Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples
Issue 43 - Evidence - October 3, 2018
OTTAWA, Wednesday, October 3, 2018
The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples met this day at 6:45 p.m. to consider the government response to the eleventh report of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, entitled The subject matter of Bill C-45, An Act respecting cannabis and to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Criminal Code and other Acts, insofar as it relates to the Indigenous peoples of Canada, tabled in the Senate on May 1, 2018.
Senator Lillian Eva Dyck (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Good evening. I offer our warm welcome to the new clerk of the committee, Mireille Aubé. I hope she will serve us graciously and efficiently as we proceed over the next few years.
Mireille K. Aubé, Clerk of the Committee: Thank you.
Senator McPhedran: She has already survived travelling.
The Chair: That’s right. Trial by fire — or by flyer.
Good evening, tansi. 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 listening via the Web.
I would like to acknowledge for the sake of reconciliation that we are meeting on the traditional unceded lands of the Algonquin peoples. My name is Senator Lillian Dyck from Saskatchewan. I have the honour and privilege of chairing this committee.
I invite my fellow senators introduce themselves, starting with the deputy chair.
Senator Tannas: Scott Tannas, Alberta.
Senator Patterson: Dennis Patterson, Nunavut.
Senator Doyle: Norman Doyle, Newfoundland and Labrador.
Senator McCallum: Mary Jane McCallum, Manitoba.
Senator Christmas: Dan Christmas, Nova Scotia.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: Sandra Lovelace Nicholas, New Brunswick.
Senator Boyer: Yvonne Boyer, Ontario.
Senator McPhedran: Marilou McPhedran, Manitoba.
The Chair: Thank you, senators.
Today, we study the government response to this committee’s report on the subject matter of Bill C-45, the Cannabis Act, as it relates to Indigenous peoples.
We have with us today the Honourable Jane Philpott, P.C., M.P., Minister of Indigenous Services; and the Honourable Bill Blair M.P., Minister of Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction.
They are accompanied by senior government officials. We have with us, from Health Canada, Mr. Eric Costen, Director General, Cannabis Legalization and Regulation Secretariat; and from Indigenous Services Canada, Dr. Tom Wong, Chief Medical Officer of Public Health and Executive Director, First Nations and Inuit Health Branch.
I understand the ministers have opening remarks to be followed by questions from the senators. We will begin with Minister Blair.
Hon. Bill Blair, P.C., M.P., Minister of Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction: Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
If I may, I would also like to begin by acknowledging we are gathered on the traditional territory of the Algonquin people.
Honourable senators, it’s a pleasure and an honour to have the opportunity to come before you, to thank you for your very thoughtful study of Bill C-45 and for the opportunity to discuss the government’s response to your report. The government is deeply committed to a renewed nation-to-nation relationship with Indigenous peoples.
We are grateful for the chance to speak with you about our efforts to address the concerns and interests that have emerged from our engagement with Indigenous peoples. Our response identifies a broad range of government actions to address the issues presented in your report. Our response also echoes the commitments and sentiments expressed by the ministers of health and Indigenous services in the letter to the committee chair and deputy chair that was read aloud during debate of Bill C-45 in June of this year.
We stand by the commitments outlined in the letter: To continue engaging with Indigenous organizations and communities on areas identified in the committee’s report; and to report back to you, to both chambers, on the progress made on the actions and areas by June 2019.
In just two weeks, we will see a historic change in Canada’s approach to cannabis, when the Cannabis Act will come into force. Our government’s commitment to meaningful engagement with Indigenous peoples extends back to the very beginning of our work to legalize, strictly regulate and restrict access to cannabis. We mandated the task force to consult extensively, specifically with Indigenous peoples and governments, and provide advice to the government on the design of a new legislative and regulatory framework. The task force engaged with the Indigenous leaders, representative organizations, youth and elders across the country, and in their final report highlighted the need for close, ongoing dialogue and consultation.
Our government has heeded this advice and over the past 18 months, we have engaged intensively. Both ministers and senior officials have heard from national and regional organizations and from communities directly. In fact, to support our Indigenous engagement activities in the summer of 2017, Health Canada created a dedicated unit to support outreach in order to respond to Indigenous interests in cannabis legalization and regulation.
Over the past year, officials have participated in over 70 meetings with communities across the country, during which we benefited from hearing diverse perspectives and questions.
I’d like to give senators a sense of where we’ve been over the past few months alone. We attended, for example, in Bella Bella, a First Nation in B.C. on the Pacific coast where senior officials met with the chief and council members; in northern Alberta First Nations with members of Treaty 8; with regional Metis government member organizations; mental wellness and addiction workers from across Saskatchewan; with all chiefs and other representatives of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs; and throughout Ontario, in over 20 communities and regional organizations. In fact, earlier this week, the team was Eagle Lake First Nation, which is approximately 400 kilometres northwest of Thunder Bay, to meet with chiefs from the Treaty 3 area.
