Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples
Issue 14 - Evidence - June 10, 2015
OTTAWA, Wednesday, June 10, 2015
The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, to which was referred Bill C-63, An Act to give effect to the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts, met this day at 6:48 p.m. to give consideration to the bill.
Senator Dennis Glen Patterson (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Good evening, colleagues. Before we begin our meeting tonight, I would like to ask if Elder Alfred Taniton would please lead us in a prayer.
[Mr. Taniton spoke in North Slavey.]
The Chair: Good evening. I would like to welcome all honourable senators and members of the public who are watching this meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples either here in the room or via CPAC or the Web.
I'm Dennis Patterson from Nunavut and I have the privilege of chairing the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples.
Our mandate is to examine legislation and matters relating to the Aboriginal Peoples of Canada generally. This evening we are hearing testimony on a specific order of reference authorizing us to study Bill C-63, An Act to give effect to the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts.
Today, we will hear from three panels of witnesses. Our first panel we will hear from the Deline First Nation and the Deline Land Corporation. On the second panel, we will hear from the Government of the Northwest Territories. Lastly, we will hear from officials from Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada, the Department of Finance Canada and the Department of Justice Canada.
Before proceeding to the testimony, I would like to go around the table and ask members of the committee to introduce themselves.
Senator Moore: Welcome, everyone. I'm Wilfred Moore from Nova Scotia — the disputed birthplace of Hockey Canada, Danny Gaudet!
Senator Sibbeston: I am Nick Sibbeston, senator for the Northwest Territories.
[The senator spoke in North Slavey.]
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: Senator Lovelace Nicholas from New Brunswick.
Senator Dyck: Senator Lillian Dyck from Saskatchewan.
Senator Ngo: Senator Ngo from Ontario.
Senator Beyak: Senator Lynn Beyak from Ontario.
Senator Raine: Senator Nancy Greene Raine from B.C.
Senator Enverga: Senator Tobias Enverga from Ontario.
Senator Tannas: Scott Alfred Tannas, from Alberta.
The Chair: Thank you, colleagues. I know you will help me in welcoming our guests for the first hour.
From the Deline First Nation are Leonard Kenny, Chief; Danny Gaudet, Chief Negotiator, Deline Self-Government; and Brian Crane, Legal Counsel, Gowlings; and from the Deline Land Corporation, Georgina (Gina) Dolphus, President.
Witnesses, we thank you for appearing here to assist the committee, and we look forward to your presentation. I hope we have time for questions from senators. It's my understanding that Chief Kenny, Ms. Dolphus and Mr. Gaudet will be making a joint presentation.
Chief Kenny, please proceed.
Leonard Kenny, Chief, Deline First Nation: I would like to begin my speaking in my language and then I will translate for you.
[Mr. Kenny spoke in North Slavey.]
It is an honour to be here today before the members of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples. On behalf of myself, our elders and the people of Deline, I thank you for being asked to speak on the legislation you have been asked to consider that will recognize the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement.
Our elders tell us to use our language as much as we can. Our language holds our culture. The phrases we use in our language are drawn from the knowledge of our land. Knowing our land helps to keep our language and our culture strong.
Self-government will allow us to continue to build and strengthen our culture. Where we have strong culture, we have strong, confident people. Over the years, many people have asked how do we know if self-government will work? How will we know if we are ready to take on self-government? Do we have the capacity to do this? As a community, we know first-hand that when you have strong families, individuals who are healthy and strong physically, mentally and spiritually, you can take on any challenge. Having healthy children and raising them well will help secure our future as a self-governing First Nation. We have overcome many hardships and will continue to work together to build up our people and our community. We are ready to take on the challenge of self-government.
This is an historic occasion. We have been working towards this day for almost 20 years. We are here today to answer your questions and ask for you to support the legislation before you.
We look forward to your questions and thank you for the opportunity to be here today.
[Mr. Kenny spoke in North Slavey.]
Georgina (Gina) Dolphus, President, Deline Land Corporation: Good evening. My name is Gina Dolphus, and I am the President of the Deline Land Corporation. I will speak in my language and then I will repeat it in English.
[Ms. Dolphus spoke in North Slavey.]
Good evening. I thank you for inviting us to be here today to talk about Deline self-government.
Our negotiating team has worked hard for 19 years on this with officials of the Government of Canada and the Government of the Northwest Territories. On behalf of our community and our elders, I thank all of those who worked so hard to complete this agreement.
For many years our community has wanted to have one government to make our decisions. This agreement will provide us with one organization that will work in partnership with other governments on behalf of our community to achieve our shared priorities in a way that makes sense.
Our community has so much potential — economically, socially and culturally. One government allows us to focus our energies on what is important. The self-government agreement creates the ability and efficiency essential for good governance. Implementing the agreement will create circumstances and opportunities to grow and support our local economy and increase our economic self-sufficiency.
Deline, like many small isolated indigenous communities across Canada, has faced its share of social and political challenges impacting our community's situation. This government provides us with the tools we need to work closely with other governments and with our own people to improve our situation. It will allow us to deliver programs and services, meeting the standards of the Government of the Northwest Territories in the ways that make sense in Deline. Perhaps, most importantly, it allows us to be confident that it ensures that our children will have tools allowing them to work in partnership with other governments and their own future for generations to come.
Masi.
The Chair: Masi. Mr. Gaudet, please go ahead.
Danny Gaudet, Chief Negotiator, Deline Self-Government, Deline First Nation: We're not only the birth place of hockey, but we also have the world record for lake trout at 74 pounds. We probably also have the freshest lake water in the world. It's nice to come to see.
It's a great pleasure to be here today as a witness before the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples. It has taken us almost 20 years to reach the point where representatives of Deline have travelled from our small communities on the shores of Great Bear Lake in the Northwest Territories all the way to Ottawa to answer questions of the honourable members of this committee. This committee meeting represents the last hurdle of a very long, fascinating, often difficult and ultimately positive and transformative journey for me, my community, for all our members and for generations to come.
You have been provided a comprehensive briefing package by the Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada, and you will have also received briefing materials that have been prepared for you.
The witnesses from the government will likely provide you with technical details about the agreement and their statements. I want to tell you about why we need your support for this legislation. I want to tell you what it means to us as Dene people whose children still speak our language in our community that sits on the shores of the pristine freshwater lake that is among the largest in the world.
The hope for more world-record fish like the one I talked about earlier still brings sports fishermen to the lake, and that sustains our own people to this day.
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission released its final report last week. Many of you are likely familiar with the contents of that report, possibly because you read it, you were briefed on it or may have attended TRC events. I and observers with me today are familiar with what is in that report because many of us have lived it. I myself spent a number of years at a residential school. I was luckier than many in my experience. However, many people in our community suffered in residential schools, including community members who are observing here today. Every day, we live with the ongoing impacts of that, what the commission called a "cultural genocide," and of various other elements of government policy that have affected us in a negative way.
I do not mention this to assign blame or dwell on negativity. I mention this because it shapes our social life, and it provides context for one of the fundamental motivators for us to negotiate self-government.
As individuals, people had to cope with their experiences in their own way. As a community, we try to lift each other up. That our community continues to thrive, work together, support one another, encourage our youth, seek guidance from our elders and to continuously extend a hand in partnership with governments are testimonies to our ability to overcome hardships and meet any challenges that come our way.
Negotiating self-government was motivated in large part by our community, understanding that in order to move forward, we must take cares of ourselves and make our own choices to chart our own future.
From the 1970s to the 1990s, we worked with other communities in our region to negotiate the Sahtu land claim agreement that provided us with collective rights over the lands and resources. It set up a management framework agreement, the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, or MVRMA, which describes how we will work together with other indigenous people in the Northwest Territories and other governments to make decisions about the land, animals and the waters that our lives as Dene and non-Dene alike depend on for survival.
