GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT ABORIGINAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE
REGULAR MEETING
Thursday, October 6, 2016 1:00 p.m. 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia
R E V I S E D A G E N D A1
1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
1.1 October 6, 2016, Regular Meeting Agenda That the Aboriginal Relations Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for October 6, 2016, as circulated.
2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
2.1 February 4, 2016, Regular Meeting Minutes That the Aboriginal Relations Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held February 4, 2016, as circulated.
3. DELEGATIONS
4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS
Corrected 4.1 Allyson Rowe, Associate Regional Director General, Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada Subject: Effective Partnerships with Municipalities Additions to Reserve/New Reserves Policy, Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act (formerly Bill S-8), and First Nations Commercial and Industrial Development Act (FNCIDA)
4.2 Anita Boscariol, Director General, Negotiations West, Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada Subject: Developments in Treaty and Negotiations
1 Note: Recommendation is shown under each item, where applicable.
October 7, 2016 ARC - 1 5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF
2017 Budget and Annual Work Plan – Aboriginal Relations Designated Speaker: Ralph G. Hildebrand, General Manager, Legal & Legislative Services/Corporate Solicitor That the Aboriginal Relations Committee endorse the 2017 Aboriginal Relations Work Plan and Budget as presented in the report “2017 Budget and Annual Work Plan – Aboriginal Relations”, dated September 21, 2016, and forward them to the Board Budget Workshop on October 21, 2016, for consideration.
5.2 Supreme Court of Canada Decision on the status of Metis and Non Status Indians Designated Speaker: Marino Piombini, Supervisor, Aboriginal Relations, Legal and Legislative Services That the Aboriginal Relations Committee receive for information the report, dated April 25, 2016, titled “Supreme Court of Canada Decision on the Status of Métis and Non-Status Indians.”
5.3 Metro Vancouver’s Reconciliation Activities Designated Speaker: Marino Piombini, Supervisor, Aboriginal Relations, Legal and Legislative Services That the Aboriginal Relations Committee receive for information the report, dated September 12, 2016, titled “Metro Vancouver’s Reconciliation Activities.”
5.4 An Analysis of the Multilateral Engagement Report on Improving and Expediting Treaty Negotiations in British Columbia Designated Speaker: Agnes Rosicki, Senior Policy Analyst, Aboriginal Relations, Legal and Legislative Services That the Aboriginal Relations Committee receive for information the report, dated August 12, 2016, titled “An Analysis of the Multilateral Engagement Report on Improving and Expediting Treaty Negotiations in British Columbia.”
5.5 Manager’s Report Designated Speaker: Ralph G. Hildebrand, General Manager, Legal & Legislative Services/Corporate Solicitor That the Aboriginal Relations Committee receive for information the report dated September 12, 2016, titled “Manager’s Report.”
6. INFORMATION ITEMS
6.1 Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada Summary Report on Indian Residential Schools Correspondence dated January 21, 2016 from John Rustad, Minister, Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation, to Greg Moore, Chair, Metro Vancouver Board.
ARC - 2 6.2 Katzie’s Ecological Restoration Workshop Correspondence dated March 7, 2016, from Jamie Vala, Division Manager, Regional Parks Central Area to Debbie Miller, Chief Negotiator, Katzie First Nation.
6.3 Katzie First Nation Election Results Correspondence dated March 8, 2016, from Barbara Steele, Chair, Aboriginal Relations Committee to Chief Susan Miller and Members of Council, Katzie First Nation.
6.4 Tsawwassen First Nation Election Results Correspondence dated April 14, 2016, from Greg Moore, Chair, Metro Vancouver Board to Chief Bryce Williams and Members of the Executive Council and Legislature, Tsawwassen First Nation.
6.5 BC Treaty Commission Update – Fall 2016.
7. OTHER BUSINESS
8. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS
9. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING Note: The Committee must state by resolution the basis under section 90 of the Community Charter on which the meeting is being closed. If a member wishes to add an item, the basis must be included below.
That the Aboriginal Relations Committee close its regular meeting scheduled for October 6, 2016, pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (m) as follows: “90 (1) A part of the meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (g) litigation or potential litigation affecting the regional district; (i) the receipt of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for that purpose; (m) a matter that, under another enactment, is such that the public may be excluded from the meeting.”
10. ADJOURNMENT/CONCLUSION That the Aboriginal Relations Committee adjourn/conclude its regular meeting of October 6, 2016.
ARC - 3
Membership: Steele, Barbara (C) – Surrey Hanson, Jim – North Vancouver District Non-Voting Members: Read, Nicole (VC) – Maple Ridge Jackson, Lois – Delta Crompton, Jack – Squamish-Lillooet Becker, John – Pitt Meadows Martin, Gayle – Langley City Regional District Booth, Mary-Ann – West Vancouver Meggs, Geoff – Vancouver Lewis, Lorne – Sunshine Coast Regional Dhaliwal, Sav – Burnaby Williams, Bryce – Tsawwassen District Drew, Ralph – Belcarra Zarrillo, Bonita – Coquitlam Waddington, Sam – Fraser Valley Regional Fox, Charlie – Langley Township District
ARC - 4 2.1
GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT ABORIGINAL RELATIONS COMMITTEE
Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Aboriginal Relations Committee held at 1:05 p.m. on Thursday, February 4, 2016 in the 2nd Floor Boardroom, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, British Columbia.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chair, Councillor Barbara Steele, Surrey Vice Chair, Mayor Nicole Read, Maple Ridge Councillor Mary-Ann Booth, West Vancouver Councillor Sav Dhaliwal, Burnaby Councillor Charlie Fox, Langley Township Councillor Jim Hanson, North Vancouver District Mayor Lois Jackson, Delta Councillor Gayle Martin, Langley City Councillor Geoff Meggs, Vancouver (arrived at 1:06 p.m.)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Mayor John Becker, Pitt Meadows Mayor Ralph Drew, Belcarra Chief Bryce Williams, Tsawwassen Councillor Bonita Zarrillo, Coquitlam
OTHERS PRESENT: Angela Turner, Union of British Columbia Municipalities (observer)
STAFF PRESENT: Ralph Hildebrand, General Manager, Legal and Legislative Services/Corporate Counsel Carol Mason, Commissioner/Chief Administrative Officer Janis Knaupp, Assistant to Regional Committees, Board and Information Services, Legal and Legislative Services
1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
1.1 February 4, 2016 Regular Meeting Agenda
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Aboriginal Relations Committee adopt the agenda for its regular meeting scheduled for February 4, 2016 as circulated. CARRIED
ARC - 5 2. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES
2.1 October 1, 2015 Regular Meeting Minutes
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Aboriginal Relations Committee adopt the minutes of its regular meeting held October 1, 2015 as circulated. CARRIED
3. DELEGATIONS No items presented.
1:06 p.m. Councillor Meggs arrived at the meeting.
4. INVITED PRESENTATIONS
4.1 Chief Dr. Robert Joseph, O.B.C., Ambassador, Reconciliation Canada, A New Way Forward Society Chief Dr. Robert Joseph, O.B.C., Ambassador, Reconciliation Canada, provided members with a verbal presentation on the Overview and Perspectives on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Final Report and commented on: • his role with Reconciliation Canada, experience working on Indian Residential School issues and participation in federal Truth and Reconciliation events • community benefits of reconciliation and considerations for developing reconciliation programs • the need to focus on core human values to address community needs and embracing diversity and relationship building for transformative change • momentum and timing to plan reconciliation efforts • his inspiration for the Walk for Reconciliation event • the need for cities to include Aboriginal Peoples in community decisions • Aboriginal rights and the Tsilhqot'in decision
In response to questions, Chief Joseph commented that change comes by Canadians sharing cultural diversity, openness, and celebrating all cultures and traditions. He commented that Canada should embrace a new approach to inviting new Canadians based on spirit, custom and culture. Chief Joseph challenged those present to engage in dialogue with others and think about how they may contribute to reconciliation efforts.
Members offered comments about their experiences with building relationships with First Nations communities and in participating at First Nation-sponsored events.
On-table material titled “Reconciliation Canada” is retained with the February 4, 2016 Aboriginal Relations Committee.
ARC - 6 Recess The Committee recessed at 1:58 p.m. and reconvened at 2:04 p.m. with the same members being in attendance.
5. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEE OR STAFF
5.1 2016 Aboriginal Relations Committee Work Plan Report dated January 25, 2016 from Ralph G. Hildebrand, General Manager, Legal and Legislative Services/Corporate Solicitor, providing the Aboriginal Relations Committee with the priorities and work plan for the year 2016.
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Aboriginal Relations Committee endorse the work plan contained in the report dated January 25, 2016, titled “2016 Aboriginal Relations Committee Work Plan.” CARRIED
5.2 Appointment of the 2016 Local Government Treaty Table Representatives to the Katzie and Tsleil-Waututh Negotiations Report dated January 11, 2016 from Ralph G. Hildebrand, General Manager, Legal and Legislative Services/Corporate Solicitor, seeking nominations by the GVRD Board to local government treaty table representatives to the Katzie and Tsleil- Waututh negotiations for 2016.
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVRD Board appoint Councillor Barbara Steele, Surrey, as the local government treaty table representative to the Katzie negotiations for 2016. CARRIED
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVRD Board appoint Councillor Mary-Ann Booth, West Vancouver, as the local government treaty table representative to the Tsleil-Waututh negotiations for 2016. CARRIED
5.3 Appointment of Metro Vancouver’s 2016 Representative to the UBCM First Nations Relations Committee Report dated January 25, 2016 from Ralph G. Hildebrand, General Manager, Legal and Legislative Services/Corporate Solicitor, seeking the GVRD Board appointment of a Metro Vancouver representative to the Union of British Columbia Municipalities’ First Nations Relations Committee for 2016.
ARC - 7 It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVRD Board appoint Director Barbara Steele, Chair of Metro Vancouver’s Aboriginal Relations Committee, to the Union of British Columbia Municipalities’ First Nations Relations Committee for 2016. CARRIED
5.4 Appointment of a Metro Vancouver Observer to the Fraser Valley Aboriginal Relations Committee Meetings for 2016 Report dated January 25, 2016 from Ralph G. Hildebrand, General Manager, Legal and Legislative Services/Corporate Solicitor, recommending that the GVRD Board appoint an observer to the Fraser Valley Aboriginal Relations Committee meetings for 2016.
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVRD Board appoint Director Nicole Read, Vice-Chair of Metro Vancouver’s Aboriginal Relations Committee, as the Committee’s observer to the Fraser Valley Aboriginal Relations Committee meetings for 2016. CARRIED
5.5 2016 Community to Community Forum Report dated January 25, 2016 from Marino Piombini, Supervisor, Aboriginal Relations, Legal and Legislative Services, seeking endorsement from the Aboriginal Relations Committee on the proposed 2016 Community to Community Forum.
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Aboriginal Relations Committee endorse the proposed Community to Community Forum as presented in the report dated January 25, 2016, titled “2016 Community to Community Forum.” CARRIED
5.6 Manager’s Report Report dated January 25, 2016 from Ralph G. Hildebrand, General Manager, Legal and Legislative Services/Corporate Solicitor, updating the Aboriginal Relations Committee on the Katzie First Nation Community to Community Forum, Metro Vancouver Lunch and Learn session, Fraser Valley Regional District staff attendance at the Aboriginal Relations Committee meetings, release of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Final Report, the National Reconciliation Gathering held in North Vancouver on January 22, 2016, and the 2016 Aboriginal Relations Committee meeting dates.
Members were provided a presentation on the January 22, 2016 National Reconciliation Gathering highlighting key speakers, next steps and timeline for an action plan expected to launch in 2017.
ARC - 8 Presentation material titled “National Reconciliation Gathering January 22, 2016” and on-table report titled “Metro Vancouver’s Profile of First Nations with Interests in the Region” are retained with the February 4, 2016 Aboriginal Relations Committee agenda.
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Aboriginal Relations Committee receive for information the report dated January 25, 2016, titled “Manager’s Report.” CARRIED
6. INFORMATION ITEMS
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Aboriginal Relations Committee receive for information the following Information Items: 6.1 Aboriginal Relations Committee – Terms of Reference 6.2 Renewed Federal Comprehensive Land Claims Policy – Metro Vancouver - Correspondence dated October 8, 2015, from Ceri Marlo, Corporate Officer, City of Maple Ridge, addressed to the Honourable Bernard Valcourt, Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development 6.3 An Analysis of A New Direction Report on the Renewed Federal Comprehensive Land Claims Policy in Relation to Local Government Interests - Correspondence dated October 9, 2015, from Mayor Darrell Mussatto, City of North Vancouver, addressed to the Honourable Bernard Valcourt, Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada 6.4 An Analysis of a New Direction Report on the Renewed Federal Comprehensive Land Claims Policy in Relations to Local Government - Correspondence dated November 26, 2015, from Mayor Derek Corrigan, City of Burnaby, addressed to Greg Moore, Metro Vancouver Board Chair 6.5 Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs Mandate Letter - Correspondence dated November 15, 2015 from the Right Honourable Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada, to The Honourable Carolyn Bennett, Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs 6.6 Appointment and Truth and Reconciliation Commission - Correspondence dated December 17, 2015 from The Honourable Carolyn Bennett, Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs, addressed to Greg Moore, Metro Vancouver Board Chair 6.7 Metro Vancouver’s Profile of First Nations dated January 2016 CARRIED
7. OTHER BUSINESS On the June 29, 2015 report titled “An Analysis of A New Direction Report on the Renewed Federal Comprehensive Land Claims Policy in Relation to Local Government Interests”, in light of the change in federal government and in the absence of the matter being included on the list of priorities identified by the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, members requested that the Board’s position be reiterated.
ARC - 9 It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVRD Board: a) write a letter to the federal Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada to convey Metro Vancouver’s dismay and disappointment with the lack of recognition of local government and local government interests included in the report, dated June 29, 2015, titled “An Analysis of New Direction Report on the Renewed Federal Comprehensive Land Claims Policy in Relation to Local Governments Interests”; b) request that the federal government include local governments in the federal government’s policy review process; and c) write a letter to member jurisdictions requesting that they endorse Metro Vancouver’s report and convey their responses directly to the federal Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada.
The Committee was informed that the Board passed the aforementioned motion at its meeting of July 31, 2015 and that staff had acted on the matter.
Motion to Withdraw It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Aboriginal Relations Committee withdraw the aforementioned motion. CARRIED
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the GVRD Board write a letter to the Prime Minister of Canada, and the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, conveying: a) the report dated July 22, 2015 titled “An Analysis of A New Direction Report on the Renewed Federal Comprehensive Land Claims Policy in Relation to Local Government Interests”, and b) the following motion passed by the GVRD Board at its meeting of July 31, 2015: “That the GVRD Board: a) write a letter to the federal Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada to convey Metro Vancouver's dismay and disappointment with the lack of recognition of local government and local government interests included in the report, dated June 29, 2015, titled "An Analysis of A New Direction Report on the Renewed Federal Comprehensive Land Claims Policy in Relation to Local Government Interests"; b) request that the federal government include local governments in the federal government's policy review process; and c) write a letter to member jurisdictions requesting they endorse Metro Vancouver's report and convey their responses directly to the federal Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada.” CARRIED
ARC - 10 8. RESOLUTION TO CLOSE MEETING
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Aboriginal Relations Committee close its regular meeting scheduled for February 4, 2016 pursuant to the Community Charter provisions, Section 90 (1) (m) as follows: “90 (1) A part of a meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to or is one or more of the following: (m) a matter that, under another enactment, is such that the public may be excluded from the meeting.” CARRIED
9. ADJOURNMENT/TERMINATION
It was MOVED and SECONDED That the Aboriginal Relations Committee adjourn its regular meeting of February 4, 2016. CARRIED (Time: 2:45 p.m.)
