role and responsibility in what restitution of land means to a first nation.... I think the entire process and the entire idea of restitution of land can be a very good one if we all put our heads together and remain on the same page about what restitution means to everybody.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Sylvie Bérubé Bloc Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC
What impact has land restitution had on first nations? What impact has it had on the health and mental well-being of the indigenous population?
4:55 p.m.
Chair, National Aboriginal Lands Managers Association
The impacts are huge, as you well know when you see the news. You see the various first nations across the country that are seeing these impacts in terms of their health and their well-being and what it does to that first nation having to live in these kinds of circumstances.
When we talk about restitution of land, I think first nations, number one, get excited. At the same time, they question their capacity in terms of how they can move forward with this. The impact is always huge, because oftentimes we have to seek guidance through consultants and seek other avenues to help us through these constraints. All of this has a health impact on the first nations and the leadership within communities.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John Aldag
I made a mistake, and I apologize.
You should have only had 2.5 minutes and I gave you five minutes. We're at the end of the time now, so you got a little bonus time there.
Lori, we'll go to you now for your two and a half minutes.
5 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
5 p.m.
Liberal
5 p.m.
NDP
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
Thank you. My question is for Amanda.
I am very touched by the fact that you are from Kanesatake. I've worked with people like Ellen Gabriel, who is an amazing advocate, and I've heard from others in your community what the challenges are, even when there's been acknowledgement that first nations, Métis or Inuit have obtained the self-governance necessary to lead their own communities. Part of it is that provincial law enforcement doesn't recognize their authority to have their bylaws enforced.
Could you speak to that?
I think it's quite important in terms of land back that we're not just talking about economic development and we're not just talking about alleviating poverty. We're allowing actual self-governance to be realized and having law enforcement respect the bylaws that have been made, so that the indigenous governance that was to be respected is being implemented.
5 p.m.
Chair, National Aboriginal Lands Managers Association
Through your relationship with Ellen Gabriel.... She has, obviously, told you some of the issues that Kanesatake faces. We are under a sectoral self-government regime. However, through the years, we have failed to do some of the things that we were supposed to do in terms of creating our justice of the peace, for example, which would have addressed the policing issue.
You're absolutely right when you state that, when you get land back, you may have it back—it's there—but if you do not have the proper measures in place in terms of justice and proper policing, chaos is the result. You can look at the news sometimes and see what's happening in Kanesatake to understand what I mean by that chaos. It's the lack of leadership—perhaps a partnership with Indigenous Services Canada—to help resolve and remedy this issue.
Everybody has to understand that, following 1990, the relationship with the Sûreté du Québec was not a good one. We lost a corporal, Corporal Lemay.
We need to really find different ways, unique ways, to address that whole policing issue.
5 p.m.
NDP
Lori Idlout NDP Nunavut, NU
Very quickly, would you say that Indigenous Services Canada is still taking too much of a colonial approach to making sure that indigenous peoples' rights are being respected in terms of land back?
5 p.m.
Chair, National Aboriginal Lands Managers Association
“Absolutely” is my one-word answer to that.
Thank you.
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John Aldag
Thank you. That takes us to the end of this panel.
I'd like to thank all of our witnesses for joining us today, including Mr. Buffalo online.
To our two witnesses here, Ms. Simon and Mr. Marshall, I really appreciate your making the time.
Colleagues, we're going to suspend now. We have the second panel to bring in. We'll take a few minutes to get set up, and then we'll get under way for the second panel.
The meeting is suspended.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John Aldag
Welcome back. We're into our second session.
Thank you, everybody, for joining us.
Chief Louis, welcome. Being that you're the only one online, you'll have to control the language choice. On your screen, you should have a choice of floor, English or French audio. Please make sure to choose whichever one you want. We'll have live translation going today, and I can't control it for you, so I'll need you to select that.
Then, we'll need you to mute yourself when you're not speaking, and then unmute yourself. Again, we can't control that remotely. It's easier if you do it. For everyone in the room, it's all controlled for us.
Now that we've started, there are to be no pictures taken and no screenshots allowed.
We're going to go through some rounds of questions. We'll start with opening statements.
I use a card system. When I give you the yellow card, there are 30 seconds left. With the red card, your time's up, but finish your thought. Don't stop mid-sentence.
Let's have a good conversation here.
Chief Byron Louis from the Okanagan Indian Band is our online guest today. We also have Patricia Mitchell, executive director for Manitoba USKE, and Shady Al Hafez, research fellow, Yellowhead Institute.