At the end of that, we saw that our community alone had three organizations that are bosses within the community: the municipality created by the territorial municipal law and accountable to the Government of the Northwest Territories, the First Nation created by the Indian Act and accountable to the Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, and the land corporation created by the land claim and accountable to the land claim beneficiaries.
There were also other various boards and committees advising governments on making decisions about education, health, housing and other areas that have profound and lasting effects on our lives. In this situation, we were always asking for things to be done for us and hoping they would be done in ways that would work for us, but rarely did decisions made by others in Ottawa or Yellowknife work well for us. It was frustrating. We knew we had to change it and find a better way to work in partnership with government. Self-government seemed to be the only tool available to us.
It was this vision that has guided us on our journey for the last 20 or so years. We can count the number of non-Dene people living there on one hand: the nurse and some teachers, the RCMP officers, and the store manager. So when we were envisioning a government model of our elders, we were clear that we had to bring together the municipality, the First Nation and land corporation into one institution: the Deline Got'ine Government. Our model makes sure that everyone in the community, Dene and non-Dene, can vote and be represented on council. We have made sure that the land claim beneficiary members are protected by setting up the beneficiaries board that is responsible for making decisions about the land claim rights and its assets. The Deline Got'ine government must respect those decisions.
We had a government that works for everyone. We know first-hand what can happen when some are left out. Everyone must work together in order for our community to move forward. This model ensures this will happen.
Getting to this model was not easy. It was developed through extensive discussions with negotiators from Canada and the Government of the Northwest Territories. We have held dozens of workshops over the last 20 years with our beneficiaries, asking for their feedback and making changes as they responded to our ideas and gave us direction.
We worked hard to make sure our leaders were kept informed. Our elders sat with us at every negotiating session, even as advisers, and to keep us focused and consistently involved, along with advisers from the First Nation and the land corporation. It was often criticized as an unnecessary expense; however, having a core group of people in the community participating and involved in providing information and support for the agreement was critical to our success when it came time for our community to vote on this agreement.
We spent six months, meeting with all our members from all over Canada, educating them on the agreement. Our hard work paid off. Of those who turned out to vote for the agreement, over 85 per cent of them voted in favour.
Since then, the Sahtu Secretariat, which is the rest of the communities in our region, has also passed a motion supporting our agreement. The chiefs in the Northwest Territories represented by the Dene Nation also passed the motion of support. Basically, we have all the leaders in the Northwest Territories supporting our agreement.
Our good friends and neighbours, the Tlicho, have participated actively in our information sessions and have supported us with advice and their congratulations on reaching this deal. We were the first community in the Sahtu region and the Northwest Territories with a community-based self-government agreement.
All the Sahtu communities negotiating self-government have been in touch with representatives of our negotiating team to ask our advice and share our experience with them. I have been to many communities in the Sahtu and other regions in the Northwest Territories to support and encourage other communities negotiating their own agreements. But negotiating is one thing. Implementing, they say, is where the work starts.
We have a tripartite implementation plan that was negotiated after we signed our agreement in principle in 2008. It describes the obligations of the parties and how we are all going to work together. We also have to finance an agreement and a tax agreement that describes how this government will be funded.
We have also had to do our own internal planning. A lot of our time after ratification has been spent planning on how we will make this agreement work in Deline. We have a comprehensive transition plan that describes how these three organizations will merge into one. We have put together a transition team of managers of those organizations working closely with our team for the last five years. The managers have spent time learning the agreement and thinking through how the organizations will become one and what needs to be done to be ready for an effective date.
They have spent time looking at one self-government and building networks among other self-government First Nations in Southern Canada and the Tlicho government in the Northwest Territories. Once the legislation passes, we will be in a position to receive the funding we negotiated to do the important work needed to implement the agreement. We look forward to starting this work as soon as we can.
In closing, I want to take this opportunity on behalf of the leaders, the elders and myself to thank the federal officials who have so ably represented the Government of Canada on this file: Ian Hamilton, Kevin Flood, Laura Hudson-Grant and MaryJean Rolando. Throughout our process, they've demonstrated a deep commitment to create an agreement that will have lasting positive change on our community.
I want also to thank each of you for your time with us today. This agreement lies at the heart of the future of my community. It represents an opportunity for us as individuals to make a contribution to building Canada in the spirit of reconciliation and respect for all Canadians and which our people have been seeking for so long. We are here to seek your support for our efforts in charting our own future for generations to come. Thank you.
Senator Sibbeston: Thank you. I would like to introduce the elders that are here as part of the delegation. The elders are very much a part of the group. They are the spiritual advisers, the cultural backbones of the community and have been involved with this process for many years. As I call them, I will ask them to stand up.
[The senator spoke in North Slavey.]
Alfred Taniton.
[The senator spoke in North Slavey.]
Leon Modeste, Charlie Neyelle, Dolphus Baton, Andrew John Kenny and Frederick Kenny.
These are the elders who have been very much involved. Thank you for coming here, and I consider you as much a part of the team for your knowledge, wisdom and integrity.
[The senator spoke in North Slavey.]
Mr. Chair, I have no questions. I'm aware of the process, the efforts that the Sahtu Dene have been going through the last few years trying to reach an agreement. I have had a chance to read the agreement, and I agree with everything in it. I encourage everyone to support the agreement so they can go ahead and build the great future that they have in mind for themselves.
[The senator spoke in North Slavey.]
Senator Tannas: Thank you for being here. Thank you for allowing us to be part of this historic moment. Before we get there, let me ask a question. Could you give us some sense of the non-resident members of the community and what was their participation in the vote? Was it markedly different in terms of how they voted, or were you able to assess that? Finally, what benefits will flow to non-community members — people in Yellowknife or elsewhere — as a result of this arrangement?
Mr. Gaudet: Thank you for the question. The non-residents voted similarly to the residents in the community. I think they were actually more supportive than the ones in the community.
We've had extensive meetings with them throughout the country. We had some big ones in Smith and Edmonton. We have a lot of members in Edmonton and Yellowknife. We had some huge meetings in Yellowknife.
Fifty per cent of our members don't live in the community. It's a huge number. The reason for that is the economy, jobs and education. We have people leaving the community mainly for those reasons. They all want to come home, but it's difficult for them to come home.
Our government has basically two aspects to it. One is governance within the local government, which will look after the community, will do a lot of stuff there. A lot of the support outside the community would have to be more on education, supporting people that are going to different schools; how do we help them retain their culture and language?
We also work with outside members to support them in getting through school, finding jobs. There is a lot of support we could provide them to get them motivated to move and be productive in the cities or other places they are living in.
The government itself could supply a lot of support when it comes to trying to access programs and services with other departments or cities and work with them to try to let people know that our members are in their community, and if they're not doing well in the community, let us know, and we'll see what we can do not only with the city but also getting them to be active participants.
The land-claims component that is part of this government will probably do more because basically we're investing their assets and monies for them. Through that, if we're successful in creating an economy and doing well in our investments and getting monies to the community, we can work with them on designing programs that will help them achieve what I just described, but we could also make payments to them if that's what they want.
In the end, overall, we'll work with all our members to figure out what kind of programs we'll need. That's the main part of it. Right now, we know we'd like to try to do a lot of things, but we have to do an inventory of what our people want, and then we will be in a position to design so we can actually do that. That's the main reason why we're doing this.
The Chair: Colleagues, we have a lot of ground to cover tonight, so I will ask everyone to be brief with the questions and even with the answers, if you can.
Senator Enverga: Thank you for the presentation. A while ago, it was mentioned that 85 per cent voted to join into this new agreement. What are your plans to bring the other 15 per cent to the fold, to make them more agreeable to this agreement?
Mr. Gaudet: I'll try to be like your government and bring everybody together.
It was not necessarily that they didn't support it. Even if they didn't vote, it was counted as a "no." We put a really high threshold on ourselves to make sure that people really wanted this thing. That was one aspect. We treat everybody the same. We work with everybody. We certainly don't ostracize people for not supporting this stuff. Everybody has an opinion, but in the end, we're hoping that when you create an agreement that brings people and families together and allows kids to work and play together and have one large family — that's the ultimate goal. So I think they'll eventually come.
