Summary Of Discussions

Aboriginal right, Aboriginal title and treaty right

• recognition, negotiation, implementation of access to traditional territories and resources
• honour/implement rather than appeal section 35 court decisions (e.g. recognition of generic section 35 right, and negotiation of specific right)
• get rid of the Indian Act
• recognize First Nations as true governments and provide a voice in Parliament
• recognition legislation

Acknowledge that agreements and their implementation form the starting point of an ongoing, evolving relationship. For example,

• Canada recognizes the inherent right to self-government and starts now to build a new relationship
• get rid of extinguishment, establish living relationships
• ongoing process to be built more on two-way recognition/relationship building, less on transactions
• Canada must implement treaties according to the spirit and intent of the treaty relationship
• treaties need to evolve over time
• implement recommendations from the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP)

Make adjustments to negotiation processes to reflect the above re-orientation and improve outcomes. For example:

INUIT BREAKOUT GROUP

There were approximately 29 participants in the Inuit breakout group. Note that this report is an overview summary of the meeting and cannot adequately capture the breadth and depth of the discussions. Please review the Inuit flip charts for the details of the discussions.

Introduction and Key Messages

The following key messages were identified at the opening of the session by the participants.

• Inuit women need to be involved in all aspects of negotiations.
• The extinguishment clause needs to be dissolved and completely removed in existing treaties. The relationship needs to be based on the respect and continuation of Inuit right. The honour of the Crown is implicated in this issue.
• The Government of Canada still has unfulfilled obligations to the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement.
• For the land claims to be successful, the federal government has an obligation to implement the agreements.
• For Inuit to believe in the land claims, they need to see progress on implementation. Since implementation is not proceeding well, organizations are hearing the concerns directly rather than the Government of Canada.
• Inuit want their traditional ways to continue and not be compromised.
• Inuit would like to include industry in negotiations/discussions.
• Inuit are often marginalized in urban settings and don’t receive the constitutionally recognized protection to which they are entitled.
• The settlement of land claims in all the regions has been carried out for the betterment of all of Canada.
• The federal government has to develop Inuit-specific policies and programs.

Critical Issues

Working in full plenary, the group developed critical negotiation issues to effectively address Inuit Aboriginal and treaty right. The facilitators worked with the participants to organize the initial 36 issues into eight distinct critical issue categories. The participants identified recommended actions and key messages on how these issues could be addressed.

1) Inuit and pan-Arctic definition and policies

There is a need for Inuit-specific policies that are not based on a First Nations approach, all-inclusive Aboriginal policy or Inuit add-ons to existing policies. An example of an Inuit-specific policy would be a broad Canadian Arctic Policy (not one limited to north ^{[ 2 ]} and south of 60 or limited to Nunavut). Land claims are not just about money but have broader benefits to Canada and Canadians.

Recommended actions

The Government of Canada and Inuit develop a comprehensive Inuit policy in Canada. This policy must include a modern definition of Inuit that includes urban Inuit as well as all four Arctic regions. A new relationship is required between the Crown and Inuit to facilitate the following:

• the GOC and Inuit, through the ITK, to negotiate and conclude the partnership accord and establish the Inuit Secretariat;
• establishment in partnership with Inuit land claims organizations of a new land claims implementation policy. The Privy Council Office and Cabinet Committee on Aboriginal Affairs should oversee a cooperative policy with the members of the Land Clams Agreements Coalition to draft a new lands claims implementation policy based on the Coalition's tabled discussion paper and the four principles stated in that paper;
• the Canadian government to develop an education strategy with ITK to educate federal employees and all Canadians about the Arctic;
• the Government of Canada to ensure that Nunavik (northern Quebec) and Nunatsiavut (Labrador) are officially included in its Northern Strategy; and
• the Government of Canada to support the inclusion of an Arctic/Inuit dimension in institutions of the Canadian federation, such as the Council of the Federation, the Social Union, and federal/provincial processes in general.

