Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples
Issue 13 - Evidence
OTTAWA, Wednesday, November 18, 1998
The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples met this day at 5:41 p.m. to examine and report upon aboriginal self-government.
Senator Charlie Watt (Chairman) in the Chair.
[English]
The Chairman: Welcome, Senator Adams. Since we do not require a quorum, we will proceed.
Today's hearing is part of the committee's special study on aboriginal self-government. This committee will undertake over the next few months to examine what is already in place and the many different sets of models that exist, as well as the future arrangements which will be worked out between the aboriginal peoples, the Government of Canada and the various provincial governments involved.
This committee will examine the new structural relationship. The mechanism of implementing such a new relationship will be examined along with the model of aboriginal self-government required to respond to the needs of aboriginal people and to compliment those new structural relationships.
Today, we have as a witness the President of the Metis Settlements General Council in Alberta, Mr. Ken Noskey.
Please proceed.
Mr. Ken Noskey, President, Metis Settlements General Council: Honourable senators, it is great to be here. My presentation will consist of a video presentation followed by an overhead presentation. I will talk about the governing structure and pieces of legislation that cover the eight Metis settlements in northern Alberta.
Video presentation.
Mr. Noskey: We showed this video to you because we felt that it was important for the committee to know and understand where we came from. Many of the people in the video are deceased, but it is good for you to see our people and some of the community leaders from the past.
We are including this video in school programming in each of the settlements that we govern. We are hoping to create a booklet as well to help educate our youth.
I will turn now to the overhead presentation and a map that shows the eight settlements, which cover a great part of northern Alberta. The biggest settlement, the Paddle Prairie settlement, is near High Level. Fishing Lake and Elizabeth settlements are on the Saskatchewan border. The others lie in between. Together they comprise 1.25 million acres of land and a population of 7,000 people. Each area has a local government.
The legal structure of the settlement government is a system of governments created by the Metis Settlements Act as passed in 1989 as part of the Alberta Metis Settlements Accord. The local government authority is a council with five members elected by the population of that particular geographic area. Each settlement has anywhere from 500 to 1,100 people.
Four provincial statutes create our Metis Settlements government. The Metis Settlements Act is the governing structure and tells us how we are structured and how we make decisions. There is the Metis Settlements Land Protection Act, which sets aside the lands for the Metis in the Province of Alberta. We also amended the Constitution of Alberta to entrench our lands in that Constitution. We also have the Metis Settlements Accord Implementation Act, which establishes the Metis Settlements Transition Commission. It includes a financial arrangement over a 17-year period in the amount $310 million.
The bylaws cannot conflict with provincial legislation. Both provincial and federal legislation apply to us. The minister has the authority to review councils and activities in the public interest. For example, we recently had an assessment of all of the communities because of petitions written to the minister, who has the legislative responsibility to protect the Metis Settlements public interest. That is the way that is structured.
Some business corporations, such as an oil and gas company, are owned by all eight settlement governments. As part of our agreement and our legislation, we have a co-management agreement on sub-surface resources. We can participate up to 25 per cent in any oil and gas development and charge an overriding royalty to any gas or oil company working on the settlements. Those funds are over and above what the province would receive. Those reserves belong to the Crown of the Province of Alberta, but we have interest in over 100 oil and gas wells on the settlements.
We also have our own settlement bank or I should say aboriginal credit corporation, Settlement Investment Corporation, which was founded 10 years ago with $4 million from the federal government. Those funds were to help our members with small business ventures. We have been operating for 10 years. Settlement Sooniyaw Corporation is owned by all eight settlements. It is the economic development arm of the settlements and it is venturing into economic opportunities and training programs as well.
The settlement council in each geographic area makes decisions for that particular settlement. The laws that they make govern the settlement areas set out by the powers in the act. It is similar to that of municipal governments. The bylaws must be approved by the general membership of each community. They have decision-making abilities regarding who attains membership, and the legislation spells out who would be eligible. They also have decision-making power with regard to who receives pieces of land within the geographic areas. Programs and services are run as well by the council. That includes garbage pick up, house repairs, and corporations and entities that provide work and employment to settlement members in that particular area.
The council answers to the members. Members approve bylaws at general meetings or they do not pass. Members approve financial expenditures and receive audited reports each year.
Members elect the councils for terms of one or two years. We are looking at changing that part of our legislation because we find that everything is too politicized. Every decision that is made about who gets a job or a house is tied politically. Six months before an election people are campaigning and six months after an election they are fulfilling campaign promises. That is one area that we are having some difficulty with.
The General Council, as the corporation, is the collective representative body that holds the lands and makes laws. The collective government is now called the General Council. The General Council also manages collective funds. We have set aside a total of $65 million and we are hoping that it will grow to $120 million. Those funds cannot be touched until the year 2007. That will be the core funding to run our local and collective governments.
We also coordinate activities and we are the political representative body for all eight settlement areas. General Council policies are created by all 44 elected representatives of the eight areas. They are binding on all settlement councils, and General Council policies cannot be contradicted by any local bylaws in any of those settlement areas. The policies address issues of how you hold an interest in land, everything to do with hunting, fishing, trapping, oil and gas development, and property taxes.