______Janis Knaupp, Barbara Steele, Chair Assistant to Regional Committees
17366122 FINAL
ARC - 11 4.1
Effective Partnerships with Municipalities
ARC - 12 Topics • Municipal Type Service Agreements • Additions to Reserve • UBCM and First Nations Summit Community to Community (C2C) Forum • Urban Aboriginal Strategy
ARC - 13 2 • A contract between a First Nation government and (typically) a local government for the provision of municipal services in exchange for a fair price. – INAC is not a party an agreement.
• INAC contributes 80% to 90% of the costs of basic municipal services – water, sewer, fire protection, solid waste collection and disposal, and 9-1-1 emergency dispatch services
• INAC offers capacity building to support First Nations through the different stages of developing a service agreement – Workshops, handbooks – Federation of Canadian Municipalities tools and resources (Community Infrastructure Partnership Program)
ARC - 14 3 Challenges and Opportunities • New development and growth raises a number of jurisdictional concerns • There are successes in relationships between First Nations governments and local governments. • There is an opportunity to build a collaborative path forward.
ARC - 15 4 • Additions to Reserve is the process by which the Government of Canada converts parcels of land acquired by First Nations to reserve status. • Expanding reserve land supports increased social and economic development in First Nations which benefits their communities and all Canadians. • Additions to Reserve can also advance reconciliation efforts and improve relationships between First Nations and other Canadians.
ARC - 16 5 1) Legal obligations and agreements 2) Community additions for:
a) community growth b) culturally significant sites (such as burial grounds, archaeological, or ceremonial); c) economic development d) to improve the functioning of existing Reserve e) where the First Nation has entered an agreement with another party to exchange lands 3) Tribunal decisions – lands awarded as compensation by the Specific Claims Tribunal.
ARC - 17 6 • Public engagement process included outreach to First Nations, provincial and municipal governments. • July 27, 2016: the new Additions to Reserve/Reserve Creation Policy Directive took effect. • Highlights: –“Guidelines for First Nation-Local Government Agreements” have been developed that address bylaw harmonization and optional service delivery, and for the inclusion of dispute resolution mechanisms into these agreements. – INAC must apply an impacts and benefit assessment to support the recommendation of an Addition to Reserve. This balances the social and economic interests of the First Nation with the interests of other relevant parties. – Early in the process, the First Nation must identify the need for essential services for lands being added to Reserve and must demonstrate how the services will be acquired. If needed, a Municipal Service Agreement is required. – Both local governments and provinces/territories will be notified early of an Addition to Reserve proposal by INAC and will have 90 days to respond. These responses will form part of the impacts and benefit assessment of the proposal.
ARC - 18 7 Key policy changes in the new Additions to Reserve Policy 1. Removal of “generally contiguous” service area: Allows for better First Nations access to lands for Economic Development and to address land acquisition challenges. 2. Environmental requirements based on intended use: More flexible approach and may allow for faster completion of this step of the process. 3. Impacts and benefits assessment: Better assesses the impact of the Additions to Reserve proposal on all stakeholders and allows the Minister to make a more informed final decision. Provides greater transparency in how the decision to approve an Additions to Reserve is reached. 4. Servicing: Old policy was less prescriptive about identifying the service requirements, especially when it came to ensuring there were plans in place to provide services before the ATR was approved. The new policy identifies the processes for the First Nation to get into Municipal Services Agreements, including dispute resolution.
ARC - 19 8 Key policy changes cont’ 5. Dispute resolution: A clearer process will help First Nations and local governments manage any conflicts related to Additions to Reserve, resulting in better local government-First Nation relations, faster progression of Additions to Reserve proposals, and quicker realization of socio-economic benefits for the First Nation. 6. Minimum standards for proposals: Provide a clear starting point for a Reserve Creation Proposal. Well developed proposals will reduce delays later on. 7. Joint work planning: Means Roles and Responsibilities are clearly defined. Clear plans and timelines, improved capacity to monitor progress 8. Removing the agreement-in-principle, implementing federal letter of support at an earlier stage: Establishes commitment between INAC and First Nation to work towards completing a proposal. Facilitates a project management approach to reserve creation process
ARC - 20 9 UBCM and First Nations Summit Community to Community (C2C) Forum
• INAC BC Region, in conjunction with the Province, supports the Union of British Columbia Municipalities’ (UBCM) and First Nations Summit’s Community to Community (C2C) Forum program.
• The first province-wide C2C Forum was held in 1997. Since 1999, small grants have been offered through C2C to allow elected officials from municipalities and neighbouring First Nations to come together and hold joint meetings.
• The C2C program facilitates relationship building and creates space for dialogue on matters of mutual interest. Local C2C events have also resulted in memoranda of understandings, protocols, service agreements and other joint initiatives.
ARC - 21 10 • The Urban Aboriginal Strategy (UAS) provides funding to Friendship Centres and urban Indigenous organizations, and contributes to projects that increase economic participation among urban Indigenous peoples.
• Through the UAS, Indigenous communities in urban centres have adopted strategies and piloted innovative approaches to enhance Indigenous economic participation.
• In British Columbia, the UAS has also been aligned with the Government of British Columbia’s Off Reserve Aboriginal Action Plan, or ORAAP.
• Recently, INAC carried out an engagement process to identify ways to strengthen the UAS. National Aboriginal Organizations also received funding to engage their members.
• In 2016-17 INAC BC Region has provided $400,000 and has requested additional funds from Ottawa.
ARC - 22 11 Reconciliation
“No relationship is more important to me and to Canada than the one with Indigenous Peoples. It is time for a renewed, nation-to-nation relationship with Indigenous Peoples, based on recognition of rights, respect, co-operation, and partnership .”
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau Minister Carolyn Bennett’s Mandate Letter November 2015
ARC - 23 12 5.1
To: Aboriginal Relations Committee
From: Ralph G. Hildebrand, General Manager, Legal and Legislative Services/Corporate Solicitor
Date: September 21, 2016 Meeting Date: October 6, 2016
Subject: 2017 Budget and Annual Work Plan – Aboriginal Relations
RECOMMENDATION That the Aboriginal Relations Committee endorse the 2017 Aboriginal Relations Work Plan and Budget as presented in the report “2017 Budget and Annual Work Plan – Aboriginal Relations”, dated September 21, 2016, and forward them to the Board Budget Workshop on October 21, 2016, for consideration.
PURPOSE To present the 2017 Aboriginal Relations Budget and Work Plan for consideration by the Aboriginal Relations Committee.
BACKGROUND All 23 members of the Greater Vancouver Regional District participate in the Aboriginal Relations program that provides support to: corporate-wide initiatives, local government interests in treaty negotiations, and responds to pan-municipal First Nations’ issues. Aboriginal Relations is guided by the Board Strategic Plan, with a focus on the following strategic direction and goal: enhance relationships between Metro Vancouver and other orders of government, First Nations and stakeholders.
In the past year Metro Vancouver has initiated a long term financial planning process, in particular with an increased emphasis on the development of a five year financial plan. The focus of this report is the 2017 annual budget and work plan (see attached). Preliminary five year financial plans have been preen prepared utilizing the framework presented to the Intergovernment and Finance Committee on July 20, 2016. The Five Year Financial Plan will be presented at the Board Strategic Workshop in early 2017.
2017 BUDGET AND WORK PLAN This report is structured to provide the budgetary highlights of the Aboriginal Relations program. The Budget Details (Attachment 1) and the Work Plan (Attachment 2) are provided for the Committee’s consideration. In addition, an organizational chart is attached that shows the department structure of Aboriginal Relations within Legal and Legislative Services (Attachment 3).
The 2017 Aboriginal Relations Budget and Work Plan has been prepared to respond to: the strategic direction provided by the Board; active treaty table discussions involving local government interests; and regional district initiatives that involve communication and engagement with Aboriginal communities.
ARC - 24 Operating Budget Highlights The Aboriginal Relations operating budget is proposed to increase by $4,197 (or 1.1%) in 2017 for a total operating budget of $373,921. This change is primarily due to inflationary increases anticipated in 2017.
The 2017 operating budget includes the following key actions:
• Complete an annual review/update of Metro Vancouver’s Profile of First Nations document. • Host an annual event involving the Aboriginal Relations Committee and First Nations’ leaders (e.g. Community to Community Forum): approximately $22,000. • Host an annual event (e.g. workshop) involving staff of First Nations and local governments on a topical issue in local government-First Nations relations: approximately $5,000. • Participate in active treaty table meetings in the region as part of the provincial negotiation teams.
There are no proposed staffing changes for this program.
Work Plan Performance Indicators Within the Aboriginal Relations Business Plan, four performance indicators developed are being tracked. These include:
• Number of local government interests represented at treaty tables • Number of special Aboriginal Relations events hosted by Metro Vancouver • Number of bilateral meetings between Metro Vancouver and the nine area First Nations with lands • Responding to external requests for information or advice related to First Nations and/or Aboriginal Relations
The trend in these performance measures suggest that activities will continue at the same level or increase slightly. The 2017 Budget has been prepared to respond to the growing demands on the service and to track Metro Vancouver’s involvement in Aboriginal Relations.
BUDGET APPROVAL PROCESS The proposed 2017 Business Plan and Budget for Aboriginal Relations is presented to the Aboriginal Relations Committee for consideration and endorsement before being forwarded to the Board for consideration.
The next steps of the budget process:
• The 2017 Budget and Work Plan for Aboriginal Relations will be presented at the Board Budget Workshop on October 21, 2016. • The Board will consider adoption of the Budget on October 28, 2016.
ALTERNATIVES 1. That the Aboriginal Relations Committee endorse the 2017 Aboriginal Relations Budget and Work Plan as presented in the report “2017 Budget and Work Plan – Aboriginal Relations”,
ARC - 25 dated September 21, 2016, and forward to the Board Budget Workshop on October 21, 2016 for consideration.
2. That the Aboriginal Relations Committee make recommendations and endorse the 2017 Aboriginal Relations Budget and Work Plan as amended and forward to the Board Budget Workshop on October 21, 2016 for consideration.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The 2017 Budget and Work Plan for Aboriginal Relations as presented in Alternative 1 comprises part of the overall Corporate Support costs. The 2017 Aboriginal Relations budget, if approved, will increase by $4,197, representing an increase of 1.1% on expenditures. The 2017 Aboriginal Relations budget of $373,921 supports the operations of all Metro Vancouver Districts and Housing Corporation and is allocated to, and supported by, the revenue sources of each.
Under Alternative 2, the Committee may wish to consider recommending amendments to the operating budget. The financial implications of Alternative 2 would affect the budgets of the other functions.
SUMMARY / CONCLUSION As part of the annual budget process for 2017, Work Plans have been prepared to accompany service and Budgets in order to provide Committee and Board members with a high level overview on the role of the service, the total budget, overall staff complement, performance indicators and key actions for the coming year.
Within the overall Aboriginal Relations program, operating expenditures as outlined in the 2017 Work Plan are projected to increase by $4,197 (1.1%) over 2016. The budget for 2017 has been prepared to respond to direction provided in the Board Strategic Plan, ongoing activity at treaty tables in the region, and increasing communication and engagement activities with Aboriginal communities. Staff recommend endorsing the 2017 Budget and Work Plan as presented under Alternative 1.
Attachments 1. 2017 Aboriginal Relations Operating Budget Detail 2. Aboriginal Relations 2017 Annual Work Plan 3. Organizational Chart for Legal and Legislative Services
19479613
ARC - 26 ATTACHMENT 1
2017 OPERATING BUDGET DETAIL
2015 2015 2016 2017 % BUDGET BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET BUDGET CHAtlGE
!REVENUES
Allocated to Functional Departments s 366,855 s 327,269 s 369,724 s 373,921 1.1% Other External Revenues TOTAL REVENUES s 366,855 s 327,269 s 369,724 s 373,921 1.1%
IEXPEtlOITURES Operating Programs: Aboriginal Relations s 366855 s 321 269 _s~--~36~9~72~4- s 373 921
TOTAL EXPEtlOITURES s 366,855 s 327,269 =$======3=69.,,,7=24= s 373,921 1.1%
ARC - 27 ATTACHMENT 2
LEGAL AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES Aboriginal Relations
Description of services Aboriginal Relations provides information, advice and support to Metro Vancouver on First Nations’ interests and issues and analyses how such First Nations’ interests and issues may affect corporate programs, processes and projects. Aboriginal Relations also responds to pan-municipal First Nation issues and represents and supports Metro Vancouver local government interests at treaty negotiation tables as well as provincial and federal venues.
The annual budget for this business area for 2017 is $373,921
Strategic directions supported Board Strategic Plan • Enhance relationships between Metro Vancouver and other orders of government, First Nations and stakeholders.
Performance indicators Historical and/or Current 2017 performance Indicator industry benchmark performance objective Number of local government interests MV 3-year average represented at treaty table meetings (2012-14): 2015: 30 20 27 Number of special Aboriginal Relations events hosted by Metro Vancouver (e.g. Community to 2014: 2 2015: 2 3 Community Forums)
Number of bilateral meetings
between Metro Vancouver and the 2014: 9 2015: 18 20 nine area First Nations with lands
External requests for information or MV 3-year average advice related to First Nations and/or (2012-14): 80 Aboriginal Relations 2015: 70 40
2017 key actions • Complete an annual review/update of Metro Vancouver’s Profile of First Nations document. • Host an annual event involving the Aboriginal Relations Committee and First Nations leaders (e.g. Community to Community Forum). • Host an annual event (e.g. workshop) involving staff of First Nations and local governments on a topical issue in local government-First Nation relations. • Participate in active treaty table meetings in the region as part of the provincial negotiating teams.
ARC - 28 ATTACHMENT 3
ARC - 29 5.2
To: Aboriginal Relations Committee
From: Marino Piombini, Supervisor, Aboriginal Relations, Legal and Legislative Services
Date: April 25, 2016 Meeting Date: October 6, 2016
Subject: Supreme Court of Canada Decision on the Status of Métis and Non-Status Indians
RECOMMENDATION That the Aboriginal Relations Committee receive for information the report, dated April 25, 2016, titled “Supreme Court of Canada Decision on the Status of Métis and Non-Status Indians.”
PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to inform the Committee of the April 2016 Supreme Court of Canada decision on the status of Métis and non-status Indians.
This report will be presented to the Aboriginal Relations Committee at its meeting scheduled for October 6, 2016.
BACKGROUND The Aboriginal Relations Committee’s Work Plan includes updates on policy changes by the Crown or significant decisions by the Courts.
This report provides a high-level review of the Supreme Court of Canada decision on the status of Métis and non-status Indians, also known as the Daniels case.
On April 14, 2016, the Court ruled unanimously that the Métis are “Indians” within the meaning of section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867. By extension they could be eligible for rights and benefits granted to many status Indians, including hunting and fishing privileges, tax exemptions, and post-secondary educational assistance.
THE DANIELS CASE To address the issue that both the federal and provincial governments have denied legislative jurisdiction over Métis and non-status Indians, a Métis man (Harry Daniels, who died before the case was heard, and his son, Gabriel Daniels) , a non-status Anishnabe woman from Ontario (Leah Gardner), a non-status Mi’kmaq man from Nova Scotia (Terry Joudrey), and the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples brought a claim against Her Majesty the Queen, as represented by the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada and the Attorney General of Canada, in Federal Court seeking three declarations:
1. That Métis and non-status Indians are “Indians” within the meaning of the expression “Indians and lands reserve for Indians” under Section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867; 2. That the Queen (in right of Canada) owes a fiduciary duty to Métis and non-status Indians as Aboriginal people; ARC - 30 3. That the Métis and non-status Indian peoples of Canada have the right to be consulted and negotiated with, in good faith, by the federal government on a collective basis through representatives of their choice, respecting all their rights, interests and needs as Aboriginal peoples.