2) Jurisdiction

There are a number of recurring critical issues with respect to jurisdiction. For example, jurisdiction needs to be clarified so that Inuit do not get caught in the middle between governments; provincial/territorial governments cannot be the primary negotiators, and sometimes federal/provincial/territorial governments pass on jurisdictional problems to Inuit organizations.

Recommended actions

• Revisit the entire jurisdiction issue with Inuit, as the Inuit were never involved during the first round of certain discussions (Council of Federation, Social Union Framework Agreement) and Inuit consent/participation/presence is required for anything that affects the Inuit.
• Recognize the Arctic region in those jurisdictional issues.
• To ensure issues are addressed, establish an autonomous Inuit secretariat (distinct from the current proposal) that would support the day-to-day implementation of the partnership accord and be a one-window shop for Inuit for all government departments.

3) Federal government capacity and requirements

The government at both the political and administrative level is not always aware of land claims, obligations and mandate. Federal initiatives not negotiated with the Inuit in advance are not always useful. The Inuit secretariat must not be bureaucratic and should expedite the land claims agreements. The Crown’s fiduciary responsibility is not limited to INAC and that needs to be reflected in the federal government machinery and how ministerial commitments are translated/done by staff.

Recommended actions

Dealing with INAC is not working and as such, institutional structures within the federal government must be established.

• A specific department (Ministry of Inuit Affairs) that has sole responsibility for Inuit is required that establishes a new relationship with the Inuit.
• Mechanisms are needed to ensure ongoing understanding of responsibilities and obligations.
• Mechanisms are needed to feed the government/bureaucracy factual information and concerns.
• Periodic meetings are needed to establish and agree on priorities and processes that can address Inuit concerns in a timely manner.
• Inuit need to be involved in all relevant policy development tables, with appropriate funding attached.
• The federal Inuit secretariat must have a mandate to make decisions and should be a unique model of how the Crown and Inuit can work together. It needs to have an expansive mandate that is interdepartmental and can troubleshoot, expedite decisions and be action oriented.
• The mandate of the Inuit secretariat should be determined through discussion and agreement with Inuit organizations. It should act as a catalyst/advocate/focal point in the federal system, and link Inuit with the various federal agencies.
• All public servants working on Inuit issues need mandatory education and refreshers. Basic knowledge of Inuit must to be a job requirement and there must be a commitment to the establishment of corporate memory at all levels of the bureaucracy. Government treaty and land claims obligations should be part of the mandatory training for all government managers, not only those public servants who deal directly with Inuit.

4) Negotiation process

Timelines for negotiations are too long and result in a loss of capacity and work, sometimes through delays and federal government stalling. When the government comes to the table with internal mandates and interpretations, it limits the latitude for negotiations. Throughout the different negotiation processes, complex issues are arising that the current mechanisms are not able to adequately deal with, such as:

• addressing self-government through public government approaches;
• mechanisms to address overlapping claims that allow for progress to happen with some groups, while others can continue negotiating;
• addressing self-government situations where negotiations occur with both Inuit and First Nations representation (e.g. for the Inuvialuit, health care is a shared responsibility); and
• proactive approaches to women’s participation that ensures women are consulted and involved at the regional level.

Recommended actions

• a new negotiations policy with an implementation policy built in
• independent appointed negotiators must have a real mandate with authorization to negotiate and with proper expertise and authority to be at the table;
• an implementation framework to be built into the implementation plan
• a tribunal or some mechanism must be established to deal with implementation complaints
• negotiations should have a process, in which a clear direction or vision (e.g. better quality of life for Inuit) is the focus, and with a time frame and finances that are based on obligations, issues and needs
• negotiations should not be driven by unilateral predetermined financial limits that cannot address inflationary factors, emerging issues and the real length and costs of implementation processes
• all parties must be accountable for moving the process forward and operate from the basic principle of good faith
• the lack of a definition of good faith undermines negotiations. The paper that Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated (NTI) informally submitted to the roundtable suggests that we should be looking to the field of labour law/collective bargaining for help in defining the term

5) Urban Inuit in the South

The growth of Inuit communities in the south continues to create policy implications and pressures relating to the government’s responsibilities for ensuring that urban Inuit have access to services.

