Mr. Chair, thank you for the opportunity to present the results of our audit of the Inuvialuit Final Agreement from chapter 3 of the Auditor General's October 2007 report. I am accompanied by Frank Barrett, who is the principal responsible for this audit.
The Inuvialuit Final Agreement is one of Canada's first comprehensive land claim agreements. When it was signed in 1984 it was the first such agreement to be signed north of the 60th parallel, and is only the third comprehensive land claim agreement to be finalized in Canada. As with all comprehensive land claim agreements, the Inuvialuit Final Agreement is protected by the Constitution.
Modern comprehensive land claim agreements are complex and address the roles, responsibilities, and obligations of each party as well as other things, such as a land transfer and cash settlement. Land claim agreements are not designed to end relationships between governments and the aboriginal groups; they are designed to change those relationships.
The principle objectives of the Inuvialuit Final Agreement are to: preserve the Inuvialuit cultural identity and values within a changing northern society; enable the Inuvialuit to be equal and meaningful participants in the northern and national economy and society; and protect and preserve Arctic wildlife, environment, and biological productivity.
The Inuvialuit Final Agreement includes more than 80 provisions, under which the federal government is obligated to take certain actions or participate in certain activities. More than three quarters of these obligations are ongoing, such as regular participation on boards and committees.
We audited federal activities related to 29 of Canada's obligations that we deemed important for fulfilling the agreement. We also examined how Indian and Northern Affairs Canada—the lead federal organization—planned for, carried out, and monitored the implementation of Canada's obligations under the agreement. Finally, we assessed whether, or how, INAC monitored and reported on the extent to which the agreement's principles were realized.
We found that the federal government had not met some of its significant obligations. Often, this was because it had not established the necessary processes and procedures, or it had not identified who was responsible for certain actions.
For example, it had not yet established a process to remove restrictions on use called “encumbrances” from 13 parcels of Inuvialuit land that would transfer control and use of the land to the Inuvialuit. Furthermore, in 1984 INAC erroneously transferred land to the Inuvialuit that contained municipal infrastructure that belonged to the Government of the Northwest Territories and to Transport Canada. Our audit found that INAC had not established processes to reacquire these lands in exchange for other lands.
Some of the obligations are being met, Mr. Chairman. INAC has paid to the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation almost $170 million, over 14 years, according to the schedule set out in the agreement. Canada has transferred approximately 91,000 square kilometres to the Inuvialuit and created three national parks. Federal organizations have collaborated with joint management boards and with committees that were established under the agreement. They have also advised environmental screening and review bodies when requested to do so.
Mr. Chair, we found that the Department of Indian and Affairs, on top of not meeting specific obligations, still had not developed a strategy for how Canada would implement its responsibilities. This is 23 years after the agreement came into effect. We also found that INAC, the federal lead, has taken no action to ensure that progress towards achieving the principles of the agreement is monitored. During the audit, officials stated that they did not view this as the department's responsibility. As a result, the department does not have a comprehensive picture of progress of the three fundamental goals expressed in the agreement.
We made six recommendations. INAC agreed with all of them. When it responded to each one, INAC made various commitments, with specific timeframes, some of which were to be acted upon by March 2008. The committee may wish to invite INAC to table its action plan and explain what changes have been put in place to ensure it lives up to the commitments it made in response to our recommendations.
Mr. Chair, that concludes my opening statement. We would be happy to answer any questions the committee may have.