Senator Enverga: That's it for now.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: Thank you, chair, and nice to see everybody here again.
My question is about the Indian Act. It was proposed of eligible First Nation members to register as Indians pursuant to the Indian Act for this self-government. What benefits, if any, will be provided for the First Nation members in this regard?
Mr. Gaudet: Under the current Indian Act, we utilize maybe 10 or 15 per cent of that act right now because all we use under that act is creating the band and setting up the chief and council. That's the extent of it. We don't live on a reserve, so all the programs and services that normally would be run by a band are currently mostly provided by the territorial government and in some cases the federal government, but not as much.
We are kind of a group of Aboriginal people with no responsibility. We are always looking to others to provide a solution to all our problems. In this case, we are reversing that because now we are taking on the responsibility. We are also going to take on, if you would say, all the existing headaches and all the problems that the community has. This is going to be in our lap; we are going to be responsible now for fixing all of those things.
We're hoping, that under this process, that we would be able to provide more to all the treaty Aboriginal members.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: Once you get self-government, will you still get funding from the federal government?
Mr. Gaudet: Yes, we negotiated a finance agreement with the federal and the territorial governments. It's a five-year transfer agreement. We're quite happy about that because we can't plan year to year right now. This agreement will exist for five years, plus we will be able to renegotiate a new one, probably starting the fourth year, before it expires.
Senator Raine: Thank you. It's a pleasure to be with you tonight and to see your dreams and aspirations.
Could tell us a little bit about your vision for the future with regard to the education of the children and how that will go when you're in charge?
Mr. Gaudet: The idea would be fairly simple. We have to educate them in two worlds; we have to educate them in the Western world and in our own Aboriginal world. We're excited about it because we want to start developing programs that allow the students not to have to be in the building but where they can go out on the land and still be taught and receive the proper education. At the same time, they would be having fun and learning the traditional culture.
We also see the ability to be able to integrate with the Western world or with the Aboriginal teaching also. There are lots of science and physics involved in being a trapper. How do we accommodate those types of things? So we can do a lot of exciting things.
We currently run programs for all, with the band and stuff like that, that is helping to keep the students in school. The charter community and the land corporation have been very supportive in spending a lot of resources on youth. What is resulting out of that is that we haven't had a youth in court in over 14 years. They are all starting to stay in school. They are really excited about school, but we have a lot of work to do yet with respect to the education system because, you know, after graduating from our school, you still have to upgrade for two years to get into college or university. There is a lot of work that we have to do there and we will work with our new partners, the federal and territorial government, to achieve that.
Senator Moore: I want to thank you for being here. Thank you for your briefing yesterday. It was very informative and educational for all of us, for this historic meeting.
I have a couple of questions. I don't know if I will put on my lawyer's hat or not, but I want to make sure you're going to get everything that you think you're getting.
We're told that there is a financial payment of $75 million over 15 years, plus a share of resource revenues from Mackenzie Valley. How much is that share? What do you think you will get out of that? Is that an annual thing? Who is administering that? Who gets the funds from that resource and who passes them out to your nation and to others?
Mr. Gaudet: Under the land claim agreement, a regional corporation was created. It's SSI. All the resources from the land claim go to SSI. Amongst the land corporations in the region, they've created an agreement on sharing. So right now on the capital dollars that come through the land claim, they are distributed to all of the members on a per capita basis. If you are representing 2,000 members or even 1,000 members and that represents 30 per cent of the people, well then you will get 30 per cent of the pot.
Senator Moore: Okay. You mentioned earlier in response to a question that the financial agreement will be negotiated every five years. But you're getting $75 million over 15 years, correct? So does that negotiation, renegotiation, Mr. Gaudet, apply to that 75? Can that be touched or is that carved in stone so we know you can count on that?
Mr. Gaudet: I think we're confusing two pots of money. The $75 million has to do with the land claim. There is already an agreement in place on how it's distributed and how it gets down to the new government, in this case. That arrangement already exists. We've negotiated a pot of money to run the new government with the territorial and federal governments. That's the five-year arrangement on the $7 million.
Senator Moore: $7.5 million?
Mr. Gaudet: Yes. I think it's $7 million for the first five years.
Senator Moore: Yes.
Mr. Gaudet: Yes.
Senator Moore: So the agreements also provide for you to be able to start collecting taxes. So does that begin in year one? When will that be phased in, so that you can really start getting your own-source revenues and start to run this thing like any other organization or government?
Mr. Gaudet: We could start immediately. We've put our colleagues with the federal government on notice that we are interested in negotiating the tax agreements to get the monies flowing right away. If we put it off, then we can do it at another time, but we want it now.
Senator Moore: It can start right in and phase it in completely over the 12 years. Okay. There is one other little thing. Are the members on the beneficiary board only Deline First Nation? If I lived there, could I be a member of the board or is it just people who are members of the Deline First Nation?
Mr. Gaudet: Only Deline beneficiary members can be on the board.
Senator Dyck: I have a question for clarification. The material we've been given and the material you've handed out to us say that the Deline Got'ine government will be composed of three different bodies: the municipality, the Deline first Nation and your land corporation. Can you explain the difference between the First Nation and the municipality?
Mr. Gaudet: The Deline First Nation band was created in 1959. They had almost all the responsibility under the Indian Act to deliver all the services to the community. In the 1960s, the territorial and federal governments created the territorial council in the Northwest Territories and all these municipalities in the North. We ended up with two governing bodies in the community, one dealing with the public and one dealing with the treaty members. In my mind, it has been very dysfunctional and not good for the community. So in this case we've said that we'll amalgamate them under this new regime.
Senator Dyck: You said it was dealing with the public and with band members, or did I mishear?
Mr. Gaudet: Yes.
Senator Dyck: How do you then incorporate members of the public? How do they fit into the self-government agreement? That's where I'm puzzled.
Mr. Gaudet: Under the self-government agreement, they will get to run for office. They will be able to vote for the councilors, but they will not be able to vote for the leader. They'll also receive all the programs and services we deliver under the municipal act. They will receive all the benefits of living in a community.
Senator Dyck: But they are not actually band members?
Mr. Gaudet: No.
Senator Dyck: Interesting. Who determines the band membership?
Mr. Gaudet: The citizens of the government.
Senator Dyck: Is that part of the self-government agreement? Is there a mechanism set up whereby a body determines that?
Mr. Gaudet: It is one component that we kept under the Indian Act, so we will continue to register treaty Indians. Those members registered and recognized by our community will become immediate members of our government.
Senator Dyck: Approximately what proportion now would be band members versus members of the public?
Mr. Gaudet: It's probably about 95 per cent to 5 per cent.
Senator Dyck: Five per cent public?
Mr. Gaudet: Yes.
Senator Dyck: They are benefiting from this agreement.
Mr. Gaudet: Yes.
Senator Dyck: Okay, that sounds good.
Senator Beyak: I read everything and I heard your presentations. I don't have any questions, but I want to congratulate you and tell you what a great example you are to show when people of good faith, spirituality and goodwill work together what they can accomplish. Congratulations — and a beautiful little girl.
The Chair: I have one quick question. You mentioned the transition team: the three senior managers from the Deline First Nation, the land corporation and the housing association. How is that going along? Have they completed the tasks for transition? Do you have the capacity to implement the transition plan, would you say?
Mr. Gaudet: Well, we have the implementation plan and the transition plan. The staff has been working very hard to try to understand the agreement. While we are negotiating, we talked about all types of ideas for models and approaches to delivery and services and how to combine to make the community more efficient and effective when we are delivering. They've been working closely with us to try to understand all of that. Then they go back into the system and say how to pull it all together to make it work. They are really involved.