Recommended actions

• the establishment of a national Inuit-specific urban policy developed with the Inuit
• an urban Inuk is defined as anyone living outside of their land claim region
• the current funding needs to have an Inuit-specific share
• in some cases, services parallel to those available to First Nations and northern services in the Arctic need to be provided to Inuit in the south
• there has to be a range of services including immediate and long-term programs (e.g. Inuit women fleeing violence, and medical care)

6) Implementation

The federal government is viewed as being good at meeting minimum requirements but not at meeting the larger objectives or spirit of the negotiated settlement agreements. At this point, the Government of Canada is functioning within the sins of omission. It has not been responding to, and there have been continuous delays in, the negotiation of the Inuit Partnership Agreement and implementation of Article 23 of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement (NLCA) (e.g. Inuit are losing out on millions of dollars as departments are waiting for direction and little progress is being made). There is a need for a new implementation policy and a way to address implementation disputes.

Recommended actions

• There must be a long-term commitment by all parties to implementation.
• In the immediate term, the federal government has to respond to legitimate issues that have been raised by Inuit organizations. (e.g. there has been no response on the Inuit Partnership Accord in four years).
• The relationship established between the Inuit and GOC has to be based on respect before checks and balances.
• Implementation plans must include objectives, quantifiable measures, defined monitoring objectives, long-term strategies, and clear commitments for renewed long-term funding, and be flexible to allow for changing circumstances in the Arctic. The Inuit must be equally involved in the planning of the implementation process. There needs to be a dispute resolution process when disagreements occur around implementation.
• The federal government must have a streamlined process that is responsive and accountable to Inuit/Arctic issues. The Inuit secretariat can be developed to be that mechanism.

The federal government should enter into good faith negotiations, which include:

• appointing a federal negotiator
• addressing the substantive proposals on the table in sufficient detail
• proceeding on the basis of whether implementation is meeting the objectives of the agreement
• disclosing all relevant information on federal implementation funding for the first ten years
• acknowledging that the NLCA is a two-party agreement between Inuit of Nunavut and the GOC

7) Capacity building

Individuals, communities, Inuit organizations and governments all require capacity building investments. The lack of sustainable funding for Inuit organizations seriously compromises their desire to move forward. The reliance on a few in communities leads to burnout. There must be processes to inform all community members of their right as Inuit and the implications of the land claims agreements.

Recommended actions

• A partnership approach to all capacity building is required.
• Develop a national curriculum, including the content and processes of the land claims agreements, Aboriginal right and Inuit-specific issues. There has to be a broader education/initiative to target all Canadians on the benefits to Canada and Canadians (e.g. curriculum in schools). The government must institute initiatives to educate itself about the Inuit.
• For the government, it would be useful to have the same staff on a file for a longer period of time, provide people with the education and knowledge to work with the Inuit and have non-Inuit working on behalf of the Inuit play a larger role in building a sustainable workforce.
• The federal government should promptly respond to the draft Partnership Agreement and set up, through ITK, a process for further discussion and conclusion of the Partnership Agreement and Action Plan. This process must include officials with a mandate to conclude an agreement.
• Bureaucrats need to have ongoing education.
• There must be an investment of funds to recognize the key role of Inuit organizations.
• Establish multi-year, core funding for Inuit national groups.
• Establish respectful relationships between parties with mutual evaluations.
• Training to reduce illiteracy and to ensure Inuit are graduating from high school and making the teaching of Inuit languages mandatory in schools are required.

8) International

The Government of Canada is negotiating international agreements that are critical to the quality of life for Inuit (e.g. environmental, fishing, Intellectual property). However, federal departments doing the negotiations are often not educated enough about Inuit. The Inuit have no role, and communication mechanisms that would ensure Inuit and the departments can work together are missing. In some cases, negotiations by the federal government that do not involve consultation with the Inuit are in violation of land claims agreements.

