Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples
Issue 2 - Evidence - Meeting of November 24, 2004
OTTAWA, Wednesday, November 24, 2004
The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples met this day at 6:30 p.m. to examine and report on the involvement of Aboriginal communities and businesses in economic development activities in Canada.
Senator Nick G. Sibbeston (Chairman) in the chair.
[English]
The Chairman: I will call the meeting to order.
Our committee is beginning its study on the involvement of Aboriginal communities and businesses in economic development activities in Canada; investigating elements that enable Aboriginal communities and businesses to succeed and obstacles to their achievement in all areas of the economy, including but not limited to, large-scale industrial development, renewable resources, tourism and other related businesses.
This is the core of our study. We are interested in knowing why it is that there are certain Aboriginal peoples in pockets of the country that have been very successful to date.
It is my pleasure to ask you, Mr. Jules, to be a witness and to give us the benefit of your knowledge and experience in this area.
For the record, I will briefly state that Manny Jules has been active in the area of First Nations economic development for quite a number of years. In 1996, the Council for the Advancement of Native Development Officers named him Economic Developer of the Year. He has been a key player in the First Nations-Canada Joint Task Force on Specific Claims Policy Reform. He served as Chief of the Kamloops Indian Band from 1984 to 2000, and chaired the Indian Taxation Advisory Board from 1989 to 2003.
Mr. Jules, I am sure there is more that can be said about you, but we will open it to you. If you have a presentation, we would be pleased to hear you now.
Mr. C.T. (Manny) Jules, Spokesperson, First Nations Fiscal Institutions Initiative: I am pleased to make a presentation to the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples. I am looking forward to the discussion, and I have three proposals for you.
To begin, last Friday afternoon, all political parties spoke in support of the First Nations Fiscal and Statistical Management Act. It is now proceeding to committee. In 1988, I led the drive for the Kamloops amendment to the Indian Act. It also received all-party support. I am requesting the Senate to pass this proposed legislation as quickly as possible after it leaves the House of Commons.
I am also requesting that the Senate standing committee support a First Nations infrastructure program to help kick-start private sector investment on our lands.
Finally, I request the Senate standing committee to support the establishment of a First Nations institution of economic cooperation and partnerships so that we can transfer the technology necessary to build our economies.
The proposed fiscal legislation is a product of many imaginations. Imaginations are powerful. They can create fear where none exists. They can create hope necessary to drive us. I want to speak to you about the imagination behind this proposed legislation.
I hope that in 10 years' time there is an option other than the Indian Act, that it has been replaced with First Nations-led legislation.
I hope that in 10 years there is no need for the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, that it has been replaced by First Nations institutions.
I hope that we are full participants in the Canadian economy, and our children have the same opportunities as other Canadian children.
I hope that we are no longer considered a social problem that costs all governments an extra $3.5 billion, and costs the economy $5 billion in lost productivity.
I hope we are part of the solution to rising health care costs.
I hope we can replace the lost productivity of an aging population.
I hope we can generate enough revenues from our economies to pay for our services.
I hope my children do not go cap in hand to another government for clean water, safe roads and good schools.
I hope that people throughout the world look to Canada as a model for federations. To become this model, the Canadian federation needs to resolve its longest outstanding issue: What is the place of the confederation of First Nations within this federation?
I hope we have established our government, the Secwepemc Nation government, with the support of a First Nation institutional framework.
These are hopes that have driven me for the last 30 years in politics. These are hopes that have led me to make these proposals for the First Nations Fiscal and Statistical Management Act, a First Nations infrastructure program and a First Nations institution for economic cooperation and partnerships.
To begin, the proposed fiscal legislation is about a simple fact: governments do not build economies; businesses do. There is five times as much private investment in Canada as there is public investment; four times as many jobs are created in the private sector than in the public sector. Despite these facts, most First Nations spend five times as much time lobbying the public sector for more money than they do trying to build the private sector. The proposed fiscal institution legislation will help us overcome the barriers we face in building a private sector on our lands.
It is 10 times harder to attract investment to our lands for three reasons. We have a substandard or inefficient infrastructure. We do not have access to the same infrastructure financing mechanisms as other governments. We do not have infrastructure reserve funds. We do not have development cost charges. We have limited access to revenues from other governments for economic infrastructure. We cannot issue debentures.
There is too much investor uncertainty. We are only beginning to put the rules, procedures and jurisdictions into place that provide confidence to investors. We need investor codes, clear lands management laws and processes, a First Nations land registry and model leases.
We need clarity relating to property, sales, income and corporate tax rates. The costs of doing business on our lands are too high. The cost of doing business on our land is at least four to six times higher than it is off reserve. Reducing these costs requires improvements to our systems of administration, land management and investment facilitation systems.
This proposed legislation begins to break down these barriers to trade so that the market can work on First Nation lands. It allows us to finance infrastructure with debentures, like any other jurisdiction in Canada. It begins to create investment certainty over property taxes and local services, financial management and information quality, as in other jurisdictions in Canada. It gives our administrations the support they need to lower the cost of doing business to the levels of other jurisdictions in Canada — phrased more briefly, to begin to level the playing field for investing on First Nations lands.
