Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on June 10th, 2024

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 113 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs.

I want to recognize that we are meeting on the ancestral and unceded territories of the Algonquin Anishinabe peoples. As always, I want to express my gratitude that we're able to do the important work of this committee on the lands they've stewarded since time immemorial.

There are a couple of changes today. I want to welcome our new clerk, Monsieur Alexandre Roger. I also want to welcome Mr. Caputo, who's going to be joining our committee today as well.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted on Wednesday, April 10, the committee is going to continue its study on tax revenues from businesses on first nations territories.

Before we begin, I would like to ask that all members and other in-person participants consult the cards on the table for guidelines on how to prevent audio feedback incidents. Please take note of the following preventative measures in place to protect the health and safety of all participants, including the interpreters. Only use a black, approved earpiece. The former grey earpieces must no longer be used. Keep your earpiece away from all microphones at all times. When you're not using your earpiece, place it face down on the sticker placed on the table for this purpose.

Thank you all for your co-operation.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format. In accordance with the committee's routine motion concerning connection tests for witnesses, I'm informing the committee that all witnesses have completed the required connection tests in advance of the meeting. We may have some technical difficulties, but we will navigate those as we do.

With that, I would like to welcome our witnesses who are here right now.

We have Grand Chief Joel Abram from the the Association of Iroquois and Allied Indians, who is joining us by video conference. The committee very much appreciates your patience in meeting with us again today, in light of the challenges last week. Thank you very much for that.

We also have Dr. Jacqueline Ottmann, the president of the First Nations University of Canada, who is also joining us by video conference.

Just to inform members, Chief Delbert Wapass from the Thunderchild First Nation is unable to attend today. Grand Chief Ken Kyikavichik is going to be joining us, but he's unable to join until noon. We will have just one round of questioning with Grand Chief Kyikavichik, starting at noon.

With that, we'll move into opening statements, starting with Grand Chief Joel Abram.

You have five minutes. The floor is yours.

[Grand Chief Joel Abram, Association of Iroquois and Allied Indians]

Thank you very much, panel. Hopefully you can hear me better this time.

I hope that you have received my speaking notes. For those of you who need translation, hopefully you will get that very soon as well.

My submission revolves around three particular areas: excise tax, casino and ATM taxes, and carbon taxes.

The Chiefs of Ontario's chiefs committee on economic development, which I chair, has focused on excise tax sharing and its possible feasibility. Also, we have reached consensus on focusing on excise tax, and that work has been ongoing.

We did undertake a legal feasibility study through Woodward & Company, and that recommended that our chiefs committee move forward with the FACT tax-sharing framework mentioned in the federal budget.

However, we are also going to be looking at this with a closer legal eye, considering the case that's going to be coming before the Superior Court of Québec and the Quebec v. White and Montour excise tobacco case in which the court has already found that the charges against them would be dropped. Quebec's government is appealing that.

It found that they're supported by UNDRIP, which is now federal law—they have that right to economic development—and also by the Covenant Chain treaty, which was found to be valid. Back in 2020, then minister Marc Miller used that treaty to meet with the Mohawks who were blocking the railroads at Tyendinaga, so that is an active treaty. That's also one of the 13 areas that Quebec is trying to use to say that the treaty is no longer valid. Also, it found that the excise tax violated their treaty rights under that particular treaty.

It will be interesting to see where this is going to go federally. If this does get to the Supreme Court, the Association of Iroquois and Allied Indians has agreed to intervene in this case in favour of the White and Montour side, supporting those rights going forward.

We are still going to look into the other parts of that and look into the FACT tax-sharing framework creation. Regardless of whether section 89 applies to that, it's up to the federal and provincial governments to create new revenue-sharing agreements with first nations leaders to ensure that tax profits are allotted for first nations community needs.

I'd like to point out that, in Ontario, Grand River Enterprises pays well over $200 million in excise taxes. However, Six Nations itself doesn't receive much of that money.

With regard to casino and ATM taxes, the problematic provincial cartel system hurts first nations gaming hosts from making that profit. When we look at the federal jurisdiction framework for gaming in the United States, we see that they have a larger number of gaming businesses. The federal government should also consider providing partnership opportunities in Internet gaming.

Another option for the government—we know this through Bill C-92 and that appeal from Quebec as well—is that the federal government has the ability to override provincial legislation and recognize first nations jurisdiction in any area it pleases. Of course, gaming could be one of those areas as well. First nations did have gaming before.

Also, we're looking at the Van der Peet test being overturned. That's a very colonial test. Whether your rights are solidified or not depends on when you met a European, which, of course, we know is all based on racism from the 1400s and doctrines of supremacy.

