July 8, 2025 • 23 mins
Andrew Beynon is on a mission to support Land Code First Nations who want to overhaul Canada's flawed Additions-to-Reserve process.
Mandated by Lands Advisory Board leadership, Beynon is working through layers of provincial and federal contacts to impress upon them the economic value of Nations moving more quickly to add lands to their reserve base.
The system can be painfully show, often taking years, if not decades, to add land that would drastically improve a Nation's economic development, environmental stewardship and cultural protection.
If you would like to support our efforts by taking part in case studies proving the economic value of a better ATR process, please contact Andrew (email below.)
LINKS:
Andrew Beynon's email: andrew.beynon@labrc.com
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
SPEAKER_02 (00:00):
Andrew, let me start with a quote.
Additions to reserve, or ATRs,Canada's process of allowing
land to be added to a FirstNations reserve land base, it
can be a long, frustrating, andinefficient process.
Your take on that?
SPEAKER_00 (00:16):
I would agree that there's unbelievable levels of
frustration from First Nationsand First Nation leadership over
this process.
terribly slow process for addinglands to reserve.
Typically, people are talkingabout three to five years or
much worse, sometimes decades,to get the job done.
It's not just a frustration overa slow process.
(00:39):
A lot of things involving thegovernment are slow.
The problem with additions toreserve is that it's harmful
delays because First Nations arenot in a position to move at the
speed of business on ATRs landcode First Nations can move at
the speed of business oneverything else.
And when you can't move at thespeed of business and the
(01:02):
process is out of your control,you lose economic opportunities.
The critical reason thatleadership is pushing us so hard
and rightfully so to replace theadditions to reserve process is
because of the harm that itcauses.
SPEAKER_02 (01:18):
Is this something that can eventually be overtaken
or consumed by First Nationsthemselves and managed by them?
We're
SPEAKER_00 (01:28):
actually proposing to Canada two steps.
One, that we take some beginningsteps where there would be a
First Nation organization havinga much greater degree of
responsibility for executing theprocess.
We can do it faster.
We'll have to see after thefederal election whether there's
(01:48):
traction for what would reallybe the the biggest change to the
process and one that we'reconvinced would make the biggest
difference is maybe the time hascome for Canada no longer to
make the decision on whether toadd lands to reserve.
I will say, I've said it On thepublic record, I'm inspired by
(02:10):
experience that I had over theyears with the evolution of
First Nation authority overtaxation laws.
And just briefly, when I was ayoung man so many years ago in
the Federal Department ofJustice, I used to provide the
legal advice to the minister'soffice on whether to accept or
(02:32):
disallow a First Nationstaxation bylaw under the Indian
Act.
And after a while, there was anewly created Indian Taxation
Advisory Board, ITAB.
They also became an advisor tothe minister, should we accept
or reject a proposed bylaw.
So for a while, we were the twinadvisors to the minister.
(02:55):
And eventually, I was told, fromnow on, the minister is going to
rely exclusively on the advicefrom the Indian Taxation
Advisory Board.
thanks for doing your work, butyou don't need to do it anymore,
which was fine.
And then many years later, I wasinvolved with working with the
(03:16):
Indian Taxation Advisory Boardand others, and it eventually
led to the creation of the FirstNations Tax Commission.
And the tax commission, as youmay know, They make the
decisions in respect of taxationlaws.
Under the right conditions, youcan have an approved taxation
law.
And it doesn't go to theminister or to Canada anymore.
(03:37):
That's a revolutionary change ontaxation, and it seems to me
that I'm hoping after theelection that the incoming
government realizes instead ofhaving Canada's worst land
acquisition process that, as yousaid from your question, is
unbelievably frustrating but isalso causing economic harm,
(03:59):
missed economic opportunities,make the real change decision to
have somebody other than Canadamake the decision on these
additions to reserve.
SPEAKER_02 (04:12):
Yeah.
We've spoken to leaders todayfrom Chiatkin, Mississauga, and
Member 2, and there's a commontheme in that we don't have the
land we need to expand, whetherit be for economic or social or
cultural reasons, and it'skilling their chances by being
held up, and they can't go atthe speed of business.
SPEAKER_00 (04:33):
Yeah.
Yeah.
It's interesting that That's notjust one First Nation, you're
hearing from three examples, butI hear it all across the
country.
I think it has severaldimensions.
Canada's history of reservecreation, if you go back in
time, there were promises madein the treaties to set aside
lands as reserves, and there wasa practice across the country of
(04:55):
doing it.
