Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Aboriginal Peoples
Issue 16 - Evidence
OTTAWA, Wednesday, December 2, 1998
The Standing Senate Committee on Aboriginal Peoples met this day at 5:37 p.m. to examine and report on aboriginal self- government.
Senator Charlie Watt (Chairman) in the Chair.
[English]
The Chairman: I should like to welcome Mr. Harold Calla and Mr. Jason Calla. I should also like to thank my Senate colleagues who are attending these meetings. As you know, the work that we are carrying out is very important.
Mr. Calla, the floor is yours.
Mr. Harold Calla, Director of Finance, Squamish Nation: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and honourable senators. I am a certified general accountant and for the past 12 years have been the director of finance for the Squamish Nation. I am an elected member of the Squamish Council; as well, I have served on other boards. I came to Squamish after spending 20 years in international business. I am working with the CGA of Canada to develop some accountability standards for First Nations. With me is my son, Jason Calla, who is also a member of the Squamish Nation and a recent graduate of the London School of Economics and Political Science, where he got his master's degree in urban regional planning.
I think it is important that you have a little understanding about what Squamish is. The Squamish tribe amalgamated in the 1920s because of land claims, specifically Kitsilano in Vancouver. My grandfather was one of the leaders in those days. We now comprise some 3,000 members. We have 24 reserves that stretch from downtown Vancouver to 30 miles north of Whistler, all the way up through the Whistler corridor. I guess the Olympic bid is going to be right in our country.
We are an Indian band within the meaning of the Indian Act. Most of our members live in the greater Vancouver area, about 50 per cent on reserve and 50 per cent off reserve. We have an annual budget of about $32 million, most of which we generate ourselves from our own source of revenues. We have significant land holdings, about 800 acres, on the north side of Burrard Inlet, and the south side of the Park Royal Shopping Centre is in our lands. We built the Real Canadian Superstore on the north end of the Second Narrows bridge and we have various other leases that we operate.
Prior to coming back to Squamish, I had always worked in organizations that had a need for capital, a need for ideas. When I came to Squamish I experienced almost the reverse. We have $1 billion worth of real estate and we cannot get any capital. We cannot develop. It took a long time to come to grips with that reality.
That has created a real sense of frustration for all of us because we cannot meet our community's needs, and there is no reason why we should not be able to. I think that Squamish, because of where it is located, has had to deal with many issues first regarding land use. The fact is that we function as a government. We function as a significant landholder in the city of Vancouver. I can think of no one else in the city of Vancouver who has $1 billion worth of real estate unencumbered right now. We do.
My experience, having gone from private enterprise back into government, is that the Indian Act limits our abilities to become self-reliant. It limits our abilities to conduct business in a meaningful way, and it obviously has a political impact on our self-determination. Until we deal with that, all of our talk about economic self-sufficiency and political self-determination is just unfulfilled promises. We appreciate this committee's mandate to start addressing that. We believe very strongly.
The Squamish government is a council of 16, representing the 16 villages that amalgamated. Our traditional system empowers those 16 individuals to conduct the affairs of the nation. We meet regularly with our membership and take direction from them. That is our style of government. We have a collective interest. When we amalgamated to become the Squamish Nation, all of the lands were held in common. We do not have vast tracts of land that are given to certain individuals. Everything we do is for a collective interest. Our problem, then, is that we have to respond to the community's needs. Our community expects that we will meet their needs.
The current financial and fiscal relationship may be seen in a historical context. The royal commission's report points out a range of historical problems that have undermined the institutions and life patterns. I think that people really have to come to grips with that. The real social fabrics of our communities were affected by those initiatives, which were well-intentioned but nevertheless had significant impacts.
I never really appreciated what it meant to sit across the table and be viewed as an Indian until I returned home to work for the Squamish Nation. Understand that a couple of months previously I had conducted myself in a business environment in the international business community. When I returned home and went to my first meetings with the department and others, I really understood for the first time what it meant to be a ward or to not be able to make your own decisions. That is part of the root of what we have to try to change here through these processes.
Mr. Jason Calla, Member, Squamish Nation: I will continue the discussion about the current fiscal and financial relationship. We have handed out some slides, as well.
It is our view that the current relationship is guided by two fundamental principles. The first is the fiduciary nature of the relationship, which relegates First Nations to a position of ward or minor. The second principle is the concentration of power in the relationship. As a result of that concentration of power, federal legislation and federal policy unilaterally impose both the rules for relating and the internal structures of First Nations as legal and political entities.
Obviously, those characteristics have far-reaching consequences. The royal commission described the consequences as a social crisis. We would argue that those principles also lead us to a fiscal and financial crisis, an economic crisis.
A relationship that is unilaterally defined, in which all power rests with the body defining the relationship and in which that same body functions as a trustee or fiduciary for the other body produces and perpetuates a state of dependency. One consequence of that is that First Nations have come to accept that perpetual dependency. A second consequence is probably our inability to control our lands, our wealth and our internal affairs.
On the fiscal and financial side, the current order prevents First Nations from effectively generating wealth and fostering economic development. We should like to refer the committee to a paper that we have submitted titled "An Evaluation of the Political Impediments to Land Use and Development on Capilano Indian Reserve No. 5." That paper, which I have just written for my degree, presents a good example of how the current system prevents development of own source revenue on Indian reserve land.
The current system makes it extremely difficult for First Nations to access capital through mechanisms that are readily available to other governments. Also, to the extent that First Nations function in the private sector as a business, it prevents them from accessing capital as well. As a consequence, First Nations are forced back into that dependency loop with the federal government. We are driven to seek limited federal dollars to meet our social and economic needs and to foster economic initiatives. Those dollars are generally available only after we have gone through multiple levels of bureaucratic red tape, and they are seldom available in a timely manner. Harold has more experience with that than I do.
Mr. Harold Calla: There has been a general recognition of the problems that the current system creates, but I think that some of the current solutions have created even more problems. I say that because virtually everybody in the private sector now understands that First Nations act as governments and that they deliver programs and services. From our perspective, over the last few years we have experienced a desire on the part of the Crown to solve some of the national deficit problems by downloading funding shortfalls and creating block funding arrangements with First Nations. As the director of finance for Squamish, I have first-hand knowledge of that. I think that most First Nations communities see that as a failure on the part of the government to fulfil its fiduciary responsibility.
Again, this problem is compounded by the fact that currently the Indian Act system does not encourage any investment or innovation that can lead to any economic independence or self-reliance. There are many levels of bureaucracies and, without being critical of individuals, many of them have no understanding of the lands or the people that they are trying to administer. The consequence is enormous unrecognized potential in many First Nations communities. First Nations communities who try to meet their needs through own source revenue are penalized by the policies of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada that reduce or eliminate discretionary funding. That is a disincentive for First Nation communities.
There needs to be recognition of the fact that First Nations communities have been required to deliver programs and services for which they have no control over either content or eligibility. At the moment, resources are provided through Indian and Northern Affairs Canada based on Treasury Board allocations to the department. There is no process that establishes the real need of First Nations communities or how that need might be funded.