Another entity or body funded by the Province of Alberta is the Metis Settlement Appeal Tribunal. It is a seven-member panel. Three members are appointed by the government and three are appointed by ourselves. The chair is chosen by the minister from a list that the General Council submits.
The tribunal's job is to investigate, mediate and arbitrate in order to resolve disputes regarding membership and land issues. It is a low-cost and culturally sensitive Metis court. We are looking at ways to expand the jurisdiction of that body. We are working closely with the provincial government and hoping to involve the federal government as well.
We have formed social institutions involving such things as a training program for labour market training initiatives to the tune of $2.4 million per year. We are hoping to finalize an agreement for a similar arrangement the next five years whereby our people would be trained in particular areas and we would be able to tap into the labour markets surrounding our communities.
Through our education society, we provide 32 bursaries per year to settlement members in two- and four-year post-secondary programs. We signed an agreement with the Province of Alberta in 1997 to fund services for our children. We have our own people running the program, called Region 18, which deals with social issues in relation to children.
The next slide shows an overall snapshot of the structure of all of the entities and the councils. At the very centre you see the settlement council and, again, the local authorities make laws and so forth. They also formed a general council that you see as part of that diagram and we have the appeal tribunal. The Alberta government is indicated on this diagram since the province has certain responsibilities under legislation and we are still under a provincial department. At the present it is the Minister of Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Affairs, Mr. David Hancock.
That is the basic structure. Aside from that you see the oil and gas company and the training program I referred to earlier. We also have an agreement with the provincial and federal governments, which is a tripartite process, whereby we would coordinate activity in relation to program access.
We have our own land and membership registry. Every member of every settlement is recorded in the registry system and every interest in land is also recorded in that registry system. It is quite an extensive and comprehensive registry system. At the present time, it is funded by the province.
That is a quick overview of the Metis Settlements government. I will add to that the question of revenue. How do we propose to fund this government? I have mentioned the future fund. By generating interest of approximately $10 million annually on an ongoing basis that would constitute our base funding. We have, at the present time, $23 million per year coming from the provincial agreement that we signed with the Province of Alberta. We also have the right under legislation to charge fees, levies and contributions to settlement members for the provision of services. We have that, as well, as a source of revenue for funding our governments. Under our business property contributions policy, any time a member wishes to start a business on a settlement that member is charged a fee, and that also would contribute to the revenue source of the settlement.
We have a utility policy. There are franchise fees for power and gas companies operating on settlement lands. That is another source of revenue. There are royalties on the oil and gas, and equity participation in oil and gas development. We have access to federal and provincial programs, through Health Canada, HRDC, Industry Canada and others.
As a government we are wrestling with some national issues because we are unique. We are the only land-based Metis in the whole country. We feel fortunate that our past leaders and the Alberta government set the land aside and it will always be our home. However, we are looking for federal constitutional entrenchment of our lands. We are hoping to get into healing and health programs. We are looking for federal funding from one of the federal departments to promote our language, our culture and our heritage. We also wish to deal with the problems of our youth and of our members with disabilities.
Those are some of our long-term goals. Because of the way we make decisions at the local and collective levels, business development on the settlements is sometimes a very cumbersome process. It is a process of consensus rather than of simple majority. That sometimes hinders progress and business activity in relation to what we wish to achieve. Not everyone can agree on issues of that nature.
The item I hold in my hand is my bible. It is the four pieces of provincial legislation and attached to the back I have General Council policies. I will make that available to you. It is important that you know what is in here. We created this. The provincial government put it in their legislature and it is provincial law, but we put it together. We had a referendum back in 1989 and our people agreed to settle the lawsuit that we had previously discussed.
We are living under the law that we created. It is evolving and we are changing as we go. We are modifying it and making adjustments. We have been at it for 60 years and we will be around for a long time. We signed the agreement with the province in 1989 and since then we have been making adjustments to the legislation and the rules that govern our community.
I will make that document available to you as soon as I can so that you know, understand and appreciate the complexity of our government. It is very complex and I cannot explain all the details to you in one hearing.
The Chairman: This committee intends to study further what we have seen in your video presentation and what you have presented in your evidence today. We gave you little notice when we asked you to appear and we also allowed ourselves very little time to review your materials; therefore, I wish to assure you that at some later date we will call upon you to make another presentation in order that we may go more in-depth into the issues which you have highlighted. We look forward to that because of your success with the Metis Settlements Act and the way that you have been able to persuade the Province of Alberta to take you seriously in entering into negotiations to establish the accord and then take steps afterwards to further develop the accord.
I am sure that the senators have some questions to put to you. I will give them an opportunity to do that and I will also ask you some specific questions later.
Senator Adams: Your presentation gives me hope that with hard work, like you have been doing for so many years in the communities, our changes in the Northwest Territories will come about in a similar way on April 1, 1999.
Right now, are the people who live in those eight reserve areas in Alberta all Metis or are there other native people? Do you overlap with First Nations people, or are you talking about Metis only?