Two things happened, and this is100 years ago or more.
One, sometimes Canada didn'tlive up to its promises even to
set aside the amount of reservesthat they said they would,
creating treaty landentitlement, or perhaps even
worse, there were times whereCanada set aside some land, but
(05:17):
then either took it all back andmoved First Nations onto more
marginal land or cut off landsfrom reserve.
There was a tendency to take upthe reserve lands for purposes
other than the First Nations towhom they were reserved.
So if you look back at thehistory, 20th century in
(05:38):
particular, even up until now,very often First Nations have
overcrowded or marginal landsthat are not in the good
locations for economic activity.
The third failing of theadditions to reserve process is
that it's too slow and it'spreventing First Nations from
(06:01):
seizing upon economicopportunities and overcoming the
legacy of the past.
So now is a time when I thinkmore and more Canadians are
paying attention to the economy.
And one of the things that we'vebeen trying to say This is an
important issue to FirstNations, but for those who are
(06:21):
interested in trying to create astronger Canadian economy, we
take the position, I thinkjustifiably based on the success
of land code First Nations, thatwhen you add lands to reserve,
especially for First Nationswith land code authority, you're
increasing economicopportunities for everyone.
(06:43):
It is not the creation of newliabilities for Canada.
SPEAKER_02 (06:47):
It's interesting to hear one example from Jatkin
where they went out and boughtland for I think$23 million
because it was an opportunityand you have to strike at the
speed of business, but then theyhave to go through the ATR
process to attach that to areserve.
SPEAKER_00 (07:03):
I think, you know, I've spoken with Chief Derek Epp
on that many times.
If he could count on a processthat had deadlines and that
could deliver on its promisesfor a relatively quick
decision-making process, hewouldn't be facing what he faced
(07:23):
of taking the risk of acquiringlands with no idea as to whether
or not that would take sixmonths or six years to add to
reserve.
And you know, there are someland code First Nations who in
the past, when they were underIndian Act land management, they
had economic opportunitiesbecause of the good reputation
of the First Nations.
(07:45):
And when Developers said, OK, wewould like to work with you.
How long is it going to take tofinalize a lease?
Can't answer that question.
It depends on the federaldepartment on Canada.
Business leaders walk away.
So it's not that you'resuffering the frustration of
delays.
That's an example of losing aneconomic opportunity.
(08:07):
I'd like to see a situationgoing forward where on additions
to reserve, there's a knowntimeframe and conditions at the
front end.
Under these conditions, youwould have land added to reserve
either X days or Y days, apredictable timeframe.
If there's a predictabletimeframe, then you can attract
(08:29):
business investment andfinancial investment at the
front end, right?
That would make, I think, a hugedifference in terms of
SPEAKER_02 (08:38):
economic opportunities.
It's interesting to see from ahigh level, many pieces fit
together.
The tax code you mentioned, theregistry that's being developed
now and which you're playing abig part in.
the ATR thing, and it all seemsto be part of the puzzle to
solve and to create economicopportunity or growth of some
(09:01):
other fashion, which should be awin-win, right?
Not only for nations, butsurrounding areas, provinces.
SPEAKER_00 (09:07):
Yes, I agree strongly with that observation.
It's interesting.
The Lands Advisory Board, basedon interactions with leadership,
has three priorities.
Improving enforcement of laws,replacing the addition to
reserve process, and buildingthe new First Nation registry,
First Nation-led land registry.
I think the economic value of aneffective, accurate, modern
(09:30):
registry is pretty obvious.
The land acquisition process, ifit can be made to be speedy and
reliable, the economiccontribution I think is also
obvious.
We've said partly that fixingenforcement is actually an
economic tool.
I'll give you a quick example.
Imagine if you were consideringinvesting in a business within a
(09:52):
small retail complex on FirstNation land.
What if we told you, okay, youcan't be sure that if the
business next door to youillegally dumps things or
carries on illegal activities orfails to comply with any fire
codes, that anybody's going tobe able to enforce that and stop
(10:15):
it.
you're going to think twiceabout investing in that
business.
So with some of the federalpolitical parties now, I think
they're getting thatunderstanding that everything
we're driving at could createbetter economic circumstances.
I'll just quickly add, noteverything is about business,
(10:35):
right?
For land code First Nations,resuming their governance
authority over lands can havevital cultural purposes or they
can be traditionally importantlands to the community.