I have personally had the opportunity to spend some time in Nunavut in order to understand the interests of the Inuit. We have met with the National Inuit Youth Council, the National Inuit Committee on Health, Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated and the Kitikmeot Inuit Association. Earlier this year, I had the opportunity to sit with representatives of Pauktuutit Inuit Women of Canada. I have also met had the opportunity to meet with Indigenous community council members in Akwesasne, Kahnawake and Thunder Bay areas, and participated in a dedicated session on the changing cannabis laws at the Assembly of First Nations special chiefs assembly.
My cabinet colleagues and I are committed to meeting directly with Indigenous leaders, community members and other leaders. In doing so, we have come to better understand their unique perspective, concerns and interests. We have also been able to share information and to help build awareness of the government’s objectives and the federal legislation.
Close collaboration with national Indigenous organizations will remain a priority. Both Minister Philpott and I, along with the Minister of Health, recently wrote to the heads of these three organizations to invite them to continue the dialogue.
I would now like to provide you with a brief update in three areas your committee and Indigenous communities have identified as priorities. These are culturally appropriate public education and awareness, Indigenous authority and jurisdiction, and taxation and revenue generation. I will then ask Minister Philpott to touch on issues pertaining to economic development in her remarks, which has also been identified as an important priority.
With respect to public education and awareness, the committee called upon the government to collaborate with Indigenous governments and organizations to fund and develop culturally specific education about cannabis. The government has responded by providing funding and working with Indigenous governments, organizations and communities to support the development of effective and culturally relevant communications approaches.
In Budget 2018, the government invested $62.5 million over five years through Health Canada’s Substance Use and Addictions Program for Indigenous and other community-based organizations to conduct cannabis public education.
As an example, we were pleased to provide funding to the Nishnawbe Aski Nation to lead a public education campaign within their territory, which will make sure that remote communities are visited by an engagement team with up-to-date information and evidence. NAN will also convene a series of meetings for communities exploring cannabis retail and economic development opportunities. The project coordinators are now booking meetings and community visits to Kingfisher Lake and Mishkeegogamang between October and December 2018.
We have also developed a number of resources to help organizations and communities in developing their own public education materials. These resources have been translated into 12 languages, including Oji-Cree, Inuktituk, Plains Cree, Mi’kmaq, and Mohawk. We’ll disseminate them to Indigenous organizations and communities across the country.
I have a number of examples of these documents that have been prepared that we will be pleased to share with committee members.
With respect to the issue of Indigenous authority and jurisdiction, since the release of this committee’s report, we have heard increasing calls from First Nation governments and representative organizations for greater control over cannabis-related activities within their communities. The government’s response in this report outlines the division of federal and provincial-territorial responsibility over production activities, distribution and the sale of cannabis under the act, highlighting specific steps taken by some provinces to include Indigenous populations in the design of their systems.
The government is committed to continuing to engage with Indigenous governments, organizations and leaders, and with provinces and territories, to support Indigenous communities in meeting their diverse objectives, including an appropriate way to accommodate jurisdictional issues.
Finally, with respect to taxation and revenue generation, we understand the committee’s recommendation to provide direct excise tax revenues toward investments in Indigenous services and programs, and to work with First Nations to enable them to collect cannabis excise tax revenues. As outlined in our response, there are existing options under which Indigenous governments can generate tax revenues from activities related to the production and sale of cannabis products within their lands.
We want to emphasize our commitment to engage Indigenous peoples, as well as with provinces and territories, in light of this recommendation.
As outlined in the letter from my colleagues to the committee in June, this government is dedicated to advancing a new fiscal relationship with Indigenous communities, based on the need for sustainable, sufficient, predictable and long-term funding arrangements.
Madam Chair, in conclusion, the government has been clear that no relationship is more important to Canada than the one with Indigenous peoples. I firmly believe the Cannabis Act represents the best approach to legalizing and regulating cannabis use within all of our communities. I look forward to exploring ways in which we can further support Indigenous communities in advancing their diverse priorities in the context of cannabis legalization and strict regulation.
I would also be pleased to return to the committee to ensure senators are updated on areas of interest regarding the implementation of the new cannabis framework.
I would like to take the opportunity to thank you once again for your time. I will now respectfully turn to my colleague, the Minister of Indigenous Services, to speak to you about issues, including supports for Indigenous services and economic development opportunities.
Hon. Jane Philpott, P.C., M.P., Minister of Indigenous Services: Thank you, Madam Chair and honourable senators, for inviting me to appear before your committee along with my colleague Minister Blair. Like him, I want to acknowledge we are gathered here on the traditional territory of the Algonquin people.
[Translation]
I will take this opportunity to thank the committee members for all their work on the study of Bill C-45. I also thank the many witnesses for their expertise, time and interest.
[English]
Minister Blair has already provided an overview of the government’s response to the committee’s report. As he indicated, I would like to address two issues raised by the committee that pertain to Indigenous Services Canada. Those are, number one, the ability of Indigenous communities to participate in the cannabis market, and number two, the provision of service in Indigenous communities for mental wellness and for the prevention and treatment of problematic substance use.
