[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]
Thursday, May 11, 1995
.1040 
[English]
The Chairman: Good morning to you all.
[Technical difficulty - Editor] - pride of any legislative architect, I should think. Those of you who haven't yet seen the chamber, please find a moment to have a look at it. It is very impressive.
We have a pretty heavy schedule this morning, and in order to accommodate everybody, we thought the best approach would be to assign 45 minutes to each group. Within that 45 minutes each group will speak, and then within the time left there will be a quick round of questions.
To begin with, from the Dene Nation we have Grand Chief Gerry Antoine of the Deh Cho First Nation, together with Fred Sangris of the Yellowknife Land Environment Committee, and Michel Paper and Isadore Tsetta, who are elders.
Grand Chief Gerry Antoine, welcome. We're very glad to have this opportunity to hear you. The floor is yours and we welcome you again.
Grand Chief Gerry Antoine (Deh Cho First Nation): I'd like to thank the standing committee for coming to our area. It's a really good time to be here because it's spring and things are beginning to change. I think it is a new beginning having the members here.
.1045
I believe the protection act was incorporated about eight years ago. I wasn't involved with it at the beginning, but I'm glad you've given me an opportunity to be here.
My name is Gerald Antoine and I'm the Deh Cho grand chief. I'm here on behalf of Mr. Bill Erasmus, who's the national chief of the Dene Nation.
The point I want to make here is in regard to a Dene perspective. I'll start by saying that everybody has his or her own perspective of seeing the world. In this part of the world, the Dene world, we see the world on the basis of the land and look at the environment that comprises the whole land.
The way we look at the land is very important to our way of life. If you look at the world, people have their own way of life. The Dene have a way of life that is very instrumental to making sure the environment is healthy and clean, not only for themselves but for future generations.
If you look at this part of the world, you see the Mackenzie River basin. I don't have a map here to help you visualize the size of the Mackenzie River basin, but it comprises both Treaty 8 and Treaty 11 areas.
When the treaty party came into the area, it wanted to make some sort of arrangement with the first nations here. On both Treaty 8 and Treaty 11, when the first nations were describing their area, they didn't have a map to show the treaty party how big the area was, or which area they had occupied. But through their oral presentation and because of them using the land, they described the upper part of the Mackenzie River basin in Treaty 8. When the treaty party came into this area in 1921, the people also described the lower part of the Mackenzie River basin. So if you put both of those treaty areas together they comprise the Mackenzie River basin. People in that area live their way of life utilizing the land and the resources there. I wanted to explain that because that's the way we see the land and why it's so important.
One of the other things I wanted to share with the committee is that the Dene have been guided by these principles that ensure a healthy environment for our future generations.
The Dene Nation has two members, which are the Deh Cho First Nation and the Treaty 8. Both have similar statements that I want to state. The Deh Cho First Nation declaration of rights states that we, the Dene of Deh Cho, have lived on our homeland according to our own laws and system of government since time immemorial. Our homeland is comprised of the ancestral territories and waters of the Deh Cho Dene. We were put here by the creator as keepers of our waters and land. That's one of the points in the declaration.
The Treaty 8 declaration states that since time immemorial we, the Dene, have lived our own lives on our own land in our own way. While inhabiting our territory we, the Dene, have developed and maintained freedoms, languages, and cultural and spiritual beliefs to live in balance with Mother Earth. These are the things both organizations are using in their mission statement to regain their territory.
.1050
You'll probably also hear today from the other Dene people who are down river from both Treaty 8 and the Deh Cho. I believe they are going to be making a presentation with regard to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.
I cannot emphasize enough that our Dene principles have always existed and are paramount to other governments' legislation, such as the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.
In the past 20 years it has become apparent that our environment is being threatened; therefore the existence of the Dene is being threatened. As I indicated in my opening remarks, the way the Dene see the land and how they associate with the land is very important and very vital to their way of life. Anything that threatens that particular environment threatens that way of life.
The primary reason is the introduction of toxic substances in our ecosystem. Most of these toxins reached the north through long-range transport in the air and water from other parts of the world. Many of these toxins are fat-soluble, which puts us at a particular risk due to the high fat content in our food chain. I believe a group from Montreal is doing a study on the Dene and the nutrients they consume.
Northerners, especially those who maintain their traditional way of life, are the ultimate victims of industrial activity and the reckless use of man-made chemicals. One of the things foretold in the Dene prophesy is that whatever occurs is not done by the Creator but by man. Man has to be held accountable for these actions.
We encourage all legislation that can help us monitor and protect our environment, including the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. We have some specific suggestions for the panel regarding CEPA and its implementation.
Under section 11, the definition of toxin must be re-examined. As it is, the three criteria are: that a substance must be emitted by Canada; there must be proven human health effects; and there must be a proven exposure to the toxin. We believe the inherent properties of the chemical, especially its toxicity, are enough to label a chemical a toxin. If exposure must be proven, it could be too late to reverse the trend.
If you look at the prophesies of the Dene there are going to be people who bring disease. Not to offend anyone, but the Dene language is a very descriptive language. Believe it or not there are no swear words in the language. One of the things our people had envisioned was that people were going to come here bringing various diseases. Looking at the news yesterday, a new virus has been discovered. It shows certain things are occurring that man cannot control. But there are certain things man can control, particularly when various chemicals are being developed. A number of things have been done in an attempt to try to control those types of things. That is one of the things CEPA is trying to do.
.1055
CEPA's definition should be expanded to include emissions from other countries. Although they cannot be regulated by Canada, they should be monitored. This is important for northerners. It could provide us with some accurate information to bring to the international table. This would strengthen our negotiations on a global scale.
Under CEPA, Canada can still produce substances on our banned or restricted list and export them to other countries. One example of this is the production and export of Lindane. Canada must end this practice. It is difficult for us to demand action at an international level while we are guilty of such practices.
Regionally, we have concerns with two substances in particular: arsenic and sulphur dioxide. In the past Canada was very close to setting a standard for arsenic under the Clean Air Act. In the mid 1970s Giant Mine was able to persuade Canada that this was not necessary. As it is, we have no way of ensuring that arsenic levels will remain as they are and not revert to the level seen in the 1980s or in the 1970s.
More importantly, the amount of arsenic in the air in Yellowknife has been estimated to be 15 times that of southern industrialized cities. The Yellowknife Dene are very concerned because arsenic is a proven cancer-causing agent. Arsenic is now under review by CEPA, and we strongly urge the government to fast-track it onto its priority substance list.
For sulphur dioxide, monitoring in the city of Yellowknife has indicated that on several occasions levels were higher than the one-hour maximum acceptable level set by CEPA. The respiratory effects at those levels, although mild and reversible, would be seen in sensitive individuals such as asthmatics. I would like to point out that the monitoring station is in downtown Yellowknife. It is safe to assume that those living closer to the source, which is Giant Mine, would be greatly affected. The people who are with me are from the community of N'dilo, which is halfway between the mine and the city. Therefore the Dene residents are at a higher risk than others. We suggest that air quality guidelines are not enough for sulphur dioxide. I recommend that CEPA must regulate actual emission levels.
Another area we wish to address is the effect CEPA has on the implementation of other northern programs. Millions of dollars have been spent to clean up CEPA violations in the NWT. This money comes out of the Arctic Environmental Strategy's Action on Waste Program.
This year over half of the waste program's budget will be spent dealing with CEPA violations. We will spend $2 million cleaning up the United States military base in Iqaluit this year. Canadians, especially northerners, should not have to pay to dispose of American military garbage. CEPA should actively pursue the U.S. to cover these costs. As it stands, if the U.S. does reimburse Canada, the money will go to the treasury and not back to the Arctic Environmental Strategy's Action on Waste Program and northerners.
.1100
Another area I would like to cover is environmental protection and funding. There are many outside factors that hinder the ability of first nations to protect and preserve our environment. For the Dene, these things include the oil and gas industry, and mineral exploration and development.
We need funds to address these issues and deal with the large corporations that want our land. The Government of Canada has a fiduciary responsibility to ensure that we have a healthy environment.
Native organizations are severely stressed by Environment Canada's initiatives. For example, in recent months the Dene Nation has been asked to review or participate in conferences concerning the CEPA toxic substances list, endangered species, air issues, climate change, pollution prevention, migratory birds, and the State of the Environment report. Approximately one-third of the Environment staff's time is spent dealing with Environment Canada issues. Yet their only source of funding is through the Arctic Environmental Strategy under the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.
Environment Canada does provide air tickets and accommodation for Dene to participate in meetings, but this is not enough. Environment Canada must provide funds that allow us to build our capacity to deal with your issues.
To summarize, our suggestions are: redefine the term ``toxin''; stop Canadian production and export of banned substances; develop an arsenic standard; develop emission regulations for sulphur dioxide; find funds other than Action on Waste to cover clean-up, especially of American military sites; and Environment Canada must properly support aboriginal organizations.
We are encouraged to see that CEPA's definition of the environment is very similar to the holistic version known by the Dene. When I explain how the land is and how we associate with the land, you can see the land has a lot of spiritual significance for the Dene. We don't look at the land as the land itself; there are linkages to the various parts of our way of life. I see that your definition of the environment is almost similar to our holistic version.
We add that CEPA must recognize and encourage the indigenous way of life. This can be accomplished by including indigenous participation in the processes of making decisions and setting priorities.
We would like to see CEPA better address the concerns of the Canadian people. Right now, there is a perception that legislation favours industry over people. We in the north have the benefit of seeing what has happened in industrial areas of the south and can avoid repeating the same mistakes.
I would like to conclude with this thought. All of us here have a common goal to ensure we pass a healthy environment on to our children and grandchildren. Let's start working together.
There's one more thing I would like to add for your information. It deals with the environment. I'd like you to pass this on to the people who are involved with Fisheries and Oceans.
I spoke with some fishermen across the lake in Hay River and informed them I would be making a presentation regarding the environment. They also have a concern that 2.5% of water content is comprised of icebergs and underground streams, 97.5% is salt water, and 0.05% is freshwater lakes and rivers.
.1105
In the present system of fishing, approximately 8 million pounds of fish are dumped annually in the Great Slave Lake. He has written me a memo here, so I'm raising this because it has to do with the environment.
He has also written stating that an imbalance of fish species may be a contributing factor in the detrimental water quality in some given areas of the lake. The mass destruction of fish resources is definitely a contributing factor to high unemployment in the fishing industry, plus the deficit factor, inadequate wages for the fishermen and helpers, not to mention the inadequate living standards for the fishermen themselves from lack of price and mass dumping.
He has indicated that the Mackenzie River and the Peace River are major drainage systems in North America. He also points out that they flow into Great Slave Lake here.
The fish waste in Great Slave Lake is 8 million pounds and over and is comprised of 2.2 million pounds of tullibee, 1 million to 1.5 million pounds of marias, 1 million to 2 million pounds of sucker, and approximately 3 million pounds of fish, fish guts and other things they throw away.
Basically the point he's making here is that there is a lot of waste and you could make better use of those 8 million-plus pounds that are thrown back into the Great Slave Lake from the fishermen here.
In my previous presentation I talked about the industry and how it affects the environment and so forth. Here you have another industry, which is the fishery, and the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation. Basically the fishermen here in the Great Slave Lake have a serious concern, so that's the point he wanted me to bring out. I'd like to end my presentation with that.