The Federal Trial Court granted the first declaration, but refused to grant the second or the third declaration. The Federal Court of Appeal amended the declaration with respect to the first declaration and refused to grant the second or third declaration. On further appeal, the Supreme Court of Canada restored the declaration of the Federal Trial Court with respect to the first declaration but refused to grant the second or third declaration.
The Court’s ruling concludes a 17-year legal battle for equality and entitlement for nearly 700,000 Aboriginal people who do not currently enjoy the benefits that flow to First Nations people living on Indian Reserves.
WHAT DOES THE COURT’S DECISION MEAN FOR THE FEDERAL CROWN? This judgment is likely to have impacts for all orders of government.
The federal government, while currently studying the Daniels Decision to determine its next steps, now has responsibility for the Métis and non-status Indians, but there is no obligation for the federal government to pass legislation.
This case resolved that the Métis and non-status Indians, as described by the Supreme Court of Canada, are no longer in a “jurisdictional wasteland.” In declaring that Métis and non-status Indians are all “Indians” under Section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867, the court determined that this declaration would prevent the federal and provincial governments from continually “passing the buck”, a practice which had financial consequences to these communities and individuals due to lack of government attention and funding.
Métis and non-status Indians may feel vindicated by the Court’s decision, and entitled to hold the federal government accountable for fulfilling its legislative mandate. However, the implications of this decision for the federal government as well as third parties dealing with Métis and non-status Indians are unclear. For example, it will be interesting to see how the federal government will set aside money for Métis people and non-status Indians. Will it take money away from First Nations? Or will it set up an entirely new budget? How will the money be allocated when most Métis don’t have a land base except on settlements established under provincial law? Will the federal government provide housing and schools in urban settings? Will it need to set up a potentially different health regime? It remains to be seen what rights Métis and non-status Indians will have, what benefits they will be entitled to, and how their concerns may affect resource development in Canada.
BC METIS POPULATION GROWTH AND IMPLICATIONS OF THE RULING FOR THE PROVINCE According to the 2011 Census (Statistics Canada), the Métis population (451,795) comprised 32.3% of all Aboriginal Peoples in Canada (1,400,685). Of all the provinces, Alberta had the highest proportion of the Métis population at 44 percent, followed by Manitoba at 40 percent. BC had the third highest proportion of the Métis population in Canada at 30 percent (69,470 people). The Métis population in Canada and BC has seen the fastest growth compared to all other Aboriginal populations. ARC - 31 The Supreme Court of Canada decision left for future determination how provincial legislation addresses Métis issues. For example, for provinces that have adopted separate legislation with respect to Métis or have set aside land for Métis communities (e.g. Alberta), provincial legislation regarding a subject matter within federal jurisdiction may be declared invalid (ultra vires) by the courts. In seeking to avoid such implications, the Supreme Court of Canada reiterated its preference that statutes enacted by both orders of government should be permitted to operate harmoniously.
The Supreme Court of Canada also declined to address the extent to which non-status Indians are entitled to be consulted regarding proposed resource development. This topic, which is potentially significant to project proponents, investors and other third parties, may be the subject of future legislative and judicial consideration.
POTENTIAL REGIONAL IMPACTS OF THE COURT’S DECISION According to Statistics Canada, one-quarter of the Métis in Canada in 2011 lived in four western census metropolitan areas. Winnipeg had the highest population of Métis (46,375), followed by Edmonton (31,780), Vancouver (18,485), Calgary (17,040), Saskatoon (11,520) and Toronto (9,980).
The Métis represented 35.3% of the total number of Aboriginal Peoples (52,375 people) within the Metro Vancouver region. The largest concentrations of Métis people in 2011 lived in Surrey (4,225), Vancouver (3,595), Langley Township (1,790), Maple Ridge (1,165), Burnaby (1,130) and Coquitlam (1,115).
These population figures are likely to rise as additional people self-identify as Métis but are not officially recognized by provincial Métis organizations. These groups foresee a spike in membership applications including persons seeking financial benefits. At the same time, Métis organizations have a vested interest in growing their numbers because higher numbers mean more political leverage.
Another impact of the judgment relates to the recognition of First Nations living off-reserve. By breaking the link between status and residency, the ruling might prompt more First Nations’ members to move to urban areas. This could potentially undermine the economic viability of reserve communities in parts of Canada, although this is not anticipated in Metro Vancouver.
ALTERNATIVES There are no alternatives to present as this is an information report.
SUMMARY / CONCLUSION This report provides a high-level overview and identifies some potential implications of the April 14, 2016 Supreme Court of Canada decision in Daniels: that Métis and non-status Indians are “Indian” under Section 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867, which means they now fall under the federal government’s jurisdiction. This report is for the Committee’s information.
19166544
ARC - 32 5.3
To: Aboriginal Relations Committee
From: Marino Piombini, Supervisor, Aboriginal Relations, Legal and Legislative Services
Date: September 12, 2016 Meeting date: October 6, 2016
Subject: Metro Vancouver’s Reconciliation Activities
RECOMMENDATION That the Aboriginal Relations Committee receive for information the report, dated September 12, 2016, titled “Metro Vancouver’s Reconciliation Activities.”
PURPOSE To provide the Aboriginal Relations Committee with examples of Metro Vancouver’s Reconciliation Activities for information.
BACKGROUND At its meeting on October 30, 2015, the Metro Vancouver Board adopted the following resolution:
That the GVRD Board: a) endorse the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada’s Summary Report on Indian Residential Schools, and send letters to the Honourable Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada and the Honourable Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation urging them to move forward quickly with report recommendations; and b) direct staff to report back on how the following proposed Metro Vancouver activities may form the basis of the 2016 Aboriginal Relations Committee Work Plan: • liaise with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission; • raise awareness about Indian Residential Schools; • provide cultural competency training; and • strengthen relationships with First Nations.
This report was presented to the Municipal Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC) on Aboriginal Relations for information and input at its meeting on April 20, 2016.
TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION’S (TRC) RECOMMENDATIONS Following the release of its Summary Report in June 2015, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) released its Final Report on December 15, 2015.1
The TRC was created in 2008 to inform Canadians about residential schools and to inspire a process of reconciliation and renewed relationships between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Canadians. The Final Report includes the 94 recommendations originally appearing in the TRC’s Summary Report.
1 The TRC Final Report can be accessed from the following web site: http://www.trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/index.php?p=890 ARC - 33 The 94 recommendations set out to redress the legacy of residential schools and to advance the process of Canadian reconciliation.
The last of the 130 residential schools in Canada closed in 1996. The TRC provided those individuals directly or indirectly affected by the legacy of the Indian Residential School system with an opportunity to share their stories and/or experiences.
The Commission hosted seven national events across Canada, as well as a Closing Event in Ottawa, with the goals of hearing from former students, engaging the Canadian public, providing education about the history and legacy of the residential schools system, and sharing and honouring the experiences of former students and their families.
METRO VANCOUVER’S RESPONSE TO THE TRC RECOMMENDATIONS A report was prepared by Metro Vancouver staff for review and comments by MTAC at is meeting in September 2015. The Aboriginal Relations Committee considered the report and further discussed the TRC’s 94 recommendations at its meetings in July and October 2015. The Metro Vancouver Board subsequently endorsed the Aboriginal Relations Committee’s recommendations set out above.
Following the October 30th Board meeting, the Board Chair sent letters to the respective provincial and federal ministers responsible and encouraged member local governments to do the same. Both ministers responded to the Board Chair indicating that their respective governments will be moving forward as quickly as possible to implement the TRC’s recommendations.
In addition, at the April 20, 2016 meeting of the Municipal Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC) on Aboriginal Relations, City of Vancouver staff provided a presentation on the City’s reconciliation efforts. At that meeting, Metro Vancouver also presented a draft of this report. Following the presentation by the City of Vancouver, MTAC members engaged in round table format, to share their respective communities’ reconciliation activities.
EXAMPLES OF METRO VANCOUVER RECONCILIATION ACTIVITIES Attachment 1 provides a summary matrix of Metro Vancouver’s reconciliation activities listed according to the Board’s recommended approach: - liaising with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (and Reconciliation Canada); - raising awareness about Indian Residential Schools; - providing cultural competency training; and, - strengthening relationships with First Nations.
There may be other examples that are not listed here as they have not yet come to fruition.
Attachment 2 includes a summary of examples of reconciliation activities being undertaken by various cities across Canada as compiled by staff from the City of Calgary. These summary notes are based on conference calls held with staff from the responding jurisdictions, including Metro Vancouver’s Aboriginal Relations staff, and are included in this report for reference and information-sharing purposes.
Attachment 3 includes a copy of the City of Vancouver’s presentation at the April 20, 2016 Municipal Technical Advisory Committee on Aboriginal Relations. ARC - 34 ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No Alternatives are presented.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The costs associated with the reconciliation activities identified in this report, including staff time and in-kind contributions, are minimal and have been included in the 2016 Aboriginal Relations budget.
SUMMARY / CONCLUSION This information report summarizes various examples of Metro Vancouver’s experiences in reconciliation over the past year in response to the Board’s resolution which directed staff to report back on how the following proposed Metro Vancouver activities formed the basis of the 2016 Aboriginal Relations Committee Work Plan to: liaise with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission; raise awareness about Indian Residential Schools; provide cultural competency training; and strengthen relationships with First Nations.
ATTACHMENTS 1. Examples of Metro Vancouver’s Reconciliation Activities, 2015-16 2. Snapshot of Other Canadian Cities Regarding Truth and Reconciliation Calls-to-Action 3. Response on the Truth and Reconciliation Calls to Action in the City of Reconciliation
19190220
ARC - 35 ATTACHMENT 1
Examples of Metro Vancouver’s Reconciliation Activities, 2015-16
Strengthening Raising Awareness Liaising with TRC Cultural Relationships and Competency Reconciliation Training Canada 2016 Community to Lunch and Learn Staff attended the Committee Chair and Community Forum to Session (November 30, National 1 Aboriginal be held each year 2015) with Chief Ernie Reconciliation Relations staff with a different First Crey presented with Gathering on member completed Nation (Squamish Ralph Hildebrand. January 22, 2016. the Provincial Health Nation in 2016). Cultural Competency Training online in 2015. One staff completed the advanced online course in 2016. Public agendas of the MTAC Meeting in April Metro Vancouver Two Aboriginal Aboriginal Relations 2016: invited City of staff reps will Relations staff Committee are Vancouver to make a attend future members have shared with all of the presentation + Round Reconciliation completed the SFU First Nations within Table Discussion. Canada activities. Shared Spaces the Metro Vancouver course which Region. promotes cultural competency.
Metro Vancouver has Reconciliation Canada Metro Vancouver Bob Joseph’s put in practice a to present at a Metro staff liaised with presentation at ARC process for sharing Vancouver Lunch and Reconciliation on February 18, 2015 information and Learn session in 2016 Canada staff to set and to MTAC via engaging with First at around the time of up a Metro webinar on June 10, Nations on Orange Shirt Day – Vancouver Lunch 2015. construction projects. September 30. and Learn Session MV has also – September 26, developed chance- 2016, find protocols.
Metro Vancouver Periodic articles on the Metro Vancouver MV staff have taken utilizes the Intranet to advise staff shared photos and and continue to take Consultative Areas of First Nations related proceedings from Bob Joseph’s Data Base events. the February 4th courses on Aboriginal (provincial) instead of presentation with Awareness, Working the traditional Reconciliation Effectively with territories. Canada. Aboriginal Peoples and Consultation and Accommodation.
Metro Vancouver has Metro Vancouver’s Metro Vancouver to an Aboriginal Profile of First Nations share photos and Relations program, updated in 2016. proceedings from staff and committees the September to engage with FNs. 2016 Lunch and Learn Session with ARC - 36 Reconciliation Canada staff.
Metro Vancouver Metro Vancouver’s may consider Education Coordinator developing protocols is involved in some and agreements with work in putting together First Nations on the FN curriculum areas of mutual component. interest.
Metro Vancouver’s Metro Vancouver also continued provides a clipping involvement at Katzie service on First Nation and Tsleil-Waututh articles to our tables and support municipal counterparts for treaty work, on MTAC. including representation of local government interests.
Metro Vancouver has Metro Vancouver staff developed working provide information to groups with First Nations at treaty Musqueam (parks tables for creating and Liquid Waste) awareness of regional and Squamish district services as well (Liquid Waste) and as governance received interest from structure. Katzie (Liquid Waste) to do the same.
Metro Vancouver acknowledges traditional First Nation territories at park openings and other meetings with First Nations (e.g. Community to Community Forums) and also allows the opportunity for FNs to provide an official welcome or prayer.
ARC - 37 ATTACHMENT 2
Snapshot of Other Canadian Cities Regarding Truth and Reconciliation Calls-to-Action (compiled by City of Calgary staff)
Edmonton: Mike Chow, Director of Aboriginal Relations Community Strategies & Development 780-496-1525 [email protected]
1. Planning: a. Have identified 16 Calls-to-Action (CTA) for Edmonton City Council; no NOM yet b. Already had been working in similar areas (i.e. public service staff training CTA #57) so they are following direction of FCM (Targeted List of 5) for strategic reasons
2. Approach: identify a tension between needs-based discussion and rights-based discussion (ie, (legal implications, existence of ‘urban reserves’, or reserves in close proximity means people commute to the city for work but services delivered on-reserve)) in municipal contexts a. moving towards a right-based approach but local social workers are not currently set up to deal with this
3. Aboriginal Relations Office: 4 full-time staff—still trying to figure out where this office fits—people don’t yet know that everyone must do Aboriginal relations in their own Business Unit—very challenging.
4. Engagement: no engagement specifically related to TRC undergoing with the Aboriginal community. a. Currently no CAUAC equivalent in Edmonton—used to be EUAC but that transitioned to community—Metchetawin [sic]; transitioned to Friendship Centres.
5. UNDRIP: waiting for announcement in the Spring from the provincial government.
6. Land base/cultural space: beginning stages a. building specific ceremonial site in the River Valley (Kihciy Askiy) and another project (River Crossing) however it is anticipated that further work will be beginning in the future on Ceremonial Spaces city wide. b. Aligned to TRC and UNDRIP but not driven by them.
ARC - 38 Saskatoon: Gilles Dorval, Director of Aboriginal Relations 306.657.8691 [email protected]
1. Planning: a. Have identified 12 CTAs for 2016 budget approval (specifically directed at “municipal governments” and/or “other levels of government” b. In addition, there are 7 CTAs that the City could advocate for. c. Will be a municipal election in Saskatoon this year, requiring more legwork with administration and Council
2. Approach: focus on economic development and land development a. This drives business, which in turn drives jobs, which in turn drives quality of life. b. The TRC serves to strengthen this approach, as does the concurrent Indigenous policy work being undertaken at the City. c. Several funding sources (federal, provincial, private) already committed.