It is important to realize that just as governments wish to establish certainty over the principles of Aboriginal rights and title, First Nations desire similar certainty. The area that we want certainty in is the ability to gain self-sufficiency. That certainly can be achieved only with the input of First Nations themselves, and those processes are key. Principles and responsibilities imposed on First Nations are unlikely to provide solutions but merely contribute to the existing crisis.
Mr. Jason Calla: When we were thinking about this problem, we had a lot of ideas. We tried to give it some structure. We decided first what the principles of the existing relationship were and then we talked about the consequences. Then we thought about what we should like to see in the future. We came up with a list of five principles that we should like to see guide any future relationship. The first principle is the removal of economic and financing impediments to the development of own source revenue. The ability for First Nations to access capital and for investors to have secure investments on reserve would fundamentally change the existing relationship and would allow First Nations a much greater degree of participation in economic activity.
The second principle we should like to see guide a new relationship is the development of greater efficiencies in administration of First Nations government in both its public and private functions. By simplifying the regulatory environment in which First Nations must operate, advances could be made in the scope and quality of public sector activities and in our ability to respond to private sector business opportunities.
The third principle is the gradual elimination of federal fiduciary responsibility. While fiduciary responsibility protects First Nations' rights, we also feel that it creates a dependency, and those contradictory forces do not allow us to foster economic development.
The fourth principle is the creation of legal certainty. We feel that the creation of legal certainty would give private investors more confidence about entering into arrangements and ventures with First Nations governments on First Nations land. It would also allow for a more productive relationship between First Nations governments and all other levels of government. There is an example of that in the paper that I submitted. There is a lot of uncertainty between governments, especially at the municipal and regional levels, about who has the power to do what. We feel that some more legal certainty would clarify that situation.
The fifth principle we should like to see guide the relationship is to permit the development of First Nations economic self-sufficiency and to bring an end to economic apartheid. The main goal of this relationship must be to end the dependency of First Nations on the federal government and the Indian Act and to develop a self-respect based upon our ability to provide a standard of living for our communities comparable to that which other Canadians enjoy.
Mr. Harold Calla: Based upon those principles, we should like to propose changes to the current relationship. It is critical that you understand that I have a dual role as a councillor with the Squamish Nation. As an elected official, I am expected by our 3,000 members to provide governance, but at the moment I am also asked to protect our assets, to develop our economy. There is a dual role: I am a government individual but I am also expected to act as a business person. Those two roles will continue to be in place, even if I have one role and someone else has the other. Our community will always own our assets collectively and there will always be a business initiative stemming from our government and our community.
We must establish what the real cost of governance is in this country. The Squamish Nation has a $32 million budget. Of that, $24 million is our own source revenue. I also want to tell you that 88 per cent of that own source revenue goes into the delivery of government services and program funding shortfalls from Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. Probably another $10 million to $15 million a year is required actually to meet our needs, because we are not meeting them now.
If we are going to engage in economic activity and maintain those dual roles, we have to establish what the real cost of governance will be in a way that reflects the needs and aspirations of First Nations. We are very concerned about the fact that at the moment the federal government, through Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, feels that it can download funding shortfalls when we have no control over program content or now even eligibility. That is a very dangerous situation for us.
I say that because we have a long track record of trying to deal with financial institutions. Before they look at investing in economic activity with us, they consider our ability to maintain control over our cost of governance. We have to resource the cost of governance. In order to do that, we feel that First Nations governments should have the ability to tax.
There is a lot of discussion about non-discriminatory taxation. What I mean by that is the elimination of section 87 of the Indian Act and the tax exemptions. If we are going to go to a non-discriminatory arrangement, if that is what the future will hold for us, then First Nations governments must be certain, without a shadow of a doubt, that they will be able to resource their costs of governance. It cannot be as it is currently. We need a rational budgeting process, but I think that First Nations governments are probably the only governments left that function in 12-month planning sections because that is all Indian and Northern Affairs Canada allows us. We function based not upon what our needs are but upon what funds are made available. We have to start identifying our real needs and put them forward in a way that reflects the real cash flow required to make our government function.
I think that we are not prepared because we have endured for too long the relationship of contribution agreements with the federal government through Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. One of the certainties that we are looking for is the ability to share revenue at source. Finance Canada has done a lot of work in which I have been involved in creating non-discriminatory tax initiatives in tobacco and gasoline taxes. We see that as a way of the future and, quite frankly, the only reason Squamish did not opt into that is because we have to go much further than that. If we are to approach our communities about non-discriminatory taxation, and we are very likely prepared to do that, we want to talk about all taxes collected within our contiguous land base. We hope that we can work towards that over the next little while.
I do not think that people have yet come to grips with the fact that once the quantum of the cost of self-government and meeting the needs in Aboriginal communities is understood, the "tax room" concept might not be applicable any longer. That quantum may have to feed into a much more comprehensive budgeting process that actually establishes rates of tax overall, not just in our communities.
Indian communities need to be provided with the same opportunities afforded to every other Canadian, and that is to generate wealth. Simply because we operate for a collective benefit does not mean that every dollar that we generate should go into the delivery of programs and services and fund the source of government. We think that there is an opportunity, particularly where there is a non-discriminatory taxation provision in this new relationship, for First Nations economic activity to be taxed only at the ambient levels.
First Nations, in order to move forward, really need to have better access to capital markets and need to be empowered to develop their own economies. The single greatest difference I have experienced since returning home to work is that I can no longer get money fairly easily. It is very difficult for an Indian community to get money. I can recall when we wanted to acquire a leasehold interest that had been written. It was a poor lease that was part of a trust action. We decided to forget about that and to buy the lease with our own money. That was my baptism of fire. I went into our community and said, "We will buy our own land back," and they looked at me as if I were crazy. However, we got the community commitment to do that because I was able to demonstrate to them why it was significant. It took 18 months to borrow $2 million. I had $7 million in the Squamish Nation bank accounts at the time but I could not get money because lawyers from Justice Canada, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, the bank and our own lawyers were sitting in a room much like this one with almost as many people arguing over what a band project was and what revenue monies were.
We have to change that bureaucratic process because there is a lot of equity. The Squamish Nation has been told that, if our existing reserve land base were considered fee simple, it would have an appraised value of $1 billion. Given that, you would think that we could get some money. However, it is just not that easy. The alternatives are that First Nations governments do nothing or that they establish business relationships with the private sector that provide little or no return to community benefits.
I want to use the Park Royal Shopping Centre as an example because everyone who has been to Vancouver is familiar with it. That has been in place since the early 1960s. It is a strict landlord-tenant relationship and we get very little spin-off benefit in terms of human resource development. Although we get a lot of money from that, we have not gotten any jobs. We have not benefited from any skills transfer. How does that happen? Why could we not do it? We could not do it because nobody thought we could. Nobody was willing to take a chance with us, so we ended up having to give up control. The golden rule here is that he who has the money rules. If financial institutions and others do not have confidence in you, they will not give you the money and therefore you cannot proceed on your own account.
As a consequence, many First Nations have to give up control of the initiatives and, as a result, there is little human resource development. The financial impact of that is that there is an inverse elastic relationship between economic development activity and social programs. Our cost for social programs is considerably higher now than it was in the past. Demographics in the Squamish Nation are astounding. They are more than just the mirror image of the Canadian population. Forty per cent of our population is 18 years of age or younger. Sixty-six per cent of our population is 35 years of age or younger, and 88 per cent of our population is 50 years of age or younger. Looking at our demographics, we will have 2,000 more people within the next 20 years. The initiatives that we refer to when we talk about self-reliance and the need to determine the cost of governance apply across the country because, as I understand it, our demographics are not much different from the demographics of the rest of the country in terms of Indian population.
We should also like to see -- and there has been some work and discussion on this -- the establishment of an Indian land registry system that might parallel provincial systems. That would be a significant step forward. To secure the interest of the capital markets, we need to create as seamless an environment for them as we can in terms of their security and their feeling of wanting to participate.
The proposed First Nations Land Management Act is a significant piece of legislation. There are fifteen First Nations in this country who are about to embark upon a journey that would see an end to the fiduciary relationship between the Crown and ourselves with respect to the management of our land. That is an excellent, progressive step forward. That act, together with the Indian land registry system, would smooth out that relationship and move towards a seamless environment for the capital markets and investors.
I think that First Nations have to be allowed to compete, and acknowledgement of that has to be an outcome of any work that is done in this field. Everyone, including many friends I have known for a long time, likes to say, "You people should be caring for yourselves. You have all of that land. Go do something with it. Start paying your own bills." We are quite prepared to do that. However, people who say that fail to acknowledge that the moment that you put your assets to work in the economy, you become competition. Then it is a very different story. They do not necessarily want you there.
I think that the "not in my backyard," the NIMBY syndrome, must not be allowed to impede economic development in Aboriginal communities. Squamish has just lost $900,000 a year on a development in Park Royal for that very reason. We were not able to proceed because others did not want us; they felt that we were going to be unfair competition because we wanted to put a Home Depot in a regional shopping centre.
Senator St. Germain: Do you mean your own Home Depot?
Mr. Harold Calla: It would have been a corporate store. We have to be careful of that. We want to be in a position to compete. I think that many people, particularly outside of our community, like the proposed First Nations Land Management Act because they feel that it allows them to conduct business without having to deal with multiple levels of governments, all of which offer an opportunity for somebody to intercede through Justice Canada or Indian and Northern Affairs Canada.
We just completed, after 18 months of negotiations, the creation of a Real Canadian Superstore on one of our reserves on the North Shore. For the first time, we acquired preferred employment provisions right in the lease. We got 80 people who used to be on welfare rolls working. In order to do that, we had to go through many levels of government, including our own. At the conclusion of that process, I was told by the property developer for Westfair Foods that it took four times longer and was four times more expensive to do business on reserve land. The land code legislation and other types of initiatives will help eliminate that problem.
I think that First Nations communities are willing to engage in the economic mainstream. We look forward to doing it. At the moment, the initiative is gaining momentum because we expect that it will encourage self-help and reduce the cost of government stemming from its fiduciary. That is fine. We are going to have to get there anyway. Most First Nations are going to have to develop internal capacities, and that must be understood.
The Squamish Nation has been managing its land unlike anybody else in this country for over 50 years because of where we are located. We have to deal with Justice Canada and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada but, since the 1960s, we have been negotiating. Then we have to convince those in Vancouver who really have the authority to make those decisions that we have actually done what is best for our communities.
Not everybody is in that position. First Nations must be encouraged to develop those capacities, and the private sector will have to join with First Nations to help them develop those capacities. We have always believed in strategic alliances for moving forward with economic development. We must allow those who have the skill sets to come in and be a part of what we do, and we must encourage them to understand that we are looking for a transfer of skills through it all.
We really need to encourage the capital markets and the financial institutions to get onside. I know that about 18 months ago, people from Finance Canada came to Vancouver to talk to me about yet another capital corporation, and I said no. I think that is absolutely the wrong thing to do. It is not capital. That is the problem in and of itself. There have been many capital corporations and there was an initiative across this country. However, just because you may have some equity capital to allow you to commence an initiative does not get you through the door to where you have the financing that is needed to put the project in place. If you are going to invest in trying to create economic development in First Nations communities, do it in a way that embraces the existing structures.
In my view, there is no reason that the existing capital markets and financial institutions cannot be utilized to create the economic development opportunities that we see for ourselves. At the moment, they see risk and they will have to be encouraged. That encouragement comes through giving them a benefit, which I say should be in the form of a tax credit for those who finance Aboriginal economic development. Also, as we go forward, we should not ignore those who have provided services for us up to this point.
Mr. Jason Calla: We should also like to recommend incremental changes towards First Nations constitutions and legal certainty. The land management code is an example of that kind of step.
All modern governments function on a rational and coherent internal constitutional basis. That constitutional basis defines the nature, scope, jurisdictions and limitations of a government. It provides legal certainty by assuring both the citizens of that society and other governments that the government in question is a government of laws and is made accountable through the rule of law.
In modern democratic societies, constitutions emerge from the societies themselves and attempt to reflect the values of those societies. First Nations in Canada currently draw their internal constitutional definition from the Indian Act. This anachronistic legal instrument neither reflects the values and aspirations of First Nations communities nor makes it possible for those communities to flourish within the Canadian federal system. The Indian Act is rooted in another century and reflects the inherent racist values of that century.
For First Nations to emerge into the 21st century, we must be permitted and encouraged to develop our own internal constitutional foundations. First Nations constitutions must come from the communities themselves and must reflect community values. However, those constitutions must also be in harmony with the constitutional order of Canada as a whole.
First Nations governments must be both democratic and politically and financially accountable. It is only through the establishment of such constitutional foundations that First Nations governments and societies can be truly self-governing. Having said that, we realize that the re-definition of the constitutional make-up of First Nations governments, as constitutional development in all societies, is a gradual and evolutionary process. Many First Nations will require time to come to terms with the implications of constitutional development.
At this point, it is critical for the federal government to remove the legal and policy impediments to First Nations that wish to move in that direction. In that regard, we commend the federal government for those provisions of the recent Nisga'a Treaty that enabled the Nisga'a to develop their own constitution. However, a great deal more can be done to allow First Nations to move expeditiously in that direction. As I said, the proposed First Nations land codes are a good example of that.
Mr. Harold Calla: Thirteen years ago, when I started working in Squamish, I did not know if there was another Indian accountant in the country. There were, but we did not know who they were. In Indian communities, the whole subject of money was kind of frowned upon. There has been a revolution over the last 13 years that says that we need money to be able to function as a government; we need to have some input as to how we get that. There is still a lot of work to be done. I was invited to attend a conference in Whistler that was a think tank on national fiscal relations. That type of initiative with the development of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and the Assembly of First Nations is a major step forward. There has to be a national consciousness about those issues. It is evolving. The country now has, I think, over 60 First Nations people who are accountants. We are returning home and bringing that experience back into our communities. There is a new capacity to deal with some of those issues, but it will take time.
I was in Saskatchewan during the treaty land entitlement negotiations in connection to my initiatives with the Many Nations Benefit Co-operative, which is based there. I recall talking about government and municipalities. That was blasphemy. I should never have been uttering those words at the national conference. At our think tank on fiscal relationships, a representative from their fiscal relations table said that they will bring forward all of those issues to the 72 First Nations in Saskatchewan. I think that a national table should be set up. That is in everyone's interest. I believe that there are some initiatives to actually undertake that, and they need to be supported.
It is important to appreciate that not all First Nations communities have evolved in the same way, for a variety of reasons, and that not all First Nations communities are willing to undertake those kinds of discussions at this time. We have to acknowledge and accept that, but we cannot ignore those who want to proceed, because we see tremendous unrealized potential. We can make tremendous contributions, and not only to our own communities. The Squamish Nation brings $32 million a year into the communities in which we reside in five different municipalities in three different regional districts. Our budget has gone from $7.5 million 12 years ago to $32 million today. It will be $50 million or $60 million in a few years and our activities have substantial economic spin-offs for both the Indian and non-Indian communities
The Chairman: Thank you for your excellent presentation. Since I had the opportunity to visit you in Vancouver a year ago, I feel that I know you and that I share your concerns, which I have heard before.
I should like to start off by talking about Bill C-49. I believe that that is the proposed First Nations Land Management Act to which you referred. I believe that it will enable 14 First Nations to opt out of the obligation of the land management provision of the Indian Act, which would allow you to manage your own land.
What does that mean for the question of jurisdiction? Will your 14 nations, your 14 communities, be recognized? Will you have jurisdiction over the land in the same fashion as the provinces or is it still partially administered by Indian and Northern Affairs, even though you are allowed to opt out of the application of the Indian Act for land management? I wonder if you could clarify that for me.
Mr. Harold Calla: The act in its present form is enabling legislation that requires that the community adopt a land code that lays out precisely the authorities and the powers that will be granted to those who will manage the land. Until the creation of what we call an Indian land registry system, they will remain federal lands. That is our view. The land code will allow us to conduct business in the same way as an owner of fee simple land might. With our land code accepted by our general membership through a referendum, everyone will know decisions made at the level of our council are decisions that can be acted upon. It is not then a matter of having to secure the permission and consent of Justice Canada or Indian and Northern Affairs Canada.
We get caught in what I call a fiduciary gridlock, which is caused by a need to avoid taking risks. The Crown is not prepared to put itself in a position where it might be sued at some future date by a member or by the band as a result of decisions made regarding land use. All kinds of cases currently underway deal with those issues. Consequently, a First Nations community that has a mind to engage in an activity that might involve some risk, such as participating in the business rather than just being a landlord, is not readily able to do so at this point because of the special relationship that exists through the fiduciary. That is the main contributor of that initiative.
It also does not allow special interest groups to utilize other federal government departments to prevent economic development on reserve for political or economic reasons. Take for example the Tswassen First Nation's activities in Vancouver recently. Certain individuals felt that they should not be allowed to create a condominium development on their lands. They enlisted the support of, eventually, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, who came in armed to take away documents. In my paper, I talk about that kind of intervention and about having the ability to compete.
First Nations are relegated to the role of followers. It is considered appropriate to do only that which others -- a regional district, a local government, Justice Canada or the federal government -- feel you should be doing. At some point, First Nations may wish to be a leader in certain initiatives. We have to be in a position to be able to do that.
Senator St. Germain: Being from British Columbia, I am familiar with some of your challenges and successes. I should like to know more about the challenges that you face. We have heard other presentations about the role of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada in the life of our native people and, as well, their lack of commitment to honour agreements.
You mentioned the final elimination of the fiduciary responsibility of government. Do you see that working hand-in-hand with the elimination of Indian and Northern Affairs or are some of your more affluent nations in a different position than those who may never see economic viability? I ask that because we are dealing with Bill S-14. Walter Twinn, from the Lesser Slave Lake Nation, came up with what would be enabling legislation to do what you want to do: invest off reserve and do with your land what you see fit.
Indian and Northern Affairs is one of the few departments that keeps growing. Its budget grows every year, while everybody else gets cut. Given that, how would you eliminate that department?
Mr. Harold Calla: After 130 years, it will take time. You are right that there are First Nations that could not function and become self-reliant based upon what they have to work with now. We have to negotiate a definition of what Aboriginal rights and title to self-government will mean in this country. This is a process, not an event. We have to start with those who are able, who have the capacity. Hopefully, in time, all other First Nations in this country will have the opportunity to be in the position that we are in. They should be. In the meantime, communities that are not able to proceed at this time will still need the federal government to take some responsibilities. It is unrealistic to think that we can get the 600 plus First Nations in this country to the starting line at the same moment.
Senator St. Germain: Are you in negotiations now?
Mr. Harold Calla: Yes, we are.
Senator St. Germain: How far along are you?
Mr. Harold Calla: We were sidetracked by specific claims litigation and the federal government would not negotiate with us for 15 months or 18 months. We are still at the framework agreement stage. We expect that we will move into the agreement-in-principle stage next year.
Senator St. Germain: You do not want assimilation but you do want to enter into the mainstream economically. How does that work?
Mr. Harold Calla: It works with great difficulty. People feel strongly about that. We have a longhouse on the Capilano reserve that is 15 minutes from the banking centre of downtown Vancouver. If you stepped into that longhouse, you could go back a thousand years. Our community has gone from a large number of people to a very small number of people who have rebuilt many of the traditions. The culture and language are still there. Assimilation will never be achieved. If section 35 of the Constitution has some meaning, then eventually we will have to deal with what the entitlement to Aboriginal self-government means. Does it mean that we are relegated to a reserve land base system forever? Maybe not. I do not think anybody can answer those questions right now.
As I said, it is a process, not an event. We want to retain our language, our culture and our traditions. We expect that we will be able to do that as we live in communities and I expect that for the foreseeable future there will be a desire to do that. I do not think that that is a threat to the rest of the country.
Senator St. Germain: I do not see that as a threat either, sir, but I do not know how much the two can co-exist. I do not want to take too much of the committee's time, but maybe you and I should have a talk down the road. I thought you and your son gave an excellent presentation. Thank you.
Senator Austin: I want to add my thanks for your presentation. I think you touch all the key points that this committee wants to examine. Your role in the life of Vancouver is well-known. Over the years, I have talked to many people from your community.
What I would like to focus on first of all is the question of your growing population, the issue of your interest in housing, your growing population on your own lands. Do you have a plan to assist in housing your community off your lands? How do you grapple with that specific problem?
Mr. Harold Calla: We currently have 860 people on a housing waiting list.
Senator Austin: In housing owned by the community?
Mr. Harold Calla: Yes. Just before I left on Monday, we received, for the first time in three years, capital funding for infrastructure from the Department of Indian Affairs. The current system will never meet our housing needs. It is just impossible. At the moment, we would like to be able to build 15 units a year. We need 35, so it just does not work. Financing housing on reserve is a challenge. Some of that has to change.
In Squamish, we have determined that we are going to buy land. We are just going to buy it, pay market value for it, with a view that, as treaties are resolved, the issues around reserve land base will sort themselves out. At the moment, our community has met and said: "Harold, gear up the economy of Squamish and go out and buy land; we are going to build houses." If you look at the main focus of our presentation, you will see that developing an economy is our aim. The main purpose behind that is to meet our community's needs.
Senator Austin: How many of your community live on your lands and how many off? When I say "community," I mean your voting members.
Mr. Harold Calla: Probably about 55 per cent of our voting members live on reserve, 45 per cent live off, but the population split, total population, is 50/50. Given the nature of the dilemma we face in housing, it is not going to be long before the off-reserve population will be a significant majority.
Senator Austin: Therefore, this is one of the key pressures you are trying to deal with in building your economy. Your principle economic asset is your land base. It has some very real value. What do you want to be able to do in terms of meeting the normal standards of the capital markets, which seek security for debt advanced? What new models of security are you suggesting you could offer the capital markets?
Mr. Harold Calla: We want them to feel comfortable that their interest is secure. The leasehold interest they receive at the moment is secure. One of the anomalies that happened in the early 1960s is that, for reasons that no one can understand, the Park Royal Shopping Centre lease got registered in the provincial land registry system. That anomaly has allowed Park Royal to be refinanced and refinanced and refinanced. That alone may be something that can make the capital markets feel comfortable. There is no question that First Nations communities themselves are going to have to build credibility with institutions.
I gave an example earlier over the fact that I had to beg for 18 months to get a $2 million loan to buy back a lease. Eight lawyers spent a lot of money trying to get it. Since we have a credible relationship with this existing institution, last year I went in borrowed $4 million for 90 days on the strength of the band council resolution, with no lawyers involved. First Nations communities have to evolve; they have to prove themselves. They have to prove they can manage their cost of governance, and they have to prove that they will deliver, do what they say, and enter into projects. At that time, I think the capital markets will open up to them. Certainly when push comes to shove and somebody, usually in Toronto, inquires as to where the money is going to come from or where the security for it will come from, they have to go back to the conventional forms, and that is what we have to be able to provide them.
Senator Austin: How many objectives can you carry with one type of economic program? What I mean by that is that you can build an investment stream for cash and then use the cash for social and economic purposes; alternatively, you could have a socio-economic stream. In other words, one of the conditions of your participating in economic investment would be the employment of members of the community. Which of those two would represent the main direction in which you are trying to take your economic management pattern?
Mr. Harold Calla: We are trying to do that which allows the Squamish member to care for his or her family in a way that every other Canadian can. Part of the problem has been a lack of exposure, a fear of being outside the community. As a consequence, many First Nations people do not have the experience to know what opportunities are out there. As we commenced the negotiations to put the Real Canadian Superstore on our land, we decided that we wanted certain things out of it because we have had a lot of money for many years and we have just as many social problems as every other community. Money, in and of itself, does not solve problems. You have to focus on community social development, on the community members.
Senator Austin: You are looking at the socio-economic model.
If the Nisga'a agreement were not adopted, would it have a negative effect on your economic development program or your relationship with the community, or would it have no particular effect on what you are doing?
Mr. Harold Calla: I think it will have a tremendous impact on all of British Columbia, particularly Squamish, in terms of quantum because of the potential that we have.
Senator Austin: You are speaking about a positive adoption now, are you?
Mr. Harold Calla: No. I am saying that, if it is not adopted, the impact in British Columbia would be very negative. Since Delgamuukw, because of the uncertainty in the province over land and an acknowledgement that Crown title and aboriginal title coexists where there are treaties signed, there is an imperative to bring some certainty to those issues. Without the Nisga'a treaty being signed, without the treaty process in British Columbia continuing to proceed to some conclusion in time, the building down the street called the Supreme Court is going to be visited many times.
Senator Austin: I agree completely with your statement.
Senator Chalifoux: As an old Metis activist for many, many years, I have been directly involved. I am sorry that Senator St. Germain is not here at the moment. He talked about assimilation. I do not use the word "assimilation"; I prefer "identity." The Chinese people have done a tremendous job of keeping their identity while still being able to work within the general population. I see that becoming increasingly prominent within our own aboriginal communities. Identity is very important to the survival of our people and our nations.
I would like to talk about the women's issue regarding membership. Bill C-31 created many good things and many bad things. My first area of interest is whether in your idea of self-government membership is one of the top issues. The children of Bill C-31 women are under Indian Affairs until they are 18, and then they are dumped. Pardon my usage of the word "dumped," but that is exactly what happens.
How are your communities and your reserve dealing with the membership and the return of the women and the children under Bill C-31? How do you see that playing out within your government structure?
Mr. Harold Calla: I am one of those who came back. My children are back. Squamish's population increased by 25 per cent as a result of Bill C-31. There is a strong feeling within our community that if you have one ounce of Squamish, you are Squamish. You trace your heritage back through your lineage. Our community has welcomed them. Many of our Bill C-31 people have come back and made significant contributions to the community. The problem in our community now is that they talk about the grandchildren, our grandchildren. Where we see the issue being dealt with is through our treaty process, outside of the Indian Act. We have recognized that those who have ancestry that trace their roots back to Squamish are going to be Squamish people, and they are wanted.
Senator Chalifoux: I would like to return to the topic of DIAND and their budget. I had a meeting last week with Charles Wood and Richard Arcand of the Western Aboriginal Development Association. You might know them. They were telling me that one of the reserves spend $1.3 million a year on social welfare and $300,000 a year on economic development. How does your band, your community, view that, and what would happen if you could take control of that?
Mr. Harold Calla: We would like to take control of it under certain circumstances. There used to be an alternative funding arrangement, an AFA, with the department. Under those arrangements, First Nations communities were given, in effect, block funding, but they were given freedom to utilize those dollars. Some First Nations communities were able to utilize the fund that came in under welfare for economic development, and received a tremendous benefit from it.
Part of the challenge that we face at the moment is that it is a mandatory program. Current funding arrangements with the federal government, now called federal transfer arrangements, are creating a lot of apprehension in our communities. As a councillor and as the Director of Finance for the Squamish Nation, I am as close to being very upset as I have been in a long time. They are wanting to offload their fiduciary duty to band councils. They are wanting to create block funding arrangements and subsequently create catchment areas.
The impact of that is that it could become a mecca for every First Nations person in the country. There would be no control over eligibility or content. Therefore, there is a fear there. We should be in a position where we can say that it is better to invest money in economic development than welfare, and our goal is to be able to do that. We do it with our own source revenue at the moment, to the extent that the cost of programs and services for government can be directed that way. Certainly, we would want to encourage that.
We acquired a construction company to undertake our own construction activity both on and off reserve. This company is doing work for municipalities and the Department of Highways.
When our driving range was being built, I used to observe the construction process. There were many people involved. I had never seen smiles on their faces before. Suddenly, their lives were filled with purpose. They were caring for their families; they were earning a meaningful income.
The Real Canadian Superstore project, which our construction company built, was done for Westfair Foods. Thus, the way we approach these projects is through a strategic alliance with people who are competent in the field. We use our capacity to lever an interest in their ventures. Many of the people in our community have benefited substantially from that. We have taken 80 people off the welfare rolls as the result of entering those initiatives. We very much see economic development, education, and social development as integral for our people.
Senator Chalifoux: I understand that you have a wonderful community and a wonderful business. However, I work and deal with communities that have nothing. When you go into those communities, it is like going back 50 or 60 years. Do you see in the role of self-government any responsibility to assist in training or whatever you can do to bring other reserves and communities up to the same level or a similar level? How do you view that?
Mr. Harold Calla: We believe in it. Squamish has been a leader for many years in doing that. I have done a lot of travelling in my last 13 years, just talking about financial management and taxation. We receive visits from many people from other areas of the country who want to look at what we do. In fact, the federal government sends them to us. We see ourselves in a leadership role. We see ourselves being able to provide some advice, some experience. Where required, we help those communities achieve those same goals and objectives, and help them to learn from some of the mistakes that we have made. The fact that we have money just magnifies our problems. In the last five or six years, we have really come to realize that it is mom and dad and the four children that we have to worry about; it is not whether or not we build a Real Canadian Superstore.
Senator Chalifoux: On page 11 of your brief, principle 5 reads: "Encourage the Federal Government to establish a national fiscal relations table and pledge resource to this table."
Could you explain what you mean by that?
Mr. Harold Calla: We see that there is a systemic problem in allocations from Treasury Board to Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and a failure on the part of all of us to engage First Nations economic development activity. A national fiscal relations table has to begin to do the body of work that is required to bring about a resolution on how Indian self-government will be resourced and how Indian economic development can assist in the human resource development of First Nations communities.
A lot of work has to be done. Part of our dilemma in this presentation is that every sentence could easily have been a page, if we had wanted it to be. There is a tremendous body of work that has to be undertaken. We want to look not only to the future but also at how current policy is impacting First Nations communities.
The financial transfer agreement will have an impact. I met with our banker on Monday. He is already saying to me, "What does this mean, Harold? Are you going to be able to cover your cost of government? What do these catchment area things mean?"
Senator Chalifoux: You mentioned the bank. We always have problems with the banks. Have you found any latent discrimination within the banking community, relating to any economic development proposals your band has?
Mr. Harold Calla: I have not. Our bank has gone the extra mile. They have lent money to us based upon our performance, where they really do not have any security.
Senator Austin: If you and I were at a national fiscal relations meeting, where I was the DIAND representative, what would you be asking me to put on the table? Would it be the DIAND budgets for the next three to five years? Are you looking for dependable, reliable commitments for fiscal transfer? What would we discuss?
Mr. Harold Calla: We have to discuss the priorities and the allocation of the funding within the department.
Senator Austin: It would be a review of the department's priorities, the way in which it is putting its money into the system now. The department has so many contingencies to deal with. Are we going to have 600 bands represented in that negotiation, or would they elect representatives? How do you see that?
Mr. Harold Calla: We see it being done on the basis of the provincial political bodies. There is an initiative under way. I know that the First Nations summit in British Columbia has committed to participate at a table. I would be there as one of those people. It is in its infancy. It needs to gather momentum; it needs to be supported.
The other major issue that a fiscal relations table has to look at is what those Treasury Board allocations are. We must know what the cost of government is going to be.
Senator Johnson: Thank you for your presentation. I look forward to reading the dissertation as well. You note in your brief that the Squamish Nation generates $24 million annually, primarily from leases, and also that these revenues represent about 15 per cent of the potential revenue that could be generated. How would you achieve the objective of generating $240 million in revenues? What are the obstacles to obtaining this objective?
Mr. Harold Calla: Let me say first of all that the primary obstacle is the fact that we are under the direction of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. As business people, we have to be able to engage in the same way that you could if you had real estate. If the Squamish Nation were CP Rail in Vancouver, we would not be sitting with $1 billion worth of real estate lying fallow for the last 70 years.
In Vancouver, there was probably previous preference given to fee simple land over leased land. However, now that the only green spots left are ours, there is now an interest. I drew up a list of projects that will be undertaken, we think, in Squamish's lands over the next 15 to 20 years, some of which we will be involved in and some of which we will not have any involvement in. That list came up to $1.3 billion in activity. We have to determine to what extent we will have any meaningful share of that activity and benefit, that whole exercise of saying we want a land base that we can have control and direction over, that we can put into play economically in the same way that everybody else can.
As well, we want to function as a government. Squamish has its own property taxation regime. We have service agreements with the municipalities, and we have been able to fund some of our activities through that. For Squamish, it is a dual role. When we gear up our economy, our government revenues pick up. That is what we are trying to accomplish. We do not feel that it is appropriate, as we move into the future and particularly as we start talking about non-discriminatory taxation clauses, to require that all of our wealth generation go into the delivery of programs and services. As a member of the Squamish Nation, I should be able to receive a benefit from the asset that I have. If I bought a piece of land outside the reserve and developed it and made money on it, I would the required tax and I would put the rest of it in my jeans and do what I want with it. We have to be able to do the same thing. There is sometimes confusion because our role as a government becomes confused with our ownership roles.
Mr. Jason Calla: The obstacle to the Squamish Nation developing economic activity is two-fold. The first is internal capacity, as a result of the last 150 years of history, lack of confidence, lack of education, social problems. That is a serious hurdle. The second is external regulation, specifically, the Indian Act. Section 18 stipulates that reserves are held by Her Majesty; section 21 stipulates that the land is not in the provincial registry; and under section 29, lands are not subject to legal seizure. All of that creates a substantially different land tenure, which is why I say there is a significant obstacle in allowing private firms, who may want to participate in a joint venture with First Nations, from doing so.
Senator Johnson: What are the areas that your government has taken over? Can you give me some examples? I would be very interested to know.
Mr. Harold Calla: Education, social services, welfare, membership, child welfare, and some areas of health. The whole issue of health transfer is upon us, and we must work to understand what that means. We do a lot of our own land management at the moment. That is why we talk about it with the degree of intensity that we do.
Senator Johnson: To what extent are you taking over in health? What are you focusing on in that area? It is a very critical area for you right now, for all of us, actually.
Mr. Harold Calla: In our particular community at the moment, a lot of it has to do with senior citizen care, care for some of the young. We are observing through the initiatives of the federal government that health transfer payments are eventually going to flow through financial transfer agreements. In fact, all funding arrangements with First Nation communities are going to flow through a single agreement, a one-line item, where you accept all kinds of responsibilities for which you have no control. It is those kinds of issues that create a problem for us because we not only have to care for our own citizens who are Squamish, but in many cases we will have to care for those who reside in catchment areas, whether they are Indian or not.
Uninsured health benefits is a big issue for us right at the moment. Our dilemma is that our membership expects us to fulfil and be accountable to a vision of a fiduciary duty based upon what they believe historically is something that they should be doing. Our problem is how do we fulfil that which we have no control over.
Senator Johnson: Given the relative youth of your population, it must be a huge challenge, given all the services that will be needed.
Mr. Harold Calla: We run 87 different programs.
Senator Johnson: That tells the story, does it not?
Senator Andreychuk: I apologize for being late to this. It was not out of disrespect to your presentation but the fact that we have too many committees.
I have read very quickly the report and I am a bit confused on one point. You have eloquently stated your concerns, your vision, in the fact that you want to have flexibility in order to achieve your goals. You have separated land base from the functions of self-government that you see. Therefore, I am not clear as to what you want on your land base. Are you asking for outright title? Are you asking for flexibility within the existing system?
Obviously, in most cases there is a risk for those who are investing in land and those who are giving up land for investment, which often then takes the form of bankruptcies and retrieval of lands from their owners. Since we set up the fiduciary relationship, it was to protect the land for the community base from decade to decade, from generation to generation. Are you looking for more flexibility within the existing system, which would imply some restrictions, or are you looking for exclusive right to the land?
Mr. Harold Calla: Eventually, we want exclusive right. Let me explain to you a bit about what we see in the land code and how we function at the moment as a government. Our land is held by a collective interest. We never view as appropriate putting that land at risk. When I talk about having flexibility to develop our lands, I am talking about the flexibility to create an interest in land, usually through a leasehold. Our community will always want to have the comfort and the knowledge that it will not lose its land, and we would never jeopardize that. What we understand at the moment, because of the number of people banging on our door, is that there is an interest in developing on Indian lands. It is important to create an environment of security and tenure, when the jurisdictions are identified, that there are not coexisting jurisdictions. As an example, part of the land code initiative will clarify issues like hours of operation, signage by-law, coexisting jurisdictions. Those are the kinds of things to which we want to bring clarity.
Senator Adams: You mention having worked with the City of Vancouver. I would like to learn more about your system in the area of policing your community. Are you interested in having your own police force and maybe even your own justice system? Are you content to allow the existing structure to continue and to work with the Vancouver police?
Mr. Harold Calla: Our reserve lands reside within five different municipalities and three regional districts, three of which are on the North Shore of Vancouver -- the City and District of North Vancouver and the District of West Vancouver. Policing issues were a challenge until we entered into the property taxation field. For tax revenue sharing purposes, the municipalities divided up the reserve. When we would call for police or fire help, they would refer us to the other municipality. Then we moved into the property taxation field and started paying for the services. At the beginning, they both responded to a call, where before a house would burn to the ground.
We have looked at achieving the same economies of scale, not recreating the institutions that are already there. We looked to ourselves to be good neighbours with our municipalities, to be co-operative with them, to be respectful. Our interests are not to destroy the community in which we all live. Given the degree of our problems, we need to develop economies to care for our people. The fact that a resident of the District of West Vancouver may have to wait five minutes to get over the Lions Gate bridge because we put a development on is not a reason for them to oppose it, in our view. If you were to look at our lands and the degree to which we have contributed to regional infrastructure through bridges, roads, pipelines, railroads, sewage treatment plants, you would gain a better appreciation for that. We want to be neighbours. We want to work cooperatively. We just do not want to be controlled. We do not want to get out of the grasp of the Department of Indian Affairs only to find ourselves at the hands of a municipal council.
Senator Adams: Outside your reserve, if there is a charge laid against someone from your community in the City of North Vancouver or the City of Vancouver, do you have a chance to talk to the city and the judges before a charge is laid?
Mr. Harold Calla: Yes, we have a court worker system in place in our community.
We see an opportunity for more meaningful dialogue by having our members become part of pre-existing institutions. That does not exclude, as we get down to treaties and self-government, some form of a tribal justice system. However, it is not necessary, in our opinion, to change the vehicle that administers it through the police departments. We just need to have some involvement in it.
Senator Austin: I would like to pursue two or three other subjects. One of the questions relates to the culture in the Squamish community with respect to education. As you know, there are tribal traditions that are against education in its conventional Western form. When I look at Jason Calla, I do not see that culture operating. I wanted to confirm that the council is pushing aggressively, as I understand it, its young members to seek higher education. Is that a fair statement?
Mr. Harold Calla: It is not the council. It is the community itself. From the time I was young, the message was always, "Go out and get an education. Become involved in and learn about the non-aboriginal world, return home with that knowledge, and contribute it to the community." That philosophy is stronger than ever. Our community understood that 75 years ago. This is the seventy-fifth anniversary of our amalgamation. Part of the seeds that were planted at that time was the opportunity to stand strong and as equals. People have recognized that education is a key requirement, particularly in today's world where we are now living in international times. Education is seen as one of the highest priorities of investment for our community. It is what will break the cycle of dependency.
Senator Austin: How do you remain a cultural community distinct from the general community and become an integrated part of the economic community? I see that as a challenge that you need to overcome. What measures do you take to preserve your cultural identity?
Mr. Harold Calla: With respect, it is very easy. Our culture is about values. It is about how we respect and treat one another. It is about how we care for the earth and how we protect it for the future. We may have different ceremonies, we may demonstrate it in different ways, even within the province, but that does not exclude us from being able to participate economically. In fact, in some cases, it brings a level of integrity to those opportunities that is, in some cases, I think needed.
In British Columbia, unlike the rest of the country, we are in pretty depressed economic times. We had a resource-based economy, as you well know. Where are the people who in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s people reaped the benefits of those renewable and non-renewable resources? We will bring more stability in the long term because of our culture and our tradition.
The only thing that would be different had we conducted this meeting in our community is that we would have opened with a prayer and we would have closed with a prayer. Everything else would have been the same.
Senator Austin: Let me ask you whether you are familiar with the legislation that was passed at the request of the Sechelt community which gave them municipal powers. As you are nodding yes, without being critical of them, tell us why that particular form of legislation does not suit your community. If it does suit your community in some ways, I would like to know that as well.
Mr. Harold Calla: First of all, I would like to say that Sechelt and Squamish are very close. Sechelt was the site of the residential school, and many members from Squamish went to Sechelt. There is closeness between the two communities.
We respected what Sechelt wanted to do, however, at that time, it was not what we wanted to do.
When you are going down this road, whoever is first, for whatever reason, is under the microscope and perhaps subject to some criticism. We are different from a municipality -- that is, aboriginal self-governance goes beyond that of a municipality. We do not want or feel that it is appropriate to be under the jurisdiction of the province. Municipalities are provincial creatures. We think aboriginal title and rights go beyond that. In time, negotiations will bring more clarity to all of this.
The Chairman: Before I conclude our meetings, I would like to ask some questions in terms of clarifying certain matters. You said that as a regional community, whether it is a reserve, a community, a village, or whatever, you do not want to be placed under provincial jurisdiction. You have also stated that, prior to any further constitutional developments, let us say under section 35, what you have brought forward is an interim solution, prior to any seriousness on the part of the public to address the so-called partnership arrangement between the region and the Government of Canada for the society of Canada?
Mr. Harold Calla: Yes, until we have a treaty, until those terms of the treaty are clear.
The Chairman: I am not completely familiar with treaty-making in British Columbia. Would it be correct for me to assume that at this point those treaties or the reserve, if you want to call it that, are placed under the federal jurisdiction?
Mr. Harold Calla: As I understand the Nisga'a agreement, ultimately, their lands will come under the provincial land system.
The Chairman: I would imagine that the Government of Canada will still have a trusteeship role over and above the fact, even though the land might be under the provincial jurisdiction. It still remains to be seen how that management itself is going to be dealt with.
Mr. Harold Calla: Yes.
The Chairman: You did not precisely answer my question in regard to whether it is under provincial jurisdiction or federal jurisdiction. Put the Nisga'a case aside for the moment. I am talking about your land, your reserve lands. Where are they?
Mr. Harold Calla: They are Squamish Nation reserve lands.
The Chairman: In other words, they are not particularly under any jurisdiction, whether it is federal or provincial?
Mr. Harold Calla: Certainly, at the moment, they are clearly under federal jurisdiction. We see in the future that there will be some identification of land. There will be a third order of land called "treaty lands" or "settlements lands." The exact characteristics of those lands must still be determined. At the negotiation table the federal negotiators -- I sit at that table as a negotiator -- are very clear in that they want certainty and finality. Ultimately, they want to create an end to the fiduciary responsibility. We are prepared to engage in that discussion on that basis, providing that we can get some security and knowledge that we can continue to function and exist as a community, not just now but forever.
Senator Austin: You need a constitutional guarantee, in that case.
Mr. Harold Calla: Absolutely.
The Chairman: I am going to go over this again, because this issue is central. I am coming back to the point that at the present time the land is under federal jurisdiction; that it is not under provincial jurisdiction.
Mr. Harold Calla: No, it is not. That is one of the greatest frustrations of the province and the regional districts, that they cannot enact their laws on federal reserve land. It was one of the biggest issues in the Nisga'a agreement, that is, having to concede that those lands would become provincial lands.
The Chairman: If I understood correctly what you are saying it is that Bill C-49 is an attempt to provide flexibility to the Indian Act.
Mr. Harold Calla: Yes.
The Chairman: This is in order for you to conduct business in the community.
Mr. Harold Calla: Yes.
The Chairman: My next question concerns the area adjacent to that reserve, on the outskirts of the reserve. Do you have any specific arrangements or agreement with the province or municipality, anybody, for that matter, under the so-called co-management? Do you have any of that, whether it is related to wildlife or the water management board or the land management board? Does such a thing exist today?
Mr. Harold Calla: Yes, it does. One of the initiatives at the moment is to try to find a way under provincial laws where Squamish could in fact have a seat on the Greater Vancouver Regional District, the Squamish Lillooet Regional District, the Sunshine Coast Regional District. We have entered into discussions with the province and, in fact, will likely conclude some major initiatives with the province in terms of allowing activities to proceed to create wildlife management areas, to participate in how those areas will be managed.
In the last 18 months, we have concluded negotiations with the province that will give recognition to the coexistence of Aboriginal and Crown title, provincial Crown. Benefits will flow to Squamish. We will participate, if we choose to, in the development of a deep sea port in the town of Squamish. We will participate in the ownership of the land for the port site itself. We will have an opportunity to acquire land that the provincial government will support as a creation of a reserve to house our community until treaties are resolved.
We are currently involved in many issues with the provincial government that are not providing an impediment. It is not business as usual because we are at the table; we were never at the table before. That business is now proceeding. The collective interest of all British Columbians is not being hindered by our activities. We are, in fact, helping bring certainty and clarity to many things.
The Chairman: You mentioned earlier that Bill C-49 would provide flexibility to the Indian Act. I think I understand that. In terms of the need to establish a registry, in a fashion similar to the province, you feel that that is going to advance your case. Is that part of Bill C-49 or is that something altogether different?
Mr. Harold Calla: No, it is not. First Nations across the country are involved in this enabling legislation. Those First Nations will have to engage in discussions with their province to help create that system. It is something that is seen as an initiative that will closely follow the land management legislation. Our opinion is that it is inappropriate to invest more time and resources into something that will have no meaning if this bill does not proceed.
There is a lot of work that has been done. Chief Manny Jules out of Kamloops has been doing some work on an Indian land registry system, as well as a few other things. Hence, some body of work has been started to do that. It is not part of the legislation but it is something that will have to follow from it.
The Chairman: You consider the Indian land registry as an important item, one that is not attached to Bill C-49 but from it that has to be created. Would you consider that an urgent item?
Mr. Harold Calla: Yes.
The Chairman: I take it you consider this to be an area that we might want to pick up and try to find some way of making immediate recommendations to allow that to take place.
Mr. Harold Calla: Absolutely.
The Chairman: At the same time, we do understand each other, but what you are bringing forward today are interim solutions to the problems that confront you today, in order for you to be able to conduct business.
Mr. Harold Calla: They are interim solutions. The principles that we lay out, the establishment of a national table, recognizes that self-government negotiations will take place, which will bring clarity to many of these things. In the meantime, in our communities, we are managing poverty. We have to provide some hope. I know that when Jason prepared the slides, he asked if he should take out some of the graphics, and I said no. I told him that I wanted him to leave them in because it depicts how I feel, having worked for 13 years. Whether it is me speaking to you today or somebody else speaking to you next month or two years from now, there is an urgency that cannot be overstated in dealing with the issues in our aboriginal communities. If we do not bring about change in a positive way, then there will be a whole different perspective and different leadership sitting at these tables representing aboriginal peoples.
We cannot ignore the magnitude of the problem that is coming because of our demographics. If we can engage in a discussion, get involved in the economy, provide opportunities for people to raise families legitimately and care for them, that is what our people want. It is what we have accomplished through some of our economic development initiatives. It is about caring for people, giving members who live in our community an opportunity to live as everybody else does.
The Chairman: I really enjoyed your presentation, Mr. Calla and Jason. We will go over your brief more thoroughly, which will help to give us an in-depth understanding of the issues. In due time, we will be getting back to you, probably to ask you to return to clarify certain areas.
You are probably aware that we have another instrument, aside from the public hearing, called the Round Table on Governance. As you know through your national organization, you are very welcome to participate in that round table.
Mr. Harold Calla: Thank you. It was a privilege and a pleasure to be here.
The committee adjourned.