The Chairman: Thank you very much, Chief Antoine. Congratulations for making such an interesting presentation and for being so clear and concise in your five points. Thank you also for bringing forward the observations made by your neighbouring group about the 8 million pounds of waste related to the fisheries. It is a very interesting part of that and certainly deserves attention.
There are colleagues who would like to ask you questions. I would regretfully ask them to limit themselves to one question each.
.1110
[Translation]
Mrs. Guay (Laurentides): Good morning, Grand Chief Antoine. I would simply like to have more details on the dumping of fish waste in the lakes because it is the first time that this issue has been mentioned by natives at our hearings. It might be good to get more information on the subject in order to see what could be done.
[English]
Grand Chief Antoine: I've been talking to some of the concerned fishermen from Hay River. They were at the Campbell River meeting the first nations held this year. The person I was talking to in Hay River has been providing me with information. Unfortunately, I don't have it all with me today, but the Dene Nation office can certainly provide you with the information you need.
I raise this concern because one of the Dene principles is that you only take what you need. Looking at the fishing industry, it's taking more than it needs. When you see that 8 million pounds of fish are being thrown back into the river, that's not sustainable development; that's a waste of a valuable resource.
I have some people here with me who will contact the individual in Hay River to obtain the information on the question you asked.
Mr. DeVillers (Simcoe North): Thank you, Grand Chief Antoine. I just wanted to pick up on your statement that there's the perception that legislation favours industry over people. One of the things this committee has been looking at and we've had a lot of evidence on is the question of the precautionary principle.
We're considering recommending amendments to CEPA that would say that in the future, for a substance to be permitted to be used, there must be evidence that it's safe, as opposed to the existing system that is the reverse of that. For a substance to be banned there must be evidence that it is unsafe. Do you think that approach would address some of the concerns you've expressed that the legislation favours industry over people?
Grand Chief Antoine: We have seen the benefit of what has happened in southern Canada, particularly around the Great Lakes and with Lake Winnipeg.
When you look at the lake here, some industries are putting some of their chemicals in the water system. You look at the water system of the Slave River. You look at the Peace River and Hinton. I believe there is an open-pit mine there that is also disposing its waste in the water.
.1115
The Bennett Dam has also created certain things with the water system. The pulp mills along the river system are alreally putting substances in there. Those substances have been found to be unsafe, but they're still putting these things into the water.
There are also the gold-mining industries such as Giant Yellowknife Mines Limited. If you walk in the area and look at what has happened, their tailings pond is pretty serious. That also goes into the water system. As a result of the arsenic levels, in 1970 it came close to considering it not be used, but there was some influence by the industry to keep it the way it is. We lived with that. We're learning from the past.
I made the statement that there seems to be a perception that legislation favours industry over people, and I think that is true. We now need to make sure the legislation protects the people, because whatever we utilize the people are the ones who are affected. Regardless of where you are, it affects the people. I think we have to make sure there is a safeguard for protecting the people.
Mr. Gilmour (Comox - Alberni): Thank you for an excellent presentation. Your point on air-borne and water-borne pollutants coming in from other countries is very well taken. Whether it's through CEPA or international agreements, it clearly has to be addressed.
This trip through the Arctic has been a real eye-opener in terms of how fragile the Arctic is and how susceptible it is to air-borne and water-borne pollutants from other countries. Your point is well taken. We probably have to address it through international treaties. In my view, we have been particularly remiss until now. Thank you for bringing it to our attention.
Mrs. Kraft Sloan (York - Simcoe): Will we have a second round? I have concerns about the diamond mines, but if you would throw them into the other questions I'm going to ask, I'd appreciate that.
I am going back to the concerns around arsenic. I am wondering if you could tell me if any epidemiological studies have looked at its effect on human health. What effects on human health have you been able to document? Have you brought this to the attention of any federal authorities? Could you tell me the source of the arsenic?
Grand Chief Antoine: I have a lady here who works in the environmental department with the Dene Nation. She could probably answer that. Her name is Carole Mills.
Ms Carole Mills (Environment Manager, Dene Nation): There are a couple of studies we're aware of. I don't have anything with me, but we could supply you with some. Arsenic is a carcinogen. One of the latest things that has come up about arsenic is that previously, when they were trying to set standards, they didn't use the carcinogenicity of arsenic; they just used the toxicity.
As far as Yellowknife goes, quite extensive studies were done with the Deh Cho people in the 1970s. There are also some reports from Health Canada on that, specific to our region.
.1120
I think our elders will get into the effects they've observed a little more. They're not epidemiological studies, but they are our own personal studies.
The issue has been brought up many times in various fora over the last two decades.
Mrs. Kraft Sloan: Which federal authorities have you brought this to the attention of?
Ms Mills: I would have to get back to you on that. The NWT has an environmental protection act and we talk regularly with the people at renewable resources.
Mr. Lincoln (Lachine - Lac-Saint-Louis): Chief Antoine, could you tell me what the position of the Dene Nation is regarding how it wants to be involved in the work of CEPA and other federal legislation? This question has come up quite a bit when aboriginal groups have appeared before us. Some have said they don't want to be just consulted in the revamping of the act; they want to be full-fledged participants like other governments. Some have said it would be acceptable to them to have input into CEPA and appear, as you are today.
What is the view of the Dene people? Do you want to be a full-fledged partner in any future changes relating to CEPA or harmonization of legislation among territorial, provincial and federal governments? In other words, how do you want to see your participation in relation to part IV of CEPA, which covers Indian lands and reserve lands?
Grand Chief Antoine: I'd like to start by saying we do have a first nation-Crown relationship. In 1899 Treaty 8 was established with the Crown. In 1921 a treaty was established with the Crown. Both Treaty 8 and the Deh Cho have been insisting that the Crown has to get back to its original obligation with the first nations in this particular area.
There was an attempt to resolve the land issue here through a comprehensive land claim policy, which included an extinguishment clause. Both Treaty 8 and Deh Cho do not accept that particular arrangement where you have to extinguish your aboriginal treaty rights. They insist they would like to get back to the original relationship the Crown had with first nations and enhance it.
In the other Dene regions such as the Sahtu and the Gwich'in, I believe certain portions of their settlement agreements outline a number of objectives they'd like to see incorporated with the things that will occur in their areas.
It's safe to say that both the Deh Cho and Treaty 8 have also looked at it in terms of the treaty, and certain things have to be brought out and recognized. That's the way both Treaty 8 and Deh Cho would like to have future working relationships with the Crown.
Our culture and our way of life are based on the cultural and economic relationship between ourselves and the land. We would like to participate in the decision-making concerning the use, management and conservation of land, water and resources.
I think one of the main objectives of all the groups is to protect and conserve the wildlife and environment of their areas for present and future generations. That's what I'd like to say.
.1125
Mr. Adams (Peterborough): Chief, I noticed what you said about the Arctic Environment Strategy. It concerns me that it appears that Indian and Northern Affairs is not on our list of presenters today on the Arctic Environment Strategy. It is very important to have its representatives here.
Secondly, with regard to the dumping of fish and fish waste, it seems to me that's in direct contravention of the Fisheries Act, paragraphs 36(1)(b) and 36(1)(c), which quite explicitly say that's not possible. That's just for the record.
Just so we have a contact in Hay River, I think you mentioned the Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation. Is it based in Hay River, and would it be an organization we could contact to get information on the dumping you described?
Grand Chief Antoine: I guess that's the legal organization you need to contact, but there's another person whose name I'd like to mention. Robert Ross is one of the concerned fishermen. A number of them have been working together to voice their concerns about the fishing. He's one of the original fishermen in that area. There are a number of them who started in the 1930s and 1940s. He's a fishing activist who is bringing out the concerns of the fishermen about the way they feel the fishing industry should be in Great Slave Lake.
Mr. Forseth (New Westminster - Burnaby): In talking about the imbalance, you mentioned that you really believe industry has been favoured over people. This is quite a summarizing statement. I suppose it adds a lot of things together that leave cynicism, resentment and perhaps even a sense of powerlessness.
To add support and credibility to that statement, can you give me an example in the north - maybe in your experience - where this is happening right now? Can you describe any present circumstances, locally, where you can clearly say industry is being favoured over people? Specifically, how do you see that could be changed?
Grand Chief Antoine: One example is the mining activity that's going on. It has an impact on the environment and also impacts on the people in that area. A lot of claims-staking is going on over which the people here have no control. It's a federal matter. These prospecting permits are issued without consultation with the first nations.
Whole large areas have been staked and claimed in the traditional territory of these people in Yellowknife. There is a lot of pressure to start this mineral industry here. There's still this unresolved issue between the feds and the crowns in terms of the land and so forth. As each day goes by, pieces of the area are being put aside as claimed. That's an example of how industry is favoured over people in this particular area.
The other example I'm thinking about is the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline in the 1970s, where everybody assumed the pipeline was going to go ahead but it didn't. It has been about 20 or 25 years now and people are still reflecting on what would have happened if the pipeline had gone ahead.
.1130
Even though Judge Berger had ruled in favour of the people, it gave people a chance to look at themselves seriously and start to get into certain initiatives where they had better control and involvement. If you look at the north now, it seems to be stable because people were given a chance to have some breathing room so they could start developing at a community level. They're beginning to be very vociferous in that and very positive in the things they're doing. So those are two examples.
Mr. Finlay (Oxford): I appreciate Chief Antoine's answer to the last question because I think we have to build on some positive action and some real community involvement in these decisions. I'm pleased that the definition of the environment that we're working under in CEPA is one you can accept as a representative of aboriginal peoples.
I also want to say that I share your view and I think it's not only somewhat hypocritical but somewhat sinister that we ban chemicals for use on our land and then allow people to make them here and sell them somewhere else, especially when we wish to complain that most of the dioxins and so on that come into the north come from somewhere else, a long way away.
I believe you said that one-third of the time of the people in your organization who work with the environment is spent on Environment Canada matters, requirements, or reports. Do you feel that what Environment Canada expects you to do or cooperate with is not useful or worthwhile, that it's somehow counter-productive? Would you give me some clear indication of what your concern is?
Grand Chief Antoine: We're talking about the environment, and we look at things very holistically. You also have to look at the environment in which the Dene have to work and continue their way of life.
One of the things that is happening within our communities is this healing and rebuilding process to also contribute to society in general. If you look at what happened when the first Europeans came to this area, a lot of things occurred that I think would be useful for people to take a look at.
One of the things that happened was the cultural oppression of first nations. I've been really thinking over the past number of years that the things that occurred were things that were imposed, and when things are imposed there is a tendency to react. I think Darwin's theory was that whenever there's an action, there's a reaction.
Naturally, if certain things occur there's going to be a reaction, and that's what has occurred with first nations. With the cultural oppression that occurred we began to have a tendency to react. We are required to comply with various laws and we react to those kinds of things.
We need a lot of time to look at the position of the Dene, in terms of what has been imposed. That's why a lot of time has been spent trying to gather and research the information to be able to present, in a reasonable way, to the people who are requesting various inputs.
.1135
I'd also like to say that I think with the state of the environment and the things going on in society, because of this rebuilding process, first nations are beginning to be a lot healthier and are saying, why are we reacting to these things when we should be forward-thinking and proactive? I think that's the message first nations are bringing to the table.