With regard to carbon taxes, Chiefs of Ontario and Attawapiskat First Nation filed a judicial review after the federal government failed to negotiate carbon pricing with first nations in Ontario.

The GGPPA established Canada's carbon pricing regime, which was meant to be revenue-neutral but had disproportionate effects on first nations. Basically, we're asking the federal government to redevelop the policy with their communities by either exempting first nations or allowing for cost recouping.

Currently, we cannot comment on carbon taxes in any capacity due to the current, ongoing legal action.

There has also been some backlash from other first nations communities, as seen from the Anishinabek Nation and the United Chiefs and Councils of Mnidoo Mnising, which made an intervenor memorandum of argument on the GGPPA to the Supreme Court in 2018, arguing that the carbon tax overlooks the exaggerated climate impacts that already affect first nations communities and arguing how these impacts uniquely affect first nations due to their cultural ties to their waters and lands.

This case also shed light on article 29 of UNDRIP and its connections to the carbon tax, which expressly recognizes, among other rights, the rights of indigenous peoples “to the conservation and protection of the environment and the productive capacity of their lands or territories and resources.”

For first nations, carbon taxes are not about federalism but rather a violation of first nations land rights and an affront to the economic reconciliation efforts the federal government has promised.

I'll leave it there for now. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Grand Chief.

With that, we will move over to Dr. Jacqueline Ottmann for a five-minute opening statement.

[Dr. Jacqueline Ottmann, President, First Nations University of Canada]

Aaniin, everyone. I'm humbled to join you today from Treaty 6 territory. I am originally from Fishing Lake First Nation, which is in Saskatchewan. It's a Saulteaux, or Anishinabe, community. I'm also president of First Nations University of Canada.

Today, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), this committee has undertaken a study to examine economic reconciliation, including ways that existing tax revenues from businesses on first nation territories might be placed under the control of those first nations themselves.

Today I stand before you to advocate that first nations should have autonomous control over the existing revenue streams from their own territories' resources. We've already heard one example.

One thing we're doing—this is beyond the notes here—at First Nations University of Canada is launching a national indigenous economic prosperity institute. At this pivotal moment in our ongoing journey towards economic empowerment and self-determination for indigenous communities throughout Canada, the national indigenous economic strategy—and this is the connection here—which was launched two years ago, is a foundational and essential document and one that encourages and guides economic reconciliation in Canada.

The NIES is a blueprint for the inclusion of indigenous peoples in the Canadian economy and envisions a future where indigenous peoples have an equal voice in managing and benefiting from natural capital and the systemic and legislative barriers to accessing capital are removed. Indigenous futures should be self-determining, and that also includes the control of this capital.

This is where the national indigenous economic prosperity institute, which was publicly announced at the Bank of Canada just last week, has a significant role. The institute directly responds to the calls to economic prosperity outlined in the national indigenous economic strategy, specifically call to economic prosperity number 79, which reads:

Establish and empower an Indigenous Institute to collect and govern Indigenous data about population, businesses, lands, and resources.

This would also include information related to taxation and business. It continues:

This Institute will monitor and measure implementation of these Calls to Economic Prosperity.

There are 107 calls to economic prosperity under four categories, including people, infrastructure and lands. The national indigenous economic prosperity institute aims to address economic disparities by fostering sustainable development and creating new pathways to prosperity.

Indigenous peoples have long been stewards of this land, possessing invaluable knowledge, culture and traditions. Despite this, many indigenous communities face economic challenges that hinder their full potential.

The institute will serve as a catalyst for change, promoting innovative solutions and fostering economic resilience within indigenous communities. It will provide a platform for indigenous-led research, development and implementation of economic strategies tailored to our own unique needs and strengths. Also, by facilitating access to resources, training and mentorship, the institute will empower indigenous entrepreneurs and businesses, create sustainable business models and enhance financial literacy. It will also support policy development and advocacy efforts to ensure indigenous voices are heard and integrated into broader economic policies.

Through these efforts, the institute aims to help build a robust and vibrant economic future for indigenous peoples, contributing to the overall prosperity and well-being of our communities.

This institute is both meaningful and inspirational. It's a beacon of hope, a source of creativity and motivation, and a hub of innovation. It will provide training, research and resources tailored to the unique needs and aspirations of indigenous communities.

This institute is made possible with the generous financial support of two foundations in particular: Mastercard Foundation and McConnell Foundation. This is a demonstration of their commitment towards economic reconciliation. This is also what we are hoping to see demonstrated within all forms of government, federal and provincial.

We at First Nations University of Canada are profoundly committed to the principles of self-determination and economic empowerment for indigenous peoples. This institute aligns very well with our own principles and the foundation that we have—

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Dr. Ottmann, I'm sorry, but I'm going to have have to ask you to wrap it up.

[Dr. Jacqueline Ottmann]

—of indigenous knowledge systems.

The institute is on its way to being launched. It is something that you will hear more about in the coming few months.

Gichi meegwetch.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Dr. Ottmann. I'm sure we'll have an opportunity for members to ask questions, so you'll be able to continue the line you were just speaking about.

Jumping right into that, for the first round of questioners we have Mr. Schmale for six minutes.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses for appearing today on this very important topic. I appreciate this conversation for a number of reasons, but specifically what our last witness Ms. Ottmann just talked about: economic reconciliation.

Before I jump to a line of questioning with her, I'll start quickly with Grand Chief Joel Abram. You were talking earlier in your remarks about the carbon tax and the effects that your nations are dealing with, specifically the increased costs of goods and services, yet the rebate the government seems to champion is not being seen by your peoples.

[Grand Chief Joel Abram]

Really, what we want to do is to start having that conversation with the federal government on that cost recouping and the disproportionate impact, and it varies from region to region too. Whether you're remote or a smaller or larger first nation, those impacts are going to vary quite widely. We think there is a way to fix this by starting to have those important conversations.

I think all first nations in Ontario really want to proceed with that rather than going the legal route all the time. I think it's always better to have these kinds of conversations and solve those things that way, rather than just being told no and being forced to go the legal route.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

As we talk about the area of taxation and jurisdiction on reserve—you touched on it a bit in your remarks—can you elaborate, if you want, on the importance to your community if your nation were able to keep more, if not all, of the fuel, alcohol, cannabis, tobacco, gaming...and those types of things? That revenue would change the dynamic from the current status quo, which is money leaving your land, only for you to beg Ottawa for it back later.

[Grand Chief Joel Abram]

Yes, definitely. That's something that's part of economic reconciliation, not to have those handcuffs on.

In a larger context, doctrines of superiority are woven into the fabric of legislation and federal policy. Nobody alive today was responsible for those, but those were definitely based on 1400s racism, all the way back to papal bulls. We have to start to decolonize that relationship, and economic reconciliation is a big part of that, as well as recognizing the old treaties that are still in effect that Canada relies on for its holdings of the land.

Again, we never had those conversations about how first nations' interpretations of the treaties were different from what's written on paper. We saw that with the “medicine chest” clause a few years back. I think it was Treaty 8 where it was found that elders' cultural knowledge was used to argue for that medicine chest. It just goes to show that oral traditions are also invaluable when it comes to finding out what treaties are valid, whether they're post-Confederation or pre-Confederation treaties.

That's the basis. We want to have as much first nations jurisdiction and sovereignty as we initially had. We reject the notion that it should be a father-and-child relationship. Our original relationship is more born along the lines of the Two Row Wampum treaty or the Silver Covenant Chain treaty. Once that relationship becomes tarnished, one party shakes the end of the chain. The other person who is holding the other end feels it, and then they get together and polish the chain, so to speak, to renew that relationship.

As you know, silver becomes tarnished if you don't take care of that relationship. Part of what we're doing here is addressing those kinds of things.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Grand Chief, you talked earlier about decolonizing the atmosphere that we're in right now, the space that we're in right now. Given the fact that we have multiple pieces of legislation—we have court decisions and treaties—how do you see the going, piece by piece, to get to the point that you're talking about?

[Grand Chief Joel Abram]

I know that the government likes to do a pan-aboriginal approach, which is a one-size-fits-all approach. That's just not always possible, depending on which treaty area you're in. Sometimes you have areas that don't even have treaties, like British Columbia. They don't have any, except for the modern-day ones like the Nisga'a have. However, they're not covered off by any. I think most first nations would reject that anyway. The Anishinabek Nation is different from the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, and so forth. They even have different treaties.

For instance, in Ontario, we have the beaver hunting grounds, which are covered off by the 1701 Nanfan treaty; and the 1701 Dish With One Spoon treaty, which also led up to 1764 at Niagara Falls, with the proclamation.

There are a lot of overlapping things that we have to look at, and a pan-aboriginal approach doesn't work a lot of the time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Schmale. That concludes our first questions.

Next, we have Mr. Powlowski for six minutes.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Thanks to the witnesses for being here today.

I think this is an interesting study. One of the most interesting things about it, I think, is that we have a bit of a fundamental problem here.

Generally taxes are a good thing. If we didn't have taxes in our society, we wouldn't be able to pay for health care, we wouldn't be able to pay for education, we wouldn't have roads to drive on, we wouldn't have bridges to cross, we wouldn't have sanitation and we wouldn't have water. We wouldn't have any of these things, nor would we have the money to address things of common concern like putting money into research into diseases that affect us or putting money into addressing climate change, which seems to affect us all. There are very definite benefits that come to our society from taxation.

I know within the indigenous community that there are all kinds of available taxes like the first nations sales tax and the first nations goods and services tax. There's the real property tax under the First Nations Fiscal Management Act, and apparently and most interesting to me, 14 self-governing aboriginal groups have enacted income tax.

I think that, pretty clearly, this is money that can be used for the betterment of indigenous communities. The fundamental problem is that we seem to be having trouble finding chiefs to come and talk to us about this because—do you know what?—it's not really popular when you impose a tax. Nobody wants to be taxed, including me. If you asked me, “Hey, Marcus, I'm gonna start taking $20,000 more a year in your taxes; how are you going to like that?”, I'm going say, “No thanks. Keep the taxes as they are. I don't like that.”

Maybe, Dr. Ottmann, you can start off by talking about it. What is the very real obstacle? I think, and you realize, that first nations can use their tax authority to their advantage; however, you're relying on political leadership to potentially bear the cost of imposing those taxes. I'm sure there's a trade-off, and maybe you can wax philosophically about this issue for me.

[Dr. Jacqueline Ottmann]

Thank you for those comments.

I think what we are doing is, to a large degree, positioning ourselves to take steps into new territory. Of course, there has been dialogue for many years about how first nations or indigenous peoples benefit or don't benefit from the taxes that are imposed upon them. The reality is that, in my case, many first nations peoples do pay tax. Very few on the Prairies benefit from the one tax that's alleviated. In Saskatchewan, we have numerous urban reserves. There are, as you mentioned, first nations that are imposing forms of tax that will directly benefit the community and individuals within the community.

I'll talk about the First Nations University of Canada, which is in its 47th year. Many people don't realize that this institution has been in existence for this long. Two of our locations are situated on urban reserves. Our Regina campus and our Saskatoon campus are on urban reserves, and our Prince Albert campus is not. We run into a situation where the employees on our Prince Albert campus are taxed, even though our work is for first nations peoples and we see ourselves as the solution to many of the issues that are experienced within our communities today, and that's education. The barriers we're experiencing are connected to the CRA and how Prince Albert is deemed taxable even though our primary campuses, two of them, are on urban reserves.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

I'm sorry. Can you clarify that for me?

If you're on an urban reserve and then, because it's a reserve, you don't pay income tax, but St. Albert is not on the reserve, so you do have to pay tax?

[Dr. Jacqueline Ottmann]

It's Prince Albert. It's in northern Saskatchewan. We have a campus there. We have three campuses.

Even though the building is owned by Prince Albert Grand Council, which is a first nation organization, the employees within that campus do pay all taxes.

That is a challenge we have right now with CRA. It was just a decision that it made. Even though our primary campus is located in an urban reserve in Regina, those first nation employees are seen differently. It's very frustrating. This is something that first nation businesses and organizations navigate every day. Of course, there are benefits to.... Everybody understands the benefits of taxation, but then there's also the quality of—

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Dr. Ottmann, I'm sorry. I'm going to have to cut you off there. We've gone quite a bit over time for this question.

[Dr. Jacqueline Ottmann]

Okay. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

I'm sure you'll have an opportunity to continue that with another one of the members here shortly.

Mr. Lemire, you now have the floor for six minutes.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Ottmann, I will let you continue your answer, but there's something I'd like to mention first.

In 2002, you and a number of first nations economic organizations developed an economic reconciliation strategy to establish and provide clear directives to help indigenous peoples achieve their economic development objectives—

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

I have a point of order. The English is not coming through.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

We're going to briefly pause here.

I will speak in French for a few moments, until we can get the interpretation.

I'm being told that everything is working now.

Mr. Lemire, you have the floor.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Ottmann, in 2002, you and a number of first nations economic organizations developed an economic reconciliation strategy to establish and provide clear directives to help indigenous peoples achieve their economic development objectives. This was in response to the 2020 OECD report on creating links between indigenous economic development organizations. Your work provides a road map for the economic component and is in keeping with the work of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples on closing socio‑economic gaps. Last week, you announced the establishment of the National Institute for Indigenous Economic Prosperity.

Could you tell us about your priorities and your organization's immediate needs?