3. Aboriginal Relations Office: One person (director)
4. Engagement: prior to TRC, several consultations were undertaken a. NorQuest College (2011) “...it was reconciliation but we didn’t call it that back then.” b. Hosted national reconciliation events (2012); had relationships and materials already in hand by time TRC reports rolled out; leadership was aware of the issues and already asking “what can we do better?”; United Way already asking “how do we change funding protocols?” (Kitaskinaw report) c. All this helped Saskatoon move a little quicker
5. UNDRIP: Working with Solicitor’s Dept over Duty to Consult; needs to go into COP (community planning documentation) a. Policy review: some business methods don’t adhere to UNDRIP—problematic b. Appreciation for Calgary’s approach (to begin from NOM) but Saskatoon was already too far along for this method; emphasis now on having a healthy dialog to agree on change
6. Land base/cultural space: a. any park can accommodate smudging/tobacco blessing—every public space is an opportunity to connect b. Indian Hill: sweat lodge c. Waneskawin [sic]: gathering space and buffalo jump outside the city—city-owned and annexed (99 year lease, up in 2 years); capital campaign to put buffalo back there d. Tobacco policy: encourage hotels; understand reason for cultural ceremonies
ARC - 39 Metro Vancouver: Marino Piombini Supervisor, Aboriginal Relations Legal and Legislative Services t. 604.432.6388 [email protected]
1. Planning: a. Endorsed in principle the 94 Calls-to-Action (October 2015), reflecting staff thinking on the TRC and grounding future work in current activities. b. Because of jurisdictional governance in the Greater Vancouver Region (more complexity because of treaty/history/indigenous rights/self-government issues) this is a unique situation; everyone is waiting to see what others are doing.
2. Approach: proceed cautiously because of governance model; don’t want to compromise the business here.
3. Aboriginal Relations Office: Aboriginal Relations Committee (13 members all politicians) supported by two staff
4. Engagement: one Aboriginal person director on the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) Board: a. Lunch & Learns b. Indigenous Corporate Training (Bob Joseph, Robert Joseph’s son—from Reconciliation Canada—and the top Aboriginal Awareness training consultant in the country) has developed a pilot for municipalities; can be customized for 1 hr summary to full day training via online modules c. Orange Shirt Day (Sept 30) d. public servant awareness of Intranets (articles and conversations) e. visual presence.
5. UNDRIP: not going to be using, except to point to work already being done.
6. Land base/cultural space: non-specific
ARC - 40 Winnipeg: Rhonda Forgues Manager, Aboriginal Relations Division Corporate Support Services (204) 986-6929 [email protected]
1. Planning: a. looking for direction/approach from other municipalities b. Having high-level conversations on roles and how to accomplish, starting with the Targeted List first
2. Approach: Although not yet begun TRC conversations, relying on experience and practice in convening the province and federal governments in Indigenous consults (ie, Aboriginal Youth Strategy, 2008)
3. Aboriginal Relations Division: eleven staff (4 of which are interns) a. Portfolios are (1) community, (2) corporate relations (see Winnipeg Plan; health & wellness), (3) Inter-governmental relations and (4) Aboriginal Youth strategy (employment, culture & recreation, literacy & education, community connections).
4. Engagement: [at beginning stages]
5. UNDRIP: [unknown]
6. Land base/cultural space: [as either internal spaces in non-profit sector, or privately owned park space]
ARC - 41 Vancouver: Ginger Gosnell-Myers, Social Planner II 604-873-7209 [email protected]
1. Planning: a. Report tabled in City of Vancouver Council on Jan.18, 2016, identifying 27 CTAs that the City had the ability to implement i. Each item assessed using the principle of “acting in the spirit of reconciliation” b. Additional activities and budgeted resources (in a second report) are included from City Manager’s Office, Human Resources, Community Services, Housing, Vancouver Public Library, Planning and Engineering (but do not align to TRC CTAs) c. For the most part, implementation of the CTAs are included in the work of City Departments and do not require additional funding i. those that do require funding in 2016 will be identified and resourced through existing operating and capital budgets ii. any future components will be brought to Council through future budget processes
2. Approach: align concurrent City initiatives/themes with TRC recommendations a. Healthy Communities and Wellness b. Achieving Indigenous Rights and Recognition c. Advancing Awareness, Knowledge and Capacity
3. Aboriginal Relations Division: created a new Manager of Aboriginal Relations within the City Manager’s Office; creation of a new planner position in Social Policy focusing on work with the Aboriginal community; hiring 2-3 more staff, embedded in different Business Units.
4. Engagement: City staff across all departments arrived at 27 CTAs a. Cultural competency training for GMS in March 2016 b. Basic cultural competency training for 350+ staff in 2016 c. Community group engagement to raise awareness, strengthen relationships and improve services to Aboriginal groups
5. UNDRIP: [unknown]
6. Land base/cultural space: Vancouver Parks Board has recently released their own report identifying 11 CTAs that will strengthen their work a. Stanley Park stewardship b. Youth leadership programs c. Community arts, sports and culture programs (commemoration) d. Education
ARC - 42 Calgary: Lorna Crowshoe, Issue Strategist Calgary Neighbourhoods 403-268-5149 [email protected]
1. Planning: a. At direction of City Council, engage Calgary Aboriginal Urban Affairs Committee (CAUAC)— formal advisory committee of Council to submit report in May 2016 with recommended CTAs, and an implementation plan. b. 6-month engagement with committee to read, “own” and deliberate on those CTAs The City could implement (criteria for (1) impactful (2) feasible (3) aligned (to UNDRIP and concurrent Aboriginal policy work and activities) (4) in the “spirit of reconciliation
2. Approach: a. Engage CAUAC advisory committee (and leverage long-standing credibility of; founded by Treaty 7 chiefs in 1979) as decision-makers b. Leverage support for Aboriginal issues, in general, from highest levels—politicians and administration; assist them in being influencers c. 3. Aboriginal Relations Division: none a. Lorna Crowshoe, Aboriginal Issue Strategist b. Adhoc assistance from policy analyst
4. Engagement: CAUAC members a. Aligning this work with ongoing engagement surround Indigenous Policy Framework (to be completed in 2017)
5. UNDRIP: participation in community conversation around UNDRIP (provincial government to “declare support” in Spring 2016) a. Desire to strengthen TRC CTAs by aligning to specific articles
6. Land base/cultural space: none
ARC - 43 ATTACHMENT 3
Response on the Truth and Reconciliation
Calls to Action in
the City of Reconciliation
Date: April 20, 2016 ARC - 44 Presenters: Wendy Au & Ginger Gosnell-Myers The City of Vancouver is embracing reconciliation for meaningful change
• On February 26, 2013 Council endorses the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
• Council proclaims June 21, 2013 to June 20, 2014 as the Year of Reconciliation in the City of Vancouver.
• On June 25, 2014 Council acknowledges that Vancouver is on the unceded traditional territory of the Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh First Nations.
ARC - 45 City Council took the extraordinary step to designate Vancouver as a City of Reconciliation…
…The process of reconciliation is not the act of one year, and indeed may not be the act of one generation. It is a long term effort that takes seriously the responsibility of creating systemic change and new relations based on mutual understanding and respect;
…Therefore be it resolved that Council reaffirm its commitment to designating Vancouver a City of Reconciliation.
July 8, 2014
City of Reconciliation Framework
Cultural Competency Effective Decision-Making Strengthening Partnerships
ARC - 46 Recognition of unceded Coast Salish Territory is the new norm
City Council brushing off VPL’s nə́ c̓ aʔmat ct Strathcona branch ceremony, December 2014 groundbreaking and ceremony
ARC - 47 The City responded to the TRC Calls to Action report
On June 23rd Council passed a motion stating “many of the recommendations in the TRC Final Report are actionable by the City.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
A. That staff report back to Council no later than September 30, 2015, with recommendations on how to move forward on the actions recommended by the TRC which are within the City’s jurisdiction to act. B. That Council request the VSB, VPD, and VPL consider a similar review of the TRC recommendations.
ARC - 48 TRC Calls to Action
There are 94 recommendations within the TRC Calls to Action final report.
Our analysis has identified 27 as actionable areas for the City to move forward on.
The TRC Calls to Action that align with the City’s work can be summarized under three themes:
1. Healthy Communities and Wellness 2. Achieving Indigenous Human Rights and Recognition 3. Advancing Awareness, Knowledge, and Capacity
ARC - 49 1. Healthy Communities and Wellness
• #5: Child Welfare • # 7, 9, 12: Education Reconciliation fund for projects • #17: Language and Culture Support for Aboriginal Healing • #21, 22: Health and Wellness Centres • # 66: Youth Grants to host Indigenous • #38, 40: Justice sporting events • # 90: Sports and Reconciliation
ARC - 50 2. Achieving Indigenous Human Rights and Recognition
• #43, 44: United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) Adopting the UNDRIP
• #47: Royal Proclamation and Recognition of unceded Covenant of Reconciliation Musqueam, Squamish, and Tsleil-Waututh territory • #67: Museums and Archives Supporting civic institutions on repatriation efforts • #91: Sports and Reconciliation
ARC - 51 3. Advancing Awareness, Knowledge, and Capacity
• #57: Professional Development and Training for Public Servants
• #3:62 Education, 6 for Reconciliation Cultural competency training for senior City managers and staff • #9:68 Museums, 6 and Archives Recording histories and stories • #78: National Centre for Truth and through the VPL Inspiration Lab Reconciliation Release of the First Peoples: • 3#:80 , 8 Commemoration Guide for Newcomers • #87: Sports and Reconciliation
• #92: Business in Reconciliation
• #93: Newcomers to Canada ARC - 52 Becoming a City of Reconciliation is a long term process
ARC - 53 A Vision Statement will help guide the incorporation of reconciliation into our work
As a City of Reconciliation, the City of Vancouver will form a sustained relationship of mutual respect and understanding with local First Nations and the Urban Aboriginal community, including key agencies, to incorporate a First Nations and Urban Aboriginal perspective into the work undertaken and decisions made by the City of Vancouver and, ultimately, to provide services that benefit members of these communities.
ARC - 54 Development of Long Term Goals will provide clarity, guidance, and accountability
• Strengthen local First Nations and Urban Aboriginal Relations
• Promote Aboriginal Peoples Arts, Culture, Awareness and Understanding
• Incorporate First Nations and Urban Aboriginal perspectives for effective City services
ARC - 55 Our commitment
The legacy of the TRC will continue through our efforts by:
• Demonstrating Council’s commitment towards a City of Reconciliation; • Acting as a leader in furthering the long term work of reconciliation; and, • Engaging the broader public and our diverse citizens in developing new relationships and to move forward with a shared understanding and respect.
ARC - 56 Looking forward ~ 2016
• Implementation of TRC Calls to Action
• Cultural competency training
• Reconciliation funding for projects
• New Aboriginal staff positions
• Canada 150 celebration planning
• Development of Reconciliation indicators and evaluation measures
ARC - 57 ARC - 58 5.4
To: Aboriginal Relations Committee
From: Agnes Rosicki, Senior Policy Analyst, Aboriginal Relations, Legal & Legislative Services
Date: August 12, 2016 Meeting Date: October 6, 2016
Subject: An Analysis of the Multilateral Engagement Report on Improving and Expediting Treaty Negotiations in British Columbia
RECOMMENDATION That the Aboriginal Relations Committee receive for information the report, dated August 12, 2016, titled “An Analysis of the Multilateral Engagement Report on Improving and Expediting Treaty Negotiations in British Columbia.”
PURPOSE To provide the Aboriginal Relations Committee with an overview of the May 24, 2016 report titled, “Multilateral Engagement Process to Improve and Expedite Treaty Negotiations in British Columbia Report – Proposals for the Principals’ Consideration” (the “Report”).
BACKGROUND As observers at the two active treaty tables in the region (Katzie First Nation and Tsleil-Waututh Nation), the local government treaty table representatives are part of the respective BC treaty negotiation teams and provide advice to the provincial negotiators.
The Terms of Reference for the Aboriginal Relations Committee state:
Among its responsibilities, the [Aboriginal Relations] Committee is responsible for: • Understanding and providing advice on the implications for Metro Vancouver of First Nations’ land claims, interests, and rights and titles […]
Multilateral Engagement Process Since the establishment of the British Columbia treaty negotiation process in 1993, various reports have been published identifying shortcomings of the process and putting forward proposals for improving treaty negotiations in BC. The most recent reports include the Eyford Report (2015) and the Lornie Report (2011). Both reports describe modern-day treaty making as complex, lengthy, and costly for all parties, including the Province, the federal government, and First Nations.
In response to the release of the two reports and the policy review process, Metro Vancouver has provided its comments and conveyed local government concerns directly to the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) for consideration.
On May 29, 2015, the principals to the BC treaty negotiation process (Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, BC Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation, and the First Nations Summit Task Group) (the “Principals”), with assistance from the BC Treaty Commission established a
ARC - 59 working group explore ways to improve and expedite treaty negotiations in BC. This work took place from June 2015 to March 2016.
The work on the treaty negotiation process occurred in the context of changing legal and political environments. Both the Supreme Court of Canada Decision in Tsilhqot’in1 and the federal government’s endorsement of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples2 (UNDRIP) contributed to a broadening of Aboriginal rights and title claims which in turn has necessitated new approaches for addressing outstanding land claims.
Treaty making in BC is unique given that Aboriginal title and rights of a large number of First Nations have not been reconciled through treaty negotiations. Today, 58 tables representing approximately half of the First Nations in BC continue to be engaged in the treaty negotiation process; however, only seven First Nations are asserting self-determination through modern treaties.
Many First Nations have been negotiating treaties for over 20 years. Both the Katzie First Nation and the Tsleil-Waututh Nation submitted their respective Statements of Intent (Stage 1) to the BC Treaty Commission in 1994. After 22 years of active treaty negotiations, they are both in Stage 4 of the BC treaty process negotiating Agreements-in-Principle (AIPs).
According to the Principals of the treaty process, the current treaty negotiation process is unacceptable. The objective of the working group was to identify impediments to achieving progress in negotiations and the conclusion of treaties. They focused on five priority subjects: process efficiencies; negotiation support funding; shared territory and overlap issues; certainty; and the role of BC Treaty Commission. The Principals also acknowledged that changes to the current treaty negotiation process and renewed commitment to completing treaties are essential for advancing reconciliation.
Multilateral Engagement Report On May 24, 2016, the Principals published a report titled: Multilateral Engagement Process to Improve and Expedite Treaty Negotiations in British Columbia Report – Proposals for the Principals’ Consideration. The Report includes the following proposals for improving and expediting treaty negotiations in BC: 1. Committing to the treaty negotiations process and to expediting negotiations; 2. Employing greater flexibility to reach treaties faster and more efficiently; 3. Reaching agreements in advance of, or outside, a modern comprehensive treaty; 4. Enhancing tools that could address shared territory and overlap issues; 5. Opening the door for, and signaling a willingness to consider, reforms to negotiation mandates and/or broader, national policy reforms on substantive matters; 6. Addressing issues related to negotiation support funding; 7. Establishing a forum to explore an alternative rights recognition approach to certainty; and 8. Clarifying the roles and responsibilities of the British Columbia Treaty Commission.
The changes recommended in the Report have a potential to improve the process efficiency by expediting the pace of negotiations, increasing flexibility within the existing negotiation process, and focusing on the post-treaty relationships. The Report explores a broad array of approaches for
1 The 2014 Tsilhqot’in decision is significant because the Supreme Court of Canada awarded the land to the Tsilhqot’in Nation. 2 The UNDRIP was adopted by the General Assembly in 2007. In August 2016, the Liberal government announced its decision not to adopt the UNDRIP as Canadian law. ARC - 60 advancing comprehensive land claim agreements. Most of these approaches have been previously discussed in past reports (e.g. core treaties and Incremental Treaty Agreements); while others offer a new perspective. For instance, sectoral agreements and treaties is a new concept introduced in the Report. The Report identifies sectoral agreements and treaties as potential alternatives to comprehensive treaties or as stepping-stones to building comprehensive treaties.
Some other ideas include scoping proposals and “condensed” AIPs. The Report suggests having a scoping discussion before advancing treaty negotiations with First Nations. A scoping proposal would include information regarding key interests and negotiating mandates, such as land and cash and fiscal arrangements.