With regards to the economic development opportunities, this government has taken specific action to ensure Indigenous peoples have access to economic opportunities in the legal cannabis industry.
[Translation]
Many Indigenous communities view the emerging cannabis market as an important opportunity for economic development. We will continue to explore ways to promote Indigenous participation in the cannabis industry for those wishing to get involved.
[English]
Continued engagement will be important in the coming months to ensure we’re doing all we can in this area. We have already taken action to modernize various Indigenous economic development programs and services. For example, in response to calls by Indigenous organizations and communities for greater support to participate in the cannabis market, my colleague Minister Ginette Petitpas Taylor announced the establishment of a navigator service in 2017. This navigator service is designed to help guide self-identified Indigenous applicants through each step of the licencing procedure. At Health Canada, a licencing professional is fully dedicated to guiding and assisting them in successfully meeting the regulatory requirements and obtaining a licence.
There is room within the new framework for Indigenous partners to participate in the federally regulated industry.
[Translation]
I should point out that several Indigenous-affiliated organizations already participate in Canada’s cannabis-for-medical-purposes industry.
[English]
To date, there are now seven federally licensed Indigenous producers of cannabis and another 19 applicants that are known to be affiliated with Indigenous groups. As well, there have been close to 90 inquiries from prospective or interested applicants. Just last week, you may have noted that Health Canada issued a licence under the Access to Cannabis for Medical Purposes Regulations to Seven Leaf, the first licensed producer located within a First Nations community.
On the issue of mental wellness and problematic substance use, our government understands there is concern about whether the implementation of the Cannabis Act will create unmet need in Indigenous communities for mental wellness supports, and supports for the prevention and treatment of problematic substance use. Our government will continue to work closely with Indigenous communities and leaders to address those needs, specifically in the area of front-line services for mental wellness, as well as the prevention and treatment of problematic substance use. We will continue to work closely with Indigenous communities to make sure additional resources are in place if needed.
[Translation]
I want to assure you that this is not an empty promise. For example, Budget 2018 commits $200 million over five years to enhance the delivery of culturally appropriate substance use prevention and treatment services in communities with the highest need.
[English]
This is in addition to what is now more than $350 million provided annually by Indigenous Services Canada to fund a variety of community-based mental wellness services and addiction treatment for Indigenous peoples across Canada to reduce risk factors, promote protective factors and improve health outcomes. One example, we now have 63 mental wellness teams serving 344 communities. That is up from 11 teams in place when we formed government.
I want to touch briefly on one other issue related to the Indigenous portfolio. Minister Blair has already touched on this, the issue of jurisdictional authority.
My cabinet colleagues the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations are working much more closely on these aspects of the Cannabis Act. I know there have been increasing calls from various First Nations governments and representative organizations for greater control over cannabis-related activity in their communities. I know that Indigenous communities, organizations and businesses have spoken up about jurisdictional concerns, specifically the exercise of First Nation bylaw-making powers in relation to the legalization and regulation of cannabis.
Our government recognizes and respects the jurisdiction of Indigenous governments. We will continue to work with First Nations, Inuit and Metis communities to address and accommodate jurisdictional issues in an appropriate way moving forward. We commit to seeking the advice of this committee to assist us in this regard.
To conclude, our government will continue to work closely with Indigenous communities, leaders and organizations to help Indigenous peoples meet their objectives and address concerns related to the legalization and strict regulation of cannabis for non-medical purposes. This includes working in partnership to address concerns raised in the context of the Cannabis Act that relate to broader long-standing health, economic and social issues.
[Translation]
Thank you for your hard work. I look forward to answering your questions.
Thank you very much. Chi-miigwech. Nakurmiik. Marsee.
[English]
The Chair: Thank you, Minister Philpott.
The floor is now open for questions from senators, starting with our deputy chair, Senator Tannas.
Senator Tannas: Ministers, welcome, and thank you for being here.
I want to ask Minister Blair specifically about the excise tax issue. We spent some time exploring that issue with Indigenous leaders who are experts in this field. There was a strong feeling that there was an opportunity there that would put the tax together with potentially the economic development incentives — it would have given Indigenous communities a lot of flexibility in terms of attracting production to their communities.
The answer in June sounds to me like it’s a little bit more certain now. There is no contemplation by the government of sharing excise tax for any production, or providing the excise tax for any production done on Indigenous lands. We now hear the first one has had its licence, so there will be an actual live example.
I think I saw in the response — and I’m paraphrasing — “maybe later, but really part of the whole comprehensive new fiscal relationship that we all hope will happen someday.”
Is that fair, number one? Number two, in the intervening time, the last few months — and I know it’s only been a few months — has there been any engagement on the comprehensive fiscal relationship, the new fiscal relationship? Has there specifically been any engagement with the First Nations Tax Commission and the people who we listen to and admire so greatly?
