Qujannamiik. Thank you for the invitation to appear here today.
I'm pleased to be here as the president of Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated and the co-chair of the Land Claims Agreements Coalition.
In 1993, Nunavut Tunngavik signed the Nunavut agreement, our modern treaty with Canada. Decades earlier, we had begun documenting our traditional land use and occupancy across our homeland, before the federal government adopted a comprehensive land claims policy. That work eventually led to the signing of our agreement and the creation of Nunavut.
Some parts of the agreement were implemented relatively smoothly. For example, capital transfer payments were clearly scheduled in the agreement, and Inuit-owned lands were registered through the land title system. However, other areas of implementation have proven far more difficult and have sometimes required litigation to ensure that the commitments in our agreement are respected.
One ongoing concern is the implementation of Inuit treaty rights in adjacent waters. The Nunavut agreement states that Inuit must have meaningful access to fisheries near the Nunavut settlement area. In practice, Inuit have to struggle to secure their access to quota allocations, which frequently favour other interests.
Large portions of offshore fisheries are allocated to parties outside of Nunavut, despite Inuit communities being closest and adjacent to these resources and despite the agreement's explicit acknowledgement of the principle of adjacency and assurances of full economic participation by Inuit. Although the courts have affirmed that Nunavut's adjacency rights must be meaningfully considered in federal decisions, these principles have not been fully realized in offshore quota allocations.
Our experience with fisheries reflects a broader challenge that many modern treaties have faced: a gap between commitments contained in our agreements and the reality of implementation.
NTI and other treaty organizations formed the Land Claims Agreements Coalition in 2003. Inuit and first nations from across the country came together because we shared many of the same concerns about implementation.
One of the coalition's outstanding recommendations since its formation in 2003 has been the creation of an implementation body to review and monitor how modern treaties are implemented. Such an office would provide transparency and accountability and would help overcome systemic barriers, thereby benefiting both indigenous partners and governments. A commissioner for modern treaty implementation could help ensure that agreements are implemented faithfully and consistently, ensuring that commitments in modern treaties are implemented in spirit and intent.
We drafted Bill C-10 co-operatively as part of the effort. It represents a joint initiative to strengthen the implementation of modern treaties and improve the relationship between indigenous people and the Crown.
Ultimately, modern treaties are commitments. Implementing them fully is essential if we are to build the partnership that these agreements were meant to create.
Qujannamiik. Thank you.