Welcome to the three of you.
I'll go to you, Chief Louis, first. You're online, and while we have the good connection, we're going to turn it over to you. We'll give you five minutes for your opening statement.
5:10 p.m.
Chief Byron Louis Okanagan Indian Band
My name is Byron Louis. I'm the chief of the Okanagan Band. It's a pleasure to be here. I'm sitting in Syilx territory in the province of British Columbia.
I'm not going to be covering the same ground as what was spoken on earlier about that, but I'd like to really talk about the actual core and foundation, if we are talking about restitution of land to first nations, Inuit and Métis.
Are we also talking about the whole issue of reconciliation? The view we take on reconciliation is the definition that talks about reconciliation being the resumption of good relations after a period of hostility. I think that really defines what our relationship has been for the longest period of time.
My question is this: How do we get beyond that? I think when we go back into that, we really need to look at what the foundation is. A lot of people don't recognize that fact, and I would ask the panellists, who have some of this research to be done.
In particular, it goes back to about 1537, with the signing of the Sublimis Deus—or the Sublimis Dei—by Pope Paul III. This document is important because it was about 45 years after Columbus had touched foot in Hispaniola and about 16 years after Cortés came ashore in 1519.
It recognized that we were in fact human beings, and not only were we human beings—and not beasts—but we were also recognized as being rational human beings and as having the right not to be deprived of our liberty or possession. Now, it is a document of colonization, but it recognizes at that point that we were in fact human beings.
You go into some of the other ones that establish the relationship that existed between first nations or indigenous peoples and the government, or the Crown, if you want to call it that. You go into 1704 and the Mohegans v. Connecticut. That is very interesting, because that's the earliest case of taking forward a case for land tenure and also of management and control. Then, of course, we know about the Royal Proclamation of 1763.
Also, most importantly, one of the outcomes later in 1814 was the signing of the Treaty of Ghent, article 9, which talked about the resumption of our full rights that were held prior to the hostilities in 1811. Well, when we talk about those rights, we're talking about the full rights. We expressed those rights through trade. We expressed those rights through interaction and engagement with government. We expressed that in diplomacy with our neighbours and with the newcomers who came in.
When you look at these systems, you see that we're still talking about the issue of not only recognition but the relationship that actually existed. You go into British Columbia joining Confederation in 1871. In that article, British Columbia said that Indians and the lands reserved for Indians were a responsibility of the Dominion of Canada. However, it also recognized that.... I'll quickly read this to you:
The charge of the Indians, and the trusteeship and management of the lands reserved for their use and benefit, shall be assumed by the Dominion Government, and a policy as liberal as that hitherto pursued by the British Columbia Government shall be continued by the Dominion Government after the Union.
Now, this is important, because if you actually.... In the policy that exists underneath there, it goes on to say:
To carry out such policy, tracts of land of such extent as it has hitherto been the practice of the British Columbia Government to appropriate for that purpose, shall from time to time—
This is very important:
—be conveyed by the Local Government—
That means a province.
— to the Dominion Government in trust for the use and benefit of the Indians on application of the Dominion Government; and in case of disagreement between the two Governments respecting the quantity of such...land to be so granted, the matter shall be referred for the decision of the Secretary of State for the Colonies.
This is one of the highest levels in colonial government, but why is this important? It shows to us in British Columbia that responsibility for us and our lands is with the Dominion and not with the province, and that the conveyance of land from time to time.... You know, to us, lands were never considered static. Reserves are supposed to be under review to look at size and demographics and other factors and be adjusted from time to time.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John Aldag
Chief Louis, I'm just going to jump in briefly. We're at the five minutes, so I'll give you a bit of time if you want to just wrap up your comments for your opening statement.
5:15 p.m.
Okanagan Indian Band
I'll do that really fast.
One of the issues of that was, for us, that this review would happen. They tried commissions and also the McKenna-McBride.
I want people to look at the B.C. Indian Reserves Mineral Resources Act of 1943. This act is a prime example of colonialism at its finest. I can explain that if people want to ask, but what I'm talking about is the relationship. How do we get to that good relationship?
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal John Aldag
Thank you so much, and I apologize for cutting you off. Five minutes is a very tight amount of time, so we really appreciate it.
We'll go now to Ms. Mitchell.
When you're ready, the floor is yours for five minutes.