Capacity is something that we've tried. We thought it was really important that governments should start working with communities that are close prior to the agreement being finalized because you need to invest in a community to help build capacity. That's one thing that lacks within this whole process. You would love to hit the ground running and have all the benefits of the agreement on day one not 10 to 15 years down the road because you don't have the resources or you haven't built the capacity prior to. That's something that needs to get done.
We haven't had too much support at the end in terms of getting that kind of stuff done. Our team will phase in some of the jurisdictions. We'll deal with the capacity we have today and continue to add as we build. Hopefully, we'll build a stronger relationship with government to show that we're quite capable not only of running this government but also doing things on behalf of other governments.
The Chair: Thank you for the excellent presentations and the dialogue with senators.
We'll move now to the second panel, from the Government of the Northwest Territories. Deline friends are very welcome to remain and there should be some seats available for you. I would ask the representatives of the Government of the Northwest Territories to come forward.
Senator Sibbeston: Mr. Chair, our guests have prepared some documents they would like me to share, but unfortunately they are only in English. If possible, we could distribute them to committee members. It's really information that they have provided and would be helpful.
The Chair: Yes. Colleagues, I think Senator Sibbeston is moving that we accept these documents; is that seconded by Senator Tannas?
Senator Tannas: Agreed.
The Chair: Agreed. Please.
I would like to welcome representatives of the Government of the Northwest Territories: Fred Talen, Director Negotiations, Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations; and Ian Blackstock, Legal Counsel. Thank you for being here tonight, gentlemen. We look forward to your presentation, which will be followed by questions from senators.
Fred Talen, Director Negotiations, Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, Government of the Northwest Territories: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good evening, honourable senators. It is my pleasure to be here today on behalf of the Government of the Northwest Territories with my colleague and legal counsel, Ian Blackstock, to answer any questions you may have concerning the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement.
The Government of the Northwest Territories has formally ratified the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement and Tax Treatment Agreement. The Northwest Territories law implementing the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement was unanimously passed by the Legislative Assembly of the Northwest Territories on March 4, 2015, and received Royal Assent on March 12, 2015.
Ratifying the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement advances the priorities of the Seventeenth Legislative Assembly of the Northwest Territories to strengthen relationships with Aboriginal governments. When speaking in the legislative assembly, Premier McLeod of the Northwest Territories remarked on how this agreement is significant for our territory. He stated:
This was a negotiation process notable for its atmosphere of respect and, again, is something we can all learn from. Based on this experience, we can be confident that the Deline Got'ine Government, when established, will be a solid partner as we work for the people of the Northwest Territories.
The Deline Got'ine Government fulfills the role of an Aboriginal government for the Sahtu, Dene and Metis of Deline for those matters that are internal and integral to their culture and society.
It will also be a public government for all residents of Deline for matters affecting the whole community, including municipal services. The final self-government agreement has been carefully crafted to reconcile public rights and interests with the Aboriginal rights and interests of the Sahtu, Dene and Metis of Deline.
The Déline Final Self-Government Agreement provides the Deline Got'ine Government with responsibilities in the areas of culture, language, education, social services, Deline First Nation citizenship, elections and local government services.
In addition, the agreement consolidates the functions of the charter community of Deline, the municipality, the Deline Land and Financial Corporations — organizations fulfilling land claim responsibilities — and the Deline First Nation band. The benefit of this model is that all these responsibilities, programs and services can be delivered by a single government, which results in increased efficiencies.
The Government of the Northwest Territories beliefs the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement, being the first standalone community-based self-government agreement in the Northwest Territories, sets a positive precedent for other self-government negotiations.
The Government of the Northwest Territories is committed to working with the Deline Got'ine Government and the Government of Canada to implement the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement.
The Chair: I would like to begin with a question relating to something Senator Moore was interested in earlier in the hearing, and it has to do with resource revenue sharing. As I understand it, as part of the 2014 Northwest Territories Lands and Resources Devolution Agreement, the Government of the Northwest Territories agreed to share up to 25 per cent of its portion of resource revenues with signatory Aboriginal governments. The Sahtu Secretariat Incorporated — I think that's what Mr. Gaudet called SSI — is a signatory to the agreement and is entitled to collect a portion of the Government of the Northwest Territories' resource revenues.
I was wondering if you could confirm, first of all, that this is a correct understanding of the impact that will flow through the Sahtu Secretariat to the Deline self-government.
Mr. Talen: You're correct. The Government of the Northwest Territories did commit, as part of the devolution of management of public lands in the Northwest Territories, to share up to 25 per cent of the net fiscal benefit accruing from resource development.
That resource revenue sharing is separate and apart from any of the financial arrangements with the Deline Got'ine Government to finance the self-government agreement. They're separate. They're not put together.
Senator Moore: I have a supplementary to that, because it's a very interesting part of this view.
Mr. Talen, what is the territory that's covered? Is it all the Northwest Territories or is it the portion that's Dene Deline lands under the lands settlement agreement?
The Chair: Do you mean where the resource revenues come from?
Senator Moore: Exactly.
Mr. Talen: The devolution resource revenue sharing comes from resources and revenues accrued from the development of public lands or Crown lands throughout the Northwest Territories.
Senator Moore: So it's the whole territories. It's good to hear. I was wondering if it was restricted.
So up to 25 per cent —
The Chair: No, I think —
Senator Moore: It is agreed to share up to 25 per cent with the signatory, so that is to be divided between the five signatories, including the Deline First Nation? Is it more than five that signed that document in 1993?
Mr. Talen: The devolution agreement and the resource revenue agreements were signed recently, in the last year or so.
The Aboriginal parties who are signatories to the devolution agreement decide among themselves how they will share the resource revenues that are shared with them by the territorial government.
Senator Moore: How many are there? It's more than the five that signed the agreement in 1993.
The Chair: There would be the Gwich'in, the Sahtu, Tlicho, the Inuvialuit —
Senator Sibbeston: And I believe the Sahtu.
Mr. Talen: The Sahtu were signatories. There have been some recent additions. Certain First Nations have signed on —
Senator Moore: Are they to share again on the per capita basis, Mr. Talen?
Mr. Talen: The Aboriginal parties who are signatories to the devolution agreement decide amongst themselves how those revenues that they receive from the territorial government are shared among the signatories to the devolution agreement.
Senator Moore: So it can be up to 25 per cent. Who decides on the percentage and is it done annually? What's the distribution rhythm of this?
Ian Blackstock, Legal Counsel, Justice, Government of the Northwest Territories: The resource revenue sharing agreement was mandated by the devolution agreement, and the parties to it are essentially the regional Aboriginal groups, one of which would be SSI. Deline is one of the five, but they would be entitled only to a portion of SSI's share of the 25 per cent. The agreement says "up to 25 per cent." I stand to be corrected, but I believe essentially it will be 25 per cent.
Senator Moore: Let's say it's less than that. Let's say it's 20 per cent. Who decides? And is it decided on an annual basis so the people involved can plan and budget appropriately and reasonably?
Mr. Blackstock: That would be a matter between the parties to the resource revenue sharing agreement, including the GNWT and the various Aboriginal parties. Most of the parties to the resource revenue sharing agreement are regional groups, such as the Sahtu, the Gwich'in, the Inuvialuit and the Tlicho government, but there is also a provision for smaller community-based groups to sign on. Certain groups in the Akaitcho Region and the Dehcho Region have also signed on, and there is a formula in the resource revenue sharing agreement that establishes how much each of the signatories to the agreement will receive based on a number of factors including population and a variety of other factors.
But it's also important to realize that the resource revenue sharing agreement is an entirely separate agreement from the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement.
Senator Moore: I understand that. It's very much a living document because there could be additional parties as it moves forward, and there would be ongoing discussions and negotiations on sharing and so on.
Mr. Blackstock: There would be ongoing negotiations, for example, about more parties joining the agreement. Not every Aboriginal group has agreed to be part of the resource revenue sharing agreement yet. We are hopeful they will, but that's a matter for them. However, the 25 per cent of the resource revenues will be split in the accordance with the formula under the resource revenue sharing agreement and Deline, as part of the Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement, represented by SSI, will be entitled to a share of that.
How that is done as far as SSI and the other designated Sahtu organizations go, that's a matter for them, and I'm not privy to it.
The Chair: Senator Dyck, I think you had a question on this.
Senator Dyck: Yes. It says here that the Deline First Nation became the first of five communities to begin negotiations for self-government, and they're also part of the devolution agreement. I'm wondering: Once they have their own self-government agreement, does that enhance their ability to benefit from or participate in the devolution agreement? What effect does it have on that agreement?
Mr. Blackstock: On the devolution agreement?
Senator Dyck: Yes.
Mr. Blackstock: I don't think it has any. As well as being the beneficiaries of the final self-government agreement, they also play the same role as they always did in the Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement. They essentially become the designated Sahtu organization for the Deline district under the comprehensive land claim agreement.
Senator Dyck: When the other First Nations decide to embark upon self-governing agreements, are they able to access any resources from the devolution agreement to be able to develop their own self-government, or are they two totally separate processes or pools of money?
Mr. Talen: I will try to answer that. That's really a question for those First Nations themselves to decide how they want to use the revenues they have available to them. That's a question for those Aboriginal parties to decide if they want to use revenues they've received, either from the land claim benefits or from devolution, to enhance or provide features to implement their self-government agreement.
Senator Dyck: One final question: Is the 25 per cent that we're talking about for all five? I guess it's five different First Nations? It can't be 25 per cent each because that's 125 per cent.
Mr. Talen: The 25 per cent is 25 per cent of all of the resource revenues that accrue from the development of Crown lands in the Northwest Territories. Up to that 25 per cent is shared with Aboriginal parties who have signed on to the devolution agreement.
The Chair: They would be mostly regions. There is room for communities, but the signatories to date have been mostly regions, groups of communities, rather than individual communities.
Mr. Blackstock: That's correct.
Mr. Talen: There have been four communities, as I understand it, that have signed on. The Smith's Landing First Nation has signed on to devolution, as has the Deninu K'ue First Nation in the Akaitcho area. As well, the Acho Dene Koe First Nation has signed on — they are in the Dehcho — and the K'atlodeeche First Nation, also in the Dehcho.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Enverga: Thank you, again. With the implementation of the Deline self-government, can you please provide an overview of the implementation of the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement? What are the roles and responsibilities of the implementation committee? Could you describe it to us, please?
Mr. Talen: The implementation committee will comprise representatives from the Deline Got'ine Government. Today, it includes representatives from the community of Deline, the territorial government and the federal government. The committee is a source of exchanging information. They have some oversight over making sure that obligations in the agreement are being met by the parties and that the expectations are being realized and they are there to assist all parties in meeting their obligations under the land claim agreement. Their primary role is to provide a conduit for implementation and to assist all parties in implementing the various features of the agreement.
Senator Enverga: Can you give us some timelines, please?
Mr. Talen: Timelines? The implementation committee will formally be created upon ratification of the final agreement, and that is when legislation passes. However, as I understand it, officials from all three parties have been working quite hard. They have negotiated an implementation plan, the financial arrangements, the transition type of documents that were spoken to earlier. So there is already lots of ongoing work. That committee will be formally established upon ratification of the agreement, and then the work will be ongoing.
Senator Enverga: Have there been steps taken to ensure that the Deline will have the necessary financial and human capacity in place to implement the final agreement?
Mr. Talen: Agreements have been negotiated to deal with the financial arrangements, to finance on an annual basis for the first five years. It has been all set out and agreed to, as have a number of other agreements, tax treatment agreements, and how that will all work with regard to own-source revenues of the Deline government, how they will be treated. That work is already laid out for the first five years and after those five years another financial arrangement for a period of time will be negotiated.
Senator Enverga: Are you anticipating any challenges with implementation?
Mr. Talen: I would expect that there will be challenges. I think there is a tremendous amount of work that has to be done. I think the Deline team is working hard to meet those challenges today, and they can certainly count on the territorial government to provide assistance and help them with those challenges as time goes on.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: It says here that the government is responsible for areas in culture, language, education, social services, nation citizenship, elections and local government services. So I assume there will be taxes, and I'm concerned about the people on social assistance. How will they be able to pay taxes?
Mr. Talen: That's a difficult question for me to answer until the Deline government is formally created on the effective date and enacts legislation. If they pass tax laws or enact any laws regarding social programs or education, it's at that time that we would have information to answer that. I wouldn't have enough information to be able to answer that today because the Deline government hasn't passed their laws yet.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: Dan, can you answer that question?
Mr. Gaudet: Thank you. Good question. With the way the government model is set up and the tax regimes that are established, all of our beneficiaries or all of the people that work in the community will enter into tax agreements with the territorial and federal government, and all the payroll tax will get paid back to the Deline Got'ine Government. So it will go to Revenue Canada and Revenue Canada will write us a cheque and send it back to us. That helps us to try to get people off of social welfare and into some type of training or education. It also helps and encourages us to create an economy so that we can to try to get people off of social welfare.
We have been talking about it for years. We have been trying to create an economy, but it's difficult when you don't have all of the departments focused on, and the resources focused on, trying to do that. That's one of our biggest difficulties. That's what we would like to do.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: One more question, chair. Why do agreements like this between the governments and Aboriginal people to get this far take so long?
The Chair: Good question.
Senator Dyck: Too many lawyers.
Mr. Talen: It's a very good question. We would like it to go faster. This was the first agreement. In many ways, these negotiations broke trail and provide a really positive model and precedents for other negotiations in the Northwest Territories. It's a complex agreement. It deals with a number of matters and requires a fair bit of delicacy to balance a number of unique features. This comes after the land claim agreement. So the agreement here is intended to be a treaty, but we didn't want to change any of the features of the land claim agreement. So we had to build that in, including some of the responsibilities of the Deline government for matters under the land claim. It covers a large range of subjects, jurisdictions and responsibilities. We wanted to get it right and it took that amount of time.
The Chair: Mr. Gaudet, you've been there since the beginning. With the agreement of the territorial government witnesses, maybe you could try to answer that question.
Mr. Gaudet: Yes. I think there's fear. I don't know. I can't really speak for the government. I think there's a fear that Aboriginal groups negotiating self-government want to be sovereign and don't want to be part of the country.
I can only speak about our case, but the reality is quite the opposite; we want to be part of this country and part of the Northwest Territories. We want to work with Canada. The first thing we have to get rid of is the fear.
The second thing is sometimes we look too hard for certainty. Everybody wants to know exactly what everything is going to look like, smell like and taste like before they can agree. Even in the Aboriginal case, we want everything, but it's unrealistic to think that way. It would be ideal if we were allowed to negotiate and then come back later and finish up but use this to start going, to start building capacity and governing ourselves and develop working relationships with the government. Show us it can be done and we will give you more responsibility later. I think that would really speed up many of these agreements and get them done because the reality of what we are doing is negotiating governments that are going to have to change with time, and we should recognize that.
The Chair: Thank you. On that note, I think it's appropriate to ask the territorial government witnesses — this is really a living agreement, and I understand Chapter 26 outlines a process for reviewing and amending the agreement.
Could you please explain the process by which the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement may be reviewed or amended, please?
Mr. Talen: Sure. I think it's important to know that this is supposed to be a living document. We've negotiated it for today; however, in 40 or 50 years or some longer time frame, it may be difficult to forecast the pressures and demands on the community or what circumstances may present themselves.
The review and amendment chapter does several things. It allows any party to propose to the other parties to sit down and look at the future of the agreement and then hopefully have a conversation in good faith about whatever issues are there and discuss whether or not amendments should be made to the agreement to address that concern. If amendments are to be made, the agreement lays out a process required to amend and requires the consent of all three parties — Canada, the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Deline government — to amend the agreement.
The Chair: Is there a dispute resolution mechanism built in?