There are a lot of things first nations can contribute to society in general. One of the things that has happened is that we're not listened to. There have been certain things said, but we're not listened to. I think there could be a really good future working relationship with first nations. You have to go back to the original intent of the treaty. That relationship needs to be enhanced now and in the future.
There are certain things that both the Deh Cho and Treaty 8 are pursuing. We want to go on with our lives and also contribute to society. We just wanted to say that society has to open that door that has been kept closed to us and that we're here as human beings too.
A lot of people say the word ``Dene'' means ``people'', but if you break down the description of that word, it means ``earthling'', belonging to the earth and to the water. If you look at the way science takes a look at people from earth, it means ``earthling''. We're earthlings in a particular area on earth, which is the Mackenzie River Basin. I just wanted to end with that.
The Chairman: Grand Chief, what you've just said and the way you've developed your message to us this morning is very helpful. In conclusion, you might want to put on record your thoughts in relation to your way of life, which you described very briefly in one or two of your interventions.
If the trends in air, water, and soil continue the way they have moved so far, do you think your way of life is secure in the centuries ahead, in the long term? In other words, do you perceive a trend that ensures the values and the lifestyle you have had so far and that the aboriginal people have held so dear? If not, could you briefly give us the benefit of your observations?
Grand Chief Antoine: I'd like to answer that particular question in terms of my description of something related to the environment. You look outside and you see a tree. You have the roots of the tree. The things the Dene people have experienced over the past number of years...there have been traditional values and principles over many centuries. There is also the cultural oppression that we've experienced. There's another route that people refer to as addictions and another route called recovery.
Whatever you feed there will give you the things on top of the soil. Basically, what's happening now in the first nations communities is that people are really beginning to take a look at their values and principles and also deal with the cultural oppression and addictions and really look at the recovery of themselves.
.1140
What you see on the ground surface is you have two branches, the traditional and also the modern, and the message that our elders have been saying is that those two have to be together in order to survive for the future. So that's how I would like to answer your question: that we see a good future and that we have to be focused in that direction.
We've encountered a number of things as first nations due to certain circumstances, but those are the things that have happened and we like to learn from that. So with what we've learned, we would like to rebuild ourselves so we could meet the future. I would like to end with that.
Mr. Fred Sangris (Yellowknife Land Environment Committee): Chief Antoine made a presentation here for the Dene Nation. But for the Yellowknives I've got two elders with me who are going to make a presentation to the committee.
The Chairman: Proceed, please.
Mr. Sangris: I'd like to make an opening remark by welcoming the committee to the Yellowknives' territory.
I have two elders with me who are going to make a presentation with regard to the Giant Mine. These elders with me have lived here and were born in this area. They've seen the surroundings in the Yellowknife Bay and the city before any of the building structures were up. So if we look at Yellowknife as a city, town, the elders were here when they saw it develop in 1934 and 1937. Before that, they saw the surroundings of the bay without anybody being in this area.
They're going to start by giving a little bit of history on the background. Then they'll go ahead and give you some of the concerns about the arsenic and the mine solutions.
This is my elder Michel Paper.
Mr. Michel Paper (Elders Advisory Council, Dene Nation, (Interpretation)): I was born in 1913. Now I am 82 years old.
Before the white people came up here, thousands of Dene people lived around the Yellowknife area. I trapped with my father then. He told me many stories. My father, his father, and his father before him - three generations - have always lived around the Yellowknife area. The water was fresh, the fishing was good, the land did not burn. We took good care of the land.
At that time, trapping was the way the people survived. Caribou was another source...by which the people survived. All the fish that were available were known by the people. The people lived a very healthy life by hunting for wildlife. All year long we would follow the caribou, and at that time we did not have to pay for wood. We did not pay for the food we gathered. We travelled by dog team only. When the firewood ran low in the camping area, we would move on to another place where there was plenty of wood. We did pay for the firewood. That was the way our people lived in the past.
In 1934-35 we heard news that the white people had arrived in the Yellowknife area. It was at Burwash Point. We travelled at night by dog team back to Yellowknife and we could see Burwash Point lit up from a distance. We heard that the white people had arrived, and we were afraid of them so we travelled back around the way of Dettah. At that time, the white people were also afraid of us.
From that time Yellowknife became a settlement. I was asked to work. They asked for 12 young men to work. We had never experienced a mine before. If there was going to be mining activity...we had no knowledge that the land would be contaminated. We had no knowledge of money and we were told that we would be working for $2 a day. There were no stores then and because we had no food to eat.... We did not eat at cafes. We - the 12 men - would set nets in the lake for fish and that is how we ate. Back then the fish was very good. After that, we would work for eight hours for $2 a day.
We hauled lumber a half a mile from the lakeshore to the area where the mine was being built. After working like that for seven months, the following year, in 1936...Giant Mines was paying their workers $5 a day, so the workers left to work for Giant Mines. They supplied the workers with a place to live, in bunkhouses. That was how we worked.
Back then, the water was fresh. We lived at the mine site and used the water from the shore for drinking and to make tea. Today, we are restricted from using the water for a radius of 15 miles or more because the water is contaminated. Many people, including children, have died from drinking the water.
The emission of smoke from Giant Mines has killed many people.
.1145
Today, the people have to pay for safe drinking water. In all fairness, Giant Mines should be paying for our water bills. Now if you look around Giant Mines, you cannot say it is a pretty sight. It is very disgusting. If you go near the mine site, it is difficult to breathe the air. Today, Yellowknife is like a contaminated area. Not so much now but in 50 years' time, no one will be able to drink the water from the lake at all. I am not too concerned about myself, but I am speaking for the future generations. I am telling you what I know of.
I have worked hard during my lifetime. I worked for Giant Mines for a period of three years, starting at $1.50 and up to $3 a day. Later I worked for Con Mines. I was young then. After I worked three years for them, I quit. I started work for Negus Mine. After one year and a half, the mine was shut down. I had no more work.
I still had a good dog team, so I started to work with the RCMP and the wildlife officer. They also worked by dog team. In one year we travelled twice to all the camps where people trapped. After working for two years with them, I started looking for other work. At that time I found work building the highway, with the federal government. I would work all year round. I did this for 26 years. I have worked hard in my lifetime.
During my employment on the highway, we travelled by airplane to Inuvik, Aklavik, Tuktoyaktuk, Coppermine, Cambridge Bay, Spence Bay, Gjoa Haven - staying in each community for almost two weeks.
When I turned 65 years of age, they told me I was going to get a pension. The employer said I should work another year, so I did. After that I retired.
I have worked in all areas that have roads in the Northwest Territories. I can say that people appreciate the hard work we have done to help build the highway.
I will tell you this story. When the white people first arrived in Yellowknife, they said there was no one living around the Yellowknife area. That is not true. There were thousands of people who lived in this area for many years before they arrived.
In 1920 a treaty was made. At that time I was just a child, but my father and grandfather have told me stories about it, so I know how the treaty was made - the treaty that was signed in 1920 with Joe Sangris. At that time he told Indian Affairs, ``As long as the sun rises, the river flows, and the grass grows, as long as it remains that way, I do not want my councillors denied their rights''. After he made this statement, Indian Affairs was not agreeable and did not work well with him. He refused the money each day for three days. The bishop told him that his wishes would be granted and that he should take the money. Only then, with all the witnesses around, did he agree to take the money in Fort Resolution. All store owners, such as the Hudson's Bay Company, Biscy, Jimmy Daray and the chief signed their names on the document. Only then did he accept to take the treaty money. That is the arrangement the chief made for his people.
From then until now we have kept that promise. We have not surrendered and released that law that our ancestors made. To this day, the Treaty 8 Council continues to hold this view. We feel that other groups that surrender and release their rights will regret this decision in the future. We feel that if we hold on to our rights, we will remain unaffected by what may happen in the future.
I can tell you many, many stories, but they cannot be told in one day. I'm telling you the stories I know.
The white people are very important too. Before the arrival of the white people, the Dene people were poor but were very industrious. There was not much of anything like shoes, axes, rifles. That is how our ancestors lived on this land before me. My father told me about when the Hudson's Bay Company arrived here. They brought with them long-barrel rifles. In order to make a trade for the rifle, furs were piled to reach the top of the long-barrel rifle. That was how the Hudson's Bay Company traded with the Dene people. Now that they have become millionaires, the Hudson's Bay Company is disappearing from the north. Now the Dene people are no longer important to them.
I am very aware of what is going on today. Even now, white people come up here poor, and when they have made their money they leave the north. That is what they do.
Weaver & Devore now have many stores. When Harry Weaver first arrived in Yellowknife, he came with an old wooden boat. He brought with him 12 single metal beds. He sold each bed for $12. When he sold all of the beds, he left by boat. The next time he came back, he brought with him more stuff, which he sold. The next time he returned, he brought more stuff with him and then set up a store. Now they are well off.
.1150
When the white people and the Dene people signed the treaties, an agreement was made based on peace among the people. When the white people are going through a hardship, we as Dene people help them. When we have hardship, the white people should help us. A treaty was signed based on those terms. To this day, the Dene people are still holding on to that view.
The Chairman: Excuse me for a moment. Fred Sangris, could you please indicate to Michel Paper that what he is telling us is extremely important and very interesting, but there are people waiting to speak to us. Could you ask him to conclude so that others in the room have a chance to speak?
Mr. Sangris (Interpretation): There are many people in the room waiting to make statements, so please finish your statement with regard to the mining issue.
Mr. Paper (Interpretation): I am finished now. Thank you.
Mr. Isadore Tsetta (Elders Advisory Council, Dene Nation, (Interpretation)): I am64 years old. I am an elderly man and I live in Dettah village. When the wind blows from the direction of Giant Mines, the pollution causes me to easily get a cold and a sore throat. I am very concerned about this.
When we first started work for Giant Mines, there were 15 of us, and now there are just the two of us. At that time, there were no buildings. We did all the work by shovel for $5 a day. We had a tent set up by the shore, where we slept, and we drank the water from the lake. We used the water for all our cooking and cleaning. Drilling work was done upstream, where the mine is now situated. At the time, the land around the mine was not contaminated, as it is today. That is what I am concerned about.
Seven years ago, when I was chief of the Yellowknife Band, we brought up our concerns about the land and water, but it was difficult to deal with the issue because of the language differences. We are unable to understand each other and therefore unable to get compensation for the contaminated land. This is happening all over the world where mining activity is taking place.
We do not know what to do with the contaminated water now. We cannot use the water now. After the land is spoiled, plants cannot grow in the contaminated soils. That is the situation with us now. If justice was done...we should be compensated somehow for the contaminated water. Giant Mines and Con Mines have ruined the water and we cannot use it any more.
We were here first, before the white people arrived and the mining started. We all know how the land was.
Three old Dene women were gathering berries when they found this rock and gave it to a white man. The white man told them that it wasn't anything important so he gave them each one stovepipe in return for the rock. Now Giant Mines is situated in that area. They lied to the old women. Being dishonest is not good. We all know that some people are dishonest; some people say they are going to do this but they never do it.