Condensed AIPs, on the other hand, would contain the core elements of a treaty such as capital transfers, land, and self-government powers. These agreements could expedite treaty negotiations; as negotiators spend significant time and resources in the AIP stage negotiating detailed language for each of the chapters, covering issues as broad and varied as land, funding, fish, culture, heritage, and forestry. The Report proposes a new approach of using chapter language from previous negotiations to streamline the negotiation process. First Nations would also face negotiation deadlines to reach settlements.
The Report also explores approaches to ensure the recognition and protection of Aboriginal rights of First Nations that may have shared or overlapping territories with First Nations negotiating a treaty. Approaches may include shared decision‐making agreements between BC, Canada, the negotiating First Nations, and the First Nations potentially affected by the treaty.
In terms of negotiation funding, the Report proposes funding First Nations in a way that discourages unnecessary costs or delays by linking funding decisions more closely to activities in a tripartite Workplan and reducing First Nations’ reliance on loan funding where possible. Large debts are a significant concern for many First Nations participating in treaty negotiations. In some cases, the debts may exceed the total amount of cash First Nations are expected to obtain in a Final Agreement. Metro Vancouver’s detailed overview of the Report recommendations is available in Attachment 1.
Local Government Perspective Metro Vancouver continues to monitor any new developments related to treaty negotiations and remains proactive in identifying potential policy concerns. Many of the issues discussed in the multilateral engagement report may affect the core business of local governments, including taxation, land use planning decisions, land acquisitions, and infrastructure project completion. Any changes to treaty negotiation approaches and mandates could also influence local government relationships with local First Nation communities.
Most recommendations presented in the Multilateral Engagement, Eyford, and Lornie reports on expediting treaty negotiations are not reflective of local government interests. For instance, the three reports fail to acknowledge local governments’ role in treaty negotiations despite their presence at the Lower Mainland treaty negotiation tables for the last 22 years. The reports also fail to promote direct negotiations between local governments and First Nations related to land use planning, servicing, or taxation issues when exploring non-treaty arrangements with First Nation such as the stepping-stone approach. The stepping-stone approach proposed in the report promotes the idea of reaching treaties incrementally. The focus seems to be on agreements concluded with First Nations on a bilateral and trilateral basis in the absence of consultation with local governments. ARC - 61 Local government perceive modern treaties as both an expression of reconciliation and a way of achieving certainty pertaining to ownership and use of lands. Even though the principals declared their commitment to completing treaty negotiations in BC, certain recommendations place much greater emphasis on non-treaty agreements that the Province tends to negotiate without local government involvement.
Local government would not have an opportunity to voice their interests in sectoral or incremental treaty agreements. Currently, local government has a voice at the treaty tables as a member of the provincial negotiation teams. With its presence at treaty tables, local government gains a better understanding of First Nations’ interests and ways in which they may relate to municipal and regional interests. Metro Vancouver staff summarized local government interests and concerns regarding the three reports in Attachment 2.
Senior officials do not seek comments from potentially affected parties at this point; they present the proposals for the Principals’ consideration only. The report identifies a number of potential options for improving treaty negotiations without making specific recommendations for a single approach moving forward. Senior officials will report on the progress in advancing the proposals in 2017. Both the timing of the implementation of the proposals and the type of policy changes the Principals will favour remain unclear. The Report indicates that it will take time to make progress.
ALTERNATIVES This is an information report. No Alternatives are presented.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications noted.
SUMMARY / CONCLUSION The Multilateral Engagement Report explores new approaches to expediting treaty negotiations within BC. The proposals discussed in the Report are intended to inspire a continued dialogue with First Nations on concluding treaties in a more timely and cost-effective manner. Even though treaty negotiations directly affect local governments, regional and municipal interests are not considered in the Report. The lack of acknowledgement and recognition is concerning to local governments given Metro Vancouver’s past submissions in response to both Eyford and Lornie reports on expediting treaty negotiations in BC.
Attachments:
1. “Recommendations from the Report Titled: Multilateral Engagement Process to Improve and Expedite Treaty Negotiations in British Columbia – Proposals for the Principals’ Consideration” 2. “Local Government Concerns Regarding Recent Reports on Expediting Treaty Negotiations in BC”
19096288
ARC - 62 ATTACHMENT 1
Metro Vancouver’s Analysis of the Report Recommendations from the Report Titled: Multilateral Engagement Process to Improve and Expedite Treaty Negotiations in British Columbia – Proposals for the Principals’ Consideration Recommendations Local Government Comments PROCESS EFFICIENCIES • Expediting the pace of negotiations • Increasing flexibility within the existing negotiation process • Reaching more agreements prior to concluding a final agreement • Developing new tools to streamline treaty negotiations • Focusing on the post-treaty relationships Scoping • Suggestion to have a scoping discussion before • The report offers no plan to tackle one of the Proposal advancing treaty negotiations. most pressing problems: the rigid negotiation • If sufficient common ground exists then the mandate of federal representatives at treaty parties could develop a scoping proposal to negotiation tables. include information regarding key interests and • Prescriptive, fixed mandates are not conducive negotiating mandates such as land and cash and to interest-based negotiations. potentially fish, and fiscal arrangements. • Even though internal mandate issues could • Scoping proposal would not be a detailed land cause delays in negotiations, they were not part and cash offer. of the Terms of Reference for the multilateral • Details such as specific parcels, maps, and exact engagement process. quanta would be provided later in a formal offer.
Condensed • Condensed AIPs would contain the core elements • In contrast to the 19th century “numbered” Agreement-in- of a treaty such as capital transfers, land, shared treaties, modern treaties are complicated Principle (AIP) territories, self-government powers, fiscal packages. The definition chapter alone of the arrangements, and fisheries. Tsawwassen First Nation Final Agreement runs • It focuses less on detailed process language for to 18 pages. • each Final Agreement chapter. Modern treaty negotiation involves settling issues as varied as land, funding, culture, • The parties would determine whether there is language, heritage, and forestry. A proposal on enough common ground on core elements of a any one of these issues requires a considered treaty to continue treaty negotiations, or whether response and discussion. another type of agreement would better suit their • Currently, negotiators spend significant time interests and mandates. and resources in the AIP stage negotiating • Key objectives of condensed AIPs: for the Parties detailed language for each of the chapters that to move faster to Final Agreement negotiations; would be part of a Final Agreement. to reduce the time and resources; to explore • Parties often incorporate in treaties other more effective approaches to reconciliation administrative details that may become stale- (e.g. ITAs and sectoral agreements). dated over time.
Process Chapter • Making available previously used process chapter • Parties should pursue clarity of language Language language. throughout the treaty at every opportunity.
ARC - 63 Recommendations from the Report Titled: Multilateral Engagement Process to Improve and Expedite Treaty Negotiations in British Columbia – Proposals for the Principals’ Consideration Recommendations Local Government Comments • Treaty negotiating tables spend a great deal of time, effort, and resources negotiating relatively standard process chapters. Process Chapter • The availability of previously used process Language chapter language could potentially increase the availability of time and resources for all the parties to have a more focused discussion on matters identified by a table as substantive and unique to their circumstances. Multi-year • Setting a time frame for Final Agreement • This strategy has a potential to expediting Stage Strategy for negotiations (Stage 5) based on an agreed-upon, 5 negotiations given political commitment of Stage 5 of the tripartite multi-year strategy. the parties. BC Treaty Process Stepping Stone • Stepping stone approach would provide a flexible • Local governments recognize that ITAs can be Approach range of options to negotiating tables to reach a an increment to treaty making, but they simply comprehensive treaty in an incremental manner cannot function as an alternative to treaties in without losing sight of the long term goal of settling the historic land and governance reaching a comprehensive treaty through the BC questions in BC. • treaty negotiation process. Local government representatives are typically excluded from side agreement negotiations. • This approach could include arriving at a treaty by • There is no indication that local governments using a combination of incremental treaty would be able to speak into the ITAs or sector agreements (ITAs), sector specific agreements, specific agreements. and the core treaty model. • Some First Nations may decide to implement these options on a stand-alone basis outside of the treaty process.
Incremental • Provincial ITAs allow First Nations to enjoy • ITAs are symbols of good faith. Treaty benefits in advance of reaching a treaty. • Local governments recognize the role of Agreements • ITAs are intended to promote economic tripartite incremental treaty agreements in (ITAs) opportunities, encourage partnerships with local assisting First Nations in developing capacity governments and provide increased certainty and providing additional certainty over a land over land and resources. base and resources. • There is no indication that local governments • Federal ITAs address First Nation interests while would be able to speak into the ITAs or sector negotiations are ongoing providing for the specific agreements. implementation of certain negotiated elements of a treaty in advance of a comprehensive treaty and help prepare First Nations to implement treaties.
ARC - 64 Recommendations from the Report Titled: Multilateral Engagement Process to Improve and Expedite Treaty Negotiations in British Columbia – Proposals for the Principals’ Consideration Recommendations Local Government Comments
Sectoral • Sectoral agreements and treaties could address • Bilateral strategic agreements may distract Agreements and sub-sets of pre-existing rights by focusing on a the parties from treaty negotiations. Treaties smaller sub-set of rights or in defined subject • The current model for treaties focuses on ***New addressing the pre-existing section 35 rights of Concept*** areas. • They could be tripartite or bilateral; entered into a First Nation community comprehensively in a single, constitutionally protected, tripartite with individual First Nations or groups of First agreement. Nations; could be constitutionally protected. Sectoral • There is no indication that local governments • Agreements and Examples of sectoral agreements/ treaties: would be able to speak into the ITAs or sector Treaties • Fish agreements/treaties setting out access to specific agreements. resources and a role in management. • Land ownership and management agreements. • Core or comprehensive self-government agreements and/or treaties with a single First Nation or aggregate. • Self-government sectoral agreements and/or treaties in areas such as health, education, child and family welfare, administration of justice with multiple First Nations.
Core Treaties • This approach would include negotiating a • The current treaty model provides for a Approach constitutionally protected treaty focused on areas comprehensive listing and exhaustive of importance while leaving administrative details description of all section 35 right and the regarding the exercise of the treaty rights and parameters for their exercise by a First Nation implementation of jurisdiction to time-limited, post-treaty. • renewable, or evergreen non-constitutionally Local government must have a clear and director role in the negotiation process. protected side agreements. • First Nations participating in treaty • The core treaty could include recognition of negotiations would need to enter into existing section 35 rights; land ownership and separate side agreements with local management; core governance; rights to governments to address specific issues (e.g. resources; dispute resolution. access, right of way, land use planning) that are currently part of Final Agreements.
Supplementary • Supplementary agreements could include: • If it is unclear whether local government Agreements/ fisheries agreements; self-government representatives would be involved in Non-Core agreements; resource access and benefits negotiation of supplementary agreements to Components arrangements for lands and resources; and communicate local government interests to the consultation/accommodation and decision- Province.
ARC - 65 Recommendations from the Report Titled: Multilateral Engagement Process to Improve and Expedite Treaty Negotiations in British Columbia – Proposals for the Principals’ Consideration Recommendations Local Government Comments making arrangements for lands and resources within First Nation’s territory, but not within treaty settlement lands.
NEGOTIATION SUPPORT FUNDING • Administering and allocating negotiation support funding by the BC Treaty Commission to First Nations to support their participation in the treaty negotiation process • Ensuring that the availability of negotiation support funding is not the main factor deciding about First Nations’ participation in treaty negotiations
Allocation of • Linking funding decision more closely to activities • Given the increasing First Nations’ loans (the Negotiation in a tripartite Workplan. average loan per table is approximately $10 Support • Clarifying which First Nations’ activities would be million), alternative funding models need to Funding eligible for negotiation funding. be explored. • Reducing First Nations’ reliance on loan funding • The Tsawwassen First Nation was faced with a where possible. negotiation loan of $5,561,480 for completing • Developing negotiations cost guidelines to its modern treaty. support First Nations’ assessment and • Local government recognizes that the debt management of costs. burden for participating First Nations in the BC Treaty Process had become an unsustainable barrier to progress for many communities.
SHARED TERRITORIES AND OVERLAP ISSUES • Addressing the concerns of First Nations not currently participating in treaty negotiations that a resolution of shared territories and overlap issues may prejudice their own legal claims in the future or potentially result in less protection for their rights over a shared or overlapping territory compared to the rights of the treaty First Nation • Addressing some First Nations concerns that treaties create a “first past the post” system, indicating a perception that Canada and British Columbia will favour established treaty rights over existing Aboriginal or Douglas Treaty rights
Addressing • Encouraging First Nations to reach agreements • Local governments require the Parties Shared among themselves to address shared territory commitment to facilitating discussions among Territories issues. First Nation groups to resolve any issues of Issues • Instructing the BC Treaty Commission to create a shared territories arising out of treaties. report assessing efforts of First Nations to address shared territory issues and providing recommendations for further action.
Funds to • Creating a dedicated source of funds, cost shared • Early and effective resolution of overlapping Support by both Canada and BC. claims is essential for addressing uncertainty Resolution of • Providing incentives for First Nations not in treaty related to land selection. Shared negotiations to encourage their participation in
ARC - 66 Recommendations from the Report Titled: Multilateral Engagement Process to Improve and Expedite Treaty Negotiations in British Columbia – Proposals for the Principals’ Consideration Recommendations Local Government Comments Territories efforts to resolve disputes (e.g. negotiation of • There is no indication that local governments Issues agreements recognizing their rights instead of a would be able to speak into the suggested treaty). agreements.
CERTAINTY Certainty • First Nations can select any certainty model that is • Local governments support the primary goal Models approved by Canada, BC and Frist Nations in the of the BC Treaty Process of achieving certainty future. pertaining to ownership and use of lands and • Establishing a forum to explore alternative rights resources as well as recognize the benefits of recognition approach to certainty. modern treaties in providing greater predictability for development and growth. • The views of local governments must be considered in any review of certainty. • Local governments should not be obligated to live with agreements that impose less certainty than the treaties previously signed; lack of certainty creates an economic cost to local government. • Some First Nations that have not yet exhausted other legal remedies may be reluctant to turn to treaty negotiations to avoid the risk of fettering their rights.
ROLE OF THE BC TREATY COMMISSION • Developing a current, mutually agreed upon articulation of the BCTC’s role in facilitation, public education, and the allocation of negotiation support funding • Encouraging more effective use of the BCTC and its expertise to advance treaty negotiations
Role of BCTC • Clarifying the roles and responsibilities of the • It appears that the BCTC might have interpreted commission regarding facilitation, allocation of too narrowly its facilitation role to mean merely negotiation support funding, and public the convening of treaty negotiation meetings. education. • To play its facilitation role, the commission requires a degree of independence from the three parties involved in negotiations. • To achieve greater independence, the commission might need longer appointment terms for its commissioners and reliable long- term funding. • The Chief Commissioner’s position has been vacant for over a year.
ARC - 67 Recommendations from the Report Titled: Multilateral Engagement Process to Improve and Expedite Treaty Negotiations in British Columbia – Proposals for the Principals’ Consideration Recommendations Local Government Comments • The commission could play a more significant role in future treaty implementation issues.