This proposed legislation is not asking the government to build our economies with a pile of public money. This is about us building viable economies ourselves.
For 130 years, our institutions of government have been crushed by the weight of the Indian Act. The result is that we have been legislated out of the economy. Our governments have been legislated out of the federation. This proposed fiscal institution legislation begins the long process of legislating our way back in.
The proposed legislation must be supported by a First Nation infrastructure program. Too many First Nations that want to build their economies are caught in a Catch-22. They need revenues to build investment-attracting infrastructure. At the same time, they need to invest to generate revenues to build infrastructure. The result is that only those First Nations that already have enough revenue can benefit from this proposed legislation. Economic disparity amongst First Nations will widen.
The best solution is to develop a First Nation infrastructure program that helps build economic infrastructure, so that First Nations can attract investment and break the dependency cycle. This proposed infrastructure program could improve the ability of First Nations to combine federal programming with property tax debentures. This proposed program will enable many small and less-developed First Nations with a significant potential to undertake those initial investments in public infrastructure that kick-start the wealth-creation process. In the past, many small towns across Canada benefited from similar programs that were offered by their provincial governments. A First Nation infrastructure program will ensure that shared-cost programs such as the Canada Infrastructure Program will provide the best rate of return.
In addition to the infrastructure program, this committee should support the development of a First Nations institution for economic cooperation and partnerships. This proposed organization would accelerate the development of knowledge pertaining to investment facilitation for our communities. For the last 130 years, the rest of Canada has created systems and frameworks that make buying and selling a home, researching an opportunity, zoning a property and building a residential or commercial development relatively simple. You take public institutions that support a market economy for granted. You do not even realize that we are missing similar institutions.
We need a mechanism to transfer this technology to our communities. This is why I am proposing a First Nations institution for economic cooperation and partnership. This agency will raise awareness about the potential of private investment and how to attract it by undertaking promotional work and help First Nations identify their investment potential. The IECP will help to transfer model investment systems and investment codes. The IECP will support the development of First Nation investment facilitation specialists. It will create a forum that will improve the coordination between First Nations and First Nation institutions. It will allow us to share our successful systems. It will assist us in finding private sector partners to assist with infrastructure programs and projects.
Perhaps most significantly, the institution will encourage market-based housing on reserves. It will do this by encouraging First Nation housing development on leasehold tenure. It will provide model housing systems and leases to communities. In doing so, the institution could unleash a wave of pent-up demand for housing on reserves. This will allow us to have the same home equity that you take for granted. It will allow us to unlock what Hernando de Soto calls "the mystery of capital." It will allow our entrepreneurs the same opportunity for financing their ideas with home equity that other entrepreneurs have. In sum, the institution will encourage more First Nations to embark on an economic development strategy. It will make substantial improvements in our ability to attract investment.
The returns from this proposed legislation, from the infrastructure program and the IECP for First Nations in Canada are significant. We believe it will help build $750 million of new economic infrastructure on our lands. It will help attract over $2 billion in new investment. It will generate nearly 30,000 new jobs. Remember, in 10 years' time, 80,000 First Nations citizens will enter the labour force. If we pass this proposed legislation, create an infrastructure program and initiate the IECP, thousands of them will learn how business works, how to build communities and how to have a positive role model for their lives.
In 10 years' time, there will be 20 per cent more seniors and only 6 per cent more workers. It is imperative for all of us to make productive investments over the next 10 years. These proposals represent an excellent return on investment, at a total cost of about $40 million per year. I am pleased to table the Indian Taxation Advisory Board pre-budget submission that describes these proposals in more detail. It explains how we will achieve these high returns.
I want to reiterate, in closing, my requests to this Senate committee. Pass the First Nation Fiscal and Statistical Management Bill as quickly as possible. Recommend the establishment of a First Nations infrastructure program. Recommend the creation of an institution for economic cooperation and partnerships.
The Chairman: Obviously, you are placing a great deal of emphasis and hope on the First Nations fiscal institutions, the bill that we will eventually see here in the Senate. Many of your comments focus on that bill and what you hope it will do for Aboriginal communities throughout our country.
Senator Léger: You emphasize how it must come from you; right?
Mr. Jules: Yes.
Senator Léger: We must let you go; is that the message?
Mr. Jules: Exactly.
Senator Léger: That is the problem, is it not? You will create the way of doing it. I understand you are held back because of the Indian Act and its consequences. To my ears, it certainly sounds like the right way, but how do we do that? Why is there so much opposition to that? I know that it must be step by step. You cannot be naive.
You said that in approximately 10 years, there would be 20 per cent more older people and only 6 per cent more workers.
Mr. Jules: That is right.
Senator Léger: I thought the opposite was coming.
Mr. Jules: You are facing an aging population in Canada. The demographic will be an older population. However, only 6 per cent will be new to the labour force. A lot of that will be First Nations that will not be ready to be productive members of Canada's labour market.
Senator Léger: I understood from other discussions and meetings that in a very few years, the young Aboriginals, number wise, would surpass the non-Aboriginals, because they have bigger families.
Mr. Jules: In Saskatchewan, you will probably have an increase in the Aboriginal population.