We have lived around this area of the country for many, many years. Sometimes people are doing work in our area, but they never approach us to let us know what they are doing. Our land is ruined. With all the mining in the Northwest Territories...even though they are using lethal contaminants, they are telling us the land will not be ruined. When they first started mining, they didn't seem to do much work, but gradually they worked on more and more land and the mining area became bigger and bigger. That is what happened here in Yellowknife. Before the mining started, there were no buildings around. Now the population in Yellowknife has increased. Downtown Yellowknife was just a bush area where we would hunt.
Our land is becoming more contaminated now, and we feel they should somehow give us compensation for something - maybe some help for the water that we have to pay for. We cannot eat the fish from around this area. We cannot drink the water. We live in Dettah village and we do not even use the water from there either.
We, the Treaty 8 Council, have talked about this many times, but no one seems to be listening to us. In the past...attended many meetings with the Dene Nation...around to the communities, talking about our land and how it is getting contaminated, but nothing is done to help us.
We would be very grateful if you could help us with our concerns about the Yellowknife area. We are more concerned for the future generations. I am very grateful that you could listen to me speak about my concerns about the Yellowknife area.
My throat is sore, so that is all I want to speak about.
Please feel free to ask me questions. Thank you.
The Chairman: Would you like to add something, Fred Sangris?
Mr. Sangris: Apart from the elders' presentation....
.1155
The Chairman: Excuse me for a moment. Fred Sangris, could you please indicate to Michel Paper that what he is telling us is extremely important and very interesting. However, in this room there are other people who are waiting to speak to us. Therefore, could you indicate to him to conclude, so as to give others in the room a chance to speak as well?
Mr. Sangris: [Witness speaks in his native language]
Mr. Paper: [Witness speaks in his native language]
.1200
The Chairman: Would you like to add something, Fred Sangris?
Mr. Sangris: Apart from the elders' presentation, I'd like to make some comments. I'll start with the history of the people in this area.
The Yellowknifes here, through our history, were known to have inhabited this area for over 10,000 years. To other aboriginal people, the tribal people in the area are known as We Le Dai. Today we're still known as We Le Dai, known as Yellowknifes, and we still live in the surrounding area, which we know as our homeland.
As the elders tried to explain, there were no European people here before 1930. You might think that these people have been here for the last several hundred years or so, but it's not the case. This is new. The Europeans started arriving in this area in 1930. They found the gold in 1934, and the mine was started up in 1937.
.1205
As the others explained, there was no one in this area. This was all the hunting grounds, the food gathering and the harvesting area and a source of drinking water. This became a settlement for the first nations of this area because of the fish that migrate through this the river system. For centuries, there was a settlement camp in the area. The people would harvest every fall, and that tradition is still practised today.
But the real danger is the toxins, the chemicals and the arsenic in the water. You may be able to eat the fish; that wouldn't do a whole lot of damage. But in time, if you eat enough fish over decades, there will be enough damage to poison a person's blood or immune system. Eventually death will follow.
Since the mine has been here in our traditional territory, we have tried to live side by side and coexist with the mining industry and the industry that inhabits our homeland. The people who live in this area have to live and use the water and the land that are around here. The harvesting has stopped over the last five years because of more dangers and warnings from the people and their leadership. We continue to tell our people not to use anything within this area, because over the years we've found that the arsenic and sulphur dioxide have done a lot of damage to our people and their health.
The first case of death within our community came in 1959, when three children in the same family died in the Yellowknife Bay area. At that time, there was no adequate water delivery from either the government or DIAND. You had the responsibility to look after first nations, because there was that fiduciary obligation to do so.
The family that lost the three children were compensated $1,000. That's all they were given. They were told, ``Here, take the money, and forget about everything''. Eventually, this person and his wife got into drinking because they couldn't deal with that. A lot of the first nations in this area did the same thing. One person mentioned here that they were powerless; yes, it's true.
You can talk to the government, industry, and as many people as you can.
Some of the presenters here have said that they favour the industry more than the people, which is true. We see that in our area. Somehow, the governments support the industry over people's lives. I don't know if the dollar is valued more than people's lives, but the aboriginal people here are the original inhabitants of this area and still live in this area. Their health is in a very poor state. People are getting cancer and falling ill.
A lot of deaths have happened since 1959. In the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s people continued to use water, until the last few years. We tried to warn most of the people about the levels of toxins in the water. The mines continue to dump their waste into our bays. Fishing has totally stopped.
The treaties state that it was agreed that our mode of life would continue without interference from anyone or anything. That hasn't happened. There has been a lot of interference from industries and governments. Our people have continued to get ill; still, no one would listen.
.1210
The government has done a lot of reports and studies on the back bay, but a lot of those studies have been controlled by government and industry. They can write whatever they want on paper, because they have control of it, whereas the first nation doesn't have that.
As the years went by, we eventually decided not to trust the government any more. The government was there to protect us, to see that our health was there. We don't have that trust any more. That trust has been broken over and over again. It's the same with the industry.
The people in this area know that they don't get their hands on whatever studies come out. It's always controlled by someone else. We are trying to initiate our own, independent study, in which we can have an exact reading of what is in our waters, what our people are eating, what's in our fish, our wildlife and all our harvesting. When I use the word ``harvesting'', it means everything: picking up wood, cutting trees, using what's in the water, drinking water, as well as picking berries, herbs and medicine.
Over the years, our elders have stopped collecting medicine and herbs because of the sulphur dioxide, which has a 15-mile radius. Slowly, this is what's happening to the people. Yet the government chooses to ignore that. They write their reports, saying that it has no effect on anyone. Yet a lot of our people who lay buried today are laced with arsenic poisoning.
In the 1970s a woman by the name of Elizabeth Drygeese had cancer and passed away. Doctors did tests on her, and she had a very high level of arsenic poisoning. Those reports came out, but the government ignored them.
Over and over again many tests and reports have been done, but because the government favours the industry, it ignores reports.
The people became powerless.
Since the Dene Nation established itself in the 1970s, today the people are capable, independent and strong enough to take on these tasks and do the study independently. What's holding us back is finding moneys to do these studies.
Whatever affects us on our waterfront and in our use of the land affects us directly. We continue to use the land, and the mines continue to dump their waste in the water without any concern for any wildlife or human health.
The elders commented on the water in the back bays. It's too polluted to use. People have used it in the past and there have been many deaths. Not even the sled dogs can use that water any more. We have to get fresh water delivered. Now our people are forced to pay for this water.
When you look at it, really the industry should be paying for that damage and what they've polluted. The government should make tougher regulations and laws to ensure that in the future the mine and industries will be aware of what they're doing.
.1215
Not only are the aboriginal people in this area affected, but also the city of Yellowknife - the people who live here, too. They also use the water and the surroundings in camping and hunting. So it affects everyone.
As I said, many studies in the past were done by DIAND. They continue to ask first nations, saying that they want to do the studies for first nations, controlled by the government. So in the reports we don't exactly get any indications of what levels of arsenic there are in our waters or in what we're traditionally eating - the high level of toxins in the fish.
Over the years the elders have been telling us, the young leaders, that the fish in the area don't taste the same any more. There's oil and gas in there now, and they start to taste different.
As my own experiment last summer, I set a net half a kilometre from Giant. I went there one day to look at it. The fish in there are terrible. You can't look at them. The eyes are swollen and red. Within 15 hours the fish are so soft that you could almost put your finger through them.
Last year there was a report that they're going to release more ammonia into the water, another toxin. This, plus the arsenic, the chemicals and other toxins, which come in one combination, go into the bay and destroy everything. The elders said they used to fish right in front there. Today none of our people fish in the bay. Eventually, they're pushed right out by the industry, which says, ``We're sorry that we've destroyed your water, but what can we do?''
This forces the first nations people, when eventually they have that right under the treaty, to use their lands in any way they can, for food -
But the industry continues to pollute.
The health of the people is in a state where it may affect other communities in the surrounding area. The elders also state that 50 years from now the Great Slave Lake might be polluted. There might be signs all over the lake saying that you can no longer swim in the water or use the fish.
Maybe it will look like a big lake, but I also remember that there's pulp mills up the river whose effluent flows into the Great Slave Lake. All their waters of other industries on Great Slave Lake flow into the lake. Whatever affects us here affects people on the river, because that's where the rivers go - down.
There are communities and people that traditionally continue to fish and hunt. They continue to use the water and to fish on that river. Some day their health may be affected. What is happening to us here is going to happen to the rest of them.
What we're suggesting to this committee is to consider the health risk to the aboriginal people who inhabit this area, who use the water and who still fish, hunt and harvest.
There need to be some tougher laws, because the territorial environment act doesn't do much. It's so powerless. It has no power to do anything with the mines or the polluters. We need tougher regulations so the mines can follow these regulations, and so the state of health of the people at large can be considered, rather than industries continuing to take more minerals out, more waste off the mines, and adding more pollution, more arsenic into the atmosphere and more sulpher dioxide.
.1220
Enough is enough. A lot of our people are buried.
Over recent years a lot of our elders have been getting leukemia, cancer. We didn't really understand it until more started to get it. As we looked into it more, we realized this had something to do with the mine. No amount of money will compensate for or replace the lives that have been lost.
Industries that are responsible for dumping waste like that should also be paying for water delivery. They totally destroyed our waterfront and used our water. Now we have to dig into our pockets to pay for water, when really the industries that are responsible should be doing that. The people who support the industries should also be doing their part, and that's the federal government. It knew well in advance that the arsenic was here and it has done a lot of damage, but it chooses to ignore it and to do nothing. Enough is enough.
This committee should really consider the health of the people, especially of the aboriginal people in this area. As I said, there have been deaths of various types out there. People are buried laced with arsenic. I think the industry is responsible for it and the government is responsible for it.
We are going to continue to live with other industries because of the diamond clay in this area. Other industries are going to be coming up here.
As Grand Chief Antoine stated, we're living in the Mackenzie basin, where everything flows into the rivers. The waste from any industry 50 miles inland will be washed down by snow and water and eventually get into our lakes and waters. This is the water we'll be using.
The people's health is in a very bad state, not considering the people who actually work in the mine. They have worked there for many years and had savings they never had a chance to spend, because they too lost their lives because of that.
I want to add to what the elders presented to you so you will become a little bit more familiar with the Dene, the people and the community life here. As the elders have stated, we were here before any of the Europeans arrived and we have to live in this area. Today everything is totally destroyed. I want you to be aware that our lives are just as important as those of the people taking the gold out of the mines. It's money over people's lives. If they had taken the time to stop and listen to the people and try to help them in a way, then maybe we wouldn't have these problems today. But the problems continue and nobody is doing anything.
Our MLAs know about our problems and concerns, yet when they speak up someone from the mine phones them. Our jobs are on the line here. We can't even talk about it, so our people are powerless again.
I just wanted to present you with that. I thank you very much.
The Chairman: As you saw while you were talking, our members have taken notes of what you have said. What was said by Mr. Tsetta, Mr. Paper and you is on the record. This is done because we want to examine what you have said very closely and carefully.
.1225
You may have the impression that nobody is doing anything, to quote you, but this committee is travelling because it wants to do something. What it is doing is measuring the quality and the impact of the existing legislation.
The legislation was introduced with good intentions, and it is now being examined to find out how it can be improved, exactly to meet your requirements; namely, to deal with the situation in a better way.