Mr. Blair: Thank you for your question, senator. I would begin my response by saying that is primarily the purview of our colleague the Minister of Finance. It is he and his officials that have been undertaking this engagement. The establishment of the new fiscal arrangement, of which the Prime Minister has spoken and which I spoke to this committee about in the late spring, that work is now under way. I have been advised that there had been discussions with some of the national organizations. I would also agree it’s somewhat preliminary and there’s complexity to this.
The discussion, as I understand it — subject to perhaps greater clarification from the Minister of Finance — is those discussions are forming part of a broader discussion, as you indicated in your question, around a new fiscal relationship. The issue of excise sales and other revenues generated are included, quite appropriately, within that broader discussion. It’s a complex issue because there are also provinces and territories involved in that discussion, which, as I’m sure you would appreciate, brings another layer of complexity. I apologize; I’m being somewhat cautious in this. I’m aware of the commitment of the finance minister engaged in that, and that his people are working through it diligently with appropriate organizations.
Senator Tannas: Thank you.
Dr. Philpott: If may, senator, clarify the last portion of your question to assure you that, yes, in fact, the First Nations Tax Commission — and I share your views that it’s an extraordinarily successful and strong organization — is working closely with the Minister of Finance on this particular matter.
Senator Tannas: Would you endorse the request of our committee that at some point in the not-too-distant future — just to keep things moving along and to check in on the undertaking — we have the Minister of Finance visit us at committee at some point in the next few months?
Mr. Blair: What I can certainly say in response is I found my appearance here in June, and the recommendations that came from this committee, to be extremely helpful and informative. They did form the basis of, I think, important guidance to the government on how we would go forward. I can only echo that it was a very good experience, from my perspective, in the work that I had to do. I believe the finance minister would benefit from your advice and counsel.
Senator Tannas: Thank you.
The Chair: Are there any other comments?
Senator Boyer: Thank you very much for the presentations.
I have a question in relation to Metis engagement. You said, Minister Blair, in 2017 you participated in 70 meetings across the country, including the Metis organizations across Saskatchewan.
I’ve spent the last few months during the summer visiting with Metis organizations and communities all across Ontario. None of them said they were engaged in this issue at all.
Minister Philpott, you said the engagement would be ongoing. Could you please explain your engagement with the Metis in 2017, and what you plan to do to engage as many Metis community organizations and peoples all across the country?
Mr. Blair: If I may begin. I have in front of me a list of those 70 engagements and who was spoken to. With great respect, rather than go through it, I can tell you our task force was established in 2016 and travelled across the country, with a clear mandate to engage with Indigenous and Metis communities. In October of that year they did meet at an Indigenous round table that included the Metis National Council. I have a number of others, which I’m happy to share with you.
I think it’s only fair to acknowledge — notwithstanding we’ve had 70 engagements, some of which our task force participated in and some of which I participated in — that it’s been a very comprehensive engagement with senior officials. I might, if I may, invite my colleague Mr. Costen to talk about those senior official engagements.
I’d also acknowledge the work is not yet done. There’s still a great deal more work that needs to be done. Other opportunities will be pursued to ensure that important perspective is part of the ongoing dialogue on this issue.
Senator Boyer: With Metis, I know what you’re talking about. Thank you.
Mr. Costen: I can add a few details. We’ve been mindful of the need to engage directly with Metis, as Minister Blair has indicated. Perhaps not surprisingly, we have started with our relationship with the Metis National Council. I’ve had a number of meetings with them and their representatives. We’ve met and had occasion to brief the governing members. We’ve had a number of regional meetings with some of the regional Metis groups. The most recent was with the Métis Nation of Ontario about a month ago.
Specific to questions of public education and the need for culturally appropriate public education materials for Metis, I would say that is the most live dimension of the conversation we’re having with Metis right now, specifically in the context of the grants and contribution program that was made reference to in the opening remarks and working to develop proposals to enable the development of Metis-specific public education tools.
We’ve certainly made some inroads. We see some progress. There’s lots of work left to be done.
Senator Patterson: Thank you both for being here. Minister Philpott, you described two sources of funding available to support culturally appropriate substance abuse prevention and treatment services with the highest need. You won’t be surprised to hear me asking this, coming from Nunavut, which has no treatment centre in the territory, as you know. I also know the committee recently heard similar concerns in the Northwest Territories on their recent visit there.
I had an opportunity to hear about a project to expand a long-standing but limited program in Kuujjuaq, Nunavik. You may also be aware of that. We’re grateful there is a fund that has been established, as you mentioned. How is it going? I guess I’m wondering — I know this is for the whole country — do you have a system in place to deal with applications and maybe prioritize areas that are currently underserviced?
Dr. Philpott: Thank you, senator, for your question and for your important ongoing advocacy in this area. I look forward to continuing to work with you on it.
There’s no question there are huge gaps that remain in terms of access to mental wellness services as well as services to prevent and treat problematic substance use. I think we have made significant progress, as you have pointed out, but there’s more to be done. You’ve commented on some of the things I already mentioned. I’d be happy to provide a list of further programs. Some of them are smaller programs that we don’t necessarily highlight all the time. I can share some examples.