Senator Léger: I see, but not everywhere?
Mr. Jules: That will not happen everywhere. If you do not invest in the future of the indigenous people of Canada, there are huge consequences. The only way to rectify that problem is to allow us, through our own institution building, to be an economic partner within the Canadian federation. In that way, we can lower the cost of health care and take care of ourselves. Ultimately, that is what we want to do.
Senator Léger: That is a clarification for me, to see it as a whole and not just one section. I probably got that message from that one section. That is certainly how to start that infrastructure economy.
Senator Watt: I will try not to cover issues we have covered in the past.
There are several areas on which I would like to be enlightened by you. You were starting to speak about housing, and that is an area I know a little about. I understand that with 99-year leases, from time to time we have to work out arrangements with financial institutions in order to access the capital we need. You are promoting that idea, and that is already being done in my area due to the fact that the land is held collectively and cannot be sold. We have to be innovative and separate buildings from the land in order to access capital from financial institutions, which, as you know, is not an easy thing to do.
You were saying that legislation on these new institutions is waiting to be passed by the House of Commons and will eventually come to the Senate and we will have to deal with it. Do I understand correctly that institutions will be set up to harness assets in the community? I am talking about the whole set of assets rather than just the land, which is still held collectively.
Mr. Jules: What will be put up as collateral is the jurisdiction over real property tax. Those communities will be able to use that jurisdiction, which currently generates $40 million to $50 million annually, to lever bonds and debentures.
Senator Watt: Would using that as collateral be good for the people who have no money, or is it only the people who have capital who will be able to utilize those institutions?
Mr. Jules: The best example comes out of British Columbia. There was a disparity between the larger urban centres, that is, Vancouver and Victoria, and Terrace, New Aiyansh and Kamloops, for example. In British Columbia, at the request of the municipalities, the government formed a municipal finance authority so they could pool their resources and take on the responsibility collectively to lever bonds and debentures.
As a result, all the communities that formerly could not put in infrastructure now can. It has created untold millions of dollars worth of infrastructure and economic development. It is like the story I was telling earlier about the Nisga'a settlement. The first thing the Nisga'a people did was build a paved road from Terrace to New Aiyansh. Infrastructure is absolutely critical to developing a new economy.
In this particular case, the underlying interest has not changed and the reserve will maintain its status. We have been able, through a collective approach, to ensure that everyone helps one another. That will benefit the smaller communities. Right now, many larger communities can go to the bank and borrow money. This allows the smaller communities to work with the larger communities and get a better return on the investment in floating bonds and debentures, so that all, the large and the small, can benefit.
Senator Watt: Have you already determined what the asset value is on those?
Mr. Jules: That would be done on an individual community basis. In Kamloops, we have about 40 businesses located on our lands. That development generates about $250 million annually, creating over 2,000 jobs. The asset base is in the range of $100 million annually, yet we have difficulty attracting quality development to our lands, despite the fact that we have this other development, because we do not have access to the infrastructure. If we had adequate sewage systems and so on, we believe that the land values would quadruple. There would be a higher return on the investment of an entrepreneur, as a result of which we would have higher real property tax, thereby enabling us to install more infrastructure, which would, in turn, create more business and more opportunities. I liken this to being on the "bleeding edge." We are creating a First Nations economy.
There is legitimacy in the explicit recognition of our rights, but why are African countries that have rights, constitutions and access to their resources amongst the poorest countries in the world? I believe it is because they do not have the institutional capacity to deal with those matters. I do not want our people to be caught in that Catch-22. I want our people to be able to create their own institutions and build their own economies so that we do not need to go cap in hand to anyone. We want to be an integral part of this economy and this federation and to be able to trumpet that to the world, so that people will want to come to Canada to learn how to deal with their similar dilemmas.
Senator Watt: In the model you talk about, you are speaking from your personal experience in the area you know best. I understand and appreciate that.
Can that model fit both the rich and the poor, communities with lots of capital assets and communities with nothing?
Mr. Jules: I strongly believe so because these will be institutions created to do our business. This is optional legislation and any community that so chooses will be able to enter the field of economic development, based on these institutions creating the certainty that is required to get into real business. Indigenous populations have a series of issues that we need to confront. There are rural communities, isolated communities and urban communities. We need to get beyond the notion that everything must be done all at once, because it cannot be.
The Nisga'a chose their priority and they built a road. Their first priorities were fishing and accessing the timber industries.
When the Marshall decision was handed down in Nova Scotia, it set in motion a lot of chaos because First Nations did not have the institutional capability to take advantage of the fishery opportunities. They did not have the scientific knowledge to enable them to know what to do with the areas they had to contend with. They did not have access to capital to enable them to buy fishing boats, et cetera. The only way is to have our own institutional bases, so that we can give that opportunity to anyone who wants to utilize it.
Senator Watt: You believe that these institutions will not put the land at risk?
Mr. Jules: Yes, I do.
Senator Watt: I have run a business before and I know that one day business is good and the next it is bad. It goes up and down. I am concerned about putting the assets under the collectivity. My other concern is the possibility of risking the little piece of land they have left.
What would happen if the business went bad, as sometimes happens? Who will bail you out? Will the Government of Canada guarantee to bail you out if that happens?