Recommended actions

• Inuit must be involved in the negotiations of international agreements and the development of federal policy (e.g. Northern Dimension of Canada’s Foreign Policy) if they will impact or affect the Inuit.
• Inuit need to have a role on international delegations and be involved in discussions or consultations.
• Expand the reporting relationship of the Circumpolar Ambassador to include the Environment Minister.
• An investment in the Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC) and Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami is required so that Inuit can participate.

Principles and Objectives

In the full plenary, the group was asked to identify principles and objectives that would support the achievement of the recommended actions.

Principles

• There has to be good faith in all areas, a common understanding so we know what is expected of all parties.
• All policies need to be Inuit-specific.
• Land claims are not the end. They mark a new beginning and form the foundation of a new relationship that is dynamic and continues to change.

Objectives

• Inuit have the right to have the same social and economic conditions as other Canadians.
• Revisit agreements that have extinguishment clauses.
• The federal government needs to state a clear commitment and obligation to comprehensive Inuit-specific policies.
• The agreements are intended to enable the Inuit to stand on their own.
• The federal/provincial governments must help Inuit achieve their goals.
• Redefine and start a new relationship with a new policy.
• A partnership agreement between the Crown and ITK must be established.

How Will We Know Progress is Being Made?

The participants provided input on measurements of progress in six areas.

1) New relationship with the federal government

• Inuit and government both feel they are engaged in an equal partnership
• the GOC rescinds, revokes and renders ineffective its extinguishment and surrender clauses and policies in all agreements
• Inuit join with governments in promoting the value of land claims agreements
• this gathering is the beginning of a long process. We have great ideas; the government should listen to them
• an Inuit secretariat is in place and is functioning as it should
• when the Inuit language is being used by the government with the Inuit

2) Implementation of agreements

• signing ceremony of the Partnership Agreement
• every land claims agreement is being implemented
• implementation committees celebrate accomplishments and no longer have to resolve disputes
• conclusion of a comprehensive implementation plan addressing all Crown obligations under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement
• an evaluation framework which will measure impact of claims
• 85% Inuit employment in all levels of Nunavut government

3) Inuit-specific policy

• an Inuit-specific policy that ensures policies and programs reflect the needs of Inuit
• Inuit participation in solutions for programs and policies

4) Financial resources

• Inuit organizations have sufficient, multi-year funds to address their priorities and needs without having to compete with other Aboriginal organizations for them
• when Inuit receive the same level of funding for programs and services as the Assembly of First Nations

5) Quality of life for Inuit

• there is a clear and measurable improvement in the standard of living and health of Inuit in Canada

6) New relationship with Canadians

• the National Post and mainstream Canadians understand the plight and aspirations of the Inuit
• when we complete the Circle of Confederation

Crosscutting Lenses

The Inuit breakout group was also tasked with applying the crosscutting lenses to ensure that the needs and concerns of Inuit women, Inuit people living with disabilities and Inuit people living in urban areas were addressed in the discussion of issues and the development of recommended actions.

• The participants agreed that there needs to be proactive approaches to women’s participation that ensures women are consulted and involved at the regional level.
• The current funding that is available to Inuit living in urban areas needs to have an Inuit-specific component or share and in some cases, parallel to First Nations programs.
• Specific circumstances of all Inuit, whether living with disabilities or living in remote or urban areas, must be factored in when developing policies or programs.

2. Any reference to ‘”northern” or “Arctic” encompasses all Inuit land claim areas, including Nunavik and Nunatsiavut (Labrador).

Table of Contents

The documentation contained on this website does not necessarily represent the views of any government or National Aboriginal Organization. The purpose of this website is to share information related to the Canada-Aboriginal Peoples Roundtable: background papers, Facilitator's sectoral and final reports, agendas and media announcements.

Top of page