For instance, in Cambridge Bay there’s a wellness centre that receives $650,000 for a mental health crisis team that’s doing on-the-land training. In the Northwest Territories, the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation received $500,000 for a mental wellness team. They are also running a program for victims of violence, an on-the-land program that received $82,000.
We have a number of smaller programs in a number of communities. We are very much trying to support the kinds of things that you and I have talked about before in terms of supporting grassroots community initiatives. We often find these are the most successful if they’re designed by people who really understand the needs.
I think we’re looking at the range of supporting those small communities right up to the big-picture investments you and I have discussed before. I know really good work has been done on preparing for the possibility of a wellness centre in Iqaluit, a Nunavut wellness centre I’m very supportive of. I look forward to talking to you about that going forward.
For Kuujjuaq, they are looking to expand a very successful addictions treatment program with an expansion of their facilities. We look forward to making an announcement soon about a federal investment to support the expansion of the services in Kuujjuaq. I think there is a range of both large and small projects going on. There’s no question the building of facilities is expensive and complex in these areas, and we acknowledge that. We are both wanting to support those expanded physical facilities and wanting to make sure at the same time that we really help communities develop some of the very appropriate options, such as the on-the-land programs that exist. As I say, you have my support to continue to work to make sure that more is done. I know Dr. Wong is very seized with this work as well through the First Nations and Inuit Health Branch.
Senator Patterson: That’s good to hear. Thank you for that. If I may turn to another subject that’s a little broader than the North — the issue you addressed, Minister Blair, about Indigenous authority and jurisdiction. We’re two weeks away today, I think, from legalization. You said communities are wanting to take control in the spirit of self-government and that your government is making a priority on the nation-to-nation relationship that the Prime Minister has spoken about, but all you said was that the government is committed to continuing to engage with Indigenous governments, organizations and leaders to support Indigenous communities. Legalization is looming.
What can communities do now to take control and perhaps prevent retail outlets from opening, if that’s their desire? Can you give us a little bit more detail about progress in this important area the committee heard about in its travels and consultations?
Mr. Blair: Yes. We’ve been engaged with a number of First Nations communities who’ve talked about their ability to pass bylaws. I will tell you that a year ago, when we first went to those communities, primarily the discussion was how we could prevent it being sold in our communities, dry communities. That conversation has evolved quite significantly, in my experience. People are now talking about how they can more effectively regulate and control the distribution within their communities and exercise their jurisdiction by the passing of appropriate bylaws that control not only distribution but also the consumption of cannabis, better protection for their kids. We’re working with them to support those initiatives.
The federal law remains in effect. We see there’s a great deal of opportunity for both local jurisdiction to be exercised and the federal law to still apply where they’re compatible. In most cases they are. Jurisdiction is currently also being exercised by provinces and territories. They have responsibility to determine proper regulatory frameworks for distribution. Municipalities and others are regulating issues around consumption. We acknowledge and respect the jurisdiction of First Nations in all aspects of that, and we’re working with them.
It’s important, I believe, that we work with them to make sure they have opportunity to participate in economic development, opportunities we’ve spoken briefly about as well. With respect to distribution and the regulation of its consumption in their communities, we’re quite prepared to work with communities as they go forward developing it. Until that work is done, there are regulatory frameworks in every jurisdiction, primarily under the federal legislation, that would control those aspects.
Senator Patterson: Thank you.
Senator Christmas: Thank you very much, ministers, for joining us this evening. As you know, one of my interests is having our communities begin to generate their own revenues, either through taxation or through business enterprises. Earlier this week I made some inquiries with the First Nations Tax Commission to see if they’ve been engaged. I was quite pleased to find out that, as we speak, today and tomorrow, the First Nations Tax Commission is meeting with the Assembly of First Nations working group on developing a new fiscal relationship. I’m also pleased to hear that members of Indigenous Services Canada will be part of those.
Given that talks have begun, do you envision the kind of tax-sharing revenue arrangement we talked about as a committee as a possible outcome of these discussions with the First Nations Tax Commission and the Assembly of First Nations?
Dr. Philpott: Thank you for the question, senator, and for your interest in the very pressing issue of economic development opportunities for Indigenous communities, which you know makes such a difference in terms of the socio-economic outlook that these communities face.
You’ve touched on a couple of things that are very important. I think Minister Blair has talked already a little bit about tax opportunities and maybe he will want to expand on that.
The other piece of this, in the short term while there’s still work being done to prepare for opportunities from a tax point of view, we’re also seeing these really good opportunities for the economic development that comes with production facilities and the fact that there are now seven facilities that have self-identified Indigenous ownership. They come in various sizes. I’m not sure what Eric’s ability is to speak to the details of what some of those are.
We have 19 more in the queue awaiting the processing of their application. We think dozens more applications are still coming in. We’ll continue to make sure that navigator service is provided, which helps communities get over the challenging hurdles of getting an application completed. I know that Health Canada is working on the application process to make it as seamless as possible.