Mr. Jules: That goes to the heart of a joint and several endeavour, which means that all the communities that get together will collectively guarantee that loan.
The onus is not on the individual.
Senator Watt: If that goes belly up, who steps in?
Mr. Jules: All the other communities.
Senator Watt: In other words, one community has the potential to put other communities at risk?
Mr. Jules: Absolutely. That is what municipalities in British Columbia have done, and there has not been one default.
Senator Watt: Have you ever run a business?
Mr. Jules: Yes.
Senator Watt: I mean an actual business, aside from the other kind of involvement that you have had.
Mr. Jules: Yes. I have been involved in many businesses, Senator Watt. The Sun Rivers Development I was telling you about earlier is a billion-dollar business.
Senator Watt: Is that under the collective notion?
Mr. Jules: Yes.
Senator Watt: It is not on the basis of individuals?
Mr. Jules: We have individuals with certificates of possession, and underlying this — I mentioned it in the brief — is that one of the institutions we absolutely need is our own land registry, to protect against exactly what you were suggesting could happen.
Senator Watt: There is a good possibility. We have to have that because I do not want to see a situation like the one that has been created in the United States, with checkerboard reserves. How is that covered in Bill C-20, the proposed legislation that you are promoting?
Mr. Jules: Under this proposal, Senator Watt, there is no land registry. I am advocating a land registry. This does not affect the underlying title of any of the reserves. The reserve as you know it, which would be set apart for the use and benefit of a band of Indians by Her Majesty, continues to be.
Senator Watt: Are you putting a layer on top of that?
Mr. Jules: You are putting on a collective layer, so all the communities can pool their assets to build infrastructure.
Senator Watt: I understand you. You have given me the answer.
The Chairman: Thank you very much, Senator Watt, for being here. We will release you. We will continue the discussion, if you do not mind.
We have had the benefit of reading your presentation of last year, February 5, 2003, on Bill C-7 in the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development in the House of Commons. You are saying First Nations are as innovative, entrepreneurial and public-minded as other Canadians. First Nations want what Canadians take for granted, namely, employment opportunities, a stable income, decent housing, reliable public service, good roads, healthy water and sewage systems and a better future for our children.
From your experience, can you narrow it down to what you consider key factors that are the most important for Aboriginal people and communities to succeed? We are looking at this situation and trying to find out why some Aboriginal communities succeed and others do not. We would like to hear from you on this point.
Mr. Jules: I was 22 years old when I was first elected to council — and I went to many meetings — in 1975. My dad was chief for 10 years and on council for a couple of years, and when I would come back from meetings, I would say, "Dad, they keep on talking about the same things. Why is that?" He said, "I have been listening to the same conversations myself. It is a philosophical approach to dealing with our issues."
He would ask me about certain individuals with whom I had been doing business, and he would say, "Does he think like us?" The way I have been raised and the way many, I thought, First Nations people were raised is with a story where a child would be sent out into the wilderness to find his spiritual guide, usually at about 13, 14 or15 years old, and when he came back the question he had to answer for himself was, "If you wanted to live our own, you could, but if you came back to the community, you would have to be a productive member of the community." That is one of the cycles we have lost, that we have to be able to give back to the community. We have to be productive members of the community, so that when someone needs help, we should be there to help him or her, or if a child needs education, and on and on it goes.
In our case in Kamloops, some of it was a philosophical approach to dealing with our situation. We started to get into land development in the 1930s. By the 1960s, we had our own administration. We had our own industrial park. We had our own series of bylaws going into the 1970s. A lot of that has happened because of the philosophical approach that we took in dealing with our issues. Also, this has been passed on from leader to leader — there was virtually an unbroken chain — so continuity is incredibly important.
There have only been two chiefs after me. From 1800 to the time I was chief there, there were 11 chiefs in my community. You need an incredible amount of stability. You need an incredible determination never to give up, because there are so many excuses that would make it easy for you to walk away: "That is too difficult of an issue to deal with. Why should we deal with the outstanding land question here that has not been resolved for 130 years? I will leave that to the next person."
You do not do that. You say, "I will find a new solution to dealing with that issue, thinking outside the box." I strongly believe, and I have witnessed it over and over again in the communities that have been successful, that it has been all about leadership. It has been all about support from the community, but that does not mean there have not been hurdles to overcome within the community. It means there is good debate in the community and a consensus, almost, in terms of the long-term objectives of the leadership. That is how the leadership comes about.
I was thinking about this with the death of Yasser Arafat, and all of us know about the intifadas and the things that were happening in that situation. One leader said, "We need a new philosophy. We need a new way of doing business. We need to build new bridges, to rebuild and reconstitute our nation." That is something that can truly be applied to First Nations.
I do not dismiss — as a matter of fact I support — those who say they have their way of doing things and resolving their issues. However, what has to be recognized is that there are many paths to the same objective; I am merely choosing one of those paths.
A path I feel that we all have to embark on is one that creates a viable economy that our people can participate in; one that brings new hope to our youth; one that takes care of our elders; one that looks after our veterans — all of those things that our community has been endeavouring to do for many years, but because of the legislation known as the Indian Act, we have not been able to fully deal with ourselves.
When I say we are prepared to do this ourselves, I truly mean that. We have the intellect collectively. There is no doubt that First Nations people, not just in Canada but in the Americas, have the same kind of intellect as anyone else. What we need, and what we want, are the same kinds of opportunities to create and re-create the greatness that Canada has achieved in our homeland.
Senator Léger: From what you just said, there are many paths. Does your philosophy, which is very clear, apply to all the First Nations throughout the country? Does your term "many paths" mean there will be different ways, too? If so, where does Bill C-20 come in? Does the federal government have one law to put in or does it apply only to Kamloops? The idea of many paths was interesting. Now what happens?
Mr. Jules: One thing that I think was made very clear, ultimately, with the rejection of the white paper policy, is that an assimilationist approach will not work. It was proven that it would never work.
What you have to recognize is that there are many First Nations in this country with many different priorities. What they need is institutions that facilitate economic development and growth at their choosing. Bill C-20 is truly enabling.
The Indian Act is still there for those who choose it. If an individual First Nation community chooses to go under section 35, on their own, that is their choice. We are providing an opportunity to make an informed choice at a community level that we feel would be beneficial, through the institutional basis.
Senator Léger: If they want it, the others can have it, if it is there.
Mr. Jules: That is right.
Senator Léger: It would come from them.
Mr. Jules: That is right.
Senator Léger: The Kamloops experience is a success, as far as I understand.
Mr. Jules: Yes. I am no longer chief.
Senator Léger: That is okay; for me, that is sort of difficult. All I know is your presence here, chief or not, surpasses what I can understand.
Now, would Bill C-20 help Kamloops; would it expand it, or is it to help the others come in?
Mr. Jules: It does both. In my community, it will ultimately be night and day.
When my dad was chief — and this is one of those small inspired moments that you have as a youth — I was looking at a sheet of paper. You come home and you have lots of paper; I am looking at one sheet here that is that same kind of paper, but it was yellow. On it, there were about 10 items that my dad had written in his own handwriting. He said, "The first thing I want to do is have better housing, paved roads, water, street lighting" — all of those things he had written down. That, for me, was one of my personal defining moments. I realized that here was a man who is obviously my hero, but he was laying the foundation for what we have to work toward. What I did as chief was really take up where he had left off.
That only comes about because of experience. You have to experience those kinds of events to be able to come forward. I have seen so many situations where you have a conflict, and then those conflicts have to end, but how do you get beyond that?
The other defining moment, just a little while ago, was when I witnessed President Bill Clinton give an address in Mont Tremblant, hosted by the Forum of Federations. He delivered one of the best speeches I had ever heard in my life, and I have heard countless. He talked about the importance of federalism, and how we have to all be part of the system; that in order for us to be successful, all parts of that federation have to be successful.
Recently, it became clear that that is the direction I am headed in. The future success of First Nations is within the Canadian federation, just as much as Canada's future success has to involve First Nations. Right now, we are number eight on the UN liveability criteria, or whatever they call it. It is a challenge that all of us face, and it is one where we all have to strive to achieve greatness. Canada will facilitate that greatness by allowing First Nations to stand up on their own.
Senator Léger: From your father's little yellow paper with the 10 points, do I understand that in Kamloops, that is what he started — the water has been put in, the roads are built, so you are working for federalism, right? Okay. Fine.
I loved your comparison with Africa. I do not understand it all, but I certainly understood that they have immense natural resources, everything is there, but they lack the basic infrastructure to help them develop and not remain static; is that right?
Mr. Jules: Yes.
Senator Léger: I thought that was very interesting.
Mr. Jules: It is incredibly interesting when you look at the state of the world, and how we fit into it, and how, in the past, First Nations have contributed in so many ways — the toboggan, the snowshoe, all of those gifts, corn. I was really struck at one point about why did the world not populate in reverse; why did we not populate here and then go over and colonize Europe?
There are many reasons for that. Some of them have to do with the development of grains and whatnot, and the fact that there were no geographic boundaries; whereas here, there are lots of geographic boundaries preventing us from having that kind of relationship with our own neighbours.
That is why it took the simple corn that we eat today 9,000 years to develop. It came right up the Mississippi, from the Yucatan basically, all the way up the Mississippi to Mohawk country. It took a long time.
Senator Léger: I am scandalized that in Canada we are talking about not having water, not having sewage systems today. That is what you are pleading for; really, it is quite unbelievable.
Mr. Jules: It is absolutely sad. I have a son who is 10 years old, and like any son he is the apple of my eye. When I look into his eyes I see the future. The future I see is one where, I hope, he can be anything he wants to be. For a while, he wanted to be the first Indian kid on the moon. Now he wants to be a silversmith and an actor.
Senator Léger: Dangerous, but all right.
Mr. Jules: That is right.
Senator Léger: It is probably on the philosophical level; I certainly cannot contribute to the application.
One other thing, the geography. There was no geography. Would you say the reserves that were imposed are terrible from a geographic perspective?