Mr. Talen: Yes, there is. There is a dispute resolution chapter, which is at Chapter 27 of the agreement. It provides a way for the parties to formally discuss disputes they have regarding the interpretation, application or implementation of the final self-government agreement.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Raine: Thank you. Maybe I should have asked this earlier to the Deline group. I don't understand; what is the form of land tenure in the Northwest Territories? Are people able to own their own property in these communities or is it held in common?
Mr. Talen: Tenure in the Northwest Territories varies a little bit from community to community. In Deline, land is either held in fee simple title or it's leased from whoever owns it or has title. In some cases, that may be the territorial government. It may be the charter community of Deline today — they own some land — or the land corporation has fee simple title lands in Deline. In many ways, it's similar to other Canadian municipalities.
The Chair: Okay. Hearing no further questions, I'd like to thank the witnesses very much for your helpful presentations.
Colleagues, again, if we could do a smooth transition to our witnesses from Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada, the Department of Justice and the Department of Finance Canada, it will allow us to complete this ambitious agenda in a timely manner. I'd ask you to please remain in your seats and we'll do a quick transition.
I'll introduce our final panel as they are getting settled. From Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada, we have Janine Dunlop, Senior Director, Northwest Territories Directorate; and Ian Hamilton, Senior Negotiator, Northwest Territories Directorate.
From the Department of Finance Canada, we have Sara Gill, Senior Tax Policy Officer, Aboriginal Tax Policy Section; and Annie Carrier, Principal Manager, Intergovernmental Tax Policy, Evaluation and Research Division.
From the Department of Justice Canada, we have Daniel Pagowski, Counsel, Negotiations and Northern Affairs; and MaryJean Rolando, Counsel, Negotiations and Northern Affairs.
Thank you all for being here tonight and for waiting for this panel to begin. Ms. Dunlop, please proceed.
Janine Dunlop, Senior Director, Northwest Territories Directorate, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good evening, honourable senators. It's my pleasure to be here today on behalf of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada with my colleagues from the Department of Finance and Justice Canada.
The Déline Final Self-Government Agreement represents the most recent example of the Government of Canada working in partnership with Aboriginal groups, territories and provinces to achieve lasting, meaningful and workable reconciliation arrangements.
As you have heard this evening, these negotiations have always been conducted in a respectful manner, which has allowed us to understand, appreciate and balance the perspectives that each party brings to the negotiation table. We would like to express our appreciation to Deline and to the Government of the Northwest Territories for their hard work and collaboration in this achievement together.
The signing of the Deline agreement comes amidst several other recent negotiation milestone achievements in the Northwest Territories and is indicative of the readiness of Aboriginal groups in the Northwest Territories to move forward in building healthy, successful communities of the vibrant North and a strong and prosperous Canada.
Deline citizens demonstrated strong support of this vision when they ratified the Deline agreement in March 2014, and this support was echoed by the unanimous passage of implementing legislation by the Legislative Assembly of the Northwest Territories.
As you are aware, the context in Aboriginal communities in the Northwest Territories differs from the situation south of the sixtieth parallel, given in most cases the absence of reserves, open and public communities and the existence of municipal governments under territorial legislation in parallel to band structures under the Indian Act. As a result, the federal inherent rights policy envisions and allows to bring together Aboriginal and public governance functions within self-government arrangements in the Northwest Territories.
The Deline agreement upholds the inherent rights policy vision in that it merges and streamlines with the new Deline Got'ine government, the three existing governing structures, with safeguarding provisions to balance Aboriginal and public interests.
The Deline agreement further empowers the community with modern law-making authorities over matters such as local services, education, income support, adoption, child and family services, social housing, settlement lands and language and culture, comparable to other modern self-government agreements in the Northwest Territories and across Canada.
Should this bill be passed, the Government of Canada is committed to continuing to work with the new Deline Got'ine Government and the Government of the Northwest Territories as we move toward the effective date of the Deline agreement and into the future as the agreement is implemented.
The Chair: Thank you very much for that presentation and to all of you for being available to answer various questions that might come up. I will begin with Senator Tannas.
Senator Tannas: Thank you. A question following up a little bit on what Senator Lovelace Nicholas was asking the previous witnesses.
We've heard that this agreement is a model, a potential template for future agreements. Surely not all communities have persistent people like Dan-Dan to spend 19 years on deals. Do you see the potential for the work that has been done by this community to actually, in years, save other communities?
Mr. Gaudet also mentioned this idea of an interim step, to get some of the things negotiated early and let the community start governing with this much while the rest is negotiated. Do you think that's something that could even shave some additional years off, allow for capacity building to take place and so on?
Ian Hamilton, Senior Negotiator, Northwest Territories Directorate, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada: Thank you, senator. To answer your first question, I think we are already seeing the direct result of the achievement of the Deline agreement. I'm also fortunate enough to have the other four communities within my scope of negotiation files, and so I can attest directly to the progress of negotiation at each of those four other tables.
We've been able to reach draft agreements in principle and certainly one with the community of Tulita. We've just — in fact, within the last few weeks — achieved that draft. We are about to go out on consultations for it. We are getting quite close with the community of Norman Wells, the Norman Wells Land Corporation in particular. We are a little bit further back with the communities of Colville Lake and Fort Good Hope.
I can certainly attest very directly that, for example, the two draft agreements in principle that we've either achieved or come close on have benefited directly from final agreement language that we see in the Deline agreement. Already, our experience is showing that the pace of these negotiations within the Sahtu region certainly has been speeded up quite considerably by the achievement of this agreement.
As regards phase implementation, generally the Government of Canada's approach in these negotiations nationally has generally been to negotiate the full suite of jurisdictions, knowing that while the governments will hold those jurisdictions right from the outset of the effective date, it's their choice as to when they choose to implement those jurisdictions. We've seen that pattern take shape across the country, where in fact many of the self-government agreements that have been put into place have not taken up their full array of jurisdictions as yet. They are doing so very gradually and carefully — very prudently, I would argue — as they develop the capacity to do so.
Senator Tannas: Thank you.
The Chair: Tulita would be the closest community to Deline, so maybe they got inspired by Deline's success.
Mr. Hamilton: It may well be.
Senator Raine: I would like to ask a few questions about the way the taxation works. Right now, the residents of Deline are paying taxes because it's not a reserve. In our notes, it says once this agreement is in place, they will give up their tax-exempt status. But I understand that's for Deline citizens who are residing on a reserve somewhere else?
Sara Gill, Senior Tax Policy Officer, Aboriginal Tax Policy Section, Department of Finance Canada: Or making purchases on a reserve. For example, a Deline person who resides in Deline, if that person were to make a purchase on a reserve in Canada, they would currently be exempt from the GST or sales tax.
Senator Ringuette: Because they have Indian status under the Indian Act?
Ms. Gill: That's right. Or if they were working on another reserve, they would be exempt from income tax on that income.
Senator Raine: Once this goes through, all Deline citizens, regardless of where they live, will be giving up that tax-free status and paying taxes where they live, or will all their taxes always go to the Deline community?
Ms. Gill: Yes, they'll give up the tax exemption after a transition period, so eight years for sales taxes and other transaction taxes; twelve years for income taxes and property taxes. But under the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement, the Deline Got'ine Government has the power to tax Deline First Nation citizens. The agreement says they may negotiate with the Government of Canada or Government of the Northwest Territories regarding the taxation of other persons in Deline, and also regarding the coordination of their taxes with federal and territorial taxes.
In practice, what that means is that while the Government of Canada is prepared to negotiate agreements with Deline that will enable them to have their own GST and their own personal income tax from the beginning, or as soon as we can get those agreements in place. And under those agreements, Deline would have its own GST that applies to all consumption in Deline and settlement lands in the Deline district. Personal income tax would apply to all persons residing in that area as well whether or not they are Deline First Nation citizens or other persons. Then those taxes would be administered by Canada Revenue Agency and then Canada would pay the cheque back to Deline.
The self-government agreement does not provide for those arrangements, but it provides that the parties may enter into those arrangements, and it's contemplated they will.
Senator Raine: If you are a citizen of the Deline Got'ine First Nation or self-government, but you're not living on reserve — because quite a few of your citizens don't — will their income tax go to Deline First Nation or to wherever they are living?
Ms. Gill: It won't go to Deline. They will pay to the federal government and the province or territory where they are living. It's only the people within Deline that are paying their taxes to the Deline.
The Chair: Thank you. It's great that we have a senior tax policy person with us tonight.
Senator Enverga: I would like to go back to the Indian Act. Can you please discuss the nature of the application of the Indian Act under the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement? What is the time frame in which the Indian Act would be phased out for this particular agreement?
Mr. Hamilton: The primary application of the Indian Act is essentially for statistical or program purposes. If a person is eligible to have status under the Indian Act or has status under the Indian Act, they continue to be registered and eligible to receive programs and services offered by the Government of Canada that are not rolled into the financing arrangement that we've reached through this self-government agreement. They continue to remain eligible. The Government of Canada does not want to do those people out of those services, or the opportunity to have those services and remain eligible for those services. That's a primary linkage there. Also, for statistical purposes, there are benefits to shaping programs by the availability of data. There is a desirability to retain that capacity as well.
Senator Enverga: Are you saying the Indian Act will continue to apply with certain provisions? What provisions of the Indian Act will continue to apply?
Mr. Hamilton: It's primarily the provisions that relate to eligibility and registration under the Indian Act. Those are the provisions that would remain, noting Mr. Gaudet's comments earlier that currently many of the Northern communities are only using probably some smaller subset of the Indian Act because of the implementation of municipal-type governments and the delivery of programs and services either by the municipalities or by the territorial government. The status quo is such that the application of the act is already reduced compared to when we see situations South of Sixty on reserve.
For example, all the bylaw-making authorities that bands would have on reserves South of Sixty, none of those are in place in the North except for where reserves apply. There are only two reserves in the entire Northwest Territories. The application of the Indian Act now is limited. It will be further reduced to the provisions that relate to the registration and eligibility under the Indian Act to be a status Indian.
Senator Enverga: For all your negotiation with Deline and the territories, can you tell me what the benefits are from your perspective and the perspective of the Deline First Nation? Can you tell me what the advantage is for the federal government or for all the territories and what the advantage is for the Deline?
Mr. Hamilton: Sure. First of all, it's important to note that through these negotiations Canada is meeting its commitments to negotiate self-government agreements at the community level, as was contemplated in the Sahtu land claim agreement of 1993. It's important that we uphold those commitments and meet them. That's certainly a benefit.
Canada, along with the other parties to the Deline agreement, gains legal certainty with respect to the self-government rights of the Sahtu, Dene and Metis of Deline. There is a legal certainty component that we seek essentially in all modern treaties, whether land claims or self-government. If they become treaties we are seeking that legal certainty so that there is legal certainty not only for the Government of Canada but for all parties and all external bodies operating in the Northwest Territories, companies and so on. Everybody knows what the regime is. That's a positive benefit for investment and all the things that flow from that.
The Deline agreement will certainly create opportunities for economic growth, development, stability and, as I mentioned, a positive investment climate in Deline, the Sahtu region and the Northwest Territories. That benefits Canada in many ways.
The agreement also provides tools whereby the Deline Got'ine government, in partnership with the Government of the Northwest Territories, Government of Canada and with other governments, can work to address the social development needs in the community.
Lastly, as I mentioned before, the Deline agreement has greatly assisted the parties at other self-government negotiations in the Sahtu region in speeding up progress in their own negotiations and achievement of milestones.
Those are some of the main benefits.
Senator Enverga: In case there is a dispute between you and other organizations, do you have any negotiation tools? What are the negotiation tools that will be in place?
Mr. Hamilton: Yes, in the treaty itself chapter 27 lays out a dispute-resolution process. Like many other dispute-resolution processes it starts with the informal. The parties try to work it out at the informal level through bodies such as the implementation committee and so on. There is recourse, if those efforts fail, to go to more formal levels, including mediation and ultimately, if necessary, to the courts. It is consistent with what we have negotiated in other modern treaties.
Senator Dyck: Thank you for being here tonight.
This is a very interesting arrangement. I was just thinking that the Deline Got'ine government will be dealing with two types of people: the Deline people themselves and the non-Deline people. In this case the Deline people are the vast majority, unlike in the rest of the country.
We know, for instance in Saskatchewan, there are oftentimes situations in the health system where let's say a First Nation person goes for health services in a province, they sometimes fall between the cracks. They don't fit under the federal government responsibility that would apply on reserve, but let's say they're off reserve and then the provincial government won't pay for health services. Has that sort of relationship been taken care of in the agreement so that let's say those kinds of situations don't occur where one type of citizen versus the other somehow isn't eligible for a service because it's covered by the Deline Got'ine government but not covered by the federal or the territorial governments?
Mr. Hamilton: Thank you. Part of the answer is that the existing situation in the Northwest Territories is that many of what I would characterize as the social envelope jurisdictions — health care and income support, all of those major expenditure items for government — are delivered largely on a public basis in the Northwest Territories. Every citizen in the Northwest Territories is eligible and entitled to receive those services regardless of who they are or where they come from. In the main, that's the primary mechanism.
The mechanism through the self-government agreement is should Deline in the future take on and exercise their social envelope jurisdictions, they're doing so on a public basis for residents of Deline, whether they are Deline citizens, Aboriginal beneficiaries of the land claims agreement and the former band or whether they are members of the public residing in the community. Those services, whether local, municipal or whether they are in the future social-envelope type services, are delivered publicly.
Senator Dyck: So they are very advanced compared to other arrangements that the rest of Canada has?
Mr. Hamilton: Yes.
The Chair: Yes, we are advanced. Wouldn't you agree, Senator Sibbeston?
Senator Dyck: Much more equitable.
Thank you.
Senator Moore: I want to thank the witnesses for being here.
In the statement made by Mr. Talen I thought it was a beautiful line, Premier Bob McLeod of the Northwest Territories remarked, "This was a negotiations process notable for its atmosphere of respect." Something we can all learn from. I'm impressed with the hope, the enthusiasm and the determination expressed by the Deline people and their negotiating team.
In view of those comments, Mr. Hamilton, I have one question for you: Have the Deline people missed anything?
Mr. Hamilton: I'll answer the question the same way I answered it when it arose as we were doing the information sessions for Deline citizens, voters, leading up to the ratification. We went on quite a tour to explain the agreement to everyone, so everyone had a clear understanding.
The answer I gave there was one I would give anywhere: Deline went to the very limit of the federal mandate. They've left nothing on the table. Frankly, in discharging my duties in this role, I would not feel comfortable if they had not because I believe fervently in what we are doing. It's important to give the maximum possible benefit to Aboriginal self-governments that we can, within the parameters. We must work to ensure they have the best possible package we can provide under the self-government agreement.
They've left nothing on the table from the point of view of financing or from the point of view of the suite of jurisdictions' law-making powers they will have under the agreement. Those are consistent with what we've done, both in the territories and nationally.
Senator Moore: I'm sure their counsel Mr. Crane would have been pushing for all of that, but I wanted to get it on the record from you.
Senator Sibbeston: I certainly don't want to throw snow or cast any shadow on this process here tonight giving final review to an important document, but on the question of implementation we have found in our country that there have been many land claim agreements, many self-government agreements that have been put into existence. On the part of native people, they are very hopeful that with that agreement they will have a good future.
But through time what happens with the federal government is that they don't live up to the spirit of the agreement and they rely on strict and narrow interpretations to get out of obligations. This is one of the things we noticed. The other matter is financial. The federal government doesn't want to pay the money that they are obliged to pay. That has been the experience of many land claim agreements in our country. So, tonight, we're here with a great deal of hope and enthusiasm for the future.
What can you tell us that is in any way different? Has the federal government changed its attitude or is there any provision in the agreement that's going to ensure that in three, four or five years from now that this Deline agreement will live up to the kind of future that the people hope that this provides?
Mr. Hamilton: I've been fortunate enough in my career to have observed some of the concerns that you've raised, senator, for example, the renegotiation of implementation plans of existing land claim agreements. I've seen first-hand some of the frustrations that have come up from Aboriginal groups as we've gone through the course of implementing agreements.
I think it's fair and open that the department has taken learning points from these experiences. Certainly, the Office of the Auditor General has commented on the implementation of agreements in the past and the department has responded to those. The way we craft implementation plans has evolved since some of the earlier agreements. We've learned, for example, to avoid wording that might be contentious or unclear in the future. The use of objective-type language in agreements is one thing we have moved away from because it's hard for everyone to understand what those objectives come down to when it comes to tangible implementation. We have moved away from certain language techniques that we put into agreements.
There are some differences between land claim agreements and self-government. While land claim agreements certainly lay out the resource management and co-management regimes with respect to roles and environmental management and stewardship, a number of the elements of land claims can tend to be transactional as well. There is a transfer, for example, of a capital transfer payment, a settlement of the land claim, a transfer of lands. Those matters tend to be more transactional in application. When we come to self-government, as people have noted here this evening, these documents very much are a living document because they are about governance. Governance must evolve, so for those reasons, we've included the review chapter in chapter 26, which allows the parties to have a full look at the agreement and its implementation, if they jointly decide that's the right thing to do into the future. There is that mechanism to be able to look.
Copies of the report must go to Parliament for parliamentary review. If there are concerns arising from the implementation committee, those concerns become aired in a public forum and form part of the public record. That's also a good mechanism to ensure that we have a viable and responsive agreement into the future.
Also, the fiscal negotiations, as people have noted, happen at a period where they're renegotiated every five years. This is consistent with what we have done with many other self-government agreements in Canada. Those monies committed are contractually binding on the Government of Canada. We are compelled to flow the monies in accordance with the agreement, in accordance with what we have negotiated.
When we come to renegotiation at the five-year point, that's when the Deline government and all other parties can come to the table and say, "Is this working? We have these concerns." They can air those concerns and negotiate, ultimately, on financing that will work. By definition, should they reach that agreement, then we have that agreed upon basis to move forward. In case they don't reach an agreement in time, they can agree to continue the arrangements as they were. There are some safeguards and backups for those that are very standard.
Senator Sibbeston: Do any of your officials have any continuing role in ensuring that the agreement comes about in the way that it is hoped for and expected or are you finished in terms of this agreement? What I mean is this: In a few years, can we look you up? Can the people of Deline call you up and ask you questions or why the federal government is giving us this or not agreeing to this? Do they have a way that they can check on you guys? Obviously, you've built up a relationship over these last few years. Are you going to be available? Can they call you when things maybe don't go exactly the way they had hoped?
Mr. Hamilton: The answer to that is a mixture. If the agreement is passed and becomes the law of the land, our implementation branch will take it on and begin to undertake the activities necessary to bring the agreement into effect and to continue to implement it down the road. They will have the primary organizational responsibility.
Interestingly, though, they are part of our same sector, the treaties and Aboriginal government sector within the department. We have a close management circle in the sense of how issues are arising. The implementation branch can report, "We're having a problem with this kind of language in these agreements. We need to be fixing that going forward." There are a lot of feedback mechanisms and there may well be many instances where they may need to clarify the intent of the negotiators as they go.
I can only speak at a personal level. My professional interests will be continuing strongly so that this agreement is implemented effectively. I'd like to be thought of some day in the future as a person who helped to bring in, with a team, an agreement that is working well. That's the legacy I would like to personally and professionally leave. Deline certainly has my personal commitment to be there and to be part of that. At an organizational level, I think we're structured so that we have that feedback loop within our own structure. There is a move to a whole-of-government approach to implementation, which I think is a healthy and positive move in a good direction because it calls upon government departments, government wide, to have this as part of their active consideration and mandate. I think that's also a good step in the right direction.
The Chair: Thank you. Good question and thorough answer.
I think that whole-of-government approach to implementation was something that came out of the stalemate that arose with the implementation of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement with which I am familiar.
In that connection, another problem with the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement was the dispute resolution mechanism. It seemed that there was an arbitration provision but it was never acted upon because it seemed that one party could veto the arbitration.
After all best efforts of settling have been exhausted, does this dispute resolution mechanism allow for a final resolution of the issue?
MaryJean Rolando, Counsel, Negotiations and Northern Affairs, Department of Justice: The Nunavut land claim agreement provided for a dispute resolution process that could reach the point of arbitration, but you're correct that it would require the consent of the parties before it could go into arbitration. The Deline process also requires that same consent. However, given the settlement that we reached with the Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated on the settlement of the litigation, there is a process by which the dispute resolution mechanism will be amended to allow any party, at their instance, to bring a matter to arbitration. That won't kick in for a couple of years. It doesn't start right away.
Certainly many groups will be seeking a similar kind of process. It hasn't been raised with Deline, but at some point in time, if ever we do reach the point where we need to consider arbitration, we would certainly be learning from policy development in this area. I guess I would anticipate that Mr. Crane would be calling me at some point to discuss this matter.
All claims do have provisions for arbitration at the instance of a party, but on very specific matters. Our interest is to resolve matters before they reach that point. I think the Deline self-government agreement is written in a way that, hopefully, we will with able to resolve those issues informally.
The Chair: Okay, thank you very much. I think that concludes the questions from Senate colleagues. The witnesses could remain where you are, and I would now like to ask the committee:
Is it agreed that we proceed to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-63, An Act to give effect to the Déline Final Self-Government Agreement and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: With leave of the committee, I would like to propose that we group the clauses of the bill. They would be grouped 10 clauses at a time. Do I have leave to group the clauses?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Moving to the bill, then, thank you.
Shall the title stand postponed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the preamble stand postponed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the short title in clause 1 stand postponed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clauses 2 through 10 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clauses 11 through 20 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clauses 21 through 30 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clauses 31 through 40 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clauses 41 through 43 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 1 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the preamble carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the short title carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the bill carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Carried. Thank you.
Does the committee wish to consider appending observations to the report?
Hon. Senators: No.
The Chair: Is it agreed, then, that I report this bill to the Senate?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Without amendment.
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Thank you. Agreed. I will do so tomorrow on your behalf.
Senator Sibbeston: Mr. Chair, will there be a chance that we could get third reading done tomorrow? Have you discussed this with your colleagues?
The Chair: Yes. I understand there is agreement from our leadership to proceed to third reading, with leave of the Senate.
Senator Sibbeston: On my part, I had discussions with our leadership to also give it third reading tomorrow. Normally, the process is that we report the bill back to the Senate tomorrow, and then usually we have to wait two days or so before we deal with third reading.
We were hoping that we could give it third reading tomorrow. So we've had discussions, and I've had a discussion with our leadership on the other side, and so they seemed to be willing to do that.
If all works well, then we may be able to get third reading done tomorrow and not have to wait until next Tuesday. I know that the people who are here from Deline would appreciate that, because it's much better being in Deline than in Ottawa, I think. That's what they say. So they would like to have it done.
Then, after that, it's just the Royal Assent. We have to get the Queen of England to give it assent through her representative, the Governor General, so that will be likely done at the end of our session, won't it?
The Chair: Yes. I understand from our clerk that meetings have taken place today with the leadership in the Senate and there has been agreement on that speedy process for third reading, so let's hope it all works out.
I would like to thank the committee. I would like to thank Senator Tannas, the sponsor of the bill, and Senator Sibbeston, the critic of the bill for allowing us to expeditiously but thoroughly deal with this bill in the last few days of the Parliament.
Senator Sibbeston: I want to thank you for doing a good job of chairing, Dennis.
The Chair: With that, masi. The meeting is adjourned.
(The committee adjourned.)