ARC - 68 ATTACHMENT 2
Local Government Concerns Regarding Recent Reports on Expediting Treaty Negotiations in BC
Local Government Multilateral Engagement Eyford Report (2015) Lornie Report (2011) Concerns Report (2016) Local governments X Not supported – local X Not supported – Metro X Not supported – local need to be identified governments not identified Vancouver and UBCM governments not identified in the report identified as “Other in the report Stakeholders and Interested Parties” (p. 83) Local government are X Not supported – Local X Not supported – Metro X Not supported – Local not third parties governments are not Vancouver, UBCM, and other governments are not acknowledged and their local government acknowledged and their interests are not recognized organizations are interests are not recognized in the report acknowledged but their in the report interests are not recognized in the report. Direct negotiations X Not supported – This X Not supported – This X Not supported – This between local recommendation is not recommendation is not recommendation is not governments and First reflected in the report. reflected in the report. reflected in the report. Nations should be promoted
Taxation is a key X Not supported – Local X Not supported – Local X Not supported – Local concern government tax loss is not government tax loss is not government tax loss is not considered in the report. considered in the report. considered in the report.
Local governments X Not supported – The X Not supported – The X Not supported – The require enforcement of local enforcement of local enforcement of local effective enforcement government ‐Fir government ‐First government ‐Fir mechanisms agreements is not agreements is not discussed agreements is not discussed in the report. in the report. discussed in the report.
Incremental Treaty X Not supported – Non- X Not supported – Potential X Not supported – The Agreements (ITA) treaty arrangements on a reconciliation arrangements report suggests developing should not be a bilateral and trilateral basis on a bilateral and trilateral options for engaging with replacement for with First Nations are basis (including non ‐ trea First Nations outside the treaties encouraged and promoted agreements) with First treaty process - in tripartite in the report. Nations are encouraged and incremental treaty Local governments are not promoted in the report agreements to secure land included in the non ‐tr (Recommendations 5 and 6). and resources for First discussions and Nations. agreements.
ARC - 69 Local Government Concerns Regarding Recent Reports on Expediting Treaty Negotiations in BC
Local Government Multilateral Engagement Eyford Report (2015) Lornie Report (2011) Concerns Report (2016) Local governments ✔ Supported – This ✔ Supported – The report ✔ Supported – The report support early resolution recommendation is recommends collaboration argues for providing of any issues of addressed with the report between the federal, resources to support overlapping claims or encouraging First Nations to provincial and territorial dispute avoidance for all shared territories reach agreements among governments developing First Nations affected by themselves and proposing criteria for funding provisions potential conflict related to creation of a dedicated to resolve overlapping claims shared territory and overlap source of funds to support and encouraging Aboriginal issues arising out of resolution of shared groups to be innovative in treaties, whether or not territories issues. their approaches to resolve those First Nations are shared territorial issues. participating in the BC treaty process.
Certainty over lands X Not supported – X Not supported – This X Not supported – This and Discussions on specific report generally runs contrary report emphasizes the resources matters certainty models were set to local government interests merits of developing options aside to be addressed later; in that Eyford focusses on the for engaging in proposed non-treaty merits of non ‐trea ty reconciliation measures agreements do not offer agreements as an alternative outside the treaty process certainty over lands and to comprehensive treaty with all First Nations. resources. agreements.
The scope of mandates X Not supported - Delays ✔ Supported – Various ✔ Supported – need to re- of federal treaty in treaty negotiations recommendations in the evaluate the approach to negotiators needs to be caused by internal report are intended to key substantive mandates expanded mandates and mandating improve the federal under discussion at the processes were not within department’s ability to Common Table; need to the scope of the multilateral negotiate agreements, reconfigure federal engagement process. including the development of mandates to introduce alternative mechanisms. greater flexibility, efficiency, authority and capability The federal X Not supported – The ✔ Supported – Various ✔ Supported – Various government’s report seems to place an recommendations in the recommendations in the involvement in treaty equal importance of all report are intended to place report place greater implementation must parties committing to greater accountability on the accountability on the federal be more substantive expediting treaty federal government especially the negotiations; no special government as a whole, not resolution of outstanding emphasis is placed on the just the department federal mandate issues. role of the federal responsible, for the resolution government. of land claims. Communication to, and X Not supported– This X Not supported – This X Not supported – This with, local governments recommendation is not recommendation is not recommendation is not matters reflected in the report. reflected in the report. reflected in the report.
ARC - 70 Local Government Concerns Regarding Recent Reports on Expediting Treaty Negotiations in BC
Local Government Multilateral Engagement Eyford Report (2015) Lornie Report (2011) Concerns Report (2016) Consultation with local X Not supported - X Not supported - Provincial X Not supported - governments on Provincial and federal and federal governments Provincial and federal matters affecting their governments might not be might not be compelled to governments might not be interests in essential compelled to consult with consult with local compelled to consult with local governments when governments when local governments when negotiating non-treaty negotiating non-treaty negotiating non-treaty agreements with First agreements with First Nations agreements with First Nations that can affect local that can affect local Nations that can affect local government interests. government interests. government interests.
Commitment to the BC ✔ Supported – The report X Not supported – The ✔ Supported – The report Treaty Process and emphasizes the Principals’ report focuses mainly on non- recommends that all parties treaty negotiations support for completing treaty options outside the re-commit to concluding matters treaty negotiations in BC current treaty process for treaty negotiations. and encouraging more reconciliation. effective use of the BCTC and its expertise in advancing treaty negotiations.
ARC - 71 5.5
To: Aboriginal Relations Committee
From: Ralph G. Hildebrand, General Manager, Legal and Legislative Services/Corporate Solicitor
Date: September 12, 2016 Meeting Date: October 6, 2016
Subject: Manager’s Report
RECOMMENDATION That the Aboriginal Relations Committee receive for information the report dated September 12, 2016, titled “Manager’s Report.”
Musqueam’s Addition to Reserve On January 29, 2016, Block K (15.67ha) and the foreshore lands (3.14ha) were formally added by the Federal government to Musqueam’s Indian Reserve #2. Block K was transferred to the First Nation by the Province under the 2008 Reconciliation Agreement together with other lands. The foreshore lands were formerly claimed by the Province but were transferred to the federal government in 2010 to be added to the Reserve.
Observers at the Aboriginal Relations Committee On January 11, 2016, the Director of Legislative and Corporate Services, Squamish-Lillooet Regional District, advised Metro Vancouver staff that Director Jack Crompton, Councillor, Resort Municipality of Whistler, was appointed to Metro Vancouver’s Aboriginal Relations Committee in 2016 by the SLRD Board at its meeting on December 16, 2015.
On February 15, 2016, Metro Vancouver staff was informed by the Manager of Legislative Services, Sunshine Coast Regional District (SCRD), that Director Lorne Lewis (Electoral Area E - Elphinstone) was re-appointed to Metro Vancouver’s Aboriginal Relations Committee for 2016 during the SCRD Board meeting on February 11, 2016.
At its March 15, 2016 meeting, the Fraser Valley Regional District’s Aboriginal Relations Committee (FVARC) selected Director Sam Waddington, Councillor from the City of Chilliwack, as its observer at the Metro Vancouver Aboriginal Relations Committee meetings. Director Waddington is also the Vice-Chair of the FVARC.
National Energy Board Decision On May 19, 2016 the National Energy Board (NEB) gave its support to the proposed Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline. The National Energy Board recommended that the multi-billion dollar pipeline be constructed if 157 conditions are met. The NEB described the requirements as achievable for the company. Kinder Morgan must meet the conditions in order for the company to construct and operate the pipeline. The federal government has until December to make a decision on this project.
ARC - 72 MTAC Workshop on Consulting and Engaging with First Nations On June 22, 2016, the Municipal Technical Advisory Committee (MTAC) on Aboriginal Relations held its annual workshop. The topic of discussion was “Consulting and Engaging with First Nations.” The workshop featured representatives from three organizations – the Federal, Provincial and Tsawwassen First Nation governments – making their respective presentations, fielding questions and then engaging the membership in a round table discussion. The three-hour session was attended by 20 participants from municipalities and regional districts (Metro Vancouver and Fraser Valley).
2016 Metro Vancouver-Squamish Nation Community to Community Forum On July 7, 2016, Metro Vancouver and Squamish Nation co-hosted a Community to Community Forum at the Chief Joe Mathias Centre in North Vancouver which was attended by 40 participants, including elected officials and staff from Squamish Nation, the Metro Vancouver Board and its Aboriginal Relations Committee and regional district staff. The half-day Forum began with a traditional Squamish Nation welcome song, followed by a buffet luncheon and a performance by Squamish Nation’s Eagle Song Dancers.
Metro Vancouver Board Chair Greg Moore’s opening remarks focused on the importance of neighbouring communities working together. Carol Mason, CAO/Commissioner, presented Metro Vancouver’s governance, structure and functions. Simon So, General Manager, Liquid Waste Services, provided an update on the Lions Gate Secondary Waste Water Treatment Plant project. Speaking for Squamish Nation, Councillor Chris Lewis provided an overview of the First Nation’s history, while Chief Ian Campbell presented Squamish Nation’s governance structure and interests within its traditional territory. A question-answer session followed each presentation. The Forum ended with an exchange of gifts among all the speakers and a closing song from Squamish Nation’s representatives.
Report on Reconciliation with Métis Released On July 21, 2016, the Minister’s Special Representative on Reconciliation with Métis (Tom Isaac) released his report, titled A Matter of National and Constitutional Import: Report of the Minister’s Special Representative on Reconciliation with Métis: Section 35 Métis Rights and the Manitoba Metis Federation Decision, to the Minister, Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada (Hon. Carolyn Bennett). Mr. Isaac’s mandate was to map out a process for dialogue on Section 35 Métis rights and to engage with the Manitoba Métis Federation in order to explore ways to advance dialogue on reconciliation with Métis in Manitoba. The 50-page report advances 17 recommendations, including asking the Government of Canada to review how it currently funds Métis governments and institutions.
Federal Government Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls On August 3, 2016, the Federal Government announced the terms of the Missing and Murdered Aboriginal Women & Girls study. The government said it will need at least $13.8 million more than previously budgeted. This would bring the cost to at least $53.8 million; the original budget was for $40 million. The inquiry, which started on September 1, 2016, is slated to last two years. Five commissioners will lead the study, including Marion Buller. She is the chief commissioner, and is also B.C.'s first female First Nations judge. The five commissioners will have the power to summon witnesses and compel testimony.
Metro Vancouver Staff Lunch and Learn Session on Reconciliation and Orange Shirt Day Reconciliation Canada has been invited to host a workshop and make a presentation to Metro Vancouver staff at a Lunch and Learn session on Monday, September 26, 2016. The session will focus ARC - 73 on Aboriginal children who survived Indian Residential Schools. “Orange Shirt Day” (which takes place every year on September 30) will also be a focus of discussion at this event.
UBCM-First Nations Summit Province-wide Community to Community Forum Postponed to 2017 Local government and First Nation elected officials and senior staff are asked to note the postponement of the Provincial Community to Community Forum (PC2C) originally slated for October 18, 2016, to early 2017. Additional information will be provided from the Union of BC Municipalities via The Compass as it becomes available. Those with questions or comments are asked to contact [email protected].
Business Council of BC and BC Assembly of First Nations Sign Memorandum of Understanding On September 6, 2016, the Business Council of BC and the BC Assembly of First Nations signed a Memorandum of Understanding aimed at bringing economic prosperity to First Nation communities, as BC’s economy grows, by giving potential investors more confidence in BC-based projects. Described as the first agreement of its kind in Canada by its signatories, the agreement contains a commitment to erasing some of the disadvantages First Nations face in terms of education, health care and social supports. Reconciliation is also a key theme of the MOU. The BC Assembly of First Nations represents 203 First Nations in BC and works to advance their Aboriginal title, rights and other interests. The Business Council of BC represents a membership of employers in every sector of the provincial economy, including post-secondary institutions.
New Policy Directive on Additions to Reserve/Reserve Creation Released by the Federal Government On September 8, 2016, Aboriginal Relations was advised by the Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM) staff that a new policy directive on Additions to Reserve/Reserve Creation had become effective on July 27, 2016.
According to the federal government, the new Policy Directive is intended to help streamline the Additions to Reserve process, clarify roles and responsibilities of the First Nation and other stakeholders and promote better collaboration between all concerned parties such as local governments. The Additions to Reserve Process was established in 1972 and updated in 2001. Beginning in 2010, the federal government sought input on a revised policy directive.
Metro Vancouver developed a position paper on Additions to Reserve which was endorsed by the Board of Directors on March 30, 2012. Key issues addressed included: • Jurisdiction: change of land jurisdiction to Indian Reserves • Consultation: regional districts not mentioned in the ATR process • Communications: status of regional district consultation remains uncertain • Servicing: Metro Vancouver has no obligation to provide services to entities other than its member governments • Land Use Planning: potential for incompatible land uses • Local Government Approval Lacking: no local government veto provided
The above concerns have largely not been addressed in the revised policy directive.
ARC - 74 At the October 6, 2016 meeting of the Aboriginal Relations Committee, invited presenters from the federal government have been asked to provide an update on the policy directive on Additions to Reserve/ Reserve Creation.
Aboriginal Relations Committee 2016 Workplan Attachment 1 to this report sets out the Committee’s Workplan for 2016. The status of work program elements is indicated as pending, in progress, or complete. The listing is updated as need to include new issues that arise, items requested by the Committee, and changes in the schedule.
Attachments: 1. Aboriginal Relations Committee’s 2016 Work Plan
19185981
ARC - 75 ATTACHMENT 1
Aboriginal Relations Committee 2016 Work Plan
Priorities 1st Quarter Status Invited presentation on Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Final Report Complete Appoint local government representatives to the Katzie and Tsleil-Waututh treaty Complete tables Appoint a representative to the UBCM First Nations Relations Committee Complete Appoint an observer to the Fraser Valley Aboriginal Relations Committee Complete Co-host an event involving First Nation elected leaders (e.g. Community to Complete Community Forum) Provide updates, as and when available, on federal and provincial legislative Complete initiatives in relation to local government interests Liaise with UBCM First Nations Relations Committee Complete Provide quarterly progress reports in treaty negotiations Complete Update Metro Vancouver’s Profile of First Nations Complete 2nd Quarter Host an event involving staff of First Nation and local government administrations Complete (e.g. to discuss First Nations engagement) Provide updates, as and when available, on federal and provincial legislative Complete initiatives in relation to local government interests Liaise with UBCM First Nations Relations Committee Complete Provide quarterly progress reports in treaty negotiations Complete 3rd Quarter Provide updates, as and when available, on federal and provincial legislative Complete initiatives in relation to local government interests Liaise with UBCM First Nations Relations Committee Complete Provide quarterly progress reports in treaty negotiations Complete 4th Quarter Implement a corporate-wide First Nations communications and engagement In Process process Provide updates, as and when available, on federal and provincial legislative In Process initiatives in relation to local government interests Liaise with UBCM First Nations Relations Committee In Process Provide quarterly progress reports in treaty negotiations In Process Review the 2017 Aboriginal Relations budget In Process
Notes: • Priorities should include relevant key actions from the appropriate 2016 Business Plans in addition to others priorities relevant to the Committee’s work plan. • In the status column use “pending”, “in process” or “complete”.
ARC - 76 6.1
BRITISH COLUMBIA
Ref. 38220
January 21, 2016
Greg Moore Chair Metro Vancouver Board 4330 Kingsway Burnaby BC VSH 4G8
Dear Greg Moore:
Thank you for your November 16, 2015 letter regarding the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada Summary Report on Indian Residential Schools and your request urging the provincial government to move forward quickly with report recommendations.
I am pleased to hear that the Metro Vancouver Board is taking positive steps to implement the report recommendations at the local government level. The Province remains very committed to establishing and maintaining a mutually respectful relationship with Aboriginal peoples of British Columbia. The Province values the report recommendations and is engaged in a number of related initiatives including the development of formalized Aboriginal relations related competencies for use in employment competitions and tools to assist in including an Aboriginal lens in the development and implementation of government policy.