But We still think that even asyou rectify that, if you don't
address the economicopportunities and create the
(10:57):
toolkit that Chief Derek Eppspoke of, then you're doing a
disservice to First Nations andthe Canadian public in terms of
the economy.
SPEAKER_02 (11:08):
Yeah, in fact, yesterday we met with Chief
Kelly LaRocca at Scugog IslandFirst Nation, and she said
culture was their number onereason for wanting to add to the
land base because they werestuck in this...
marshy area that isn't great foragriculture or other purposes,
but yeah, language retention andculture.
It doesn't have to be abouthaving a gas station on the
(11:30):
reserve.
That's right.
SPEAKER_00 (11:31):
But even if it is, or perhaps even especially if
it's for cultural purposes, veryoften in those cases, there's no
objections from neighboringcommunities to what may have
been a former burial site for aFirst Nation or culturally
important lands.
Get on with it.
Get it done.
The delays are offensive to theculture of First Nations and
(11:54):
those other economicopportunities.
If I could just mention as well,though, Richard, I was just
thinking you mentioned our workto build the registry and how
things are so much connected toeach other.
We have to turn to First Nationleadership at our annual general
meeting this year, but one ofthe things that we're proposing
(12:16):
is let's use...
the skills and capacities whichwe're building in the registry
to contribute to an effectiveATR process.
The registry is all aboutelectronic, high-speed, accurate
document tracking sophisticatedmapping, surveys, and the
(12:36):
registration of all interestsaffecting particular parcels of
land.
Those are all the typical issuesthat arise for consideration in
the ATR process.
So we're saying to Canada, aswe've seen the emerging success
of this registry, for efficiencyreasons alone, there's a First
(12:57):
Nation organization that couldbe relied upon.
So one lens that Some FirstNations can look at from the
value of an additions to reserveis that they may not necessarily
just be acquiring the lands onwhich they're going to execute a
high quality economicdevelopment activity, but
(13:20):
immediately adjacent to that,they can control areas that are
very sensitive for environmentalprotection and so on.
And if lands are owned in feesimple by a First Nation, but
they're under a municipalgovernment, the First Nation
can't be as sure when they'redeciding on what type of
development to undertake, what'sgoing to happen on the
(13:42):
neighboring lands.
If they have the governancepowers, then they can balance in
the right places areas forenvironmental protection or
cultural protection publicfacilities relative to the
development areas.
And it creates a more cohesiveapproach as
SPEAKER_02 (14:02):
well.
SPEAKER_01 (14:02):
Okay.
SPEAKER_02 (14:03):
And I'm wondering if some smaller communities on the
ATR issue, whether or notthey're at a disadvantage
because they might not havecapacity, the resources, the
specialized staff to put an ATRapplication through.
SPEAKER_00 (14:16):
Well, right now, the current additions to reserve
process, which, as I've said, Ithink is arguably the worst land
acquisition process in Canada,it's frustrating because it
takes so long, but it chews uphuge amounts of resources.
First Nations staff, hiredlawyers, surveyors, sometimes
(14:37):
appraisers, provincialofficials, municipal officials,
and federal officials.
For First Nations that'srelatively small or doesn't have
access to that capacity, it's anenormous challenge in terms of
the resources expended.
In fact, I've heard that forsome First Nations, where they
(15:00):
have managed to pull togetherthe financial resources to
acquire a parcel of land, theATR process has been more
expensive than the market valueof the land.
No way.
SPEAKER_02 (15:12):
Really?
SPEAKER_00 (15:12):
Yeah.
So imagine that, right?
That just doesn't make sense interms of the scale of things.
Not even close.
No developers, no municipalitieswould run things that
SPEAKER_01 (15:22):
way,
SPEAKER_00 (15:23):
right?
And I don't think the Canadianpublic would expect that First
Nations should face that kind ofa situation.
For heaven's sakes, if it'srelatively small parcels of land
or or in areas that are remotefrom other areas of land, and
especially where the FirstNation doesn't have a huge
(15:43):
amount of human resources todevote to the activity, we've
got to get on with the ATR andits completion.
Because it's only after you havea confirmation that the lands
are under the First Nation'sjurisdiction that you can
unleash all the governancepowers and attract the
(16:04):
investments which can get youout of being a low capacity, low
economy First Nation.
You can't do it at the frontend.
And Richard, if I may, I've seensometimes in the past where some
First Nations entering into landcodes, there's been a question
around, well, do you have thecapacity to take on land code
(16:26):
governance?
And to me, that's the same assaying, do you have the capacity
to take on an ATR?