Mr. Jules: There is an interesting point about reserves as opposed to reservations. I really did not understand that there was a distinction between the two. Reserves, in most cases, came about because, as in the case of Kamloops, that is where we wintered. That is where our winter homes were. That reserve is where we have always been. In reference to the reservations in the United States, you have heard of the trail of tears and the relocation. A lot of people were uprooted and sent to a different place. The geographic significance of those lands is incredibly important. In the case of Kamloops, we can go back at least 4,500 or 5,000 years in that location. That story in and of itself is incredibly important to tell.
The Chairman: Mr. Jules, so far, when asked about what makes you successful, you have talked about a philosophical approach, a proper approach, leadership, stability, determination and opportunities. I wanted to ask you how important it is to have opportunities in order to be successful. An opportunity can be in terms of location, with respect to population, or it can be resources. You obviously need resources that you can utilize or make valuable. In your case, in Kamloops, obviously your location was significant. Location is sometimes everything in terms of business success. Can you comment on that?
Mr. Jules: You have probably heard people talk about a so-called Tiffany location, and that comes from New York and the location of the Tiffany stores. We are not quite a Tiffany location, but we are located near an urban centre, and that has meant that we have had to deal with issues that are quite different from those of many other communities.
What was critically important was that we wanted another way of doing business, so to speak. I have seen communities that have been isolated and have had incredible success. One good example, I think, is Sawridge in Edmonton. I think you would be familiar with that.
The Chairman: Slave Lake.
Mr. Jules: You are probably familiar with Walter Twinn. Sawridge is pretty isolated, but yet they built an incredible development at Jasper, the Sawridge Hotel. They had many other things happen, and yes, there was resource development right there. Many times, you have to be in a position to exploit the situation you find yourself in, whether it be the location or the resources, but so much depends on what is between the ears — your imagination — and the wherewithal to get that done. First Nations need the institutional support to be able to carry on that work. I cannot emphasize enough that even if we have the best imaginations, if we do not have access to institutions that other people take for granted, we will still find ourselves in the poverty cycle that we are in right now.
The Chairman: In the Northwest Territories, the main means of travel was by river into the North. Boats came down the river. During the summer months, we were affected by the boats, and then once the ice flowed, we would not see any and there would not be any visits or much movement for another seven or eight months.
I am also aware of the effects of roads. I grew up in a time when roads were beginning to come into the North and go to communities. We have had this debate as to whether it was a good thing for a road to come to a community. Would it create social problems? Would it bring in strangers and people from the South that you would not be familiar with? Communities have had this debate. Invariably, initially there seemed to be chaos, because roads would bring in liquor, as an example, much more liquor than people are used to, so they had a hard time coping with things of that sort, but over time, people become somewhat accustomed to the roads and what they bring to a community. Eventually, that brings some development, and then the community decides, through trial and experience, whether they then take part and benefit from that road development. You must have seen that occurrence in your area.
Mr. Jules: Lots of it. We are at the southern end of the Yellowhead Highway, not at the northern end, by Prince Rupert. It starts at Winnipeg. That Yellowhead Highway was built through the reserve. It was negotiated in the 1960s, some of it for $50 an acre, but it was not transferred from the band to the federal government, and then to the provincial government, until the 1980s. You have a huge dilemma south of 60 over land, road rights of ways and those kinds of issues.
That is why it is critically important that you have jurisdiction over those areas. All kinds of infrastructure are important. I am a huge advocate and a fan of seeing the Trans-Canada Highway with four lanes ultimately going right through, because I think that is critically important for this country. I have driven on the Trans-Canada Highway with two lanes, and I just do not think that is right.
Roads are a big issue, particularly for rural and isolated communities. A lot of the communities I have dealt with long for the day when there would be permanent road attaching their community to what they would view as the outside world, so that they would be able to bring in goods at a cheaper price, building supplies and whatnot. That is a fact that we will have to address, because the diversity of First Nations is critically important, I believe, for the world. At one time, there were 6,000 languages. Many of them will become extinct. Human diversity is important not only for Canada but for the world.
Many of our people will choose, as is their right, to continue to live wherever they reside right now. We will have to, as Canadians and as First Nations, help with that. We will have to make sure that the caribou herds are not exploited to extinction; that when the pipeline goes through it is sensitive to those migratory routes; and that when diamonds are being explored and exploited, it is sensitive to the original peoples there; and that those original peoples can participate not only in the exploitation of those resources, but also in the long—term benefit from that in a very real way. Many times, as you have seen — and I get that from your story — a lot of that benefit has gone down the highway.
One idea I have tried to advocate is having the dollar bounce in our community at least three or four times. Right now, the leakage to outside of our community is incredible. Ninety-five per cent of the money that comes into our community immediately leaves. How can we capture that? How can we allow that dollar to bounce a couple of times, so that we can create other opportunities for that capital, create other jobs and other means to retain that? It is a big issue for us.
The most telling example, though, is the Nisga'a. When they got their treaty, the first thing they did was build an incredible highway. As I was saying earlier, I never equated volcanoes with the Nisga'a, and I do not know if it has any significance, other than the fact that it surprised me, and they had stories about it. However, the mere fact that their first objective was to build a road speaks of the high importance of the infrastructure programs we need for First Nation communities.