The breakthrough news this week of the community in Akwesasne having its first facility on reserve is very significant,. We would expect that others would follow with an interest in being able to have a facility that’s going to provide revenue and economic opportunities where perhaps there aren’t a whole lot of options.
This is something I hear about across the country when I visit communities. I point them very specifically to the navigator service and let them know they certainly should be encouraged to pursue that.
We sometimes have other opportunities within our department through a variety of economic development programs that my officials could speak to that will allow both resources to support investments and sometimes opportunities for access to capital in terms of developing these.
I think it’s beyond just the tax opportunity. It’s the business development opportunity that I think is quite powerful.
Mr. Blair: I just might add to that. I will confess to you, senator, our focus overwhelmingly in the development of these regulations was on keeping this away from kids, restricting their access and displacing the existing illicit market, which has profited criminal enterprises in the billions of dollars.
But we are not blind to the opportunity that a new regulated industry provides to communities across the country and certainly for First Nations communities. That opportunity is in economic development, the creation of jobs and legitimate business opportunity and enterprise in all communities, including, of course, First Nations communities. There is also a revenue implication.
We tried not to focus, quite frankly, on the dollar signs. We tried to focus on harm reduction and reducing social and health harms. We also see within that opportunity another opportunity to reduce harm and to create opportunity and hope in many places where perhaps none exists.
We are quite prepared and enthusiastic about exploring the opportunities of assisting First Nations communities in seizing economic development. I think it’s also a very important discussion, which is complicated. We’re working through it because we see other revenue opportunities that can support the community as well.
Senator Christmas: I want to follow up on Senator Patterson’s questions.
I notice in your statement, Ms. Philpott, you did talk about bylaw-making powers that First Nations can exercise. In our study, in our report, we were given some information that tool in the toolbox may not be available to First Nations. I’m very interested in your comments now that, given the federal framework and if bylaw-making powers are within that framework, then there is room to enable First Nations and other communities to exercise bylaw-making power on cannabis. Am I hearing correctly?
Mr. Blair: I believe those bylaws are not inconsistent with the federal law. I think there is an opportunity there that First Nations can exercise within their own jurisdictions’ bylaws to protect the health and safety of their kids and to regulate the activities of consumption and retail within their communities. If those are the bylaws to which you refer, I believe that’s possible.
We would want to work very closely with them to make sure they’re not, quite frankly, putting kids at risk or creating other opportunities. I think it’s important we maintain that shared commitment of protecting our children and reducing the harms associated to the inappropriate use of this substance.
But where they are not incompatible, I think there is an opportunity for us to work together.
Senator Christmas: I personally find that very encouraging. When we as a committee studied that topic, we were told otherwise. I’m quite pleased and relieved to hear those powers exercised by those communities have the potential of being recognized. I can see them definitely being part of this whole regulatory process.
Mr. Blair: I don’t mean in any way to equate First Nations with the authority that municipalities, for example, have. This is a nation-to-nation discussion.
I have had the opportunity to visit a number of band councils where they clearly have a well-developed capacity to develop and enforce their own bylaws. They understand and know the best interests of their community. I can’t think of anyone better positioned to determine the proper way to regulate this substance to achieve our shared goals of protecting their kids and keeping their communities safe. I believe there’s an opportunity for us to work together.
Senator Christmas: Thank you, Mr. Blair.
Senator McPhedran: Thank you both with your impressive teams for being here. It is much appreciated.
I want to build on this discussion somewhat and go to a question. I think each of you has used the term “regulation” in your answers. There’s been some reference to the authority of local communities to make decisions at the bylaw level.
My question comes partly out of the fact that most of the members of this committee travelled together in the western Arctic just a couple of weeks ago. One of the communities we visited is the most northwestern community in Canada, Old Crow. This was among many issues that came up. Let me frame the question this way, which I think is drawn very much from the discussion we had with leaders in Old Crow. That is: Do you see “regulation” extending to a complete ban? Do you see that authority at the local level essentially as allowing the community leaders and councils not so much to regulate consumption, but ban consumption?
Mr. Blair: Senator, if it’s all right, I’d like to begin by responding to that, if I may.
I think it’s important to frame this in terms of what we are trying to achieve, and we have seen the failure of prohibition. We have had for over a century in this country a criminal prohibition — not a regulatory one — that has led to the circumstances where we have the highest rates of cannabis use among our kids of any country in the world. That ban has facilitated billions of dollars in illicit profit by organized crime. Quite frankly, what we have found right across the country, in every community and certainly in Indigenous communities, which have an even higher proportion of use among its youth, is that a total prohibition, either regulatory or criminal, has not had the effect of protecting our kids and keeping our communities safe.
It would be very much my opinion that in recognizing the authority of jurisdictions we should work with them on how they might exercise their regulatory authority to protect their kids, to keep their communities safe and to keep organized crime influence out of their communities.
Dr. Philpott: I will just perhaps add to that in terms of from the point of view of the possibilities for what Indigenous communities can regulate, if they’re interested, there is a broad range of options. As this committee knows better than most, communities are in different stages of their exercise of their right to self-government. If we’re talking about First Nations, for example, the vast majority of First Nations at the moment exist under federal laws that put some determinations around what the opportunities are. Of course, bylaws are possible for what might be called “Indian Act bands.”
We know we are also a government that has made it very clear we support and recognize inherent and treaty rights. Those include, of course, the right to self-determination, including the right to self-government. As we see more and more communities exercise self-government in a complete or sometimes sectoral sense, we need to be open to recognizing the rights to regulate and set both laws and regulations would exist within that.
We’re trying to demonstrate that openness and having those very active conversations. At the same time as Minister Blair has been having these really interesting conversations with communities to say, “Yes, of course, the ability to ban is something that you may want to discuss.” As we have those conversations with leaders, we’re also sharing what is discussed commonly in terms of what is the best approach to a healthy drug policy that will ensure education is maximized and harms are minimized. Sometimes banning substances has not been as successful as leaders have felt in a variety of experiences.
We need to make sure that we get that balance of respecting the rights of communities, but at the same time sharing what we know as to what the evidence has shown around criminal prohibitions, for example.
Senator McPhedran: I want to encourage us to try to speak maybe a little more plainly here. Let me try.
We know there are a number of communities that, for a very long time, have chosen to be “dry” in Canada. We know that level of municipal legislative authority has been recognized and entrenched for a very long time.
Of course, we appreciate the complexity of transition, Indian Act, et cetera. We have been told at one point it is in fact the federal Department of Justice interpretation that ultimately prevails.
That’s what I think I’m hearing you say. Perhaps not in quite the plain language that would be helpful. I’m going to reframe my question. At this point in time, do you see it as possible — not whether you think it’s a good idea — but respecting self-determination of communities, is it possible, within the existing legal framework, including Bill C-45, for a community like Old Crow to decide they’re going to go with a ban on cannabis? And that kind of comes down to a “yes” or “no.”
Mr. Blair: May I just say I wish it was as simple as a “yes” or “no.” There is some complexity there. I’ll try to speak plainly. I think it’s important to be as accurate as we can as well.
Those bylaws and legislation that would be enacted by Indigenous self-governments can coexist with the Cannabis Act but they can’t conflict and frustrate its purpose. Ultimately that would be a matter of law to be determined. We would simply want to work with those communities to ensure they carefully consider any additional restrictions they may wish to establish to ensure it’s generally consistent with the objectives of the act.
It’s one of the things I was referring to earlier in the objectives of the act, which are quite explicit about displacing the illicit market and keeping this out of the hands of kids. That’s the context in which those decisions would be made.
If I may, I’ll offer a lay opinion because I think this is a matter that would perhaps require greater legal interpretation: I believe it’s possible for a community to make that determination, as long as it was done in a way which did not frustrate the intent of the federal act.
Senator Tannas: It is important to build on what Senator Christmas said and what Senator McPhedran said. We were in the community of Old Crow and they are very proud of the turnaround that has happened there since they declared their community dry. They had hoped — and we had other communities we visited — they would be able to extend that authority to marijuana.
Now, we need to be clear: I’m hearing you say without saying it is the answer is, “they cannot do it.” That’s fine. We just need to say it. Because Senator Christmas, I think was saying, “Oh, I’m hearing maybe that it’s okay.” If it is, they do not have that other authority, that Canada knows best and this is the way it is, then let’s say it. Otherwise, the work that we did and the places where we went and said, “Look, we tried, it’s not allowed, it’s illegal, you can’t do it.” We’ll have to get them all on the phone again and say, “Maybe there is a way this could be done. Maybe there is a way you can ban marijuana from your communities.” Just say it. That’s all we’re asking.
Mr. Blair: Let me be clear, if I may, senator: It would not be a federal offence to possess cannabis in that community. The federal law, the Cannabis Act, has repealed that and made it possible for people to possess it. There are other aspects of that law that also apply in banning it under certain ages and in certain amounts.
It is entirely possible, I believe, for a community to pass additional restrictions as long as it’s not frustrating the intent of the act. Quite frankly, I’m not inclined to tell them they cannot do it. A court could determine that it frustrates the intent of the act.
Senator Tannas: I suppose a citizen of that community could take action, but would the government take action if a community declared a ban?
Mr. Blair: Yes. My understanding is that the Minister of Justice has made it clear she does not intend to litigate on that issue.
Senator Tannas: Thank you. That is terrific.
The Chair: That’s very good to know. Thank you.
Senator McPhedran: Could we get documentation on that?
The Chair: It will be part of the transcript.
Senator McPhedran: No, of what the minister said.
The Chair: Then ask your question for documentation.
Senator McPhedran: On behalf of the committee, may I request the favour of facilitating documentation in terms of the justice minister’s position on that?
Mr. Blair: Yes, ma’am.