If you don't take on the ATR oryou don't take on land code
governance, you're likely toforever be in the trap of being
low capacity, missingopportunities and so on.
So we have to get the sequenceof things in the right order.
SPEAKER_02 (16:49):
How serious is the backlog?
I understand there are so manysitting in the hopper right now
that it might take years toclear that.
SPEAKER_00 (16:56):
I don't think the federal government would like to
admit that there's a backlog.
They're doing their best to tryto go through ATRs and to go
faster.
Personally, I would say there'sa backlog.
Because if you total up acrossthe country using the current
additions to reserve process,all of the treaty land
(17:17):
entitlement obligations and allof the ATRs that are known, you
would probably be at hundreds ofyears in some locations to get
the ATRs done.
That's just simply far too slow,far too expensive, and that is
why we're saying to Canada,there's no way that you can
refine the existing process oradd enough trained personnel to
(17:42):
it to get the outcome that allof us want.
So I'll share something withyou, Richard.
You don't often hear ministersof the government of Canada say
that their own process isbroken.
Former Minister Miller, as theMinister of Crown Indigenous
Relations, that was one of thethings he said on the record in
(18:05):
front of parliamentarycommittees.
And my comment, at least, iswhen government ministers say
that a government process isbroken, it's not that it's slow.
Most government processes areslow.
It's that it's not achieving theoutcomes that the government
wants.
So I think there's an emergingrealization.
(18:25):
We have to go faster in order toachieve the results that are
needed for First Nations and allCanadians.
both of us commenting on how oldwe are, a lot of the staff that
I deal with now weren't bornwhen I was first pulled into
discussions about how to finallytackle the issue of treaty land
(18:49):
entitlement in Canada.
That's 30 plus years ago.
And when I was a much youngerfellow and working on the
important treaty landentitlement in Saskatchewan and
Manitoba, for example, if youwould have told me that in the
year 2025 that there would stillbe outstanding treaty land
(19:12):
entitlement and it might takeanother 50 or 100 years to fix
it, I wouldn't believe you.
It's unacceptably slow.
It doesn't make sense to go soslowly.
And there's a faster and lessexpensive way to do it And all
of that would contribute to abetter economic development for
First Nations and
SPEAKER_02 (19:32):
Canadians.
It's too bad that the largerCanadian public couldn't become
an ally to try to support theefforts of First Nations to
advance and succeed.
I'll say on that
SPEAKER_00 (19:43):
front that I think more and more there's many
Canadians who are seeing thatThere may historically have been
a past when a lot of reservelands were lagging behind the
rest of the economy with verypoor housing conditions and so
(20:03):
on.
In the past, partly because ofthe history of reserves created
on marginal lands or reservesthat were created and then lands
taken away, and especiallybecause of the failures of the
Indian Act, For a lot of theCanadian public, when asked
about reserve lands and shouldwe expand them, I think the
(20:27):
reaction is, well, why would youdo that?
You're just piling failure ontop of failure.
And what Canadians see on TV,for example, is there's no
drinking water, or there'sdeclarations of emergencies, or
there's evacuations of FirstNations from their lands.
(20:49):
But what unfortunately I thinkisn't well known to a lot of
Canadians is that in more moderntimes where there's been
successful additions to reserve,which are on lands that are not
marginal or disconnected fromthe economy, the success in some
cases is to the point where theFirst Nation is as successful or
(21:11):
more successful than aneighboring municipality in
attracting high quality economicdevelopment.
So I attribute that, I think,mostly to a different history,
and the more that Canadiansbecome familiar with the success
stories, hopefully the stronger
SPEAKER_02 (21:29):
the support will be.
That's one good thing about theseries, and I'm glad the
Resource Centre initiated theseries, because I think it'll
help change that narrative aboutwhat's going on across the
country.
SPEAKER_00 (21:39):
I hope so as well.
But I think we also have a dutyto be able to explain We believe
that this will be a success andthen going forward prove that it
is a success.
So I'm very confident that theFirst Nations leadership are
very careful in the lands thatthey want to see added to
(22:02):
reserve because once it is addedas land of that community, the
accountability for success orfailure lies
SPEAKER_02 (22:11):
with them.
Thank you for spearheading thiseffort and being part of the
team doing that and for being onthe podcast.
Thank you, Andrew.
Thank
SPEAKER_00 (22:17):
you, Richard.
Andrew, let me start with a quote.
Additions to reserve, or ATRs,Canada's process of allowing
land to be added to a FirstNations reserve land base, it
can be a long, frustrating, andinefficient process.
Your take on that?
SPEAKER_00 (00:16):
I would agree that there's unbelievable levels of
frustration from First Nationsand First Nation leadership over
this process.
terribly slow process for addinglands to reserve.
Typically, people are talkingabout three to five years or
much worse, sometimes decades,to get the job done.
It's not just a frustration overa slow process.
(00:39):
A lot of things involving thegovernment are slow.
The problem with additions toreserve is that it's harmful
delays because First Nations arenot in a position to move at the
speed of business on ATRs landcode First Nations can move at
the speed of business oneverything else.
And when you can't move at thespeed of business and the
(01:02):
process is out of your control,you lose economic opportunities.
The critical reason thatleadership is pushing us so hard
and rightfully so to replace theadditions to reserve process is
because of the harm that itcauses.
SPEAKER_02 (01:18):
Is this something that can eventually be overtaken
or consumed by First Nationsthemselves and managed by them?
We're
SPEAKER_00 (01:28):
actually proposing to Canada two steps.
One, that we take some beginningsteps where there would be a
First Nation organization havinga much greater degree of
responsibility for executing theprocess.
We can do it faster.
We'll have to see after thefederal election whether there's
(01:48):
traction for what would reallybe the the biggest change to the
process and one that we'reconvinced would make the biggest
difference is maybe the time hascome for Canada no longer to
make the decision on whether toadd lands to reserve.
I will say, I've said it On thepublic record, I'm inspired by
(02:10):
experience that I had over theyears with the evolution of
First Nation authority overtaxation laws.
And just briefly, when I was ayoung man so many years ago in
the Federal Department ofJustice, I used to provide the
legal advice to the minister'soffice on whether to accept or
(02:32):
disallow a First Nationstaxation bylaw under the Indian
Act.
And after a while, there was anewly created Indian Taxation
Advisory Board, ITAB.
They also became an advisor tothe minister, should we accept
or reject a proposed bylaw.
So for a while, we were the twinadvisors to the minister.
(02:55):
And eventually, I was told, fromnow on, the minister is going to
rely exclusively on the advicefrom the Indian Taxation
Advisory Board.
thanks for doing your work, butyou don't need to do it anymore,
which was fine.
And then many years later, I wasinvolved with working with the
(03:16):
Indian Taxation Advisory Boardand others, and it eventually
led to the creation of the FirstNations Tax Commission.
And the tax commission, as youmay know, They make the
decisions in respect of taxationlaws.
Under the right conditions, youcan have an approved taxation
law.
And it doesn't go to theminister or to Canada anymore.
(03:37):
That's a revolutionary change ontaxation, and it seems to me
that I'm hoping after theelection that the incoming
government realizes instead ofhaving Canada's worst land
acquisition process that, as yousaid from your question, is
unbelievably frustrating but isalso causing economic harm,
(03:59):
missed economic opportunities,make the real change decision to
have somebody other than Canadamake the decision on these
additions to reserve.
SPEAKER_02 (04:12):
Yeah.
We've spoken to leaders todayfrom Chiatkin, Mississauga, and
Member 2, and there's a commontheme in that we don't have the
land we need to expand, whetherit be for economic or social or
cultural reasons, and it'skilling their chances by being
held up, and they can't go atthe speed of business.
SPEAKER_00 (04:33):
Yeah.
Yeah.
It's interesting that That's notjust one First Nation, you're
hearing from three examples, butI hear it all across the
country.
I think it has severaldimensions.
Canada's history of reservecreation, if you go back in
time, there were promises madein the treaties to set aside
lands as reserves, and there wasa practice across the country of
(04:55):
doing it.
Two things happened, and this is100 years ago or more.
One, sometimes Canada didn'tlive up to its promises even to
set aside the amount of reservesthat they said they would,
creating treaty landentitlement, or perhaps even
worse, there were times whereCanada set aside some land, but
(05:17):
then either took it all back andmoved First Nations onto more
marginal land or cut off landsfrom reserve.
There was a tendency to take upthe reserve lands for purposes
other than the First Nations towhom they were reserved.
So if you look back at thehistory, 20th century in
(05:38):
particular, even up until now,very often First Nations have
overcrowded or marginal landsthat are not in the good
locations for economic activity.
The third failing of theadditions to reserve process is
that it's too slow and it'spreventing First Nations from
(06:01):
seizing upon economicopportunities and overcoming the
legacy of the past.
So now is a time when I thinkmore and more Canadians are
paying attention to the economy.
And one of the things that we'vebeen trying to say This is an
important issue to FirstNations, but for those who are
(06:21):
interested in trying to create astronger Canadian economy, we
take the position, I thinkjustifiably based on the success
of land code First Nations, thatwhen you add lands to reserve,
especially for First Nationswith land code authority, you're
increasing economicopportunities for everyone.
(06:43):
It is not the creation of newliabilities for Canada.
SPEAKER_02 (06:47):
It's interesting to hear one example from Jatkin
where they went out and boughtland for I think$23 million
because it was an opportunityand you have to strike at the
speed of business, but then theyhave to go through the ATR
process to attach that to areserve.
SPEAKER_00 (07:03):
I think, you know, I've spoken with Chief Derek Epp
on that many times.
If he could count on a processthat had deadlines and that
could deliver on its promisesfor a relatively quick
decision-making process, hewouldn't be facing what he faced
(07:23):
of taking the risk of acquiringlands with no idea as to whether
or not that would take sixmonths or six years to add to
reserve.
And you know, there are someland code First Nations who in
the past, when they were underIndian Act land management, they
had economic opportunitiesbecause of the good reputation
of the First Nations.
(07:45):
And when Developers said, OK, wewould like to work with you.
How long is it going to take tofinalize a lease?
Can't answer that question.
It depends on the federaldepartment on Canada.
Business leaders walk away.
So it's not that you'resuffering the frustration of
delays.
That's an example of losing aneconomic opportunity.
(08:07):
I'd like to see a situationgoing forward where on additions
to reserve, there's a knowntimeframe and conditions at the
front end.
Under these conditions, youwould have land added to reserve
either X days or Y days, apredictable timeframe.
If there's a predictabletimeframe, then you can attract
(08:29):
business investment andfinancial investment at the
front end, right?
That would make, I think, a hugedifference in terms of
SPEAKER_02 (08:38):
economic opportunities.
It's interesting to see from ahigh level, many pieces fit
together.
The tax code you mentioned, theregistry that's being developed
now and which you're playing abig part in.
the ATR thing, and it all seemsto be part of the puzzle to
solve and to create economicopportunity or growth of some
(09:01):
other fashion, which should be awin-win, right?
Not only for nations, butsurrounding areas, provinces.
SPEAKER_00 (09:07):
Yes, I agree strongly with that observation.
It's interesting.
The Lands Advisory Board, basedon interactions with leadership,
has three priorities.
Improving enforcement of laws,replacing the addition to
reserve process, and buildingthe new First Nation registry,
First Nation-led land registry.
I think the economic value of aneffective, accurate, modern
(09:30):
registry is pretty obvious.
The land acquisition process, ifit can be made to be speedy and
reliable, the economiccontribution I think is also
obvious.
We've said partly that fixingenforcement is actually an
economic tool.
I'll give you a quick example.
Imagine if you were consideringinvesting in a business within a
(09:52):
small retail complex on FirstNation land.
What if we told you, okay, youcan't be sure that if the
business next door to youillegally dumps things or
carries on illegal activities orfails to comply with any fire
codes, that anybody's going tobe able to enforce that and stop
(10:15):
it.
you're going to think twiceabout investing in that
business.
So with some of the federalpolitical parties now, I think
they're getting thatunderstanding that everything
we're driving at could createbetter economic circumstances.
I'll just quickly add, noteverything is about business,
(10:35):
right?
For land code First Nations,resuming their governance
authority over lands can havevital cultural purposes or they
can be traditionally importantlands to the community.
But We still think that even asyou rectify that, if you don't
address the economicopportunities and create the
(10:57):
toolkit that Chief Derek Eppspoke of, then you're doing a
disservice to First Nations andthe Canadian public in terms of
the economy.
SPEAKER_02 (11:08):
Yeah, in fact, yesterday we met with Chief
Kelly LaRocca at Scugog IslandFirst Nation, and she said
culture was their number onereason for wanting to add to the
land base because they werestuck in this...
marshy area that isn't great foragriculture or other purposes,
but yeah, language retention andculture.
It doesn't have to be abouthaving a gas station on the
(11:30):
reserve.
That's right.
SPEAKER_00 (11:31):
But even if it is, or perhaps even especially if
it's for cultural purposes, veryoften in those cases, there's no
objections from neighboringcommunities to what may have
been a former burial site for aFirst Nation or culturally
important lands.
Get on with it.
Get it done.
The delays are offensive to theculture of First Nations and
(11:54):
those other economicopportunities.
If I could just mention as well,though, Richard, I was just
thinking you mentioned our workto build the registry and how
things are so much connected toeach other.
We have to turn to First Nationleadership at our annual general
meeting this year, but one ofthe things that we're proposing
(12:16):
is let's use...
the skills and capacities whichwe're building in the registry
to contribute to an effectiveATR process.
The registry is all aboutelectronic, high-speed, accurate
document tracking sophisticatedmapping, surveys, and the
(12:36):
registration of all interestsaffecting particular parcels of
land.
Those are all the typical issuesthat arise for consideration in
the ATR process.
So we're saying to Canada, aswe've seen the emerging success
of this registry, for efficiencyreasons alone, there's a First
(12:57):
Nation organization that couldbe relied upon.
So one lens that Some FirstNations can look at from the
value of an additions to reserveis that they may not necessarily
just be acquiring the lands onwhich they're going to execute a
high quality economicdevelopment activity, but
(13:20):
immediately adjacent to that,they can control areas that are
very sensitive for environmentalprotection and so on.
And if lands are owned in feesimple by a First Nation, but
they're under a municipalgovernment, the First Nation
can't be as sure when they'redeciding on what type of
development to undertake, what'sgoing to happen on the
(13:42):
neighboring lands.
If they have the governancepowers, then they can balance in
the right places areas forenvironmental protection or
cultural protection publicfacilities relative to the
development areas.
And it creates a more cohesiveapproach as
SPEAKER_02 (14:02):
well.
SPEAKER_01 (14:02):
Okay.
SPEAKER_02 (14:03):
And I'm wondering if some smaller communities on the
ATR issue, whether or notthey're at a disadvantage
because they might not havecapacity, the resources, the
specialized staff to put an ATRapplication through.
SPEAKER_00 (14:16):
Well, right now, the current additions to reserve
process, which, as I've said, Ithink is arguably the worst land
acquisition process in Canada,it's frustrating because it
takes so long, but it chews uphuge amounts of resources.
First Nations staff, hiredlawyers, surveyors, sometimes
(14:37):
appraisers, provincialofficials, municipal officials,
and federal officials.
For First Nations that'srelatively small or doesn't have
access to that capacity, it's anenormous challenge in terms of
the resources expended.
In fact, I've heard that forsome First Nations, where they
(15:00):
have managed to pull togetherthe financial resources to
acquire a parcel of land, theATR process has been more
expensive than the market valueof the land.
No way.
SPEAKER_02 (15:12):
Really?
SPEAKER_00 (15:12):
Yeah.
So imagine that, right?
That just doesn't make sense interms of the scale of things.
Not even close.
No developers, no municipalitieswould run things that
SPEAKER_01 (15:22):
way,
SPEAKER_00 (15:23):
right?
And I don't think the Canadianpublic would expect that First
Nations should face that kind ofa situation.
For heaven's sakes, if it'srelatively small parcels of land
or or in areas that are remotefrom other areas of land, and
especially where the FirstNation doesn't have a huge
(15:43):
amount of human resources todevote to the activity, we've
got to get on with the ATR andits completion.
Because it's only after you havea confirmation that the lands
are under the First Nation'sjurisdiction that you can
unleash all the governancepowers and attract the
(16:04):
investments which can get youout of being a low capacity, low
economy First Nation.
You can't do it at the frontend.
And Richard, if I may, I've seensometimes in the past where some
First Nations entering into landcodes, there's been a question
around, well, do you have thecapacity to take on land code
(16:26):
governance?
And to me, that's the same assaying, do you have the capacity
to take on an ATR?
If you don't take on the ATR oryou don't take on land code
governance, you're likely toforever be in the trap of being
low capacity, missingopportunities and so on.
So we have to get the sequenceof things in the right order.
SPEAKER_02 (16:49):
How serious is the backlog?
I understand there are so manysitting in the hopper right now
that it might take years toclear that.
SPEAKER_00 (16:56):
I don't think the federal government would like to
admit that there's a backlog.
They're doing their best to tryto go through ATRs and to go
faster.
Personally, I would say there'sa backlog.
Because if you total up acrossthe country using the current
additions to reserve process,all of the treaty land
(17:17):
entitlement obligations and allof the ATRs that are known, you
would probably be at hundreds ofyears in some locations to get
the ATRs done.
That's just simply far too slow,far too expensive, and that is
why we're saying to Canada,there's no way that you can
refine the existing process oradd enough trained personnel to
(17:42):
it to get the outcome that allof us want.
So I'll share something withyou, Richard.
You don't often hear ministersof the government of Canada say
that their own process isbroken.
Former Minister Miller, as theMinister of Crown Indigenous
Relations, that was one of thethings he said on the record in
(18:05):
front of parliamentarycommittees.
And my comment, at least, iswhen government ministers say
that a government process isbroken, it's not that it's slow.
Most government processes areslow.
It's that it's not achieving theoutcomes that the government
wants.
So I think there's an emergingrealization.
(18:25):
We have to go faster in order toachieve the results that are
needed for First Nations and allCanadians.
both of us commenting on how oldwe are, a lot of the staff that
I deal with now weren't bornwhen I was first pulled into
discussions about how to finallytackle the issue of treaty land
(18:49):
entitlement in Canada.
That's 30 plus years ago.
And when I was a much youngerfellow and working on the
important treaty landentitlement in Saskatchewan and
Manitoba, for example, if youwould have told me that in the
year 2025 that there would stillbe outstanding treaty land
(19:12):
entitlement and it might takeanother 50 or 100 years to fix
it, I wouldn't believe you.
It's unacceptably slow.
It doesn't make sense to go soslowly.
And there's a faster and lessexpensive way to do it And all
of that would contribute to abetter economic development for
First Nations and
SPEAKER_02 (19:32):
Canadians.
It's too bad that the largerCanadian public couldn't become
an ally to try to support theefforts of First Nations to
advance and succeed.
I'll say on that
SPEAKER_00 (19:43):
front that I think more and more there's many
Canadians who are seeing thatThere may historically have been
a past when a lot of reservelands were lagging behind the
rest of the economy with verypoor housing conditions and so
(20:03):
on.
In the past, partly because ofthe history of reserves created
on marginal lands or reservesthat were created and then lands
taken away, and especiallybecause of the failures of the
Indian Act, For a lot of theCanadian public, when asked
about reserve lands and shouldwe expand them, I think the
(20:27):
reaction is, well, why would youdo that?
You're just piling failure ontop of failure.
And what Canadians see on TV,for example, is there's no
drinking water, or there'sdeclarations of emergencies, or
there's evacuations of FirstNations from their lands.
(20:49):
But what unfortunately I thinkisn't well known to a lot of
Canadians is that in more moderntimes where there's been
successful additions to reserve,which are on lands that are not
marginal or disconnected fromthe economy, the success in some
cases is to the point where theFirst Nation is as successful or
(21:11):
more successful than aneighboring municipality in
attracting high quality economicdevelopment.
So I attribute that, I think,mostly to a different history,
and the more that Canadiansbecome familiar with the success
stories, hopefully the stronger
SPEAKER_02 (21:29):
the support will be.
That's one good thing about theseries, and I'm glad the
Resource Centre initiated theseries, because I think it'll
help change that narrative aboutwhat's going on across the
country.
SPEAKER_00 (21:39):
I hope so as well.
But I think we also have a dutyto be able to explain We believe
that this will be a success andthen going forward prove that it
is a success.
So I'm very confident that theFirst Nations leadership are
very careful in the lands thatthey want to see added to
(22:02):
reserve because once it is addedas land of that community, the
accountability for success orfailure lies
SPEAKER_02 (22:11):
with them.
Thank you for spearheading thiseffort and being part of the
team doing that and for being onthe podcast.
Thank you, Andrew.
Thank
SPEAKER_00 (22:17):
you, Richard.
Popular Podcasts
New Heights with Jason & Travis Kelce
Football’s funniest family duo — Jason Kelce of the Philadelphia Eagles and Travis Kelce of the Kansas City Chiefs — team up to provide next-level access to life in the league as it unfolds. The two brothers and Super Bowl champions drop weekly insights about the weekly slate of games and share their INSIDE perspectives on trending NFL news and sports headlines. They also endlessly rag on each other as brothers do, chat the latest in pop culture and welcome some very popular and well-known friends to chat with them. Check out new episodes every Wednesday. Follow New Heights on the Wondery App, YouTube or wherever you get your podcasts. You can listen to new episodes early and ad-free, and get exclusive content on Wondery+. Join Wondery+ in the Wondery App, Apple Podcasts or Spotify. And join our new membership for a unique fan experience by going to the New Heights YouTube channel now!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!