You spoke to us about the health risk of people, and that of course affects the health of every human being. You spoke to us about the attitude of government; you spoke to us about a broken trust with governments. It could be said, though, that governments want to repair and rebuild this broken trust. Otherwise, we wouldn't be travelling; otherwise, we wouldn't be looking at this legislation; and otherwise, there wouldn't be any land claims settlements in this country. They are intended to rebuild a trust and to give power back to the people, if you like, to allow for a system that will make it possible for people to determine their future.
True, mistakes have been made and are continuing to be made, but certainly none of us around this table would accept the thought that we should allow a trust to remain broken. We want to repair it, and we all would be very grateful to you if you were to communicate this concept to your elders, and also if you were to thank them for giving us a picture of what was here until 1930 and of what happened after 1930. Your observations on arsenic and the deterioration of health, on leukemia and the losses that you have seen in life are something that we will remember and certainly look at again.
As for industries, governments and people, this is a philosophical discussion that could keep us around this table for many hours, if not for many days. We would like to think, though, that at the end of the day there are people in all these sectors who are concerned with their health, whether they are in government, in industry or outside those two sectors. Nevertheless, your observations are related to your experience and they are very important to us.
The task of elected representatives is to find answers to conflicting views and to find a common base, and if there is one common base that we all share, it's the desire to protect and enhance public health. That term embraces all of us in this room.
We have listened to you and we will remember what you have said. We thank you for your participation this morning.
We now invite the next group to the table.
.1230
From the Métis Nation of the Northwest Territories we have Gary Bohnet, Mike Paulette and William Carpenter.
Mr. Gary Bohnet (President, Métis Nation - Northwest Territories): First, I would like to introduce my colleagues. Mike Paulette is the vice-president of the Métis Nation - Northwest Territories, and Bill Carpenter is the environmental director of the Métis Nation's environmental program. I am Gary Bohnet, the president of the Métis Nation.
The Métis Nation - Northwest Territories is the political voice for the Métis of the Mackenzie Valley. There approximately 5,000 Métis in the western part of the Northwest Territories, and we stretch from the 60th parallel to the Arctic Ocean.
The brief I'm presenting today was developed in the context of what we have learned to date from the Arctic Environmental Strategy.
The Arctic Environmental Strategy was launched in 1991 and focused on several key components in the overall goal of achieving sustainable development: contaminants, waste, water and environmental economy. Before getting into what the Arctic Environmental Strategy has taught us about these issues, I want to say a few words about what we have learned about working together to achieve results in the environment.
It is not customary for an aboriginal organization to hand out compliments to the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development in public, but in the case of the Arctic Environmental Strategy the credit for much of the program's successes to date is due to the partnerships that northern aboriginal organizations were able to establish with DIAND. This was especially true for the contaminants program.
In the action on contaminants program, we have learned that a host of organic pollutants have contaminated our northern land, water and food chains. We have heard the concerns of our people who are questioning the quality of their traditional foods. We have learned that the predominant sources of these pollutants are industries in Europe and North America. We have learned that banning the use of a toxic substance in Canada does not immunize us from being contaminated by these substances. We have learned how important it is to work in partnerships with other northern peoples and governments to achieve reductions in the use of environmentally hazardous substances.
The action on waste program has documented the lack of stewardship by the Government of Canada for aboriginal lands. There are numerous sites with waste, including specified hazardous substances, that were dumped and abandoned when the sites were no longer needed for military purposes. Mining sites were abandoned and tailings were not secured in the days before the territorial land use regulations.
As a general rule, these sites were withdrawn from land selection processes during negotiations on aboriginal rights to northern lands and resources.
In the western Northwest Territories, two regions, including Métis, have settled aboriginal land and resource rights. The remainder are under discussion.
If it is learned that hazardous substances were on aboriginal lands at the date of the agreement, government may clean it up if it is doing a clean-up in the general area.
My question to this committee is, should not the entire traditional territory of the aboriginal people settling a claim be available for land selection, and should not government be obligated to restore the land to its original state before it is vested with aboriginal owners?
.1235
The Métis Nation expects to see all Métis claims to lands and resources in the western Northwest Territories settled. There should be no restrictions on land selection due to prior government negligence or concern for future liabilities.
The action on water program has reinforced the vital role that water serves in the ecosystem and how easily watersheds can be contaminated forever. It has shown how important it is to establish water quality baselines so there are bases for comparison and so trends and patterns in the long-range transport of atmospheric and local pollutants can be monitored in the future.
I review these aspects of the Arctic Environmental Strategy here because we have been active participants in the program's planning and execution. We've had to see our priorities for research and clean-up dictated by the demands of CEPA with respect to hazardous waste sites.
The Arctic Environmental Strategy was to be a proactive initiative and, to a significant degree, it achieved that. But with respect to CEPA it became a reactive program. CEPA determined the department's priorities for clean-ups.
Don't get me wrong. Clean-up is important. It's essential, but sometimes we get the impression that responding to CEPA is more important than it is to clean up for the sake of environmental quality in its own right.
Is the Arctic Environmental Strategy instructive for the review of CEPA? Studies have shown that the most persistent organic pollutants that are contaminating our traditional food sources originate from exogenous sources. Banning the use of toxic chemicals in Canada alone is not sufficient for the degree of environmental protection that is required for the arctic ecosystems.
Is it possible that some of the chemicals we are seeing in the long-range transport of air-borne pollutants are Canadian in origin - toxic substances that were manufactured in Canada for the export market? If a substance is banned for use in Canada, should it not also be banned as an export from Canada?
We have also learned of the importance of cooperation to achieve synergy. In the program aboriginal partnership with DIAND has achieved much more for the circumpolar environment than we would have achieved individually on our own. It is the same for CEPA.
The literature describing your work has made a big issue of harmonization. It is essential that national standards be established for enforcement and administration of this act.
The provinces and territories must buy into the legislation and regulations and their implementation and administration. Dynamic partners are much more effective agents for environmental protection than all well-meaning crusading individuals. Without the active partnership of provincial and territorial agencies, the Department of the Environment alone will not achieve the full potential that the duties of the act describe for Canada in section 2.
Can CEPA be a powerful force in pollution prevention? We have learned that enforcement and punishment do not provide the necessary mechanisms and incentives to prevent pollution. How can prevention be achieved? Planning is a big part of prevention.
From our work in the waste program, we know that the military and many mining companies never give any thought to dismantling and removing their buildings and works from the north. Restoration and reclamation must be part of all the planning for all projects in the remote wilderness areas. Furthermore, it should be unacceptable to enlarge the area of disturbance by permitting burial or underwater disposal of materials because it is cheaper to do so.
New products should be subjected to rigorous assessment as to their acceptability on environmental grounds. First, they should be required to achieve the effects that are claimed for them by the manufacturer, and then they should be tested for collateral damage in the environment. If they achieve their claims and cause no collateral damage, they should be approved for use in Canada.
.1240
What is the role for CEPA on the international stage?
The Arctic Environmental Strategy has provided valuable experience in this area. Its international equivalent is the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy, to which our circumpolar neighbours have signed on.
There is no question that pollutant abatement in the circumpolar north can be achieved only through international cooperation, especially in the areas of research and complementary legislation.
I would like to compliment Mr. Adams on his observation in this regard, as reported in the CEPA newsletter of March 31.
The partnership between northern aboriginal organizations and DIAND has allowed each organization to establish an environmental department or section, which works with government and, where appropriate, industry on environmental issues. This has produced capacity and networks that provide effective local participation in the research and monitoring programs. It also established an international network that disseminates data from studies that serve as a preconditioner to our circumpolar neighbours with regard to diplomatic protocols for the environmental protection.
The funding under the Arctic Environmental Strategy also provided the capacity for our organization to prepare for hearings such as this. Even though our resources are stretched in every direction, rather than request the committee for funds to cover preparation for research and doing things as far as this brief goes, what we are going to do is request that each of you as a member of Parliament make a point of supporting our partnership with DIAND for environmental research and protection by supporting the continuation of the Arctic Environmental Strategy when it comes up for renewal in 1997.
Remind the Minister of DIAND, the Minister of Finance, and the Chairman of the Treasury Board that they have an effective and cost-efficient partnership for environmental protection in the Canadian Arctic and the circumpolar north. This will help to ensure that the aboriginal peoples of Canada will remain an integral element in planning, evaluating and managing environmental research and protection for their traditional homelands.
Mr. Chairman, it was a very brief presentation, but we're really open to questions.
The Chairman: It was very brief but very effective, and I congratulate you for the content. It's a terrific brief, and the three ministers you mentioned are very close friends of ours. We will convey your message at the appropriate opportunity, somehow or other, in the near future. Those are very well-taken points.
I will start the questioning with Mrs. Guay.
[Translation]
Mrs. Guay: Thank you for your presentation. I found it very interesting. I think that you are going to be able to count on the support of all the honourable members here.
My question relates to U.S. Army sites. We went through the same experience in Iqaluit. They have problems: the army is gone and has left behind its toxic waste. Here, in the Yellowknife area, has the government started depolluting those sites or is it still under negotiation? What is going one exactly in that regard?
[English]
Mr. Bohnet: I'll let Bill Carpenter, the environmental director, touch on the mine sites.
Mr. William Carpenter (Environmental Director, Métis Nation - Northwest Territories): We don't have a number of military sites specifically close to Yellowknife, but there certainly are approximately 21 military sites across the Canadian north that do need attention. If you look at the total amount of money that was available under the Arctic Environmental Strategy and under the action on waste component, there was absolutely insufficient money to attain the clean-up necessary. You could spend all of the money of the entire Arctic Environmental Strategy to clean up military sites.
.1245
I hope that the Canadian government will be able to make some arrangement with the U.S. military to have this work done in the future, because otherwise you are going to find that this goes on forever, that there is insufficient money to have this done.
The problem we have had in the local area has been one of abandoned mine sites, mine sites that were from work that occurred prior to the implementation of the 1972 land reuse regulations. Their abandonment has resulted in hazardous and non-hazardous material being left at various sites. Some of this was cleaned up by our crews and other organizations who were funded under the action on waste program last year to obtain a clean-up of these sites.
Mr. Mike Paulette (Vice-President, Métis Nation - Northwest Territories): With respect to these sites, in the community of Fort Smith, for example, where there is the largest Métis population in the NWT, there is evidence of buried military waste. At this point we don't know the extent of what is buried there or what effect that has on the community. We do know that there is a high incidence of diabetes, for example, and other diseases among the residents of Fort Smith. Questions are being asked at this point. There is that problem, and I'm sure it may be prevalent in other communities along the Mackenzie.
Mr. Carpenter: If I could add one further point, one military site that we will be spending some time on this summer is the old Canol pipeline, called the Canol route, Canol trail. It was built during World War II, as you know, and was abandoned after one year of use.
There is some hazardous material left. One of our projects under the action on waste program for our Métis nation local in Norman Wells will be to remove the 345 fuel drums that are still on the site and have been accumulated at different locations. Some of them require a casement on top to prevent leakage. These will be removed this summer.
Also, under the same project we are starting to expand the work to take up the telegraph wire that was left. By the legal definition of your act, I suppose it is not a hazardous piece of waste, but it is certainly hazardous to the wildlife. Dozens of caribou and moose get entangled in it every year. We are undertaking that providing we get the full support of the Department of Indian Affairs on it.
Again, there's a question of the U.S. military having just abandoned that.
Mr. Lincoln: We just listened to the Dene representatives speak to us about mining and the impact on water, fish and wildlife. Now there's a tremendous plan for huge diamond mining exploration in this part of the world. Also, forestry resources are going to be exploited more and more.
I wonder what your organization feels about this tremendous thrust - now that resources for mining and forestry are being depleted more and more in the south, exploitation of resources versus alternative ways of looking for economic development that is more sustainable, such as eco-tourism and long-term exploitation of resources, without resorting to this tremendous impact involving chemicals and massive exploitation of the land with impacts on wildlife and water and land resources.
What is the attitude of your organization and what part are you playing now in regard, for example, to diamond exploration by BHF and De Beers and so forth?
Mr. Bohnet: That's not a very difficult question for us to answer. We share the concerns of the Dene and other aboriginal groups as far as development goes. We've always supported development to a certain degree, but not at the expense of the environment and the lands and waters around us. While there's a lot of pressure being put on development in the western territory, for a number of reasons, but basically economic, we support some of the initiatives, but not at any expense.
.1250
We have seen the results of development in the territory, where aboriginal people, particularly the Métis, have received very little of the economic benefits from major development projects. We have to be active players with the developers for potential development, but we've always made it clear to BHP, for example, that we're not supporting them purely on an economic basis unless the environmental safeguards are there for us and for all people in the western territory.
Mr. Lincoln: Do you think it's possible?
Mr. Bohnet: There are a lot of outside pressures being put on the idea of pushing major development in the western territory. The fiscal regime in this country, and in fact in the Northwest Territories, means money's getting tighter. People are looking for other sources. In the past it's always basically been money first, environment second, or environment further down the line.
I would like to caution this committee, and you as parliamentarians, that we have a chance to do things a little bit differently here in the western territory. Let's take our time and do it right. Let's not make the mistakes that were made in southern Canada and in other parts of the world. We have an opportunity here to do things differently. All it takes is the courage of our parliamentarians and our governments.
Mr. DeVillers: I would like to go to bottom of page 2 and the top of page 3 in your brief. You express your concerns that with respect to hazardous waste sites, clean-up efforts are being dictated by the demands of CEPA, that responding to CEPA has become a larger priority than cleaning up.
Could you expand on that? Do you have any specific recommendations to alleviate that problem?
Mr. Carpenter: Mr. Chairman, one of the concerns relates to the amount of money available within the Action on Waste program that undertakes the clean-up of these sites. If you allowed CEPA to dictate all of the clean-up requirements, it would use up all of the money of the Action on Waste program. What we're seeing is we have to fight to get other things done that are just as important to the people.
Some of the CEPA violations, or apparent CEPA violations - because some of them still require assessment - are certainly taking the Crown's priority, perhaps because of their worry of legal liability and deputy ministers going to jail and so on. Some extremely isolated sites take priority over sites that the aboriginal organizations would like to see done.
But I think the bottom line is money. There need to be more money and more resources made available so that an entire clean-up of both the CEPA violations and other unsightly wastes can be done.
Mr. Bohnet: It would probably be fair for me to throw a question back to the committee: what is the federal government doing to recoup some of the costs from agencies and governments who made the mess on the land, the U.S. military and major mining companies, who still exist out there today, so the dollars available under, for example, the Arctic Environmental Strategy, rather than paying for CEPA violations, can actually go into other priority clean-up areas in the Arctic?
The Chairman: This committee is struggling to ask questions. We would stay in Ottawa if we had the answer.
Mr. Bohnet: I guess the answer goes under enforcement. Where is CEPA's strength as far as the enforcement of its previous legislation and even the proposed legislation of the day? Is it strong enough so that enforcement is going to be there, or is it going to be driven by politics?
The Chairman: Enforcement has been one of the weakest points of CEPA. We are on the road to cover that.
.1255
Mr. DeVillers: That was the purpose of my question. We've been told by many environmental organizations that there are not enough regulations to be properly enforced to protect the environment. Your brief here seems to be telling us something to the contrary. You're finding that we're overregulated in the clean-up areas under CEPA and you would rather see the funds and effort being expended elsewhere. That's why I was looking for particulars on that.
Mr. Bohnet: For clarification purposes we're saying that the CEPA violations have to be cleaned up, but there's more to it than just going out and cleaning up today's mess, which has been a direct result of the non-enforcement of previous regulations and legislation. So if you're going to make legislation, let's make it so that it's practical and you can implement the legislation.
The Chairman: We certainly agree with you on that. That's why we are on the road.
Mr. Adams, congratulations on your commercial.
Mr. Adams: I want to comment again on the fact that DIAND is not appearing publicly before us. I know we've been in contact with them, but in light of this brief too, I think we should make sure we follow up later on in dealing with DIAND.
Mr. Bohnet and colleagues, I thank you for all this material, as well as for the commercial.
You make an eloquent plea for partnerships and you put the case very well. You actually use the examples of the Arctic Environment Strategy and some of the successes of the clean-up. I appreciate that. But in our experience, partnerships are not enough. You have to have penalties; you have to have ways of enforcing regulations. You've suggested that yourself. To the extent to which within the Métis Nation you have powers of enforcement, amongst your own people, as distinct from dealing with developers, do you as an organization have powers or envisage powers where you could enforce regulations that you accept are necessary in your territory?
Mr. Bohnet: I'd like to say yes, but as a politician the answer is truly no. We are a political organization. When it comes to environmental issues, the approach we have used is to educate our own people that we are also part of many of the problems that are out there when it comes to environmental problems. We are part of the problem, so we want to be part of the solution.
This is where partnerships come in. We've always taken the belief that basically no one people alone have the environmentalist issue. As Canadians, environmental issues belong to all of us. I think the values we place on our land and resources may be somewhat different from some of the large urban centres south of 60.
We don't have powers for enforcement within our particular political organization. We've taken a much different approach - schools and so on.
Mr. Adams: Thank you.
Mr. O'Brien (London - Middlesex): My question comes from the same area asMr. DeVillers' earlier. I'm still not clear on it. Is your argument with what has been done, the sites for clean-up, or the fact that CEPA has put cleaning up of these sites as a first priority? I guess I'm wondering, if there is another first priority, who would determine it? The GNWT? Exactly who?
Mr. Bohnet: I think when you're establishing priorities, people at the community level have to be involved in establishing these priorities. For far too long, when plans were being developed or legislation was developed, it was done arbitrarily either by the politicians or the bureaucrats. They identify that this is a CEPA violation, or a potential CEPA violation, with very little consultation with people at the community level.
.1300
We're not saying the priorities that have been established are wrong. The health of the people is the number one priority and we see that. But I think we're becoming more and more frustrated when we see the millions of dollars being spent cleaning up these hazardous sites, which have never been the fault of the local people and aboriginal people, when there are other priorities established by communities that are just as important and the dollars aren't there for them.
Mr. O'Brien: There can't be two first priorities, can there? Something has to be first so I'm trying to -
Mr. Bohnet: The health of people is the number one priority. We don't disagree with that. Who pays when we disagree with that?
Mrs. Kraft Sloan: I was wondering if your organization has specific concerns about the proposed diamond mining and its potential negative effects on the environment.
Mr. Bohnet: We've already made one presentation to the panel that has been established to review the BHP proposals. We've outlined some concerns we have about clarification of information on the way their planning process is worked on. We're also going to be making a number of other recommendations on things that are important to us.
I think it would be premature for me to start to specifically outline concerns directly related to the environment with this panel until we have our homework done. We have a number of concerns on the socio-economic side because of lessons we have learned in the north from prior major development projects. We want to make sure that aboriginal people benefit from all aspects of any development, but not at the expense of the environment.
For example, when the Norman Wells pipeline was built a number of years ago, the jobs aboriginal people got were either as labourers or camp attendants. The projects were run from southern union-based companies. We oppose that. The whole socio-economic side is a much bigger issue than the subject of this committee here. We'll be dealing with the proper authorities on that one.
Mr. Finlay: I want to follow up on something Mr. Adams said too because I think you're getting to the nub of the matter here. You want some local control and local priorities established, yet you also recognize that some development is necessary.
On the top of page 2 you say that mine sites were abandoned and tenders were not secured in the days before the territorial land use regulations. Do these territorial land use regulations include requirements now for the removal of buildings, reconstitution of the mine site, etc., and can you enforce them? Those are things that can be done by local legislation. Do these territorial land use regulations give you the authority or the power to do that?
Mr. Carpenter: I can address that initially. It doesn't give us the authority as the Métis Nation, but certainly within the mandate of the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs under the land use regulations, I believe they have a great deal of power to control that. The question of enforcement is probably always there, but the 1972 land use regulations do require remedial action. They require restoration; they require a number of issues that would prevent the leaving of material behind like they used to. So in part, yes, they are being addressed by the current land use regulations.
As to whether they're being fully enforced may be another question about the amount of money available to the department to do that. There's always room for improvement and one area of improvement is probably in that field.
Mr. Bohnet: I think later this morning you will be hearing from some of the other aboriginal groups that are directly involved with land claims. Within those land claim agreements are certain systems or regulatory regimes where they're fully part of the regulatory regimes. I think they would be much better on that end of it, how they're directly involved in setting the policies and legislation. I'll leave that for the group following us.
.1305
The Chairman: Perhaps there couldn't be a better way of concluding this presentation. We would love to spend more time with all three of you. Unfortunately there are time restraints and there are people waiting for their turn. But on behalf of the committee, Mr. Bohnet, Mr. Paulette andMr. Carpenter, we really thank you very much for your very helpful paper and the points that were made during the question and answer period. We appreciate that.
Mr. Bohnet: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Just before we leave, we have a little gift for the committee members that ties in with this environmental stuff.
These are garbage bags. They are made in Fort McPherson, Northwest Territories. They're lined with something, so you can take your garbage and put it in there, and you can reuse the bag. I think the theme of it, ``Our Land, Our Future: Please Keep It Clean,'' is basically the beliefs of the Métis Nation and probably most aboriginal people in the territory. We have one for each of the committee members. So in closing, there it is; pick up your garbage.
Mr. Paulette: Mr. Chairman, we were going to ask you to use them, to break them in here in Yellowknife, but I think, because of your schedule, we'll just....
Mr. Bohnet: Anyway, on behalf of the Métis Nation, thank you very, very much.
The Chairman: Thank you. Will the next group come to the table, please?
From the Council for Yukon Indians, we have Patrick James, the chief of Carcross/Tagish First Nation. With him is: Norma Kassi, former MLA and the coordinator from Vuntut Arctic Environmental Strategy; and Lucy van Oldenbarneveld, research assistant for the Council for Yukon Indians. We welcome you three to the committee. We are very keen to hear your views, and the floor is yours.
Chief Patrick James (Carcross/Tagish First Nation): First of all, I'd like to take this opportunity, in recognition of the Yellowknife First Nations, to thank them for allowing us into their traditional territory and for allowing us to make this presentation. I'd like to thank them for it.
On behalf of both of my communities, the Carcross/Tagish First Nation and the Council for Yukon Indians, I'd like to wish a very pleasant good morning to each and every one of you who are here.
Incidentally, we do not have any gifts for you today. It's only when you come to our traditional territory in the Yukon that we give out gifts.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank the standing committee for this opportunity to present our views relating to CEPA.
With me today, as you mentioned, is Norma Kassi, who is from the Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation and has been coordinating the Arctic Environmental Strategy program; and Lucy van Oldenbarneveld, a CYI research assistant.
.1310
First of all, I'd like to express some concerns.
It's kind of ironic that a Yukon first nations' chief has to come almost a third of the way across the North American continent to make a presentation that relates to the environment to a very important standing committee.
In some of the issues I bring forth, as I go through my presentation to you, you will realize that the environment is very important. Pollutants and contaminants and the issues around them are just as important all across the north. I'd like to mention that here today.
I would like to preface this presentation with a reminder that comments and concerns expressed today are preliminary in nature. Full analysis in the form of a report will be submitted to the standing committee by May 26. This report will contain in-depth analysis and specific recommendations on the relationship between CEPA and the Yukon first nations.
The Council for Yukon Indians brings to the committee the unique perspective of first nations' people living in Canada's north. CYI represents approximately 8,000 Yukon first nations' people, who have recently settled a land claims agreement that will encompass 16,000 square miles of land in the Yukon and give first nations decision-making powers off settlement lands.
Our first four final and self-government agreements became law on February 14, 1995. As I will describe a little later on, one of our first priorities is to give effect to the interim measures sections of the development assessment process, chapter 12, section 12.3.6.
We have had the opportunity to review many of the comments made by other first nations to the committee and agree with much of what they have to say, in particular the need for federal, provincial and territorial governments to recognize first nations as environmental decision-makers and not merely as stakeholders.
This committee, in their newsletter Let's Talk CEPA, stated that the ultimate goal of the parliamentary review of CEPA is to develop a legislative tool that will enable decision-making at every level of Canadian society and help support a healthy sustained environment. We look forward to working with you on these matters, government to government.
The purpose of our presentation today is to describe development in the Yukon relevant to the whole issue of environmental protection, and also to describe the work undertaken by CYI to enable us to make specific recommendations to the committee regarding changes to CEPA required to fulfil and be consistent with self-government and final agreements, as interpreted by first nations' communities in the Yukon.
One final purpose of our presentation is to highlight for the committee how important environmental protection and pollutant prevention is to the Yukon first nations.
CYI believes that environmental protection is the inherent right and responsibility of first nations on their lands, and in particular that Yukon first nations' people, with other governments, have an important role to play in environmental decision-making.
CYI believes that the development assessment process, as described in chapter 12 of the Umbrella Final Agreement, together with other provisions of the Umbrella Final Agreement and separate final and self-government agreements, will allow first nation communities in the Yukon to meet these objectives.
Chapter 12 will be CYI's main instrument of conducting environmental assessment, but, more importantly, it will become the one-stop shop, the one window that will be used by first nations to ensure that development on our lands is environmentally sound and can sustain themselves in a way that does not interfere with or damage the sacred relationship first nations have with the land.
.1315
Aboriginal people in the Yukon have in recent years been finding more and more of their traditional country foods to be contaminated. Indeed, toxic contamination is a growing concern for us. Although it is difficult to pinpoint exactly how these toxins came to pollute our foods, we do know that cadmium, toxaphene, DDT, PCBs, and a number of other long-lettered pollutants are taking their toll on our people. Communities have been plagued with diseases such as diabetes and various forms of cancer. These diseases used to be virtually unknown to us when our land and food was healthy.
We are uncovering more and more toxic waste left behind by the United States army, such as leaky oil barrels, drums full of PCBs, and underground gasoline storage containers. We all realize that a growing amount of research has shown the Arctic to be a global sink, a pollution mecca for industrial toxins from around the world, including Canada, whether it's because of air currents or simply that toxins like the cold temperature and bioaccumulate rather than break down. The point is that aboriginal people are stuck with the fall-out of this.
These chemicals are being found in our bodies in amounts higher than the national average. Traces are being found in our plants and animals, because these toxins are coming from all around the world. The Yukon first nations would strongly advocate that the Canadian government continue to lead the way in developing international protocols for the reduction and elimination of airborne pollutants.
There is strong evidence that agent orange, a potent herbicide, was sprayed in heavy doses along the Alaska Highway pipeline corridor during the operational years. Another thing I just picked up on after listening to some of the other first nations discussions is that they reverted to the NWT-Yukon pipeline, which runs through our traditional territory as well. Research needs to be done on those areas. The pipeline ran near a number of our communities as well as through our traditional hunting areas. As you know, agent orange was used as well by the U.S. troops in Vietnam. It is obvious there has been significant environmental damage done to our land by outside forces.
Our people are becoming more afraid to eat their traditional food because they have heard there are toxins and pollutants, and they are unsure these foods are still safe to eat. You can imagine the anxiety the situation creates for our elders. The point here is that as first nations we have continued to treat the land with respect, and we don't have any control over those who come in and abuse it.
Things are different now, and this is why we must be involved at all levels of legislative change when it comes to the environment. We believe that amendments to CEPA must not be done in a vacuum. All legislation that is currently being looked at for amendments at both the territorial and federal levels that will affect the north must have a first nations' voice at the discussion table as an equal partner or none of the changes will be relevant to us. The federal agenda of devolution, harmonization, and deregulation must not continue until first nations have been consulted and included.
.1320
Recent discussions and agreements between Canada and Yukon regarding devolution of powers between the provinces and territories regarding the harmonization and environmental laws are of great concern to CYI. We have not been involved in these discussions, even though they are of relevance to ongoing negotiations between the Council for Yukon Indians and the Yukon and Canada.
For example, any transfer of lands or resources and the right to make laws with respect thereto from Canada to the Yukon would be premature until final settlement and self-government agreements have been reached with all Yukon first nations.
As I mentioned, establishing interim measures under the development assessment process is the number one priority for Yukon first nations. We believe that Environment Canada, who have environmental jurisdiction, must be involved as a major player in developing these interim measures. As signatories to the UFA, including chapter 12, Canada and the Yukon have agreed in principle with the development assessment process. They have further agreed that as independent decision-makers they will comply with the results of that process. This will most likely mean that both federal and territorial laws, including CEPA, will have to be amended.
For example, all provisions in CEPA now providing for consultation with provincial and territorial governments should, at a minimum, be amended to require consultation with Yukon first nations. Consultation is a key theme throughout our land claims, and we have defined what the consultation process must be. Primarily, it means consulting with all the communities on issues that affect them. CYI is currently having a legal analysis prepared to do some of the following: review the basis for first nations jurisdiction over the environment, given the terms of the UFA and various other agreements; review the application of existing federal and territorial environmental protection laws, including CEPA, to settlement lands; assess the existence of gaps in the environmental protection laws and make recommendations as to how such gaps might be addressed; assess the adequacy of CEPA as it now exists to meet the needs and expectations of CYI communities and make recommendations about the changes that could be made to CEPA.
This report is now under way, with a final report to the standing committee by May 26. Once CYI has its final report it will be in a better position to make specific recommendations regarding the amendments and provisions of CEPA.
In closing, I would like to thank you for your time today, and offer this committee any assistance or advice we may be able to provide. Thank you very much.
The Chairman: Mr. James, this is very helpful, particularly the legal analysis you mentioned in the last few minutes. We certainly look forward to receiving them, and possibly as early as you can deliver them, because, as you probably know already, we are in the final writing stage and we would find your comments, particularly on gaps and assessment of adequacy, extremely helpful.
I apologize to you for the brief disruption.
.1325
We have a half hour at our disposal to make a good round of questions, and then perhaps a second one.
Mr. Gilmour: Thank you for your presentation. You mentioned the U.S. Army DEW Line sites. How many are there in the Yukon and what is the extent of the clean-up to date, and of the clean-up that needs to be done?
Ms Norma Kassi (Coordinator, Arctic Environmental Strategy): Through the Arctic Environmental Strategy, a very cooperative initiative taken by government that created tremendously good partnerships between first nations in the Yukon and DIAND in dealing with our environmental issues, we've become very aware of what is happening on our lands with respect to toxins, long-range pollutants and local pollutants, as our chief and other first nations groups have brought to your attention this morning.
There are presently 42 DEW Line sites across the north. There are several in the Yukon. I'm not sure of the exact numbers. However, we have been told that within a 21-kilometre radius there are very high levels of PCBs around those DEW Line stations.
The clean-up has been done for waste, not particularly for attacking contaminants. We've been told there are a lack of resources and a lack of money with respect to clean-up of that kind of waste. We too would like to make a very strong recommendation here as Yukon first nations that the Arctic Environmental Strategy does continue. The partnership is there. The cooperation is there.
We need more money and resources to be able to clean up, and to key in particularly on the health-hazardous waste that's been left behind. We also understand there are international negotiations between Canada and the U.S. to address some of these clean-up issues and to get the U.S. to be responsible and bring some resources forth. However, at the local level we haven't heard any good results yet. We do need to make sure the U.S. gets responsible for some of that.
As you have heard my chief say, we do have tremendous concerns about our people and our health in the Yukon. We do have very high levels of diseases such as cancer and diabetes. We know through studies done through the Arctic Environmental Strategy that PCBs contribute a lot to diabetes.
Mr. Lincoln: Chief James, you talked about linking CEPA to settlement lands and the whole process of the agreements that are going to be signed and have been signed. I know you're going to present a brief by May 26 with further recommendations. I wanted to touch on a part of CEPA that presently covers Indian lands. It is under part IV, which covers reserves, surrendered lands or any other lands vested in the Crown and subject to the Indian Act, and all waters on and air above such reserves or lands.
I wonder if you have any thoughts for us as to whether your organization has developed any ideas for broadening this. Do you want to have CEPA broadened? Other aboriginal groups we've met don't feel that CEPA actually applies to them. They say they want to be on their own and set up their own regime on their lands. CEPA would then come in to fill gaps and so forth, or maybe support them. They don't want CEPA to necessarily apply to them. Do you mean CEPA should continue to apply to settlement lands? What is the view of your organization?
.1330
Chief James: I think what I'm making reference to is that it's not the idea that first nations people don't want CEPA to apply on settlement lands. One thing I want to make clear is the jurisdiction and powers of first nations' government in the Yukon not only applies on settlement lands, but there are management regimes outside of settlement lands that relate to all Yukon lands, and first nations people have decision-making powers on those boards and committees that are set up in reference to things like the CEPA board or a committee for environmental concerns.
In general, I don't think first nations people are opposed to any type of development. We want to be part of what is happening and we want to be able to make regulations as to how this development proceeds, not only on traditional territory but outside of it. I think that's an important thing I would like to stress.
Mr. Lincoln: Would you see CEPA broadening the definition regarding Indian lands, as it stands today?
Chief James: Maybe I'll pass that question to Norma or Lucy.
Ms Kassi: Under section IV of CEPA, we understand there is reference to Indian lands, reserve lands, etc. In the Yukon we are dealing with settlement lands at this point.
Mr. Lincoln: I realize that.
Ms Kassi: Through the development assessment process, from a very local level to a territorial level, we would like to have an agreement under section 12 of our umbrella final agreement with all governments in the territory. The two governments and the Yukon first nations would agree to develop the regulations with respect to our environmental concerns and issues. They would develop the concerns or the regulations locally, go out to the territory and then nationally. That is where we would have to work very closely with CEPA.
Right now we're still under negotiation. There are several areas we have to deal with in the negotiations. A lot of the CEPA and CEAA will be superseded by the development assessment process, hopefully by its deadline in two years when it's supposed to be in place.
Mr. Finlay: Mr. Chairman, I'm trying to follow up on that point for a moment on page 10 or 11. The chief made the point that the first nations continue to treat the land with respect, but have not had any control over those who came in to abuse it. Things are different now. I presume you're talking about the umbrella agreement. There is a little concern...we must be involved at all levels of legislative change when it comes to the environment. We've heard this comment before, as on page 12, ``We have not been involved in these discussions''.
Can you suggest a reason why you have not been involved? Is it because you don't see the umbrella agreement the same way the Yukon territorial government or the federal government does? Where is the problem, if we're working towards a solution?
Chief James: I can give you some background information, and then Norma can jump in.
One of the things I see happening abroad and across Canada...in Yukon, when you take the Yukon itself...it's my point of view, and many first nations across the Yukon share this point of view. There are two economies that exist in the Yukon: the traditional economy, which first nations people share amongst themselves, and the industrialized economy, which operates parallel to the traditional economy. We've allowed the industrialized economy to manipulate and make changes to many policies and legislation regarding the environment. Yet, we have an existing traditional economy where the government does not allow us to have any input into legislative decision-making concerning the environment.
.1335
Maybe Norma could join in at this point.
Ms Kassi: One of the biggest problems we face in the Yukon territory, which is probably no different from a lot of the problems first nations face across the country, is that our land claims have been settled, but other governments are basically having difficulty recognizing the Yukon first nations as a governing body, a government.
We have been dealing with DIAND. There are many pieces of legislation, laws, and regulations under the waters act, the Fisheries Act, the Yukon mining laws, and the mining act. Those are all presently under review. Hopefully, they will be reviewed, go through the legislative process in Parliament, and be ready for the development assessment process to kick in. That is one of the biggest problems we face in the Yukon, not really being recognized as partners in the agreement. That has to be brought to the forefront in the Yukon.
We have all these different kinds of laws and regulations to deal with. What we want to do under the development assessment process is approach that in a one-window way, bring it all together and deal with the environment in the Yukon territory in a holistic way and not have all these pieces of laws and regulations we have to deal with. As I said earlier, we want our laws and regulations to be developed from the local to the territorial to the national and to work in cooperation with the territorial and federal governments.
As my chief strongly stated in his presentation, we should be dealing with Environment Canada. Basically, Environment Canada has been non-existent in the north. We very rarely hear about them. We deal with DIAND. We need to deal with Environment Canada in our negotiations for future development, particularly in CEPA, CEAA, etc., and in developing a second process under the UFA.
Mrs. Kraft Sloan: My earlier questions were answered, but you just triggered something when you said that Environment Canada is basically non-existent in the north. I was just wondering if you could expand on that a bit more.
Ms Kassi: We in the Yukon have been dealing with the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs where there's EARP, FIRA, water boards, and forestry, which is all governed by DIAND. Basically, very little attention was given to the environment as a whole until the Arctic Environmental Strategy, AES, was developed and we began working with DIAND through that program. We very rarely deal with Environment Canada. We should be negotiating with Environment Canada as first nations of the Yukon on developing these regulations.
Mrs. Kraft Sloan: Do you feel the perception that Environment Canada is not really there for them is shared by people outside of the native community, or is it just because of the focus you've had with DIAND?
Ms Kassi: I can't speak for them. However, I think they'd probably say yes, they're very rarely evident here.
Mrs. Kraft Sloan: One of the things I've been trying to promote on this committee, and I'm glad to see it in your report, is the fact that legislation doesn't occur in a vacuum and that we have to take a look at other things that are going on in order to understand how we can best develop and implement what we're trying to do here.
Thank you very much for your brief.
Mr. Adams: Almost all of the members here are new, but at least two of us sat through the night on the last committee stage of your agreement. It was one of the most traumatic times - I think, John, you would agree - that we had since we had since we were elected. It was a pleasure to share that with you. It really was.
.1340
You answered my question before, should the Metis Nation...about enforcement. Under the agreement - under chapter 12 or elsewhere - I wondered about the extent to which, as a nation, working with the Yukon first nations, you have power of enforcement on your own people, as distinct from the development process and people coming in from outside. I wonder if you'd care to comment on that.
Chief James: I think we've been working quite closely in our first nations as well as with the non-native community, and we have established the justice committee. As you know, aboriginal justice is very strong within the Yukon and is part of their settlement of self-government in different things like that.
Both native and non-native people have been sharing our same view as a community justice committee. A lot of the charges that are coming down to the courts have been referred to the justice committee to be dealt with at a community level. Those are some of the areas that I feel could play a very important role in terms of how the first nations communities and the community at large can deal with the environmental concerns.
One of the things happening...if there is such a law-breaker who has been incarcerated and sentenced by this committee, they direct those resources and whatever they can accomplish within the community back into the community. As a result, a lot of good comes to the community in terms of benefits that are derived from those actual court cases.
I feel that first nations communities and non-first-nations communities can develop laws that can effectively deal with environmental law-breakers and different things like that.
Mr. Adams: It's not that I'm particularly hung up, Chief James, on enforcement, but it seems to me human nature being what it is, it includes not only clean-up, which you're dealing with at the moment, but the whole prevention idea. It may well be necessary to have means of enforcing procedures and so on to prevent further pollution. So thanks for that.
Ms Kassi: In the Yukon, the first nations people have always taken care of each other and taken care of the territories we occupy. Basically, since we've existed here, we have enforced our own traditional and conservation laws on each other for thousands of years. It's the polluters who have come in who are the ones we have had very little control of in the past. They just came in and did what they wanted to do.
Right now in the Yukon we have undertaken the land claims agreements. Things will be different now. They will have to deal with the first nations people firsthand. Certainly, enforcement, as part of any acts or agreements that will take place in the future, must be stronger than ever before, particularly when in the Yukon right now we're faced with.... The small territories sell 70,000 active mining leases today. It is probably more in the last few days.
We're also very concerned because they will now undertake heap leeching as a new initiative in the Yukon. We are concerned about the cyanide and chemicals that will have to be transported to the area where they will be doing this. We have to have laws in place to protect our territories. Those toxic contaminants will be travelling through several first nations villages to their destinations, wherever they have them in the Yukon. At this point, enforcement is very low. We have very little or nothing in terms of what DIAND's responsibilities are. Under the development assessment process, we want to make sure that there are stronger enforcement laws.
.1345
Mr. O'Brien: I appreciated your presentation. Mr. Lincoln has already noted that we've heard the comment about government-to-government negotiations or consultations before, so it's interesting to hear you reinforce that.
Could you indicate what efforts you might have made to establish government-to-government links? You mentioned that you have been dealing through DIAND, but could you give us some examples of attempts you may have made to establish those kinds of links and what the result was?
Chief James: Successful attempts or...?
Mr. O'Brien: It's on the record, so I think you should tell us whatever the result was.
Chief James: I think in the Yukon we have many attempts to deal with different types of development that are taking place.
What is happening now is that we're dealing with devolution, and harmonization and deregulation as well. We're trying to deal with those types of things. It seems the trend that is happening within the Yukon is that this whole thing is going full steam ahead with very little attention paid to the new order of government in the Yukon, which is first nations government.
I think it's simply inappropriate for the feds to continue with these types of extensive changes to jurisdiction and responsibilities until such time as first nations affairs are in order and are willing to participate. I feel there's a lot of them willing to participate at this point in time; however, there are some little odds and ends that need clarification and clearing up before that participation takes place.
Mr. O'Brien: For example, then, would the aboriginal peoples of the Yukon have made a specific request say to be involved with the CCME, the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment? Was such a request made?
We've heard from other aboriginal leaders that it was made and denied, so I'd like to know for the record whether the aboriginal peoples of the Yukon made such a request.
Ms Kassi: Presently we have a representative of the Council for Yukon Indians. Just recently, in the last month or so, we have participated in those discussions at the CCME.
The Chairman: On whose initiative?
Ms Kassi: It was a recommendation that came out of the Arctic Environmental Strategy meeting, I believe, requesting involvement at various levels of the talks on harmonization.
The Chairman: You did not answer my question, I'm sorry. Who took the initiative?
Ms Kassi: The Council for Yukon Indians made a request to the Minister of Environment, I believe that we have a representative on -
The Chairman: Had that request been made before and turned down?
Ms Kassi: I'm not sure.
Mr. O'Brien: The chairman has taken my question further, and that's fine.
The Chairman: I apologize.
Mr. O'Brien: No, we all want to know the same information, so I appreciate that.
I think it would be useful if you could let us know the answer to the question that was just posed. Did you make a previous request, and how was it met by the CCME?
If I might, Mr. Chairman, on CEPA, do I hear you saying that we should basically stop our work right now until the self-government negotiations are concluded? Of course, as the chairman noted, we're pressing along very determinedly to try to meet a deadline for the revisions to the act, the rewriting.
Am I understanding you to say that we should kind of stop dead on that until...or that we proceed on two parallel tracks? I hope that is what you are saying because that's the view I have.
Chief James: I think basically all Yukon first nations welcome CEPA and welcome their input and the work that is being done. It's just that first nations people need to be involved. As you know, in our presentation and in different things we will make many recommendations. Those types of things, I feel, are important. That relationship that can develop with CEPA and the Yukon first nations, I think, is important, and I think it needs to continue.
Mr. O'Brien: Thank you.
.1350
The Chairman: To conclude, let me ask you a question, Chief James. You spoke earlier about the industrialized economy and the traditional economy. Out of curiosity, could you tell us what the are preconditions for the two economies, the two functions side by side? You must have thought about it.
Chief James: I've thought about it a great deal. The most important issue here I guess is...what is happening is that the industrialized economy is the only one that government recognized as input into making changes to the environment and the land and allowing development issues.
The formation of policy and legislation is basically all industrialized input, but we've disallowed the traditional economy. The users, the people - as mentioned with the Dene - have very little input. I've brought that a little further and I've recognized my own people and their economy, their search for all these different medicinal plans, food and harvesting. Those are inherent rights of first nations people. I think the first nations people would like a say as to how laws and legislation are developed. They want input as to how development takes place in certain areas. Those are important.
The Chairman: Is that the only precondition?
Chief James: There are a lot of preconditions.
The Chairman: Could you tell us more?
Chief James: Our report on the May 26 will address a lot of those types of things.
The Chairman: We very much look forward to reading that. If you do any writing on this subject, I'm sure there are many members of the committee who would like to read your reflections.
This brings us to a conclusion this morning. We thank you, Chief James, for your appearance and for the wisdom you have brought to the table. We thank you, Norm and Cathy and Lucy Van Oldenbarneveld.
We adjourn now for a quick lunch and then for a visit to St. Patrick's High School to see an environmentally designed school. We will come back here at 2 p.m. sharp to resume with four witnesses this afternoon. Thank you.