Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples
Issue 11 - Evidence - Meeting of June 21, 2005
OTTAWA, Tuesday, June 21, 2005
The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples, to which was referred Bill C-56, to give effect to the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement and the Labrador Inuit Tax Treatment Agreement, met this day at 9:35 a.m. to give consideration to the bill.
Senator Nick G. Sibbeston (Chairman) in the chair.
[English]
The Chairman: I call the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples to order. Let us begin our meeting today with a prayer. It is National Aboriginal Day, a momentous day to deal with the matter before us, the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement Act.
We will pause for a moment to pray to our creator and Lord, who is present with us today. We thank him for all the blessings he has brought on our country. We bless the Aboriginal people and all the federal and provincial government officials who are with us here today.
We ask you, Lord, to be with us today and give us wisdom as we deal with the business before us.
[Editor's Note: The Chairman speaks in his native language.]
The Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement bill that is before us deals with the outstanding land claims of the Inuit of Labrador. It is the result of many years of work and determination by the Inuit people of Labrador and the governments of Newfoundland and Labrador and Canada.
Appearing this morning from the federal government is Ms. Sue Barnes, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, and Federal Interlocutor for Metis and Non-Status Indians. Joining Ms. Barnes is Gail Mitchell and Michael Delaney.
We will also hear, by videoconference, from the Honourable Thomas Rideout, Minister responsible for Aboriginal Affairs in the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.
We will then hear from representatives of the Labrador Inuit Association, William Andersen III, President; and Toby Andersen, Chief Negotiator, and Veryan Haysom.
The Honourable Susan Barnes, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians: Mr. Chair and honourable senators, I am very pleased to be here today with Mr. William Andersen III, President of the Labrador Inuit Association, and Mr. Tom Rideout, provincial Minister responsible for Aboriginal Affairs, to speak to Bill C-56, an act to give effect to the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement and the Labrador Inuit Tax Treatment Agreement.
Minister Scott wishes me to extend his greetings and best wishes to all. He is very pleased that the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples is considering this bill today.
I wish to echo the words of the chair. We should all be very proud that we are discussing this momentous piece of legislation on National Aboriginal Day. There could be no more fitting day to have this committee meeting.
Bill C-56 will enact a tripartite agreement negotiated by Canada, Newfoundland and Labrador, and the Labrador Inuit Association. All parties have recognized the significance of the agreement and the importance of moving forward. The overwhelming support demonstrated in the Inuit ratification vote, the expeditious passage of provincial legislation and the unanimous consent given in the House of Commons have brought us to this day.
As you know, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs, Northern Development and Natural Resources reviewed the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement and following two very productive committee hearings on the agreement as a pre-study, Bill C-56 passed all stages in the House of Commons by a motion of unanimous consent on June 15.
The Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement represents the first treaty in Newfoundland and Labrador, the first modern treaty in Atlantic Canada, and for the Inuit, it represents a major milestone in a very long journey. This agreement is indeed historic in many respects. Everyone who has been involved should be proud.
This act will give effect to an agreement that demonstrates that creativity and energy arise when all parties are willing to work together to reach an agreement and move forward.
The agreement marks the end of almost 30 years of effort for the Inuit. It reflects their vision and dedication and sets them on a path for a much better future, a future in which they will work with the Government of Canada and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to create stronger communities, more inclusive economic development opportunities and a very important balancing of traditional and modern activities.
The agreement also demonstrates the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador's commitment to improving the lives of its Aboriginal residents and ushers in a new era of collaboration and cooperation in that province.
Bill C-56 will give the Labrador Inuit the ability to assume greater control over the decisions that affect their communities, the ability to create and deliver programs and services that address their unique needs and develop solutions for those issues that currently challenge the Inuit. By tackling these issues, the Inuit will be able to face the future with increased optimism.
This agreement will not only benefit the Inuit but all Labradorians. The extensive consultations with industry groups, labour and environmental organizations, community councils and other interested parties throughout the negotiation process indicated a very strong level of support for the agreement.
The Inuit are anxious to move forward with this agreement, as are other Labradorians. They understand that resolving this land claim will deliver significant benefits to them all.
Honourable senators, experience has demonstrated that Aboriginal self-government promotes greater openness, transparency and accountability. It attracts investors and business partners and fosters economic growth through increased certainty. It encourages self-reliance and leads to improvements in housing, employment and quality of life. It enables community residents to build capacity and operate a sustainable and stable economy.
Each of these goals also delivers significant benefits to all Canadians. Thriving Aboriginal communities are able to make cultural, economic and social contributions to the fabric of this land.
Bill C-56 clearly sends a signal not only to the Labrador Inuit but also to all Aboriginal people in this country. Canada is serious about working with them to support their vision of a better future for their families and their communities. We are committed to establishing a new relationship with Aboriginal peoples based on mutual respect and recognition. This commitment is reflected in the successes because of the previous agreements with the Nisga'a, the Westbank First Nation and most recently the Tlicho. All of these agreements reflect the government's approach to the implementation of the inherent right of self-government as expressed in the 1995 Inherent Right Policy.
This agreement meets the government's goals of balancing the economic and social needs of Aboriginal Canadians with the desire of all Canadians to move forward in a way that respects the Charter and balances the jurisdictions of the federal and provincial governments with the emerging jurisdiction of Aboriginal governments. My colleague, the honourable member from Calgary Centre-North, acknowledged this in his comments in the House last week.
This bill will also create the Torngat Mountains National Park Reserve of Canada. The park reserve will be the first of its kind in Labrador and will preserve for all Canadians an area of untold beauty. On behalf of all Canadians, I thank the Inuit for sharing this magnificent area with us. We also thank the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador for its land transfer to the federal government, which allowed for the creation of the reserve.
As members of this committee conduct their review of Bill C-56, I encourage you to consider that the Inuit have said this agreement will allow them to regain their dignity and independence. Enacting this legislation will allow the rest of Canada to support the Inuit in achieving what all Canadians desire — dignity and independence.
The Honourable Thomas G. Rideout, Minister responsible for Aboriginal Affairs in the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador: Good morning, members of the Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples. It is an honour for me to speak to you today from Labrador via teleconference to Bill C-56, the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement legislation.
Allow me to introduce the two officials with me. On my right is Ruby Carter, and on my left is David Hughes.
I thank the members of the committee for inviting me to appear as a witness to this important piece of legislation.
Mr. Chair, we were very proud to pass our own provincial legislation for this very important agreement during last fall's sitting of the House of Assembly. I am pleased to tell you that our provincial legislation was ratified in one day with all-party agreement.
I was also honoured to participate with the President of the Labrador Inuit Association, William Andersen III, Premier Danny Williams and the Honourable Andy Scott, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, in a tripartite signing ceremony for the agreement this past January in Nain.
In addition, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and the Government of Canada signed a historic agreement that will lead to the creation of the Torngat Mountains National Park Reserve.
I was pleased to see this legislation pass so swiftly through the House of Commons last week.
The passage of this legislation will mark a significant milestone for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, for the nation, for the Labrador Inuit, and for the history of Aboriginal people in Canada.
On May 26, 2004, the Labrador Inuit voted on this agreement. It was among the highlights of my career in public office to experience the overwhelming endorsement by the Labrador Inuit. The endorsement was overwhelming and definitive. Approximately 85 per cent of eligible voters went to the polls, and over 75 per cent of those voters cast a ballot in favour of the agreement.
On May 26, 2004, the Labrador Inuit spoke clearly and loudly. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and the House of Commons have heard them. We are now hopeful and optimistic that the Senate of Canada has heard them as well.
This agreement has been almost 30 years in the making and represents the culmination of decades of work and perseverance by the Labrador Inuit, the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, and the Government of Canada.
This agreement will enable the Labrador Inuit to exercise greater autonomy over their own affairs. It will bring clarity to landownership and management of our resources, benefiting all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.
As Minister responsible for Aboriginal Affairs and on behalf of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, I wish to express thanks to all parties that were instrumental in bringing us to this very important agreement.
I am here today to reiterate the significance of an efficient handling of this legislation and to emphasize the importance of expedited passage of Bill C-56 in the Senate as we take the final steps to make this dream a reality.
As Minister responsible for Aboriginal Affairs, I ask that the Government of Canada take that vital final step and secure the future that those people deserve, the future that we have all worked so diligently and so long to attain.
I thank you for the opportunity to make those few remarks.
The Chairman: Thank you very much. We will reserve all questions until after all the witnesses have been heard. If you do not mind, Mr. Rideout, waiting a while, there could be some questions for you.
Mr. William Andersen III, President, Labrador Inuit Association: If I may, I would like to say a few words in my own language, and I will interpret afterwards.
[Editor's Note: Mr. Andersen spoke in his native language.]
It is a pleasure to be here, and for me it is an honour to see fellow Inuit sitting at the Senate to hear us. As well, yourself being Aboriginal, it is truly special that we are sitting before you and you are going to be the ones that make a decision on our claim.
It would have been nice for our elders to see this happening. They are Martin Martin, Jerry Sillett, Bill Andersen Senior, Chesley Flowers, and George Flowers, just to name a few.
Honourable members of the Senate, thank you for having me here today to speak to you about Bill C-56. I am here today to ask you to support the Labrador Inuit Land Claim Agreement. The final step is in your hands.
As President of the Labrador Inuit Association, I am here on behalf of over 5,000 people who are waiting for the news that we are bringing our land claim home. Together, they make up the people of Nunatsiavut, our Labrador homeland. Let me tell you about some of them and why it so important that our land claim comes into effect without delay.
I am here on behalf of Bill Edmunds, from Makkovik. He was one of LIA's first leaders. He helped create a vision of self-government and self-determination to which so many people have devoted their time and energy for almost 30 years.
I am here on behalf of Mario Winters in Hopedale. He is four years old and is learning his language — a language that was almost lost. He is attending a language immersion daycare called The Hopedale Language Nest. His teachers are his elders. With the provisions of our land claims agreement, we want to spread programs like these across our land so that our language and culture will survive.
I also cannot forget patients from the north coast, who oftentimes travel to St. John's, Goose Bay for one-hour appointments and are gone away from home for a week or more. Bringing home our agreement gives us the opportunity to address some of these issues so that people do not have to spend days and days away from home for just a half-hour appointment.
I am here in memory of Gus Bennett. He was young and bright. You would think he had everything going for him, but he looked ahead and saw no hope for his future. We lost him to despair. This agreement is about creating hope.
I am also here for Clara Ford who, like me was relocated from her home in Hebron. Her family was not consulted on this and they did not give permission. As a result, she has never truly felt at home. The Hebron Compensation Fund will finally recognize the consequences of her loss. It will be a legacy that will help her descendents come to terms with the past and move toward a better life.
Then there is Jessica MacLean, a bright young student who is trying to decide what to study at university. Her fond hope is to obtain an education and come back to work in Nunatsiavut. We need people like her. They are the ones who will lead Nunatsiavut into the future. I want to tell her there will be reasons to come home; there will be opportunities.
There are so many others. There are the people in all our communities who value their deep connection with the land and their traditional hunting and fishing rights. They want to know their rights are safeguarded for all time.
There are young people starting innovative new businesses. With support and opportunities, they will strengthen our communities. There are families waiting a long time to have their housing needs met; they live in conditions most Canadians would not tolerate.
Our land claims agreement means that we will begin to make the changes that will make our lives better. From health care to justice, to community infrastructure, we have many changes to make and we are ready to begin. We have already waited a long time. We know the work will be hard. There will be no overnight miracles, but we are up for the task. If we learn anything from nearly from our land claims negotiations, it is patience and dedication to long-term goals.
Most of you heard the excellent presentations made in the Senate last night, and you have available to you detailed information on the content of our agreement. Therefore, I have not spoken to its content.
I am available with others from LIA to answer your questions today. I have with me two vice-presidents from LIA, Ben Ponniuk and Zippie Nochasak and our chief negotiator, Toby Andersen and our legal counsel Veryan Haysom.
The Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement is something about which all Canadians can be proud. Every time we strengthen a sector of our society, we strengthen our whole country. Together we are stronger. That is why I ask you today to take this final step. Let us close the circle of Inuit land claims in Canada.
On National Aboriginal Day, the timing could not be better. Let us move forward together into a new era.
Senator Rompkey: I would like to say a few words, because if I have questions after over 30 years of association with this claim there is something wrong with me or there is something wrong with the claim, and I hope there is nothing wrong with either one.
I would simply like to echo what Mr. Andersen said. He has made the essential point, and I tried to repeat it in the Senate last night. The underlying importance is one word, and that is ``hope.'' If we had to choose one word that is the correct word. William chose that word and he chose it well. This is about hope because we have seen so much despair in some communities and in other nearby communities.
One of the things we did not mention last night was the overlap in land claims and the negotiations with the Innu. I was very glad to see Ben Michel at the hearings in the House of Commons and to know that relationship is still there so that that land claim can proceed as well, because there has been despair in their communities and they need hope. Hopefully the whole of Labrador can build together and build a future based on hope.
I also want to remember people. I am glad that Mr. Andersen mentioned some of the elders. I will not repeat those names, but they were friends of mine and I remember them well and I think it is well that we remember them today.
I want to put on the record as well the former presidents of the LIA that have been coming to Ottawa since the early 1970s. The first, as you know, was Sam Andersen. We should remember Sam today and put his name on the record. There is also Bill Edmunds, who passed away. Bill was a very strong leader for LIA. I want to mention him today. There is Fran Williams, of course, who still plays a very active role in name, particularly in communications. I want to mention her as well. You would agree with me when I mention Beatrice Watts because she contributed so much to the land claim negotiations and to the building of education in Labrador.
One of the things that Mr. Andersen mentioned, which comes out of the concept of providing hope, is education. The Inuit in northern Labrador have never really had full control over the education system and have never been able to do what they want to do. That is essential if we will take jobs and capitalize on efforts and developments like Voisey's Bay. We have already capitalized on them; however, we must do more.
That will come out of a revitalized, revamped and rejuvenated education system. Ms. Watts was one who contributed to that, particularly, in terms of culture and language. Therefore, I would want to record her name as well.
Then there are the people who have helped to negotiate on behalf of the federal government and have put in so many hours at the negotiating table. I remember particularly Jim MacKenzie, who is working on another land claim today, but I would like to remember him. Christie Morgan is here as well. She was part of that negotiation process as well.
Those are people who put in a lot of time and effort and brought us to the point where we are today.
I simply ask the other senators to support this claim very fully, although I know I do not have to because I think the support is there. I hope we can conclude our hearings today, have third reading tomorrow in the Senate, and then have Royal Assent with the Governor General on Thursday to make the whole process complete, so that the Inuit can then go back to Labrador with their land claim and begin their lives anew.
Congratulations to you, Mr. Andersen and to your people for the efforts you have made. I know how many hours you have all spent away from Labrador and away from your families. That includes yourself, Mr. Toby Andersen and the others who have worked hard at the negotiations. It has been a long time coming, but it has paid off and I want to wish you every success for the future.
Senator St. Germain: My question is to Ms. Barnes. The minister, unfortunately, cannot be here because of illness.
The question relates to the delays and time that it takes to finalize these agreements. We have several other native groups that are seeking agreements.
Have we learned anything about expediting these processes? We have gone through changes of governments and it still takes considerable time. Why does it take so long?
During the last bill, the Tlicho bill that we heard that several elders had passed on before ratification of their land agreement and their self-government agreement. The people from Labrador have experienced the same scenario.
Have we learned anything? How can we expedite these processes so that these people can get on with their lives?
Ms. Barnes: I thank you very much for that very valid question.
That is partially the reason why we went with First Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples to the round table process last year. As you will recall, the minister and I attended that round table negotiation.
There was input from all of the First Nations, the Métis and the Inuit at each one of these tables. There were agreements that the five national organizations signed at the policy retreat.
With respect to the negotiations, part of the reason is the complexity, the fact that it is a tripartite agreement and that we still have all of those boundary issues.
In this case, we are trying to gather into one set of agreements, everything that will capture the past and project into the future. We are trying to make the agreement compatible with both of our constitutional obligations which takes into account the hopes and aspirations of different cultures across this land.
We have developed an Aboriginal cabinet in government to get departments that operated in silos to come together, discuss issues more comprehensively and work better in the future.
I will give you one specific example where we do seem to learn every time. In this arrangement, the implementation monies are given and known up-front as opposed to having to be renegotiated. We have had some problems in the past on the implementations.
Mr. Andersen, perhaps, is best able to talk about the past, but our hope for the future is in the implementation plan. This plan puts the money into the hands of the Inuit. It is truly tripartite. The people have the money up-front and that provides them with certainty to move ahead with plans. We have representations on the implementation committee from each level of government.
Senator St. Germain: My next question is to Minister Rideout. From what you and the minister have said, the provincial ratification moved along expeditiously.
What did they do that we are not doing at the federal level? Perhaps the minister could answer that question.
Ms. Barnes: Perhaps I could answer that, too. One of the things that the minister put on the table is that the federal government goes after the provincial ratifications. They were ratified on December 6, I believe, of last year. We had the tripartite signing very soon after in late January of 2005, and we sent the documents to the translators. From that point on, we worked hard to get the federal documentation ready. Materials like these have to be available for our members, so we moved very quickly.
We were busy with the matrimonial real property on reserve in the House of Commons, but as soon as this was in the House, we moved incredibly quickly for the federal government.
Mr. Rideout: From a provincial perspective, of course, we were not bound by any protocols saying we could not pass any legislation before the signing of the tripartite agreement. That was a factor for the Government of Canada. It could only move on the legislative process after the tripartite agreement was signed, which, of course, took place in January. We were able to move with an all-party agreement in December and pass the legislation in one day because there were not any impediments to our doing so, and we were able to get Royal Assent on the same day.
It is a pretty complex piece of business and we all understand that, but we are delighted and hope that we are nearing the end.
Senator St. Germain: Mr. Andersen, did you deal with the injunction with regard to Bill C-68, the gun registry during your negotiations?
Mr. Veryan Haysom, Negotiator, Legal Counsel, Labrador Inuit Association: I have been asked to respond to that question. It was an issue for negotiation. The position taken by the federal government was that federal firearms legislation, along with the federal Criminal Code, should apply to Inuit, and that is effectively what the agreement says.
Senator St. Germain: My last question relates to education, which Senator Rompkey mentioned. The people covered by the agreement have full responsibility for education.
Has the province traditionally been in control of your educational process, and how will the transfer proceed? Are you experiencing the same challenges as the rest of our Aboriginal peoples with your educational process in that it is not equivalent to that of the rest of the country?
Mr. William Andersen: I am not certain that it is not equivalent to that of the rest of the country, but our long-term objective is to take over the education system at the primary and secondary levels. However, we will continue to operate under provincial education programs at this time.
In the land claims agreement, we are given a number of years to take over programs and services. When we create the Nunatsiavut government, we do not intend to take over everything immediately. We need to grow into it. When we are ready, we will begin to take over these programs.
We can immediately work on programs to safeguard our language and culture. We have experienced a drastic loss of language and culture in our region over the past 25 to 30 years. Today, we have no more than half a dozen people under the age of 25 who can speak Inuktitut. Although Inuktitut has been taught in our schools since the 1970s, we are not producing any Inuktitut speakers. We are doing something wrong. We have to figure out what it is and correct it, hopefully in cooperation with our provincial government.
Senator St. Germain: I wish to congratulate the Labrador Inuit and wish them well. Our party has aggressively supported this from the beginning, both here and in the other place. Good luck, God bless you, and I wish you well.
Mr. William Andersen: Thank you very much.
Senator Adams: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Senator Adams spoke in his native language.]
This is a good day for us. It is National Aboriginal Day. I was raised in Quebec, where I used to say ``thank you'' in one dialect and now that I live in Nunavut, I say ``thank you'' in a different dialect.
I was appointed to the Senate in 1977, very near to April Fool's Day. In May or June of that year, the Senate dealt with a bill on an agreement with northern Quebec. At that time, I did not know much about how the Senate worked. Now that I have been here for 28 years, I understand much more.
The Senate dealt with the land claims of the Inuit and the Northern Quebec and James Bay agreement in 1977. We dealt with the repatriation of the Constitution in 1982 and how that would affect the Inuvialuit. When we passed the Constitution in 1982, John Munroe was the Minister of Indian Affairs. Senator Watts was here and worked on that at that time also.
We dealt with the Nunavut agreement in May of 1993. Brian Mulroney was the Prime Minister at that time.
In 1999 we had a big celebration. We elected 19 members to the legislative assembly in Nunavut.
That is a short history of what has happened with regard to agreements in the last 28 years.
I recall meeting with the councillors and mayors in the communities. We went to Nain to meet with the ITC, which today is the ITK. Work on that agreement began in 1970. We flew up to Goose Bay and went as far as Makkovik. We had bad weather and some people were seasick in the boat. We chartered a plane and flew up to Nain. That was the first agreement between the Inuit people and the Government of Canada.
The Inuit and other First Nations have been settling other land claims agreements. It is always nice to pass these bills, but there is always more to do.
In my 28 years in this place I have learned that sometimes the departments and ministers understand the agreements, and sometimes it is difficult for the officials to understand.
My question relates to the future and the commercial fishery. Looking at it from a business perspective, it is important to create jobs in the community. It is very difficult today, especially with the quotas because people have private quotas, and sometimes the companies try to get more fish.
Is there an agreement between the Newfoundland government and the Government of Canada so that the Inuit people in Labrador will be able to develop a better fishery?
Mr. William Andersen: Once our agreement is given Royal Assent, it will give us the opportunity to move forward with the creation of possible partnerships between Labrador Inuit, Nunavut and Nunavik. We know that we all have our own quotas, inshore, midshore and offshore. We also recognize that what we have is not something that can make us viable as individual regions. If we work something out collectively in the three different Inuit regions, then we could become a very viable fishery operation for northern peoples.
I know from having dealt with the fisheries for a long time now that we cannot look at the fishery in the North only. We as three regions have to start looking to the future to see how we can get involved elsewhere in the world in the fishing industry. I do not see why we cannot do it, because the Norwegians, the Danish, the Russians and the Spanish come to our grounds to fish, and they are creating jobs for their people back home. We could do the same thing for our people in northern Canada. We have to be innovative and, in some cases, aggressive. Once our agreement is in place, I am prepared to go there, and I hope that our other Inuit partners are also.
Senator Adams: That is very interesting. We have been here for thousands of years, and now we are late and everything has been fished out. We have difficulty sometimes because it is different from down south. We do live off of mammals, caribou and seals. We have the same policies with the Government of Canada as do the rest of Canada and the people working in the south, but our communities are different.
If we are to have a future with hunting and trapping and quotas, we have to be more commercialization between the people of Labrador and Nunavik and Nunavut. We have been here for 130 years and the government made us regulate.
We are part of Canada, and we do what people in Canada do, pay taxes and property taxes and everything. When costs are so high in the community, it is difficult. The only way for the economy to prosper in the future between ourselves, Nunavut and Nunavik and Labrador, is to look at commercial fishing.
Every year, the income from the fishery is over $5 billion. Right now in Nunavut, we have regulations on everything we do and that is very different for us.
We do not need an education to catch fish. Today it is different; you need money to support your family. There must be some way that the Government of Canada could come back to us and negotiate. It has been done before, especially with commercial fishing.
Mr. William Andersen: With our people getting more and more involved in the fishing sector, especially the midshore and offshore, one thing we have to come to grips with is that the return on product depends on how well we please our markets. A long time ago, I used to think this is the way we catch fish and this is the way we eat fish. However, the markets in the world demand a product the way they want it. We have to learn how to deliver that product the way they want it, not the way we see fit to deal with it. This is a learning process. The Inuit regions also have to work together on coming to grips with it. We could have a very successful venture or ventures in the future in terms of the fishery.
Senator Watt: [Senator Watt spoke in his native language.]
I would like to acknowledge the fact that, in the past, going back to the early 1970s, I can remember Jerry and Bill Edmonds were the two dominant leaders in Labrador when I first went to Labrador by snow machine. I am happy to see this agreement come forward. I see that you still have the same lawyer that you obtained back to the early 1970s. Congratulations for the success in your negotiations.
At the outset, I would extend my congratulations to you and your people. This has been a long time coming.
I have gone through similar things in the past, appeared in front of a Parliamentary committee, and at times wondered why they were asking certain questions so directly related to us and unrelated to the other people's concern.
You are going to have to live with this agreement and a long stretch of implementation is ahead. Negotiations are never finished. You are inheriting a modern treaty that you have to work on constantly.
I am sure that your provincial government will also look at certain specific pieces of legislation concerning critical issues such as education, health issues, municipal matters, local government, and things of that nature.
Aside from that, there is a specific agreement related to the Inuit, which has important elements, and I normally call them ``ethnic components.'' You also have a public component attached to your agreement that recognizes the right to self-government and the right to take your own directions, as you see fit. It is unique and no one else can tell you how to go about it because it is at your doorstep.
I would like to get a bit of clarity in terms of a ``certainty model.'' In a sense, it does away with the question of the extinguishment clause, surrender and released.
I notice in your agreement that you do not refer to the land as the ``subsurface rights.'' Correct me if I am wrong on this, but I understand that you have 25 per cent participation rights, this is ownership to your land. This is where I have a bit of difficulty. Is that 25 per cent out of all of Labrador, or does that 25 per cent relate only to the land that is ascribable to you?
Related to that question is, if it is limited only to the Inuit land, why is that so?
As you know, we are neighbours. We are on the Quebec side, you are on the Labrador side, and the traditions of the Inuit continue on your side and on ours.
The Inuit of Nunavik have, if I understand correctly, hunting rights within the Labrador boundaries. You also described that the remainder of your claim still exists on the Quebec side, which back in James Bay times was the area that was extinguished and created problems in the past. I am sure those problems still exist today and still need to be dealt with down the road.
I will limit myself to those questions for now.
Mr. William Andersen: Mr. Chairman, I would like to call on our chief negotiator and legal counsel to respond to the question of resource development in Labrador Inuit lands, the Labrador Inuit settlement area, and anything that perhaps would have an impact on any of those areas of land with respect to developments outside of those areas.
Mr. Toby Andersen, Chief Negotiator, Labrador Inuit Association: I will respond to Senator Watt's question on the resource development 25 per cent revenue and I will ask our legal counsel to respond to the issue of the overlapping claim in Quebec and where that claim stands. We have an overlap agreement negotiated between Nunavik and Labrador, but I will ask our legal counsel to give you background on that whole issue.
With respect to subsurface resources, under this agreement the Nunatsiavut government will receive 25 per cent of the provincial revenues from subsurface development on Inuit-owned land. That land consists of 6,100 square miles.
How did we arrive at 25 per cent? It was a fairly tough negotiation. There were some other formulas across the country in other claims, but they did not seem to fit our needs and expectations. This was the first negotiation process for the province, which was a key player as land is under provincial jurisdiction.
It was a tough negotiation and, as Inuit negotiators, we had two options. One option was to accept an offer to derive 25 per cent revenue from a development over 100 per cent of Inuit-owned lands. That means that wherever the development takes place on Inuit-owned lands, if it is a subsurface development, we would receive 25 per cent of the revenues. The second option was to derive 100 per cent of subsurface revenues over 25 per cent of Inuit-owned land.
From where does the 100 per cent come? It was almost like looking for a needle in a haystack, so we went back to our people and our board and we opted for 25 per cent revenue from 100 per cent of Inuit-owned land. The formula is probably the best in any land claim agreement in this country. It is over a small area never of 6,100 square miles.
When you go outside the area of Inuit-owned land, there is a different formula. The province and federal government were not prepared to go beyond where other land claim agreements have gone with respect to revenue sharing from a development throughout the whole settlement territory.
For outside of Inuit-owned lands, we have the same formula as others. As an example, the Nunatsiavut government would receive, 50 per cent of the first $2 million and 5 per cent revenue from a development outside Inuit-owned land anywhere else in the territory.
That is the overall deal, and there are two differences: The 25 per cent applies to the 6,100 square miles Inuit-owned land, and the other formula of 5 per cent, with the 50 per cent for the first $2 million plus 5 per cent thereafter, applies outside Inuit-owned land throughout the rest of the territory.
Could I ask Mr. Haysom for a response to your question on the overlap issue?
Mr. Haysom: Senator Watt you asked about certainty and its relationship to the area in northeastern Quebec claimed by the Labrador Inuit. That area is shown in schedule 2-A to the agreement. You are correct that this agreement provides no certainty for the area shown in schedule 2-A.
The settlement of the Labrador Inuit claims in that area depends on resolution of the overlap with Makivik and with Nunavik Inuit, which is close to a settlement. The negotiators have initialled an agreement in principle that has yet to be finalized and formalized, but that process is well in hand.
It is contingent on settlement with the parties to the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement and the Northeastern Quebec Agreement. That negotiation takes place at a different table from the table involving just the federal government and the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. That negotiation has yet to be finalized.
Senator Watt: Regarding unsettled issues in relation to Quebec, this matter still needs to be dealt with somewhere down the line.
Do you have any idea of how you will approach the Province of Quebec? Will you use an instrument like the federal government to put pressure on the provinces to enter into negotiations with you?
All parties to the James Bay agreement would have to be participants in whatever takes place. What do we have to do to bring the people to the table, to sit down and begin to deal with that issue? I feel it is an urgent matter that needs to be dealt with. You cannot have it one-sided forever.
Mr. William Andersen: Senator Watt, if you look at our map, the area in question would primarily touch on Inuit areas of interest, both Nunavik and Labrador. In that regard, we have reached an overlap agreement.
Senator Watt: I understand that you have an agreement between the two Inuit groups, but I am talking about beyond that agreement. Do you have a plan?
Mr. William Andersen: There is a provision in our land claim agreement that if there is any interest in our area, we are obligated to address that interest. We will live up to that provision.
It is not really up to us to recognize who may or may not have Aboriginal rights to the Labrador Inuit settlement area. If the federal government or the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador accepts a claim by somebody else, we have an obligation to ensure that the claim is addressed.
Mr. Toby Andersen: The overlap agreement between Makivik Corporation and the Labrador Inuit is very close to finalization. It includes harvesting rights up to 12 miles on the Ungava side, with the consent of the Makivik Corporation.
You are correct in that it does not deal with land on the Quebec side because of the other signatories to the James Bay agreement. We believe that the conclusion of this overlap agreement between Nunavik and Labrador will bring the Inuit together, and we will immediately start to put pressure on the other signatories to pick up where we left off in 1984-85. We do have an agreement in principle negotiated between the signatories to the James Bay agreement and the Labrador Inuit. It was put on the shelf, but it could be dusted off.
It was put on the shelf because of the concern from Nunavik that the federal government would deal with their claim and any claims on the Labrador side. That has been done. We will look to the federal government, as you mentioned, to start the process to bring Quebec back on side and decree an end as well.
Senator Watt: I am just pointing out the wording here under the certainty model:
Labrador Inuit will seek and release to Canada and the province of all their Aboriginal rights in Canada...
I do not think we should interpret that as though all the matters under the federal jurisdiction are finished. From what I understand, we have to negotiate further matters under federal jurisdiction such as navigable waters, transportation and others.
I believe the problem we are highlighting falls under those criteria. I want to ensure that on the government side it should not be considered as final in relation to the federal government's undertaking that needs to take place somewhere down the line. It is an area that could be interpreted two ways.
Ms. Barnes: Senator Sibbeston, we should clarify the area to which Senator Watt refers. Ms. Mitchell is our chief negotiator, and she would like to add certainty to your understanding.
Senator Watt: I want to ensure that they do not end up having a hurdle down the road and we do not end up having a hurdle when we begin to address the unsettled areas. It is better to put that on the record to ensure we do not run into that problem later on.
Ms. Gail Mitchell, Director, Policy and Coordination, Comprehensive Claims Branch, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada: There is an area exempt from the certainty provisions. As legal counsel for the Inuit has pointed out, it is set out in the map for the agreement. It is schedule 2(a). There is a portion of area where we expect to have some discussions around how to resolve that. It is that area set out on the map.
Senator Peterson: Thank you to the presenters. I am a new member of the Senate and of this committee, but I would like to congratulate you on your success to date, although at times it must appear to be a long and arduous journey.
This bill represents what can be achieved when people of resolve and good faith work together to accomplish something. Like you, I look forward to the successful passage of this historic bill through the Senate.
The Chairman: Mr. Rideout, how significant is the Voisey's Bay development in the settlement of this land claim with the Government of Labrador and Newfoundland.
Mr. Rideout: The claim moved more quickly toward settlement than it would have had that project not been on the radar screen. We were not the government but I believe it played a role.
The courts of this land have made it clear in many decisions over many years that, unless there is agreement with Aboriginal groups, major developments like Voisey's Bay could be in jeopardy. That may have been useful in moving the claim toward settlement.
In terms of revenue sharing from Voisey's Bay, the Labrador Inuit Association receives a 5 per cent provincial royalty, as do the Innu. There is economic benefit to those two Aboriginal groups from the Voisey's Bay development.
The Chairman: Mr. Andersen, we have experience with land claims and self-government agreements with other Aboriginal people across the country, but they all involved land. As far as I know, this is the first land claim that also deals with water. The settlement area includes an adjacent ocean zone of 48,690 square kilometres of ocean.
How significant is this water in your claims?
Mr. William Andersen: It is very significant, Mr. Chairman. The Labrador Inuit are more ocean-going than our Inuit counterparts in the other regions of Canada. We are more like the Inuit of Siberia or Greenland. We rely much more on resources from the sea than do other Inuit regions. We have been involved in commercial activity in the Labrador Sea ever since we first had contact with the Europeans more than 500 years ago.
It is not only for commercial purposes that we have claimed this 48,000-square-kilometer area of water off the Labrador coast, which extends 12 miles out from headlands. In the wintertime, that area is almost the edge of the landfast ice. Labrador Inuit go seal and polar bear hunting there year-round, other than during break-up in the spring and freeze-up in November and December. During the rest of the year, we use the area extensively, so it is very significant to us.
The Chairman: I notice that you are to be consulted with respect to any management scheme and that if there is any development in those areas there would have to be an impacts and benefit agreement made with the Inuit of your territory. You have gained that through this claim. You are obviously concerned about the possibility of development in those offshore areas in the future.
Mr. William Andersen: I do not think an offshore development would be any different from onshore development with regard to negotiating an impacts and benefits agreement. Labrador is known to the world as the ``iceberg alley.'' Some years ago, Petro-Canada researched the impact of icebergs on ocean beds off the Labrador coast and found that a two-mile-long iceberg travelling at four kilometres per hour will carve out up to 12 inches of solid rock for one to two miles before it stops. Therefore, we will need top-of-the-line technology in order to get into oil or gas development offshore.
Through the impacts and benefits agreement with Voisey's Bay Nickel, the LIA obtained future opportunities for our youth. They are the ones who will decide how things might proceed in the offshore.
Voisey's Bay has not been bad for us. It is small compared to the larger picture of our future. When the project goes into operation, about 45 per cent of the employees will be Labrador Inuit. They are already hired. We have had great success in that area, and I believe we can do better in the future.
Senator St. Germain: Mr. Andersen, what counsel would you give to other Aboriginal groups negotiating land claims with regard to expediting the process? I see this as our biggest challenge, and it transcends all governments. These negotiations have taken so much time and we have many more agreements and many more Aboriginal issues to settle.
What advice could you give in that regard?
Mr. William Andersen: I do not think I can give any advice. Throughout this 30-year process, we were always prepared to negotiate, but we had to wait for the other parties. Our organization does not have the authority to tell the government to move. We have been saying that to them for 30 years. The only advice I would have to other organizations is to keep your doors open. Often times, I believe Aboriginal groups slow down out of frustration. Patience, I believe, is the most important factor in achieving ones objectives.
Mr. Toby Andersen: Your question is a very good one. It cost the Labrador Inuit over $50 million to negotiate this claim. We owe that to the government. We were not only negotiators; we were educators. We had a province that was into a land claim negotiation for the first time. We had a federal government whose negotiators starting out did not know anything about Labrador or Labrador Inuit. We had to educate them. We brought them into our territory. It took time to build trust, which is what is so important. I look across the table at the chief negotiator for the other parties and say, ``I trust you.'' We built that relationship over time.
With respect to fast-tracking the process, this particular agreement has some components that you do not find in other land claims agreements. Senator Watt highlighted the subsurface resource development formula. We have already mentioned the offshore commercial fishing component, which gives Labrador Inuit a guaranteed percentage of new licences issued after the effective date. It includes a national park and an implementation fund that sets a very significant precedent in Canada.
The Government of Canada always insists that implementation of land claim agreements is open ended. This makes the agreement never ending and costs Canadian taxpayers millions upon millions of dollars. Ours agreement is closed; we have an implementation fund, the first in Canada.
In fast tracking the process, there are other parties to deal with. As was said, each Aboriginal group comes to the table with their own interests. I believe that any other Aboriginal group would do well to take a good hard look at this agreement, see what components fit, and give the federal and either provincial or territorial governments an agreement in principle based on this report. That would speed up this process by years and years and years.
Senator Adams: Mr. Chairman, I have a short question. I know that the Labrador Inuit have different dialects than those in Nunavut and Nunavik, and there are differences in the written language as well. What are your intentions as far as the education system and language? Do you want to contain that yourself, or should it be a joint venture in the future?
Mr. William Andersen: Thank you for the question. Mr. Chairman, I do not want to sound saucy, but once we have a Nunatsiavut government, once the Senate has passed the bill and we get Royal Assent, that will open the doors for us to start discussion between all the Inuit groups in Canada, not just Nunavut, Nunavik and Labrador, but the Inuvialuit as well. We will discuss how we might approach collectively the protection, preservation, and promotion of our languages and cultures. I say ``languages and cultures'' because our dialects are different enough from one another that they are almost distinct from one another.
I do not believe that any one group should do away with their dialect, but we have to make a move toward understanding each other better in the future.
The Chairman: That concludes our business of hearing the witnesses before us. I want to thank the witnesses here, those that are here in our room, but in particular, Minister Rideout, who is in Goose Bay.
Minister Rideout, because you are so far away, we want to give you an opportunity to say a last word from your location. Do you have anything to say?
Mr. Rideout: It has been a very interesting morning. I thank you for allowing us, through this medium of modern technology, to be able to communicate with you. We tried to make it back to Ottawa to do a face-to-face presentation, but the travel arrangements were horrendous, so we were pleased that we could do it this way.
I would like to conclude by offering my best wishes to all of the LIA, to the senators, and on this National Aboriginal Day, let us resolve to make sure that this modern day treaty receives Royal Assent as soon as possible.
Ms. Barnes: It was a pleasure to be up in the territory for the signing ceremony on January 22. One who was not there that day was my former colleague, Lawrence O'Brien, who was the member there, and I am sure that he would be very happy that this is happening today.
It was a good feeling in the House last week when all the four parties did their best to move this forward in an expeditious manner. It is in your hands now, and I thank you.
The Chairman: I also want to thank the staff and technicians whose have made the marvel of videoconferencing available so we could hear from the representatives of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.
With that, honourable senators, next on the agenda is clause-by-clause consideration. Is it agreed, senators, that the committee move to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-56?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: The normal procedure is to postpone consideration of the long title, the preamble and the short title contained in clause 1. Shall the committee proceed in the normal way?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Shall clauses 2 and 3 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried. Shall clauses 4 to 7 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried. Shall clauses 8 to 15 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried. Shall clauses 16 to 27 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried. Shall clause 1, which contains the short title, carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried. Shall the preamble carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried. Shall the title carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried. Is it agreed, senators, that this bill be adopted without amendment?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Is it agreed that I report this bill to the Senate?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chairman: Carried.
Senator St. Germain: Immediately.
The Chairman: It shall be done this afternoon. I thank everyone for attending this meeting.
The committee adjourned.