Senator McPhedran: Thank you so much.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: This is just a simple question. All I want is a simple answer. Are the provinces going to have a say about cannabis in First Nations federal land communities? The Indian Act communities are federal jurisdiction. Will the provinces be able to come in and say, “No, you cannot have dispensaries”? “Yes” or “no”?
Mr. Blair: In the absence of the exercise of jurisdiction in those acts, I believe the regulations of the jurisdiction would apply. The answer is I think the First Nations have their authority in their jurisdiction, and if they exercise it, that’s up to them. If they choose not exercise it — for example, the provincial regulations with respect to the limitation of age — it is the province that has the authority. It is through their regulations that it’s enforced.
For example, in every province and territory it’s provincial legislation that prohibits the purchase, possession or consumption of cannabis for persons under the age of majority. So that would apply in that jurisdiction.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: Thanks for the answer.
My next concern is — I know we’re running out of time — the self-governing communities, for example, the territories, municipalities. Right now their money goes through the territories. They have no control on how much money they get. It’s up to the territory.
Will the taxation and revenue generated have to go through the territories in order for them to get their taxation revenue?
Mr. Blair: Senator, my understanding is that’s precisely the conversation currently taking place between the Finance Department and Indigenous communities as part of the larger fiscal framework. That will be determined as part of those discussions.
Senator Lovelace Nicholas: Thank you.
The Chair: It reinforces the need for us to have the Minister of Finance testify before us.
Senator McCallum: I want to go back to prohibiting cannabis in the community. When we went to the Legal Committee, I asked this question. Because this act took marijuana from prohibition, the band is going to practise prohibition. If I was in the community, and I said other Canadians are allowed to have marijuana, I challenged the chief and council and took them to court, who would win the case? Would it be the Federal Court or the bylaw?
Mr. Blair: I will tell you the Cannabis Act does not create a legal right to possess cannabis. It’s permissive. It allows people to possess under certain circumstances and only cannabis that has been produced with a licence and sold with a licence.
Senator McCallum: The law says you’re removing it from prohibition but the bands continue to prohibit it. When I asked that question, they said, “We don’t know until it goes to court.” Which law will supersede it? Is it the bylaw that’s preventing me from smoking on the reserve or the federal law that says marijuana is now legal?
Mr. Blair: I believe the federal legislation contemplates other jurisdictions exercising an authority to place limits on where cannabis can be consumed, if cannabis can be consumed, by whom and under what age. The federal law acknowledges other jurisdictions to exercise that authority. With great respect I would never presume to guess at what a court may determine.
Senator McCallum: Anyway, at that point the lawyers said they would have to go to court and see how it worked out.
Can I ask one more question?
The Chair: A quick one.
Senator McCallum: The Indigenous senators have met with the Métis Nation of Canada. One of the points they brought up was they didn’t have health services, even though they had wanted it. I wrote a letter asking if it was possible to set up health services for this community because they’re looking at basic services and now they’re going to be needing mental health services as well.
Do you know if any steps were taken towards setting up the basic services for them?
Dr. Philpott: Thank you for the question. As you know, most Metis receive health services through provincial jurisdiction and are served by provincial or territorial health services as the case may be. We have had conversations with the Métis Nation of Canada around health transformation. We had an investment in our last budget to support the work of the Métis Nation on looking at how they might want to exercise jurisdiction around health and opportunities that health transformation with the Metis might look like.
We are continuing those conversations. I think there will be further opportunities going forward. It is certainly an area of active discussion at the permanent bilateral table that we have with the Métis Nation.
The Chair: I see it’s 7:45. Ministers, do you have time for one more question or do you have to leave?
Mr. Blair: We’re at your disposal.
Senator Boyer: Thank you very much. It’s going to be quick. I promise.
It’s about the budget. You said in Budget 2018 the government invested $62.5 million. I’m wondering about Budget 2019 and Budget 2020. How much is going into the communities versus law enforcement?
Dr. Philpott: The $62.5 million was specific funding around the substance use and addiction program that helped to support some of the public health interventions. I also spoke about very significant investments to increase access to mental wellness programs and also addiction treatment programs, which we’ve made investments in every single year since we formed government. I can speak for the ones on mental wellness and addictions, which are under our department. Those go in very large part directly to communities to run some really outstanding programs designed and delivered by communities.
Senator Boyer: You mentioned that in 2018 it was $62.5 million. I’m wondering about 2019.
Mr. Costen: Just to clarify, in Budget 2018, $62 million was allocated. That $62 million will be spent over a five-year period. In the first year it was $12 million of the $62 million, and it’s profiled. All of that money is for community-based health prevention programming.
Senator Boyer: None of that would go towards law enforcement?
Mr. Blair: To be clear, it’s a separate pot of money. In fact there has been a significant investment in FNPP, First Nations Policing Program and Inuit communities. And also investment on drug-impaired driving training and access to other resources. It’s a different group of money.
The Chair: Thank you.
On behalf of the committee, Minister Blair and Minister Philpott, I want to thank you for taking the time to come and appear before the committee tonight and to answer all of the questions from the senators.
(The committee adjourned.)