The Chairman: Mr. Jules, would you comment on the situation of Aboriginal communities having resources under their lands or nearby? You are aware that a certain amount of resource development occurs in different parts of the North. I think of the situation in the Northwest Territories, for example, the diamond mines, where the Dogrib people are nearby. They were able to capitalize on the fact that there was a major development close by them. We have Aboriginal people on the Prairies who have oil and gas resources. Would you comment on Aboriginal people and resource development?
Mr. Jules: When you have potential for that kind of development, you have to have an institutional capability to capitalize on it. That is not the case right now.
First, First Nations must have the institutional basis to capitalize on any nearby resource development, and they must also be able to influence the timing of such developments in consultation with the other levels of government. The best example right now — the decision was handed down just recently — is the Haida case dealing with consultation.
One of the reasons the First Nations want to be involved in these developments is to ultimately be able to benefit from them. That means developing partnerships.
Again, to reinforce what I was saying earlier, I would love to see an institution for economic cooperation and partnership, so that we can break down the legislative barriers preventing us from being a productive part of the Canadian economy and, thereby, the global economy.
The Chairman: You talk about leadership and all that it entails. Could you please comment on what you think it takes for Aboriginal people to be able to partake in development in terms of the culture, the language and their integrity as a community and people?
I have seen situations where Aboriginal people in a nearby community are beaten down because of alcoholism. They are weak, and they are beaten into the ground by the neighbouring community. In that situation, people were having a hard time coping and taking part. Obviously, where people are strong and feel good about themselves, they have a basis on which to take part in the community. Do you have any comments on that?
Mr. Jules: I have seen similar situations. I have seen communities with access to incredible resources and receiving an incredible amount of revenue, but also having the highest rates in the country of suicide, alcoholism and infant mortality. I do not know how to explain that, how that could even happen, other than because we have lived under the cloak of the Indian Act for so long, it is always somehow someone else's dilemma or problem to solve, rather than our own, in partnership with other levels of government.
A good example would be the Alkali Lake Shuswap community. Andy Chelsea, one of the best people I have ever met in my life, was chief at one time. They used to call this community "Alcohol Lake." People would come into the community and they were partying all the time, and it was incredibly rundown. When he was elected chief, in the late 1960s and into the 1970s, his first objective was to dry out that community. They have done an incredible amount of work since that time. They have developed an incredible community spirit, and have had a number of both successful and failed economic development projects. Yet this community serves as a model for many others across the country that have found themselves in that situation.
One of the successes was that when they sent someone away to a treatment program, many times they did not just deal with the individual. They dealt with the family. It would not be just one person, but a collective of the family. They would ensure that when that family or individual returned to the community, their house would be fixed. The broken windows or whatever would be repaired. The community tried to find opportunities for them. It has not solved all of the problems. They have a huge amount of resources close to them, but yet they do not have access to them.
It is absolutely incumbent, not only on the federal government to come to the table to try to resolve these issues, but also the provincial government and, more importantly, ultimately, the businesses. That is where we have to be. We cannot depend on the 5 or 10 per cent from the provincial governments. We must be able to create the basis on which our economy can be built with that 95 per cent from private sources. That will take some time.
The Chairman: Welcome, Senator Christensen.
Senator Christensen: I apologize for being late. There are too many meetings going on here.
The Chairman: Welcome. We have Mr. Jules, who has been an interesting witness for us with respect to business and Aboriginal people vis-à-vis economic development. His experience is in the Kamloops area. Do you have any questions?
Senator Christensen: I apologize for not being here to hear your presentation. As I say, we have too many meetings going on here. That is probably where the rest of the senators are, too — voting.
On the issue of economic development, I presume you are familiar with the Yukon final agreement and the First Nations in the Yukon?
Mr. Jules: Yes.
Senator Christensen: We still have three First Nations that have not entered into their final agreements. All the others have.
One of the problems that seems to be occurring, which I understand happened in Alaska as well, especially on the West Coast, on the panhandle, is the lack of willingness to enter into joint ventures with other bands and share resources. In developing their governance acts, they tend to reinvent the wheel, with the help of a lot of consultants, rather than taking the best from what others have already done and using it. A lot of valuable time and resources are wasted for both the band and the area.
As more and more First Nations are considering entering into self-government agreements, is there any way that can be overcome?
Mr. Jules: I am glad you raise this. That was actually part of my presentation. The proposed institution for economic cooperation and partnerships is based on an international model that was developed just after the Second World War. A small number of countries originally participated in the development of that organization, and now just about every country in the world belongs to it. The purpose of that organization was to break down barriers preventing economic development and growth, but also to partner, so that you do not need to be reinventing the wheel again and again. We do not have the institution to do that now, and that is why I am suggesting the creation of a new institution that would help facilitate economic development and growth in a real way.
Senator Christensen: Who would develop that institution? How would it be developed?
Mr. Jules: I am one of those who is trying to develop this. Like anything, it is an idea.
Senator Christensen: You cannot do it by yourself. Others must be involved.
Mr. Jules: Thinking is sometimes a solitary occupation. I spend a lot of my time thinking, but I also spend a lot of time talking to people. There is a consensus among most people I talk to that there is a need for such an organization, and I am promoting it.
Senator Christensen: I agree that there is a huge need, due to the time and resources that are wasted redoing these things.
Mr. Jules: I need only look back on my own experience. I have talked a lot about my dad this evening. I realize that if I had not learned from my dad, I would be repeating everything he did and all the lessons that he learned would be lost.
First Nations have such an oral tradition. In addition to reading it, you must hear it and witness it. Therefore, much of the responsibility of this institution would be to mentor and to bring together like-minded communities to build other institutions to break down barriers preventing us from getting into the economy.
As an example, the Blood Tribe in Southern Alberta developed an irrigation system. Their first hurdle was to deal with the Wheat Board. They could not sell products off the reserve without permission from the minister. We should be working with the Blood Tribe to learn how they broke down the barriers that they faced.
Senator Christensen: We need to develop templates for joint venture agreements with larger corporations, for tendering processes and those sorts of things.
Mr. Jules: Yes, exactly. Ultimately, when you build standards, you build stability and certainty. Those can be transported from one community to another.
Earlier, I was asked to talk about taxation, which strikes fear in the hearts of everyone. Under Bill C-20, we are proposing to use real property tax powers to create other opportunities. I believe that you ultimately cannot separate the power of taxation from the power of governance. They are so intertwined that you cannot do one without the other. The notion that we should be dealing with them in isolation is, I think, a wrong approach that has led to many of the problems we face today.
This is something that First Nations citizens should not be afraid of, because we ultimately have to be able to trust ourselves.
The Chairman: In conducting our study, the committee will be travelling to different parts of the country. We will begin in the Northwest Territories, to look at the situation with the diamond mines and the Aboriginal people in that area, and we will also go to Inuvik to see the involvement of the Inuvialiut and the Gwich'in in the gas pipeline project.
In the part of the country from which you come, what area, project or community would you suggest we visit to look at successes? I know that you come from Kamloops, but as you are a frequent visitor to Ottawa, we are getting to know you and your success.
Mr. Jules: You must come and see where I live. The spectacular geography there has created the desire in many people to move forward. I would suggest Kamloops, although there are many other communities you can visit right across the country. However, I am a pretty good host.
The Chairman: Are there certain peoples that you would suggest in British Columbia who are similar to yours, who would be able to assist us as witnesses in our study?
Mr. Jules: There are many communities that the committee would benefit from visiting. I would suggest that you look at Millbrook with Chief Lawrence Paul, as well as the Membertou Band with Bernd Christmas. They have been involved in a lot of international business.
In Sept-Îles, Quebec, there are downtown developments right on the reserve that tell an incredible story. There are a number of communities in Ontario that it would be worthwhile to look at. In Manitoba, I am drawn to John Thunder's community in Buffalo Point, as well as The Pas. In Saskatchewan, there are a number of communities I would recommend. The Meadow Lake Tribal Council has been involved internationally in timber and various other businesses. Brian Standing's community at White Buffalo and Darcy Bear's community have incredible developments, as well as Muskeg Lake.
They have been able to lever treaty entitlement lands into economic growth. That is something you should be looking at. In Alberta, Siksika, in the southern part; up in the North, in the tar sands area, talk to individuals like Dave Tucker, who has been able to do an incredible amount of development; Sawridge, of course. There are lots of communities there, for example, Hobbema, Sarcee. Tsuu T'ina, formerly Sarcee, has an incredible amount of development, and they have had to deal with a whole range of issues that would be interesting to study.
In British Columbia — of course, I am drawn to that — there are lots of communities: Osoyoos, Chief Clarence Louis; Squamish; Tsawout on Vancouver Island; Campbell River; the Sto:lo communities in and around Chilliwack, Lheidli Tenneh up by Prince George and some of the developments that the Carriers have gotten involved in, in terms of logging and tree farm licences and the like. Up North, of course, you named a couple of the communities that you will be visiting. Richard Sidney from the Yukon — there was one discussion about the Yukon.
There is a whole range of communities out there, and individual leaders, that have been endeavouring to persevere.
The Chairman: Are there any other questions arising from what Mr. Jules has said?
Senator Léger: The last list answered my question still better. I was planning to say how often we have met leaders here — it is wonderful. Now the Aboriginals have a chance to have education and higher education. I cannot see that you will go backwards. That is not possible. I do think you are predecessors of the best coming up, hopefully.
Do you feel the same way, that there will be changes continuing for your son? You have given a beautiful list right there, and hopefully this will continue.
Mr. Jules: One of the things that drives an individual like me is hope for the future. One of the things that my son asked a while ago on one of our many walks was, "Dad, why do I exist? Why am I here?" That is a tough question. After a few more walks around the little path, I told him, "Son, the reason that we are all here, I believe, is to make this world a better place."
The Chairman: With that, then, I thank you very much, Mr. Jules. Your statements tonight are truly inspiring and will help us a great deal in our study.
Undoubtedly, we will see you again. There is a bill that you are obviously very involved with, Bill C-20, which will come before us in due course.
As a result of what you said tonight, may we say that we are totally inspired and we will not need to hear you again on that bill, or will you insist otherwise?
Mr. Jules: You are the senators.
The Chairman: Thank you very much.
The committee adjourned.