If you would like to speak with a ministry representative about the Report recommendations or with respect to the Metro Vancouver Board's recommendation to move forward quickly, please contact Monica Cox, Director, First Nations Social and Cultural Policy, Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation, at 250-356-5223 or email Monica.Cox(a),gov.bc.ca.
.. ./2
Ministry of Office of rhc Mailing Address: Telephone: 250 953-4844 Aboriginal Relations Minister PO Box 9051 Stn Prov Govt 1:acsimile: 250 953-4856 and Rcconciliacion Victoria BC VBW 9E2 e-mail: ABR.M [email protected] website: www.gov.bc.ca/arr ARC - 77 Ref. 38220 -2-
Again, thank you for writing.
Sincerely,
John Rustad Minister pc: Monica Cox Director, First Nations Social and Cultural Policy Ministry of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation
ARC - 78 ~ 4 metrovancouver 6.2 ~ SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION
Regional Parks Central Area Tel. 604-520-6442 Fax 604-520-3520
File: PA-03-01-WID
March 7, 2016
Ms. Debbie Miller Katzie First Nation 10946 Katzie Road Pitt Meadows, BC V3Y 2G6
Dear Ms. Miller:
Thank you for the letter, dated February 5, 2016. I found the eco-cultural restoration workshop last fall informative and appreciated the opportunity to participate.
As you know, we are undertaking a park planning process for Widgeon Marsh Regional Park Reserve. The initial phase included an archaeological overview assessment, biophysical summary, and review of recreational opportunities. We are now summarizing this information. The planning efforts will be advanced later this year and there will be opportunities through that process for further discussion regarding the potential for restoration projects and cultural interpretive exhibits in the area.
I have also shared this letter with my colleague Wendy DaDalt, who manages the regional parks in Maple Ridge, Pitt Meadows, and Langley. She would also be interested in exploring your ideas further with respect to opportunities at Pitt River Regional Greenway and Kanaka Creek Regional Park.
We look forward to the presentation of the Eco-Cultural Restoration Plan and future discussion on our shared interests.
Sincerely,
Jamie Vala Division Manager, Regional Parks Central Area
Cc: Chair, Barbara Steele, Aboriginal Relations Committee Wendy DaDalt, Division Manager, Regional Parks East Area
JV/cg
17535750
4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada VSH 4G8 • 604-432-6200 • www.metrovancouver.org Greater Vancouver Regional District • Greater Vancouver Water District• Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District • Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation ARC - 79 6.3 a metrovancouver ~ SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION
Executive Offices Tel. 604-432-6215 Fax 604-451-6614
MAR0 8 2016 File: CR-11-01-ARE
Chief Susan Miller and Members of Council Katzie First Nation 10946 Katzie Road Pitt Meadows, BC V3Y 2G6
Dear Chief Miller and Members of Council:
Re: Katzie First Nation Election Results
On behalf of the Board's Aboriginal Relations Committee, I write to congratulate you on your successful election as Chief and Council for Katzie First Nation.
As Chair of the Aboriginal Relations Committee, as well Metro Vancouver's local government representative at the Katzie treaty table, I look forward to continuing to meet and work with you and your community on both treaty and non-treaty related matters, including intergovernmental issues of mutual interest within the region.
Please feel free to contact me at your convenience if you have any questions or issues you would like to discuss. In the meantime, all the best to you as you begin your new term of office.
Sincerely,
Barbara Steele Chair, Aboriginal Relations Committee
HBS/RH/mp
cc: Chair Greg Moore, Metro Vancouver Aboriginal Relations Committee, Metro Vancouver Carol Mason, Chief Administrative Officer I Com!:11issioner
17616497 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada VSH 4G8 • 604-432-6200 • www.metrovancouver.org Greater Vancouver Regional District• Greater Vancouver Water District• Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District •Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation ARC - 80 ""'4 metrovancouver 6.4 ~ SERVICESAND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION
Of/ice of the Chair Tel. 604 43Z·6Z15 FaK 604 451-6614 APR14 2016 File: CP-12-01-TSA
Chief Bryce Williams and Members of the Executive Council and Legislature Tsawwassen First Nation 1926 Tsawwassen Drive N Tsawwassen, BC V4M 4G4 ......
~ t-'(lt::::. Dear C~s and Members of the Executive Council and legislature:
Re: Tsawwassen First Nation Election Results
On behalf of the Metro Vancouver Board, I write to congratulate you on your successful re-election as Chief, as well as to extend my congratulations to all Tsawwassen First Nation members who will be serving on the Executive Council and the Legislature.
I look forward to continuing to work with you and your community on intergovernmental issues of mutual interest within the region.
All the best to you as you begin your new term of office.
Yours truly,
Greg oore Chair, Metro Vancouver Board
GM/RH/mp
cc: Aboriginal Relations Committee, Metro Vancouver Carol Mason, Chief Administrative Officer/Commissioner
17902600 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada VSH 4GB • 604-432·6200 • www.metrovancouver.org Greater Vancouver Regional District• Greater Vancouver Water District• GreaterARC Vancouver - 81 Sewerage and Drainage District •Metro Vancouver Housing Corporation Fall 2016 6.5
independent facilitator for treaty negotiations updatetop story / Treaty Negotiations Tla’amin First Nation celebrates Status Report treaty effective date 65 First Nations, representing over half of all Indian Act Bands At midnight on Tuesday, April 5 the Tla’amin Nation became in BC, are participating in, or have the eighth First Nation to implement a constitutionally completed treaties through, the protected modern treaty in British Columbia. treaty negotiations process. Celebrations began in the late evening on April 4. After 12:01 am, Tla’amin’s new legislature conducted its first business as a self-governing First Nation by passing over 50 laws and regulations.…
Treaty anniversaries: BCTC at the United Nations First Nations Summit Task continuing to celebrate progress Acting Chief Commissioner Group and Co-Chairs re-elected Celeste Haldane, Director of Congratulations to the seven Process Mark Smith, and Process to three-year terms First Nations celebrating treaty Advisor Sashia Leung were at The First Nations Summit anniversaries this year. Five years the 15th session of the United held elections for Task Group ago, on April 1, 2011, Huu-ay-aht, Nations’ Permanent Forum on and Co-Chairs on June 9. Ka:’yu:’k’t’h’/Chek’tles7et’h’, Indigenous Issues (UNPFII). Congratulations to Grand Chief Toquaht, Uchucklesaht and Ucluelet For the first time, the Treaty Commission joined Edward John, Cheryl Casimer, (Yuulu?il?ath?) First Nations, along delegates from around the world at the United Nations and Robert Phillips on being… with the governments of Canada… Headquarters in New York. The forum was held from May 9 to 20…
Former Chief Commissioner appointed BCTC’s responsibility to public BC treaty negotiations process paying off for to Order of Canada education and information First Nations and the province On June 30, Sophie Pierre was named Public education is one of the Treaty It is essential for something as important to our country as Officer of the Order of Canada for her many Commission’s three roles in fulfilling treaty negotiations that we get our facts right. In an editorial dedicated years as a First Nations leader… its mandate. As the independent… published on May 3, Business in Vancouver wrote that…
ARC - 82
© BC Treaty Commission join our mailing list: follow us: Fall 2016
independent facilitator for treaty negotiations updatetop story / Tla’amin First Nation celebrates treaty effective date
At midnight on Tuesday, April 5 the Tla’amin Nation became the eighth First Nation table for his entire eight years with the BCTC, and said to implement a constitutionally protected modern treaty in British Columbia. this is by far the highlight of his work as a commissioner.
L-R: Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Tla’amin joins Tsawwassen First Nation, the five Reconciliation John Rustad, Minister of Maa-nulth First Nations, and the Nisga’a Nation in Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada Carolyn implementing a modern treaty. The Nisga’a treaty was Bennett, Hegus Clint Williams, Councilor Eugene negotiated earlier, while the other seven treaties were Louie, and shíshálh Nation Chief Calvin Craigan. negotiated within the BC treaty negotiations process.
The Tla’amin Final Agreement received Royal Assent in sent a mother, father, and child. Behind 2014. The First Nation had been preparing for the effective them stands three taller poles represent- date by drafting laws and preparing for self-governance. ing the past, present, and future of the Tla’amin Nation. The treaty provides Tla’amin First Nation with 8,323 hect- ares of treaty settlement lands and a one-time capital The celebration then moved to the transfer of approximately $31.1 million over ten years. In Evergreen Theatre in Powell River for an addition, it provides economic development funding of Celebrations began in the late evening on April 4. After afternoon of acknowledging the many people who have approximately $7.3 million, a fishing vessel fund of $0.3 12:01 am, Tla’amin’s new legislature conducted its first contributed to this historic milestone. Hegus (Tla’amin million, and $0.7 million annually in resource revenue business as a self-governing First Nation by passing over word for leader) Clint Williams was joined on stage by sharing for fifty years. Continued on page 3 50 laws and regulations. Tla’amin’s councilors, along with the Honourable Carolyn Bennett, Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs Tla’amin citizens and leaders gathered to celebrate and Canada, and the Honourable John Rustad, Minister of burn copies of the Indian Act as the Nation transitioned Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation. to self-governance. This symbolic ceremony reflects a key benefit of modern treaties for First Nations: progressing “I want to state to our people that the Indian Act never beyond the confines of the Indian Act and achieving self- defined us, or made us Tla’amin people,” Hegus Williams determination. said to the packed auditorium. “If anything, it has held us back and no longer wanted us to be Tla’amin.” Tla’amin had a joyous day-long community celebration on Saturday, April 9. It began with the unveiling and bless- Commissioners Jerry Lampert and Tom Happynook both ing of six welcoming totem poles outside of the new attended the celebrations, along with Treaty Commission Copies of the Indian Act were burned by Tla’amin citizens Government House. Three poles stand in front and repre- staff. Jerry has worked with the Tla’amin negotiating on the eve of the effective date. ARC - 83
© BC Treaty Commission join our mailing list: follow us: Fall 2016
independent facilitator for treaty negotiations updatetla’amin first nation celebrates… Continued from page 2 Tla’amin is located north of Powell River on the Sunshine Coast. There are approximately 1,075 Tla’amin citizens, with traditional territory and water around the Powell River area, including Lesqueti, Texada, and Cortes Islands, and the Comox Valley.
“Congratulations to the Tla’amin people for choosing a brighter and more prosperous future for their Nation and for the Powell River region,” said Commissioner Jerry Lampert. “This treaty strengthens their government, culture and land, and strengthens the economy of the Powell River region.”
Videos from the celebration are on the Treaty Commission’s YouTube channel, and more photos can be found on our Facebook page. The fire burns outside of Tla’amin First Nation’s new Government House on April 5. Hegus Clint Williams holds a copy of the Indian Act prior Photo courtesy of the Province of BC (flicker.com). to the burning. Photo courtesy of the Province of BC (flicker.com). All photos taken by Alex Sutcliffe, Tla’amin Nation citizen, unless otherwise noted.
Tla’amin citizen Dr. Evan Adams was the Tla’amin citizens were all smiles at the Tla’amin’s future leaders wave their Nation’s flag on stage at the Comm. Jerry Lampert spent eight years MC for the celebration. treaty effective date celebration. Evergreen Theatre in Powell River. supporting the Tla’amin negotiation table. ARC - 84
© BC Treaty Commission join our mailing list: follow us: Fall 2016 update independent facilitator for treaty negotiations Treaty anniversaries: continuing to celebrate progress Congratulations to the seven First Nations celebrating treaty anniversaries this year.
Five years ago, on April 1, 2011, Huu-ay-aht, Ka:’yu:’k’t’h’/ Chek’tles7et’h’, Toquaht, Uchucklesaht and Ucluelet (Yuulu?il?ath?) First Nations, along with the governments of Canada and British Columbia, implemented the Maa-nulth Final Agreement. These five former Indian Act Bands jointly negotiated the treaty, but have moved forward as five independent governments.
The Maa-nulth Nations are located on the west coast of Vancouver Island. Since the effective date, the Nations have implemented numerous laws and regulations, and have pursued various economic development opportunities on their treaty settlement lands, in forestry, fisheries, and tourism. The communities have also achieved infrastructure milestones, including sewage treatment, water systems, and new roads.
The Tsawwassen Final Agreement was implemented seven years ago, in April 2009. Since that time, Tsawwassen has created a billion-dollar retail and Maa-nulth First Nations citizens march to the BC Legislature for the introduction of the Maa-nulth Final Agreement in November 2007. residential development: The Tsawwassen Mills and Tsawwassen Commons malls. The project is creating thousands of jobs, was the biggest real estate deal in Nisga’a Nation implemented the first modern-day communities negotiating treaties and seeking self- BC for 2014, and is the largest non-resource agreement treaty in BC 16 years ago, in April 2000. Although the governance. The Treaty Commission works to connect ever signed by a First Nation in BC. Nisga’a Final Agreement was negotiated prior to the First Nations currently negotiating with First Nations establishment of the made-in-BC treaty negotiations leading and implementing modern treaties and self- The development would not have been possible without process, it set the stage for the BC Treaty Commission government through forums and other venues to the Tsawwassen treaty, and the Nation did not sell its Agreement and the BC treaty negotiations process. support sharing knowledge and experience. The Treaty treaty settlement land to develop the malls. Instead, it Commission is grateful for their generosity, mentorship, leased the 108 acres for 99 years, ensuring its governance, These seven treaty Nations are no longer governed and leadership. taxation, and control over the land. by the Indian Act, and are an inspiration to the many ARC - 85
© BC Treaty Commission join our mailing list: follow us: Fall 2016 update independent facilitator for treaty negotiations BCTC at the United Nations Acting Chief Commissioner Celeste Haldane, Director of Process Mark Smith, and Process Advisor Sashia Leung were at the 15th session of the United Nations’ Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII).