Mr. Noskey: As far as the Metis Settlements go, to qualify for programs and services, and to run for office, you must be a Metis Settlements member. You have to be Metis, not First Nation. Again, that is spelled out in legislation. If you are a registered Indian, you cannot be a member of our community. Therefore, because the lands were set aside for Metis, you must be Metis to qualify for the programs. However, there are people who have been reinstated under Bill C-31. Prior to 1990, if you were registered as an Indian and you were living in the community and you were a member under the former act, you were grandfathered in because we did not want to break up families. There are registered Indians who have full-fledged membership in the Metis Settlements areas. We also have living on those settlements schoolteachers and businessmen who are non-Metis, Indian or otherwise.
Senator Adams: You mention schoolteachers and health services. Is any other department funded by you or funded by the government? In our communities, we usually have a nursing station; we do not have hospitals. We live in the Territories, but to have an operation, we have to go to Churchill or Winnipeg. When women give birth, they often have to go down to Churchill or Winnipeg. How does the system in your area work? Does it provide better control within your community?
Mr. Noskey: The province is still responsible for education, for funding our schools. We have five schools in eight settlements and they range from grade 1 to grade 6 or from kindergarten to grade 6. We also have one school in the community that goes up to grade 9. The rest of our children go to the regions surrounding our communities to be educated. We have our own local school boards in five of those communities, and we are active in the other school boards where the children attend school.
Health is also provided by the province. We do not have responsibility for health. That is the responsibility of the Alberta government.
Children's services are provided by a social services delivery agency, Region 18, and we administer that on behalf of the province with our own people. We have people who have master's degrees in social work, and they are qualified to run those programs for us.
Senator Adams: Is there a grade limit in the community? Do you have a university or do your members have to go to Edmonton or somewhere else in Alberta for university?
Mr. Noskey: They must leave our community for the majority of their schooling, although correspondence is now being accepted in our communities. Because of the direct Internet link, people can access those programs. We have federal funding that we provide to our members so that they are able to afford to take advantage of those programs. Many people are leaving our communities to attend post-secondary institutions in urban settings.
Senator Adams: The Government of the Northwest Territories at one time had a policy where our communities only went up to grade 10 and students had to travel to bigger settlements to go up to grade 12. I was wondering if your situation was similar.
What about the police forces? You have bylaws and local councils. Do you have some agreement with the RCMP to operate police services? Now that you have land and forestry and oil and gas, and a new government in Nunavut, do you need policing from outside to help you?
Mr. Noskey: In regards to the police services in our communities, I am working with the provincial justice department. I have been making presentations saying that we need our own police force and bylaw officers in our communities. We wish to take over that responsibility and make our communities peaceful places to live. I do not know when I will be able to negotiate that type of system but that is what we are working towards. We may be able to negotiate a Metis Settlements Police Force. We would like to take on that responsibility for ourselves.
In that regard, the way we have achieved what we have today is by taking one bit at a time, like eating an apple one bite at a time. We have taken one area of responsibility and mastered it and kept it, and then taken another bite. It is a step-by-step process. Unless we have the capacity to administer a program, we will not take it on. We wish to make sure our people are capable and accountable and able to manage a program before we take it over. That has always been our approach.
Senator Adams: Do you have any difficulties with the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development in your community right now? I know you have different treaties but I should like to know whether the department or your community has control there.
Mr. Noskey: The Constitution of Canada recognizes three indigenous or aboriginal peoples in this country: the Inuit, the Indians and the Metis. The federal government has taken on responsibility for the Indians and the Inuit, but we Metis are in no man's land. They say we are recognized as an aboriginal people but there are no resources or programs specific to the Metis as there are for the First Nations. Ralph Goodale is our Metis interlocutor at the present time but he has no people, no resources and no right to negotiate anything because the federal government is refusing to take fiduciary responsibility for the Metis.
In Alberta we have been fortunate. The Alberta government set the land aside and was willing to negotiate with us as Metis people. That is the reason we have what we have. We do not have much to do with DIAND because we are not First Nations, although I did speak to Jane Stewart a number of times to try to get reimbursement for using Metis money to provide a service for First Nations people. The last time she talked to me she said it was the first time she had heard of that. That is what I am working on and that is what I am being pushed by our membership to do. You are using Metis money to provide a service to First Nations people who are a federal responsibility. I am pushed as a leader to go out and see what I can do in regards to being reimbursed. We have set some interesting precedents in the last little while, and we will see where they take us. We do not have much to do with DIAND because we are not recognized.
Senator Adams: You still seem to have some concerns about some of the things in Bill C-31, even though we passed it a long time ago. What are you concerned about, having to do with the Metis?
Mr. Noskey: We had some concerns when we negotiated the agreement because many of our people were reinstated under that bill. Because we did not want to split up families, in 1989 we grandfathered everyone in under the new legislation. If you registered after 1990, you cannot qualify as a member. It raises some concerns for us.
[Translation]
Senator Prud'homme: First of all, it is very difficult for me to react. I am not a member of the committee; I just came because I am personally interested. I think I am very sensitive to what I saw in the video. For a few moments, it felt as if it was a video on the French Canadian people or nation in Quebec to which I belong. I did say French Canadian nation in Quebec to which I belong. I obviously have brothers and sisters in the other provinces. I felt like you had made a very good description of my own pride. Since I really want people to understand who we are, who I am, I feel an obligation to understand who you are. If I read quickly the document you gave us, I see that in 1932 Metis of Alberta where under the leadership of Joseph Dion -- I hope he is not related to our minister, Mr. Dion -- a French Canadian, a French speaking Metis I imagine. When I see the names of Florence Parenteau, Sylveste Auger, Richard Poitras and Bill Parenteau on the document, I feel I am almost with my own family.
[English]
I feel it is my family. That is why I am here. I know people who resent very much those who speak so freely, even in this so-called great free country where everyone is equal. You are equal as long as you behave like them. I am not part of that.
I have been saying this for 35 years. I see a good friend of mine from the great Huron tribe of Quebec right here. I have obligations. I will tell you why and that will be all I will say.
I once participated in a constitutional conference with Mr. Joe Clark in British Columbia. There was a young punky guy from Saskatchewan whom I was desperately trying to convince of my views, for three days, and I was losing the debate. I was very gentle and non-aggressive, as I think I am, albeit determined. An Indian woman said she wanted to speak. I thought, "I can handle this young punk from Saskatchewan, but from her I will have to endure anything." However, it was the contrary. I have been waiting many years to say that publicly.
She said that she understood my pride in my tradition, my way of life, my culture, and my determination to remain myself. She said that her only annoyance with the young man was that she was forced to express her pride in English because she had lost her language. She said that she understood my desire not to lose my language.
How many Metis are there in Alberta?
Mr. Noskey: Based on the 1998 census, Metis Settlements has approximately 6,800 members. The Metis Nation of Alberta, the other recognized body, claims to represent 50,000 Metis in the province of Alberta. Therefore, in total there are approximately 58,000 Metis in Alberta.
Senator Prud'homme: My ancestors came to Canada in the 1600s. I am not ashamed to say that there is a lot of mixed blood in the French-speaking people of Quebec.
If a Metis married a non-Metis and had children, what would their status be since Bill C-31?
Mr. Noskey: I will stick to Metis Settlements, which is what I know best. Under Metis Settlements, if you marry a non-native, bring him or her into the community and have children, those offspring would be eligible to be full-fledged members of our Metis communities.
Senator Prud'homme: Is that true regardless of whether the Metis marrying a non-Metis is male or female?
Mr. Noskey: Yes.
Senator Prud'homme: Do you encounter much resentment when you raise those issues? I see what is going on with the Nisga'a, for whom I have great respect. Must you face what they face when you make such representations as these?
Mr. Noskey: Definitely, but I feel less and less over time. People have been changing their views. I have been involved as a leader for 15 years. I have been discriminated against and kicked by both whites and Indians. During the Charlottetown process I was classified as a second-class aboriginal person, since I was a Metis. Again, I will be in no man's land as a Metis, but we are who we are.
The Chairman: I wish to follow up on the question that Senator Prud'homme raised regarding membership, just for my own clarification. Did I understand you correctly that if a Metis man marries a non-Metis, only the children become eligible to be members of the community under the Metis act?
Mr. Noskey: That is correct. They are eligible to become full-fledged members of the community, yes.
The Chairman: If it were the other way around, does that still apply?
Mr. Noskey: Could you clarify for me what you mean by "if it were the other way around"?
The Chairman: When a Metis man marries a non-Metis woman, only the kids become eligible. If a Metis woman marries a non-Metis man, are the kids eligible?
Mr. Noskey: Yes. It works both ways -- male and female. There is no gender difference. If you are a member of the community, you have all rights and privileges and your offspring would be eligible but your spouse would not be eligible.
The Chairman: What happens in the case of that individual whether a man or a woman, who sort of lives in "no man's land" in the way that you described yourself living in no man's land?
Mr. Noskey: In the Metis settlements, you have residency rights and the right to hold land and get services because your offspring live with you on that land. As long as your spouse is alive, everything is under the name of the spouse. If your spouse were to become deceased, everything would be transferred to you, whether you are a member or not, and would be held in trust for your children until such time as the transfer to them could take place.
The Chairman: In the past, have you adopted either a woman or a man and had the experience where he or she became a full-fledged member of your community? Have you then excluded the woman and the man if they are not Metis and only the kids become eligible because you have had a bad experience in the past?
Mr. Noskey: I cannot make that judgment call, although we do have provisions in our legislation whereby we can adopt an individual if he or she was registered as a treaty Indian prior to becoming an adult.
The Chairman: Is that true only for people who were registered as treaty Indians?
Mr. Noskey: That is correct.
The Chairman: I am asking these questions because you have come up with a system that is different from the status Indians and also different from the Inuit, who have settlements with the Government of Canada and also with the provinces.
In the case of the Inuit in Quebec, for example, we adopt. In other words, if a woman marries a native man, she automatically becomes a beneficiary under that criterion. The same thing applies for a man. We are having a great many problems in our communities. You are more educated from your fellow peoples. You have a tendency to try to take advantage of what is available for economic and social reasons. That is disturbing to the communities, especially the smaller communities in northern Quebec. The same thing is being experienced now in the Northwest Territories -- at least, if they are not experiencing it now they will be experiencing it very soon.
The Inuit of Quebec can actually identify that now and want to do something about it because they have 20 years experience implementing a similar type of agreement that you are talking about.
I wanted to make that point because you are contemplating a movement in that area to find a solution to the problem. I appreciate that.
Mr. Noskey: On that point of adoption, priority is given to settlement members for work purposes. That does not mean that if you are a member of the community because you are married to a Metis spouse you will not be provided work or services. You have benefits and residency rights if you are married to one of the settlement members.
The Chairman: The only advantage that you have in that area is that the individual, whether a male or a female, if he or she is a non-native person, will not try to use a service because he or she has not been adopted as a member. You do not have that problem.
I will now focus on some points in your presentation that I should like you to clarity.
You spoke about the transitions that took place from 1938 to 1990. I learned from your brief that during that period you came up with two instruments. One is a governing instrument, a concept of self-government, and you managed to persuade the Alberta government to take you seriously. The other one is economic development cooperation.
You talk about facilitating economic development and the fact that settlement government structure is problematic in how it functions. That is what is described there, twofold. For example, you say that holding elections every year creates too much uncertainty and hampers investment and development. By the same token, you say that the government structure might be too democratic, and everyone gets to vote on everything.
Why do you link the two? One involves the private sector and the other involves the public sector. How are they interrelated for you to be able to say that we have problems in this particular area, namely, not being able to deal with economics as economics per se or to make economic decisions? It seems to favour the governing side. Could you explain in more detail? I wish to know if this is a concern that we should consider.
Mr. Noskey: It is definitely a concern that needs to be addressed in whatever governance and institutions, whether political or economic, you create. However, because every economic development arm and business corporation that we have established is owned equally by all eight settlements and our board happens to be made up of directors who are political appointments or elected representatives, there is overlap. Some of the business decisions are influenced by the politics of our communities and our peoples. We have tried to separate the social, the economic and the political. That is why there are different entities. There is some overlap at present but, over time, it will evolve into business corporations that will be solely business-minded, not vertically minded or socially minded. Again, it takes time and evolution will take care of that.
The Chairman: Are there people playing two sets of roles?
Mr. Noskey: Exactly. In some cases, people sit on social, political and economic institutions as well. They are influenced by politics in many cases. As our communities are small and there is only a handful of individuals who are capable of understanding the business, political and social realism, they are sitting on various boards and institutions. That creates some difficulty.
As I said, decisions regarding housing allocations or jobs are linked to politics because we have annual elections. Two members are elected every year on a rotational basis
We are looking at the election process right now and hoping to tie into the municipal system of elections. Therefore we could implement our business plans and come up with decisions that are less politically motivated because you would have four years to implement your business plan once you set it up. We are looking at that right now.
The Chairman: You also mentioned in your presentation that you are under provincial jurisdiction. Therefore, the general obligations of Alberta apply to you.
I would not think that you could sit on the business and governmental structures concurrently. Conflict of interest guidelines must be in place in Alberta. Have you looked at that to see whether there is a law that exists that you can use to try to stop those problems?
Mr. Noskey: The laws that govern our institutions are incorporation documents. However, because we have control, there are fewer conflict of interest guidelines within the bylaws of those entities that we create. Therefore, those general applications do not necessarily apply. People are not taking the time to determine what would constitute a conflict of interest for a board of directors of one of our oil companies, for example. We will be looking at that more closely. You raise an interesting point.
The Chairman: Are you recommending to this committee that we should look at the problems not only within the act but in the bylaws as well? Would you like to hear recommendations in that regard?
Mr. Noskey: We would accept recommendations from anyone with that experience.
The Chairman: If I understood correctly, you are concerned only about the Alberta legislation.
Mr. Noskey: Correct.
The Chairman: Is there no umbrella legislation from the federal government recognizing the fact that the Metis have settlements within Alberta? Is there a requirement for another piece of legislation to protect what you achieve through negotiations with the province?
Mr. Noskey: Aside from protecting our land, there is no overriding agreement to protect what we have.
We signed an agreement with the Province of Alberta in 1989. As part of that agreement, the Alberta government committed to federal entrenchment of our lands. Until such time as that happens, the litigation that we had against the province for 20 years is on the shelf. Until that commitment is fulfilled, the threat of that litigation sits there. We are hoping that some day not only our land but also the agreement that we have and the provisions that we have will be entrenched and enshrined in Canada's Constitution.
The Chairman: You also mention that the laws of Alberta had to be amended in order to create a new act for the Metis. Do you fall under the criteria as outlined in section 35 of the Constitution Act?
Mr. Noskey: The agreement that we signed with Alberta in 1989 stated that the government would not abrogate or derogate from any aboriginal or treaty right. What we have here is a fancy real estate deal compared to what we had with the Province of Alberta.
The Chairman: In other words, there will always be a threat from the Alberta legislature that what they have given you they could easily turn around and extract.
Mr. Noskey: No court of law can expropriate any part of our lands without our consent. That is in the legislation. It cannot be expropriated in any fashion without our consent. No judge can rule against it to expropriate our land. Therefore, it is protected in that manner.
There is no reference to the Metis in Canada's Constitution other than the provision that deals with aboriginal people. However, in Alberta's constitution it does mention that we are Metis and that we have contributed and continue to contribute to the history and identity of Alberta.
The Chairman: If I understood correctly, that non-derogation clause, which I believe is section 25 of the Constitution Act, is the only one that is specifically mentioned within the settlement act?
Mr. Noskey: To my knowledge, that is correct.
The Chairman: We will look into that further to determine the actual legal interpretation of the two and how the two of them are linked.
You also mention that there was a sunset clause when Alberta enacted the legislation in terms of financing. I believe that you are getting to the end of that program.
What are you planning to do? Will you begin to utilize the powers that were given to you under your governing structure by way of levying taxes, investments or bonds? Can you sell the lands? Can you use the land as collateral? Can you ask for investment? Can you go to the international community to ask investors to invest in your lands?
Mr. Noskey: I will answer your questions in a general sense since they are general in nature.
Our agreement with the Province of Albert is a 17-year financial package. Under that package, we had windows of opportunities to review whether the finances would be adequate to fulfil the intent of our agreement. So far, we have negotiated another agreement for another 10 years to add more to the original agreement.
At the present time we receive core funding of $23 million per year. That will go on until the year 2007. We are hoping that by that time the future fund, about which I spoke earlier, will generate for us, in interest alone, approximately $10 million. We have certain provisions and advantages under the oil and gas co-management agreement that will generate another $10 million per year which we can use to continue to fund ourselves.
Aside from that, we have access to the federal programs and services which other indigenous people and municipal governments receive. That, too, will sustain our governments. We are hoping that the aboriginal right, the fiscal arrangements and the government's response to RCAP, the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, will yield some revenue for us at the same time. We are hopeful of that because we did not abrogate or derogate any aboriginal rights. As Metis, we feel that we do have rights. Therefore, we are hoping that that will generate some revenue at the same time, other than levies, fees and taxes raised from industry and utility companies. Our members pay fees for the services that we provide. Those are the revenue streams that we see.
The Chairman: Did you also mention in your presentation that you are almost at the point now where you must use your own private funds, Metis funds, for public purposes? Normally, those are expenses handled by the government and so on. Are you afraid that when you run out of funds you might need to start using your own resource funds which are supposed to be for the benefit of Metis economic development and not so much for public service, such as education, welfare, housing and things of that nature?
Mr. Noskey: We are hoping, eventually, to take on all those areas of responsibility from the province or the federal government and administer the programs ourselves. We hope that once we take on that responsibility there will be a long-term commitment and agreement that will help a continuous flow of funds to provide those services. If there is not, we will not take over the service and they will maintain the responsibilities and the administration of those programs. Therefore, I have no fear of that. It is under negotiation now, which is the way we have always approached what we have done.
The Chairman: What happens in the case of one of your communities which requires a recreation facility for the youth? Do you kick in from the private funds and then go to a government to ask them to make a contribution?
Mr. Noskey: We go to industry and the government, as well as using our own funds.
Senator Adams: I do not know exactly the number of Metis across Canada. Does your organization help other Metis? In the territories, we have Treaty No. 8 and Treaty No. 11. What treaties do you have in Alberta?
Mr. Noskey: Our treaty groups are 6, 7 and 8 in Alberta. Again, that refers to First Nations. The Metis have two organizations. The organization that I represent has 7,000 members on the land. There is another organization called the Metis Nation of Alberta, which is part of the Metis National Council, with which we are not affiliated. We are different, separate and unique.
Senator Adams: There should be no difference between the Metis of Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan. My concern is that different Metis groups may want to be recognized differently by governments. You have said yourself that you no longer need to partner with the provincial government. My people will be part of Nunavut and we will be like any other provincial government.
My concern is that every Metis organization will want to have a separate treaty with Ottawa and the provinces in which they reside. Do you have a problem with that?
Mr. Noskey: The Metis in other provinces have the same ancestral background as the Metis in our settlements. There is no difference. There are differences in organizations. We are not a part of those provincial organizations for Metis in other provinces. We are separate from the Metis National Council. We are the same people, with the same history and the same identity. You are right in regard to political representation. Because we are an aboriginal people, we are striving to obtain the same rights as the Indian and the Inuit people. That is what our people are striving for. Whether that is done under my leadership, or under the leadership of some other person down the road, we would like to see that.
Senator Adams: Will the funding from Alberta continue or will it end at some point in time? Are your reserves large enough and under your control? How does that agreement work with the province?
Mr. Noskey: Our financial agreement for core funding ends in 2007. We are hoping that our reserve will be able to generate enough revenue for us to continue to fund on an ongoing basis.
Senator Adams: After 2007, you do not have to pay any of Alberta's taxes. Is part of the revenues from the oil and gas sector going to the Province of Alberta in the form of taxes?
Mr. Noskey: Because the province owns the oil and gas, all the royalties are paid to them. However, we charge an overriding royalty to companies that are developing. This is over and above what the province receives. We have partnership arrangements with those companies. We are partners and we are players because we have our own oil and gas company as well.
Senator Adams: Can those companies with whom you are partners sell their gas and oil across Canada?
Mr. Noskey: Yes.
Senator Prud'homme: If I understand, most, if not all, of your people are the descendants of the people who, after the sad battle of Batoche, went to Alberta. Is that right?
Mr. Noskey: Yes.
Senator Prud'homme: After the sad event of Riel -- a dark spot on Canadian history -- you moved westward.
Do you not see a weakness in the fact that you are 7,000 strong? I am learning today that there are more Metis than that, of course, but you have your own organization. You are proud of that, and I accept that.
I was sad to see the way we treated people in Thompson, Manitoba in the 1960s. My people, les Canadiens français, were not responsible. It is good to put that on the record.
I see Metis in Alberta, but I have more knowledge of the Metis situation in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.
[Translation]
Is it not a weakness that the two organizations are not affiliated in Alberta? You say that you are the leader for 7,000 people. But there is another organization. Your answer to my colleague was that there are several other organizations in Manitoba without any affiliation.
Why is there no mandatory affiliation? There really is a strength in numbers. When we hear a Metis leader speak, we tend to think that he is speaking for all Metis.
[English]
Until you come here and you sit down, you do not realize, but the more people you meet -- Metis, Indian, or French people from Ontario or Quebec -- the more you realize that we are very different, regardless of what you read or hear in Alberta. I do not need to make concessions coming from Quebec, as my brothers and sisters must do daily in Ontario to survive. Find me a Prud'homme in Saskatchewan, for example. We disappeared. Why are so many organizations needed to express the same pride? Some native groups are very rich, but they are often located right next door to a sister band that has nothing. I suppose I know the answer.
If people are against you because they have bad motives, do not worry. You can expect me to be on your side, even if it is unpopular. I have always been like that. I defended the Palestinians, for example, so you can imagine.
Mr. Noskey: First, Girouxville and Falher in Alberta are French speaking communities that we are close to and friends of.
There are two Metis organizations in Alberta. The Metis in the province of Alberta have the right to qualify to become full-fledged members of our community with all the rights and privileges of our organization.
The other organization, the Metis Nation of Alberta, is a society under the Societies Act of Alberta, without a land base. They deal with Metis in other parts of rural Alberta who do not live on the settlement. There are two distinct groups of individuals, land based and non-land based. Given that we are the only group of non-land based Metis in all of Canada, our situation is unique. However, we do welcome any Metis in all of Canada to be part of our Metis Settlements in Alberta because we represent a home for the Metis. At the present time, that is protected in the laws of this country. With respect to your point, that is the difference.
I agree that there is strength in numbers, and I would certainly support an organization representing the Metis population of this country, from the Pacific to the Atlantic and all Metis in between. I would support one body, one spokesman and one representative group that respected the regional authorities and representative bodies. At the present time that is not the case. That is sad but it is reality. That is the way it is.
I work with the Metis Settlements General Council and I support what the council is doing. I wish every province had the land base set aside. I wish they had legislation for the Metis, as we do in Alberta. I support them and encourage them.
I was in South America with Gerald Morin last week, and we talked about how we can work together. I meet with Audrey Poitras, President of the Metis Nation of Alberta, on a regular basis. We talk about how we can joint venture to create a better livelihood for all the Metis in Alberta. We have joint training programs and joint ventures. We have a relationship, but there is a healthy respect. It is like the federal system where a confederation of provinces comes together for the benefit of all. That is what I see.
The Chairman: I wish to get back to the question of the Metis settlements in Alberta. The map focuses on the identification of those lands that were granted to the Metis through the Metis settlements of Alberta. When the size and the boundaries of the settlement were established, was it granted to you as aboriginals, or was it granted to you in the form of a municipal boundary?
Mr. Noskey: Twelve areas were set aside in 1938. They were half-breed Metis colonies whereby the Metis could experience their traditional way of life and protect their culture.
The Chairman: It was not done solely on the need to have a municipal structure within your community; rather, it was based on the fact that you were Metis, you were different, and you had rights to protect.
Mr. Noskey: Exactly. On that basis they were set aside.
The Chairman: Would you agree that as citizens of this country you are entitled to have local government, but at the same time you are also entitled to have a boundary where that local government will be situated, without taking into account your aboriginal status?
Mr. Noskey: I do not understand your question.
The Chairman: As an aboriginal person, you stated that the only way you acquired that land was due to the fact that you are Metis. You are different.
Mr. Noskey: That is right.
The Chairman: Did you use that argument to convince the Government of Alberta?
Mr. Noskey: Yes.
The Chairman: Do you not agree that you are entitled to have a local government and that your local government is entitled to have a certain amount of land designated for that local activity, regardless of whether or not you are Metis?
My question is this: Are you still planning, down the rode, to enter into negotiations involving the federal government to get land based on your status as an aboriginal person as recognized by the Constitution?
Mr. Noskey: We are no different than any other aboriginal group of people in that regard. Our people feel that they should have rights similar to those afforded other aboriginal people in this country -- the right to self-government, to self-identity, to protection of our language and culture.
What we have in Alberta is a type of municipal government. This is how I classify it: It is a regional aboriginal territorial government. It is not a municipal government. It is an aboriginal government.
The Chairman: Is it not a "barely municipal" government?
Mr. Noskey: You could not govern that area without being a Metis and an aboriginal. There is no way that you as an individual from another community could come and run the affairs of our government because it is a Metis-specific government. It always has been and always will be.
The Chairman: Are those designated areas all-encompassing as a municipal boundary? Do you set your municipal boundary within that size and therefore have a smaller version of the boundary strictly for the local government activities?
Mr. Noskey: There is only one boundary and it surrounds a particular geographic area of the settlement. That is the only boundary known to us. It is outside of the municipal boundary and municipal districts in the province of Alberta. It is unique and different. The municipal governments have no jurisdiction within our settlement area.
The Chairman: Where is the limit for the jurisdiction of your governing structure? Does it apply only to those areas marked on the map describing the boundaries?
Mr. Noskey: It is only within those geographic areas, yes.
The Chairman: Any government needs to ensure that there is enough population in a certain geographic area. Despite that, you have the ability to acquire a local government if you wish and to have a boundary within which that local government applies. It seems to be all in one bag, rather than setting out a public sector and a private sector. Do you not differentiate between the two?
You are protecting your status as an aboriginal people. Your aboriginal concerns are reflected in your governing structure, because you do not allow anyone else to enter in that area. It is squarely for the Metis people. It is therefore not a public government; it is an ethnic government. For that reason, you are quite satisfied with placing everything under one governing structure, rather than creating another instrument to protect your Metis cultural issues. Is that a fair assessment?
Mr. Noskey: Yes. They are one and the same.
The Chairman: In this country today, a differentiation is being made between the two. We are trying to find some way of working out a marriage contract between the public and the ethnic governments. They were separated through the agreement and now bits and pieces are being examined to see if they can be reintegrated into the governing structure even though it might be a public body.
We use the term "ethnicization" when we talk about a public body with genuine input and control by the aboriginal body. If the governing structure is going to be a public body, we say that the system, the procedures, the values must be "ethnicized."
Mr. Noskey: Our governing body is a Metis Settlements body only. It is Metis-specific in regards to the public.
The Chairman: In other words, at the present time, no one else in the country has what you have.
Mr. Noskey: That is right. It is unique and different. When you talk about protecting the public interest, the minister presently has the responsibility to protect the public interest of the Metis Settlements-members.
The Chairman: The only concern here is that the general public of Canada tends to see an ethnic government as a racist government. That is a negative perception that may be held by the Canadian public, but, in a sense, that could be accommodated. The rights of the non-native people could actually be described and dealt with quite sufficiently by the Metis people. That still probably needs to be developed down the road.
Mr. Noskey: That is probably a good way to describe the situation in which we find ourselves. We legislate against the Indians and say that they cannot become members of the Metis Settlements. Someone could challenge us on a constitutional basis for discriminating against an individual or race. That would apply to other Canadians as well.
Probably someone could challenge us in the future, but we have an aboriginal right because we are an aboriginal organization and this country was ours before the Europeans came in. As Metis, the larger part of our identity is the aboriginal component. Judges agree with us that we live an Indian mode of life. We faced court cases in the province of Alberta when our people were caught hunting on unoccupied Crown land, but, because we live an Indian lifestyle, we were given the same rights afforded Indians for substance hunting.
There is a presence there. Do not forget that we are an aboriginal people. That is the basis of our agreement.
The Chairman: Would you say that you are still going through a learning experience and still developing a new way of dealing with other people who might have an interest or an ability to enter into your society? The door is open, if I understood you correctly.
Mr. Noskey: Absolutely. We are always open. We are willing to be partners. We are willing to be Canadians. We are willing to be unique. We are willing to talk to people as well. Now we deal with municipalities, towns, provinces, the federal government, and industry. We have relationships and agreements with First Nations as well. We have partnership arrangements with everyone within our communities and that is how we have always functioned. We pay income tax and provincial taxes like any other Canadians.
The Chairman: You are full-fledged taxpayers like the Inuit.
Mr. Noskey: We are like anyone else in Canada. That is an important distinction to make. We pay GST and everything else. We are not exempt.
In terms of fiscal responsibility and long-term revenue generation, we are discussing with Revenue Canada whether we can, similar to the Nisga'a, receive some of the revenues which we pay into the Canadians coffers.
The Chairman: Are you saying that you want to tax yourselves and enjoy the revenues from it?
Mr. Noskey: If our people paid tax to themselves and their government, they would be more active with regard to how that money is being spent. They would take their election processes more seriously. We would be self-governing and self-regulating at the same time.
Senator Prud'homme: Is there anyone else who claims part of the settlements in Alberta that are now yours according to the law? Does anyone else claim part of that land as theirs, as we see happening in British Columbia more and more? There, claims are clashing with other claims for the same lands. Are those eight Metis settlements that I see clearly defined and described unclaimed, or is there an Indian group claiming that this is theirs equally or that half of it is theirs?
Mr. Noskey: As far as I know there is no First Nations or treaty group claiming that the Metis Settlements lands are theirs at the present time.
I will say one thing with regard to land. With respect to the other four pieces of land that were set aside in Alberta for the Metis, there was a great deal of interest in acquiring those lands one more time for the Metis in Alberta. As a leader, I have been approached with that question a number of times.
The Chairman: We appreciate your presentation. We will be calling you back to deal with specific areas that need further development. We may also ask you to take part in the round table on government.
Mr. Noskey: Given that I am a member of that round table, I will be very interested in the report.
The committee adjourned.