For the first time, the Treaty Commission joined This year’s UNPFII was particularly historic for Canadians. delegates from around the world at the UN Headquarters The Honourable Carolyn Bennett, Minister of Indigenous in New York. The forum was held from May 9 to 20 with the and Northern Affairs Canada, announced on the second L-R: Acting Chief Commissioner Celeste Haldane, Process Advisor theme ‘Indigenous Peoples: Conflict, Peace and Resolution’. day of the forum that Canada has officially removed it Sashia Leung, and Director of Process Mark Smith at the UN. objector status to the UNDRIP. BCTC made an official submission, which included three recommendations that were accepted into the “We intend nothing less than to adopt and implement at hand. The BC treaty negotiations process is well placed UNPFII 15th session report. The submission connected the Declaration in accordance with the Canadian to embrace these changes, and lead the country, and the modern treaties and the BC treaty negotiations process Constitution,” she announced at the forum. Minister world, in reconciliation.” to the principles of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Bennett added that Canada sees “modern treaties and Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), particularly the principle self-government agreements as the ultimate expression Minister Bennett was joined by Justice Minister and of self-determination and self-governance. This will of free, prior, and informed consent among partners,” Attorney General of Canada Jody Wilson-Raybould, who form the focus of our 2016 annual report, which will and “UNDRIP reflects the spirit and intent” of treaties. opened the forum with a statement on the relationship be released on October 13th. between Canada and Indigenous Peoples. “By adopting and implementing the Declaration, we are breathing life into section 35 and recognizing it as a full box “The challenge moving forward, I submit, is not to fight of rights for Indigenous peoples.” said Minister Bennett. battles already won, but rather to translate these hard fought for rights into practical and meaningful benefits The Treaty Commission is optimistic on the ground in our communities,” said Minister Wilson- Raybould. “Indigenous communities are clearly in a period this will result in a renewed commitment of transition — of Nation building and rebuilding. Our job to completing more treaties in British as the Government of Canada is to support this transition.” Columbia. The Treaty Commission recognizes Grand Chief Ed John of the First Nations Summit political executive L-R: Marc-André Blanchard, Permanent Representative of Canada “Modern treaties, fairly negotiated and honourably imple- for his dedicated work with the UN. He participated in to the UN, Mr. Alvaro Pop Ac, Chair of the UNPFII, Hon. Jody Wilson- mented, are the greatest expression of reconciliation and developing the UNDRIP and will complete his second Raybould, Hon. Carolyn Bennett, and Grand Chief Ed John, along of the UNDRIP,” said Acting Chief Commissioner Celeste three-year term as a North American Representative with representatives from Guatemala. Haldane. “A new era of recognition and reconciliation is to the UNPFII this December. ARC - 86
© BC Treaty Commission join our mailing list: follow us: Fall 2016
independent facilitator for treaty negotiations updateT’exelc First Nation is fourth NStQ community to vote ‘yes’ to AIP First Nations Summit Task Group On April 28, 2016 the Williams Lake Indian Band (T’exelc First Nation) held a second community vote on advancing and Co-Chairs re-elected to to Final Agreement negotiations. The official referendum resulted in a ‘yes’ vote, and T’exelc now joins the other three-year terms three NStQ First Nations in Stage 5 negotiations. The First Nations Summit held elections for Task Group and Co-Chairs on June 9. The Northern Shuswap Tribal Congratulations to Grand Chief Edward John, Cheryl Casimer, and Robert Phillips on being Council and its associated NStQ Treaty Group represents Canim re-elected to the First Nations Summit Task Group, and Leah George-Wilson and Ray Harris Lake Indian Band [Tsq’escen’], on being re-elected Co-Chairs. All five will serve another three-year term. Soda Creek Indian Band [Xat’sull], Canoe Creek/Dog Creek Indian The Treaty Commission welcomes the continuity this Band [Stswecem’c/Xgat’tem], re-election brings. The Task Group and Co-Chairs were and Williams Lake Indian Band involved with the Multilateral Engagement Process, [T’exelc]. The four communities held Agreement in which looked at improving and expediting treaty Principle (AIP) votes in February that resulted in Canim negotiations in BC and resulted in a report released Lake, Soda Creek, and Canoe Creek/Dog Creek all voting in early June. The implementation of the report’s ‘yes’ to proceeding. recommendations has the potential to accelerate the completion of more modern treaties in BC. T’exelc’s initial vote was suspended after a disruption took place during the voting process. Disruptions such This continuity is equally important after Canada as this one reveal the challenges communities face when officially announced its full support of the United Nations conducting AIP approval votes and Final Agreement Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in ratification votes. Support from all negotiating parties May. One of the core principles of the Declaration is the is necessary to ensure successful votes: votes that are advancement of self-determination and self-governance fair, informed, and with engaged participation from the for Indigenous Peoples. This is also a core principle of the community. The Treaty Commission plays a support role BC treaty negotiations process. Modern treaties, fairly during this process, which includes the publication of negotiated and honourably implemented, provide an the upcoming Guide to First Nations Ratification. ideal opportunity to lead the country in reconciliation.
The Treaty Commission congratulates T’exelc and the The Treaty Commission looks forward to working with L-R: Ray Harris, Leah George-Wilson, Grand Chief Edward John, other three NStQ First Nations on engaging its com- the First Nations Summit, along with the Governments Robert Phillips, and Cheryl Casimer at a First Nations Summit munities and voting ‘yes’ to moving forward to Final of Canada and British Columbia, to effectively make meeting in June 2015. Agreement negotiations. progress in negotiations and advance reconciliation. ARC - 87
© BC Treaty Commission join our mailing list: follow us: Fall 2016 update independent facilitator for treaty negotiations BC treaty negotiations process paying off for First Nations and the province It is essential for something as important to our country as treaty negotiations that we get our facts right.
In an editorial published on May 3 The development will create over 4,500 jobs during Without a treaty there is no self-government. Without (“Bypassing BC treaty process pays off” — construction and another 3,000 jobs when the shopping self-government the legacy and problems of colonialism centre opens. This development is a direct result of the will continue. “The Indian Act was put into place to BIV issue 1383; May 3–9, 2016) Business Tsawwassen treaty. control and limit the existence of First Nation people, in Vancouver wrote that there are two it never provided any security or certainty,” said Hegus First Nations that “have managed to While agreements, such as the Jericho Lands deal BIV Clint Williams, Tla’amin Nation’s leader. referenced in the May 3 editorial, provide economic navigate” the six-stage made-in-BC treaty benefits, many First Nations are committed to By implementing its treaty, Williams says Tla’amin is negotiations process, providing “a meagre reconciliation through treaties. As noted in the Treaty “removing [themselves] from the shackles of the Indian return” on taxpayer investment. Commission’s 2015 annual report [p. 23], 65 First Act to become a self-governing nation.” Nations, out of all 200 Indian Act Bands in BC (52.5%) are participating in or have completed treaties through the This is incorrect. BC treaty negotiations process. Of those, 41 First Nations A modern treaty, fairly (39%) are in active or completed negotiations. As of April 5, 2016, when Tla’amin Nation’s treaty took negotiated and honourably effect, eight First Nations are implementing modern In 2015, four Agreements in Principle were signed, the treaties in BC. Seven were negotiated within the BC treaty most ever in one year. So far in 2016 the four communities implemented by the First negotiations process: Tsawwassen, the five Maa-nulth represented by the Northern Shuswap Tribal Council each Nation, Canada, and BC, is First Nations (Huu-ay-aht, Ka:’yu:’k’t’h’/Chek’tles7et’h’, voted ‘yes’ to continue into Final Agreement negotiations. Toquaht, Uchucklesaht, Ucluelet), and Tla’amin. The the greatest expression of Nisga’a treaty was negotiated prior. BIV noted that the taxpayer investment in treaty negotiations has been $656 million. Although this is the reconciliation. Bypassing Since signing its treaty in 2009, Tsawwassen First Nation amount the Treaty Commission has allocated since 1993, created a billion-dollar retail and residential development, only $141 million is non-repayable contribution funding. this does not bode well for one of the largest construction projects in BC, and the The remaining funds are repayable loans and the seven biggest non-resource agreement ever signed by a First First Nations implementing treaties are already repaying our collective future. Nation in BC. its loans. ARC - 88
© BC Treaty Commission join our mailing list: follow us: Fall 2016 update independent facilitator for treaty negotiations Former Chief Commissioner Nancy Olding retires after 23 years with the appointed to Order of Canada Treaty Commission On June 30, Sophie Pierre was named On May 1 the Treaty Officer of the Order of Canada for her Commission’s many dedicated years as a First Nations longest-serving staff leader. This appointment is made on the member entered retirement. Nancy recommendation of the Advisory Council Olding has been the for the Order of Canada. executive assistant to every chief commissioner the The Order of Canada recognizes outstanding achievement BCTC has had. and dedication to service in all sectors of Canadian society. There are three tiers: Companion, Officer and Member. Nancy received More than 6,000 people have been appointed to the formal education in Order since its creation in 1967. Ontario and worked for many years as an Sophie was Chief Commissioner for six years, from 2009 executive assistant until 2015. Before leading the Treaty Commission, she in various legal and manufacturing offices. Prior to joining was the elected chief of ?aq’am [St. Mary’s Indian Band] BCTC she worked as an assistant to Chuck Connaghan in for 26 years and administrator and chair of the Ktunaxa/ industrial relations. Kinbasket Tribal Council for 30 years. While serving as First Nations Summit co-chair in 1992, Sophie was a signatory In April 1993, when Chuck became the first chief to the historic BC Treaty Commission Agreement. commissioner of the Treaty Commission, Nancy joined him as his executive assistant. She supported every chief Sophie has continued to support modern treaty making, commissioner that followed, including Alec Robertson, including attending and presenting at this year’s Multi- Miles Richardson, Steven Point and Sophie Pierre. Community First Nations Governance and Treaty Forum in March. The Treaty Commission wishes Nancy all the best in her retirement. Her knowledge, dedication and diligence will Congratulations to Sophie for this monumental and be greatly missed. well-deserved achievement. ARC - 89
© BC Treaty Commission join our mailing list: follow us: Fall 2016 update independent facilitator for treaty negotiations BCTC’s responsibility to public education and information Public education is one of the Treaty Commission’s three roles in fulfilling its mandate. As the independent voice of treaty making in British Columbia, BCTC is uniquely positioned to provide the public with treaty related information and advocacy.
The governments of Canada and BC also share The Treaty Commission presents on treaty negotiations responsibility for public information, and the three at conferences, special events, community forums, parties to each set of negotiations — Canada, BC and tradeshows, and schools. This year we have presented the First Nation — provide specific information on their to universities, city officials, law groups, and industry participation in treaty negotiations. professionals. On occasion, BCTC hosts visitors from around the world and shares information about the The Treaty Commission achieves its public education role treaty negotiations process in BC. Most recently, the in a number of ways, including publishing free resources Treaty Commission met with representatives from and reporting on the status of treaty negotiations Indonesia and the Philippines. Commissioner Jerry Lampert spoke at the NStQ Annual Citizen’s through the release of the annual report and newsletters. Assembly in April. The BCTC website is a resource of materials and In January of this year the Treaty Commission presented information on treaty negotiations, and lately our at the ‘Crown in the 21st Century’ conference presented One of the best ways to interact in-person with the active social media presence has meant more direct by the Government House Foundation of British public is at trade shows and conventions. In the past engagement with the public regarding treaty issues. Columbia and the Institute for the Study of the Crown year the Treaty Commission had booths at the Union in Canada. This conference was attended by Lieutenant of BC Municipalities conference trade show and the Governors and territorial Commissioners from across Vancouver Board of Trade trade show. We had one-on- Canada, as well as many constitutional experts. Acting one conversations with municipal and business leaders Chief Commissioner Celeste Haldane was on the in BC, and answered questions they had about treaty Indigenous Peoples and the Honour of the Crown panel negotiations and building relationships with First discussion moderated by former Chief Commissioner and Nations in BC. Lieutenant Governor of British Columbia, the Honourable Steven Point. This fall we will be at the Vancouver Island Economic Alliance Summit in Nanaimo and the BC Federation of BCTC is increasing its engagement with youth in BC. Labour Convention in Vancouver. This year the Treaty Commission held workshops at the annual Gathering Our Voices (GOV) national Indigenous If you are interested in supporting BCTC’s public youth conference. It was the first time BCTC attended education role by hosting a speaker at an upcoming Acting Chief Commissioner Celeste Haldane at the Vancouver GOV, and the workshops focused on youth empowerment conference or in your classroom, please email us at Board of Trade trade show last year. through governance education. [email protected] ARC - 90
© BC Treaty Commission join our mailing list: follow us: Fall 2016
independent facilitator for treaty negotiations update bctc is on twitter:
BCTC’s YouTube Best of BCTC Instagram like our fb page: BCTC’s YouTube channel now has all seventeen Are you following us? presentations from the Multi-Community First Nation Governance and Treaty Forum, and videos from the Tla’amin effective date celebration. Check them out at www.youtube.com/BCTreatyInformation
Watch Judge Steven Point’s inspiring Nationhood Keynote Address from day three of the Forum on our YouTube channel.
Tla’amin’s Hegus Clint Williams at Spotted in K’ómoks First Nation’s Hon. Carolyn Bennett at the UN BCTC joined Lake Babine Nation’s the totem blessing outside of the administration building: the I-Hos announcing the Government of land and lake tour with the new Tla’amin Government House. canoe carved in 1994 by Calvin Canada’s full support of UNDRIP. negotiating parties in August. Hunt, Mervyn Child, and K’ómoks Hegus Clint Williams community members. spoke about the importance of self- governance to the Tla’amin Nation at the treaty effective date celebration in April.
Commissioner Jerry Lampert gave a speech and interview on the significance of Metlakatla First Nation’s Health In April, the Little Chiefs opened Photo taken on the way Always know the latest BCTC the Tla’amin Final Centre. NStQ’s Annual Citizen’s Assembly to Duncan to meet with news by signing up for our Agreement. Watch with a welcome song. Hul’qumi’num Treaty Group. newsletter at www.bctreaty.ca the video on our YouTube channel.
ARC - 91
© BC Treaty Commission join our mailing list: follow us: Fall 2016
independent facilitator for treaty negotiations updateThere are 65 First Nations, representing 105 Indian Act Bands out of a total of 200 Indian Act Bands in BC, which are participating in or have completed treaties through the BC treaty negotiations process. Active or completed negotiations Status Report involve 40 First Nations, representing 76 Indian Act Bands, totalling 38% of all Indian Act Bands in BC.
Gitxsan Hereditary Chiefs McLeod Lake Indian Band first nations implementing treaty agreements (7) Homalco Indian Band Musqueam Nation Maa-nulth First Nations [Huu-ay-aht, Ka:’yu:’k’t’h’/Che:k’tles7et’h’, Hul’qumi’num Treaty Group Nuu-chah-nulth Tribal Council Toquaht, Uchucklesaht, Ucluelet] Kaska Dena Council Quatsino First Nation Tla’amin Nation Laich-Kwil-Tach Council of Chiefs Ross River Dena Council Tsawwassen First Nation Lake Babine Nation Sechelt Indian Band Nazko First Nation Snuneymuxw First Nation - first nations with completed final agreements (2 ) Stó:lo Xwexwilmexw Treaty Association Squamish Nation Lheidli T’enneh First Nation Taku River Tlingit First Nation Teslin Tlingit Council Yale First Nation Tlatlasikwala Nation Tsimshian First Nations* [Kitasoo/XaiXais] Tlowitsis First Nation Westbank First Nation first nations in final agreement negotiations Tsay Keh Dene Band or completed agreements in principle (7) Tsimshian First Nations* [Gitga’at] In-SHUCK-ch Nation Tsleil-Waututh Nation K’ómoks First Nation Wei Wai Kum and Kwiakah First Nations Northern Shuswap Tribal Council Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs about the bc treaty commission Te’mexw Treaty Association The Treaty Commission is the independent body responsible Tsimshian First Nations* [Kitselas and Kitsumkalum] first nations not currently negotiating for overseeing treaty negotiations among the governments Wuikinuxv Nation a treaty (25) of Canada, BC and First Nations in BC. It has three roles: Yekooche First Nation Acho Dene Koe First Nation facilitation, funding First Nations, and province-wide public Allied Tribes of Lax Kw’alaams information and education. first nations in advanced Carcross/Tagish First Nation agreement in principle negotiations (7) contact us at Carrier Sekani Tribal Council t 604 482 9200 f 604 482 9222 toll free 1 855 482 9200 Ditidaht First Nation and Pacheedaht First Nation Champagne and Aishihik First Nations 700 – 1111 Melville St Vancouver BC Canada v6e 3v6 Gwa’Sala-’Nakwaxda’xw Nation Cheslatta Carrier Nation [email protected] www.bctreaty.ca Katzie Indian Band Council of the Haida Nation Ktunaxa Kinbasket Treaty Council follow us on instagram Esk’etemc First Nation ’Namgis Nation https://instagram.com/bctreaty - - Haisla Nation Tla-o-qui-aht First Nations Heiltsuk Nation follow us on twitter Tsimshian First Nations* [Metlakatla] https://instagram.com/bctreaty Hupacasath First Nation *Tsimshian is counted as one First Nation, but has communities in various stages Hwlitsum First Nation like us on facebook www.facebook.com/bctreaty first nations in active negotiations (17) Klahoose First Nation Kwakiutl Nation watch us on youtube Da’naxda’xw/Awaetlala Nation www.youtube.com/user/BCTreatyInformation Gitanyow Hereditary Chiefs Liard First Nation ARC - 92
© BC Treaty Commission join our mailing list: follow us: