INAN Committee Meeting

     I call this meeting to order.

    Welcome to meeting number 38 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs. We recognize that we meet on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

    Pursuant to the order of the House of June 12, the committee is studying Bill C-27, final self-government agreement for the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę act.

    Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format. Members may be attending in person in the room or remotely on the Zoom application. The folks we have online have passed their tech tests and also have the translation available, so we will be able to go forward. If I need to suspend, we will suspend to resolve any technical issues as necessary.

    Please remember that just one person can speak at a time. It's very difficult for the interpreters—our wonderful interpreters, who do such a great job—and it really does crack loudly in their ears. It hurts. Let's be cognitive of that. Please wait to be recognized by me, and make sure your questions are through me.

     As well, before we proceed with the witnesses, I need approval for a budget of $1,000. It has been distributed.

    Is it the pleasure of the committee to adopt said budget?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    The Chair: I would now like to welcome our witnesses from the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę Government Inc., Sherry Hodgson, president, and Paul Tan. They're appearing by video conference.

    You have five minutes to present. Please go ahead.

     Thank you very much.

    Good morning. On behalf of the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę Government and its citizens, I want to thank everyone for allowing us the opportunity to speak before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs about Bill C-27.

    The creation of the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę Government will provide stability and certainty for local investment and development, with recognition of our ancestral identity through education, policy and program delivery. Passing Bill C-27 will provide parliamentary recognition and acknowledgement of our right to self-determination within the Constitution framework of Canada. This right to self-determination is established through the Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement.

    Once we receive parliamentary recognition and acknowledgement of the right to self-determination, we will be able to exercise indigenous decision-making authority that accommodates our ancestral traditions and the modern living standard and needs of our citizens. Specifically, we can represent ourselves in protecting our heritage and pursuing economic opportunities that align with national security and sovereignty through government-to-government relationships.

    Bill C-27 and our final self-government agreement do not grant our self-government with additional aboriginal titles or expand existing ones. What we will have is what is already provided through the Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement. The Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę Government will continue to function within the town of Norman Wells and be a stable source of revenue for our community.

    The community is at a critical juncture, as our biggest economic driver is shutting down. We have anticipated this day. However, once Bill C-27 is passed, the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę Government will be able to directly participate in opening up resource exploration and other economic development opportunities. I want to be clear: Our final self-government agreement does not take away private land titles. In fact, we encourage private sector investment at fair market value and provide equitable treatment for our citizens.

    With this, I ask this committee and all members of Parliament to pass this bill as soon as possible so that we can have an effective date of August 1, 2026. Otherwise, we will be required to hold a general election on September 7, 2026. As I do not want to run for an elected position again and I also do not want to leave behind an incomplete transition process, as that will create uncertainty and instability, I want to complete this transition so that the next leadership will inherit a functioning self-government, allowing them to focus on attracting investments, generating economic opportunities and creating programs and services that preserve our indigenous heritage.

    Mahsi cho. Thank you very much.

     Thank you very much. We will proceed to our questions.

    For the first round, the Conservatives have six minutes.

     MP Schmale, you're first.

     Thank you very much, Chair.

    Thank you to our witnesses.

    Madam President and Paul, it's nice to see you again. Thank you for all your assistance in responding to all those emails so quickly. I don't know how you did it. I messaged you at some pretty weird times and you shot back some answers. I do appreciate that. I think that collaboration was able to get us to the point we are at now, which is hopefully dispensing of this today, if possible.

    Madam President, you've said that you want this passed as quickly as possible. Do you see any changes that you wish to incorporate, or is the implementation legislation and agreement as you want it? Is it correct, in your eyes?

     Yes, it is correct. Thank you very much for the question. I don't see the need for any changes at this time.

    No changes in the implementation.... The agreement's fine. Everything's good. That actually does help as we try to move this forward.

    You mentioned, in your opening remarks, the work building on the Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement. That was done in 1993, give or take. It was the final agreement under Prime Minister Brian Mulroney.

    I understand your government has advocated for economic development in the north—specifically around the opening of a number of mines—and the benefits associated with that. You did talk about your economic driver shutting down, that being Imperial Oil. I'm sorry to hear about that. I understand your government has a few businesses tied to the operation. That seems as though it's going to be a massive hit to your community and to your people.

     Yes, with the closing of Imperial Oil, there will be some changes within the community. However, for the foreseeable future of what is going to happen there, I believe that we'll be continuing, for several years to come, with the work that we actually do, as you mentioned—our businesses.

     Can you talk more about the work that you are expecting to do in the coming years?

     We will continue to provide the work that we are doing to date: marine services and the process through environmental work that we do with both companies that we have. What we will see in the future, with the new final self-government agreement in place, will be the regulatory process. We will also have opportunities that will come with the facilities that will be required for restoration processes on reclamation work.

    It's my understanding that the existing pipeline has basically come to the end of its useful life and needs to be replaced. It's caught up in a few environmental assessments. Has the government reached out at all, to your knowledge, either to the company or to you as the government of your nation around Norman Wells? Has it offered to fast-track the assessment to ensure some certainty to Imperial Oil, maybe to get a few more years out of their operations?

     I would like to answer that, if that's possible.

    Right now, the EA process has been ongoing. We've reached out for the section 35 consultation via the NEB, or the inheritor of it, to engage with us. The importance of it is that as a self-government, Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę Government will be able to directly participate in the engagement, where our voices will be heard directly, and to advocate our support for the process. This way, it allows us to engage in a much more economical fashion versus being engaged as an aboriginal stakeholder through the Sahtu Secretariat Incorporated.

    That does definitely speak to the urgent matter we're dealing with in front of us.

    My concern is that Parliament has given the government pretty much every tool it needs to ensure that projects like this get approved as quickly as possible while doing the proper consultation, yet it doesn't seem that it's actually using this tool, which could provide a massive number of jobs and massive opportunity and wealth, not only for Norman Wells but also for surrounding areas.

    Looking at my research here, about 70% of the tax revenue collected by the village of Norman Wells is from the Imperial Oil facility.

     Unfortunately, that brings us to the end. With only 10 seconds left, perhaps you could submit that in writing, or perhaps it'll come out later. Thank you.

    Next, we go to MP Hanley.

    Thank you.

     Thank you very much for your testimony, President and Mr. Tan. It's nice to see you out there in Norman Wells.

    I might begin by asking if you care to reply to my colleague Mr. Schmale's question, as an opening.

     Thank you.

    As with every single regulatory process, the regulatory process we've engaged in takes time. The issue we have with the regulatory process is that, right now, we want to make sure the economic standards are increased where we continue to participate.

    Once Bill C-27 is passed.... Its importance is that it would allow the TGG to directly advocate for the economic drivers to exist. We could continue to ensure that the regulatory process is not delayed and that indigenous voices are heard directly versus being filtered through as indigenous stakeholders.

     Thank you very much.

    President Hodgson, this self-government process, as you referred to it, originates from the Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement that goes back to 1993.

    When you look at the history and at how this is now becoming, imminently, the establishment of a modern treaty.... Can you talk about the significance, apart from trying to achieve this within your presidency, of course? I completely understand that, but what about its significance, at this time, not just in terms of the economic circumstances you're being presented with but also in terms of progress towards the benefits that come with the establishment of a modern treaty?

    At the beginning of the negotiation process that started decades ago, the elders wanted to see the future and the benefit of self-governing ourselves, the same as it had been years ago. From then to where we are today, the benefit of the final self-government agreement for citizens is being able to govern ourselves in every way—economic activity, traditions, education and having our voices heard on a level we have been wanting to see for decades, throughout the negotiation process.

    For me, as president—as I mentioned, I'm not seeking re-election—the certainty of having this foundation set, through the work of the citizens, is what I would like to see. It's what they want to see.

     Thank you for that reflection.

    I am curious about your thoughts on Bill C-10, which, I imagine, you've been following. That's the legislation to establish a commissioner for modern treaties. It's currently at third reading.

    I wonder whether you can comment on this as we move through the passing of this legislation. Hopefully, we get there. How do you feel about the importance of Bill C-10—establishing the office of a commissioner for modern treaties?

     Mr. Hanley, if I may, I would like to answer that on behalf of Sherry and the organization.

    The Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę Government supports Bill C-10 because, once Bill C-27 is passed, we'll be a member of that. We believe Bill C-10 not only advocates for us but also provides a single voice for all modern treaties, including self-government agreements. We look forward to engaging and working with the commissioner for modern treaties.

     Thank you very much. That's good to hear.

    I'll cede to Ms. Idlout for the final 45 seconds, if I may, Mr. Chair.

     I was going to remind you of the time. Thank you.

     Just very quickly—and thank you so much for appearing at our committee—could you share with us the extent of the celebration that would happen if this bill were to pass and whether there would be any opposition from other parties regarding this bill?

    Qujannamiik.

    If I understand the question, you are asking whether or not we will have a celebration and if there is any other opposition outside of the parliamentary process.

     I'm asking both. I think that it would be great to hear that there would be some celebration, and I also want to understand whether there would be anyone who would oppose this bill.

    We received overwhelming approval, with around 85% voting yes to this bill. Like every election and any ratification, there will always be individuals who don't want something, but we received overwhelming majority support.

    They've looked forward to having this self-governing agreement since.... It was supposed to be 2021 for ratification, but things got delayed due to various reasons. There is an expectation of a big celebration, and we already had a pre-celebration last July. I imagine the community and its citizens will want another celebration once this bill is passed, and we look forward to inviting you all.

     Thank you.

     Mrs. Gill, you have the floor for six minutes.

     Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    Ms. Hodgson, Mr. Tan, thank you for appearing before the committee today.

    As you mentioned at the very beginning, you're in favour of the bill being passed quickly.

    Ms. Hodgson, you mentioned several advantages of the bill's quick passage. It's clear that more than 33 years of work have gone into what we are talking about today. We could even say more.

    First, what does the bill's quick passage really mean for the people of your nation? Second, what would be the disadvantages if we delayed passing the bill any longer?

     The significance of adopting this bill and the passage of this bill is that it creates stability and certainty going forward after having the economic centrepiece of this community shut down, and it provides certainty on transitioning. Given the fact that we are moving towards the transition process, if we delay further, as President Hodgson has mentioned, it will create significant uncertainty for those who are expecting self-government, which should have happened four or five years ago. It creates not only disappointment but also a lack of trust in the process to creating one. That's the con of it.

    The positive of it, more so, is that the adoption and passage of Bill C-27 not only allows the stabilization of moving forward with a functioning government but also ensures that for the next centrepiece of consultation for the highway, the EA process for the pipelines or any other regulatory process, the certainty to voice our support or our concerns, versus being in the transitional process. Especially if this bill were not passed, we would be questioning what our identity is. Are we a self-government, or are we still a not-for-profit? By delaying further, it would create uncertainty for our citizens. It would create uncertainty for our partners in the industry, and it would create uncertainty in our engagement with the territorial government and, to a certain extent, with the federal government as well.

     I know that we've talked a lot about the issue of certainty for development, the economy, and trust in the process, of course. As for the populations, I believe Ms. Hodgson mentioned the issue of identity. There's the issue of deciding for oneself what is highlighted and what is put forward. We're talking about self-government.

    Could you tell us a little more about the benefits for your nation?

     Part of self-government is creating some sort of identity. Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę is where the oil is at and the people of it. This creates an identity and preserves what the citizens have tried to call themselves as such. Having this agreement not only affirms what they have been calling themselves since time immemorial but, in the current context, also reaffirms their identity. We all, as citizens of Canada, recognize indigenous identity. This bill would reaffirm who they are in the context of the indigenous identity.

    I have one last question for you, Ms. Hodgson or Mr. Tan.

    Ms. Hodgson, you mentioned the issue of ownership. I think you wanted to address unfounded fears or ideas about the very nature of the treaty, but I don't want to put words in your mouth, of course.

    Could you talk briefly about the subject?

    If I understand the question correctly, this agreement does not add any aboriginal titles other than what the land claim already provides. We encourage and, in fact, we want to preserve private property rights. We want to ensure that private property rights are respected and that our aboriginal title under the land claim is also equally respected. This bill does not expand what the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę already have. The land claim provides that, and we're happy with that provision under the land claim.

     Thank you very much.

     Next, we go to the second round.

    For five minutes, we have MP Zimmer.

     Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you, President Hodgson and Paul Tan for appearing at committee today.

    You're probably aware of an announcement that was recently made. There has been a recent 30 by 30 announcement in the Northwest Territories that essentially puts a fence around 30% of the Northwest Territories. Perhaps it sounds good turning 30% of Northwest Territories into a park if you live in Vancouver or Toronto, but as you know, the economy is struggling in the Northwest Territories. The last mine that's still operational is about to close at the end of 2026 and, really, economic development in the Northwest Territories has stalled. We have heard from many first nations in this very committee that economic reconciliation is key to indigenous communities flourishing, whether it's in B.C., the Northwest Territories or anywhere.

    Are you seeking this agreement to close down the area to resource development or to help open it up for development?

     Historically as an organization, we want to ensure that exploration of resources is the foundation of indigenous economic sovereignty. We want to make sure that the process is understood. We want to ensure that a voice to support the exploration and economic development is established that respects the local community. We have actively engaged and actively promoted economic development through exploration, and we will continue to do so.

     President Hodgson, can you speak to that? I heard you say earlier that generating economic opportunities was part of your goal. Maybe you can explain to the committee what some of your hopes and dreams are for your community, economic development-wise, if this agreement is put in place.

     Currently, some of the things that I would like to see are continued opportunities for our citizens. Some of our citizens are working in the businesses within the community and without.

     We also, as part of our organization, work together with two other organizations in the area that continually provide and negotiate with organizations that want to come into our areas within our district. The negotiating process provides for those opportunities to be expanded upon, such as the mining and the different things that are being explored at this time in the Sahtu area—specifically, in the Tulita and Norman Wells district areas.

    My idea is to hopefully work towards having that process work well within the regulatory process so that they can move forward in a direction for development that is positive for our citizens.

     It just so happens that this committee is doing an affordability study in the north about food affordability, housing and other things. Key to affordability is having economic development or jobs that come around, so even if that food is a bit more expensive—as we know it is in the territories, especially the further you get out of Yellowknife—at least you have an opportunity to have a wage that helps pay for that extra cost of milk and other foods.

     Maybe you can explain how much previous economic development has meant to the community in the past, and even speak to some of those opportunities. You spoke in a general sense, but are companies lining up to talk to you about how, once this agreement is signed, they're ready to go on the other side?

     Affordability and jobs are key, but maybe there are some key industries that are knocking at your door, even now.

     You're probably going to have to put that writing, because we have 10 seconds. Perhaps it will come up in other questioning. You can send the answer to us in writing about the opportunities as well.

     Next, for five minutes, we have Jaime.

     Thank you, Mr. Chair.

     Thank you, President and Mr. Tan.

     I know five minutes isn't really a long time to go over the history of how this legislation and how this agreement has come to be. Can you take us back to the first steps, when your nation's communities decided it was important to pursue a self-government agreement as opposed to what's currently in place, and why you believe this would be good for the nation as a whole?

     If you can give me some details about the journey to get here, that would be great.

     The Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement was signed in 1993. Chapter 5 of that agreement is the self-government chapter. In 2007, the president and the board of the day, after 13 years of having the Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement, decided that it was time to take that step, so they moved on the framework agreement, which brought them to the process of the next couple of decades of negotiating.

     We have had continuity in place with the elected presidents of the day, who continued to work towards the ratification that happened in March 2025. During that time, it was a lot of working together with our group, our negotiations group, and some of the change that happened in there, as well as within the federal and territorial systems. It got us to the ratification and where we are today. There were some hiccups along the way, of course, with different things that happened in the world that made the process a little slower, but we are where we are today.

     We're looking forward to having this passed so that our citizens can be reassured that the work that has been done over the last couple of decades is at a point where they can start working on next steps that will work well for the community and for the benefit of the citizenship.

     Okay. Thank you.

    Just picking up on some of the conversation in the room, you're absolutely happy with the way this legislation is written and you need no changes. We can go through it line by line in an efficient and speedy process, get this through the House and get to the celebration.

     I have no changes. We're waiting for the celebrations next.

    Voices: Hear, hear!

    For all the other communities that are looking at this process and saying, “Wow, it's great that they're getting this done”, what best practices would you recommend for other nations wanting to go down this route with our government?

    What are two or three key things that you think we should be sharing with other nations going down this route as well?

    If I may, I'll answer that.

    From our experience, and in working with other communities, one of the experiences we've often shared in our regional meetings is about being open-minded to conversations. In most of our negotiations, in appreciation of the federal team, we were open-minded to understanding where Canada was coming from as a policy position while advocating for ours. I think that's the key part. It's the trust and faith that all three parties—federal, territorial and us—want this agreement. We want to work together in establishing a self-government agreement that works for our community, especially given the fact that each community has different needs.

    Working with the federal system to establish an agreement for the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę was a process of not only communicating but also understanding the constraints that each party brought to the table. That's what we have shared in terms of best practices.

     Thank you.

    Mr. Chair, I have no further questions.

    You're out of time, so that's great.

    We will go to MP Gill for the last question.

    You have two and a half minutes.

     I have no further questions, Mr. Chair.

    Perfect. Thank you very much.

    Thank you.

     This brings us to the conclusion of the first round.

    I will suspend for a little bit so that we can go to clause-by-clause.

     I'm going to resume.

    If it's the will of the committee, we will now proceed to clause-by-clause analysis of this bill.

    This is a reminder that if you need interpretation, please leave your earpiece in your ear because the questions will be in French and English. It's just easier and smoother if you have the piece in your ear if you're asking or answering questions.

    I would like to provide members of the committee with a few comments on how committees proceed with the clause-by-clause consideration of a bill. This is an examination of all the clauses in the order in which they appear in the bill. I will call each clause successively and each clause is subject to debate and a vote.

    If there are amendments to the clause in question, I will recognize the member proposing it, who may explain it. The amendments will then be open for debate. When no further members wish to intervene, the amendments will be voted on. Amendments will be considered in the order in which they appear in the package each member received from the clerk. Amendments have been given a number in the top right corner.

    What we can do as well, instead of going through all of them individually.... Basically the clauses are clause 2 to clause 44. Do we have unanimous consent to group them? We can speak to them, but if we group them together, people could raise their hands and then say, “I want to speak to this.”

    Do we have unanimous consent to put them all together?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

     I'm grouping them all, to vote on all of them, but if people want to speak to any particular number, they can. Is that clear?

    (On clauses 2 to 44)

    Does anyone want to speak to anything?

    We have all these great folks here if anybody has a question, but I'm not seeing any questions.

    Do they want to add anything?

     I'm seeing them shaking their heads no.

    You might as well give us something.

     Hi, I'm Taylor Chamberlain. I'm the lead negotiator for the final self-government agreement for the Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę.

    If I can add anything, I just want to acknowledge Shannon Shannon, who was the federal negotiator on this agreement for about a decade. She put a lot of love and effort into this agreement. We learned on May 8 that she had passed.

    We hope to bring this agreement to fruition through this session, but I do want to acknowledge the amount of hard work that went into it and the people who may not be able to see us get to this next step. Thank you.

     Thank you ever so much for that intervention.

    On behalf of the committee, thank you to Ms. Shannon, for what she did over the last decade.

    Thank you. Chi-meegwetch.

    Does anybody have any...?

    Go ahead, MP Schmale.

    Thank you for bringing that to our attention, and I'm sorry for the loss of that individual.

    It was brought up a few times in the previous witness panel that it was building on the land claim settled in 1993. Then, of course, you had the 2015 Déline agreement, which was implemented in 2016.

    Compared to Déline, what differences does this agreement have?

     You may see quite a few similarities between the agreements.

    For Déline, though, that agreement was an indigenous public agreement upon effective date. For this agreement specifically, it is an exclusive indigenous government agreement, which means that Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę Government will exercise jurisdiction and authority over its citizens as of the effective date.

    However, it does have a transition incorporated into the agreement that will allow for Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę Government to become a public government, should their population reach 70% or higher in the town of Norman Wells.

     Are you good?

    Yes.

    MP Hanley.

     Thank you for your intervention.

     I want to add my condolences. To be able to honour Shannon with this would certainly be an added feature.

     To follow that line of questioning, are the aspects you referred to that distinguish this modern treaty unique if we compare it with any other modern treaty, especially a recent one?

     Other public indigenous governments already exist, but the transition from an exclusive indigenous government to a public government is unique given the town of Norman Wells and the population demographic that exists there right now.

    It made sense, as part of the negotiations, to incorporate a transition. When Tłegǫ́hłı̨ Got’įnę citizens represent a majority in the town, the government will have authority over all residents in the town.

    Can I ask one segue to that, Mr. Chair?

    What's the importance of that as a precedent for other modern treaties that might be in evolution or negotiation at the moment, or that are anticipated?

    In terms of precedent setting, it would depend on the individual circumstances of each agreement being negotiated, and the location where it is being negotiated. I wouldn't be able to speak to what that could look like outside of the town of Norman Wells.

    I will say that public indigenous governments already exist, and so do exclusive indigenous governments. It would really depend on the negotiations with individual communities.

     Thank you.

    Thank you.

    Did you have your hand up?

    No, they answered my question.

    Okay. Thanks, Bob.

    MP Greaves, you're next for questioning, but before I go to you, I'm going to MP Gill.

     I'll speak very briefly. Given what Ms. Chamberlain said, I also want to offer her my condolences. I also want to extend them to everyone who worked with Ms. Shannon, of course.

    I'll take this opportunity to say that the Bloc Québécois supports this bill.

    I have no further questions, but I want to say that people live on through their work.

     Thank you.

    Now it's MP Greaves.

     Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you to the witnesses.

     I'll go to you, Ms. Chamberlain.

    In British Columbia, around other recent modern land claim or treaty negotiations, or other self-government agreements, we've unfortunately seen efforts to misinform and confuse members of the public about what the implications of those agreements would entail. In many instances, efforts to purposefully generate that concern have focused on questions around private property ownership.

    I'm wondering if you could speak to whether or not you've had similar challenges in this negotiation—people being concerned about the impacts on private property—and what kinds of communications the government has put out to address and allay those concerns as not being warranted in this case.

    In this case, specifically, the Sahtu Dene and Metis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement was the agreement that addressed land rights and title in the entire Sahtu region of the Northwest Territories. As part of the self-government agreement negotiations, there hasn't been property title as a topic to address.

    We haven't had any concerns, as far as I'm aware.

     Thank you.

     All right.

     Are we ready to proceed to the next part, which would be whether the committee provides unanimous consent to pass clauses 2 to 44?

    (Clauses 2 to 44 agreed to)

    The Chair: Shall the short title carry?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    The Chair: Shall the preamble carry?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    The Chair: Shall the title carry?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    The Chair: Shall the bill carry?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    The Chair: Shall the chair report the bill to the House?

    Some hon. members: Agreed.

    The Chair: I'll do that ASAP. Hopefully, tomorrow I will report this.

    I'm thanking our team here.

    Taylor, thank you for bringing Shannon's legacy to our attention.

    President Hodgson, I don't know if you're still online. You're also leaving a legacy to your people as you retire from being president. This is good.

    Thank you again, President and Mr. Tan, for your work on this over the years.

    Thank you to the committee for getting this done expeditiously.

    With that, folks, we are going to suspend and go to our next study.

    Chi-meegwetch, everyone.

    Welcome back. It is great to have you here.

    Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee is resuming its study of affordability challenges in northern Canada.

    I would now like to welcome our witnesses.

    We have Merlyn Recinos, co-chief executive officer, and Inuaraq Angutimarik, director trainee. They're from the Arctic Fresh Group.

    Welcome. Thank you for being here.

    We have, from the Nunavut Sealink and Supply Inc., Brian Tattuinee, business development manager.

    Welcome.

    We are going to allocate five minutes to each group to speak.

    Just to let everybody know, you have the earpieces because we will be asking questions in English and French. Answer in whichever language you choose. For the interpreters, make sure that your mic is off when you're not speaking because it provides feedback. Only one person may speak at a time, and please address everything through the chair.

    Thanks to our wonderful interpreters for being with us today.

    We have five minutes for Arctic Fresh Group.

    Is one person doing it, or are you sharing the time?

    We're sharing the time.

    Take it away.

    Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

    My name is Inuaraq Angutimarik. I'm an Inuk from Nunavut. Thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak today.

    I would like to start with a story. The first time I was taken on a seal hunt, I was six or seven. A few elders and family members brought me along on a community hunt because they wanted to make sure that I was exposed to our harvesting culture. I do not remember every detail, but I remember the lesson. Harvesting is about more than food. It teaches us how to survive on the land, how to work together and how to take care of one another.

    What is harvested is often shared with elders and people who cannot harvest for themselves. I still carry those lessons today. Instead of harvesting on the land, I might buy a few extra groceries and share them with people who need help. The lesson is the same. Strong communities are built when people look after each other.

    When people talk about affordability, they talk about numbers and statistics, but for the youth, affordability is about everyday life. It is about seeing your classmates come to school hungry. It is about knowing that many families live in overcrowded homes with no places to rest to prepare for a day in class or at work. It is about watching people leave their communities because they cannot find housing, training or employment opportunities.

    Young Inuit want to build our futures in the north. We want to raise families, contribute to our communities and help shape Nunavut and Canada's future. We are proud of being the inhabitants of Canada's real north—the people who ensure that our country stays an Arctic nation. To do that, we need opportunities. We need safe and affordable housing. We need access to education, training and good jobs. We need opportunities to learn trades, to work in fisheries, to participate in infrastructure projects and to build careers close to home.

    When governments invest in food sovereignty, housing, infrastructure and workforce development, they are investing in young people. They are creating opportunities that allow Inuit youth to stay in their communities, to build meaningful careers and to strengthen the north for future generations. I hope this committee will remember that affordability is not only about lowering costs today. It is about creating opportunity, self-reliance and hope for the future.

    Qujannamiik. Thank you.

     Thank you very much.

    Merlyn, you have three minutes.

    Thank you.

    Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs. Thank you for inviting us to appear before you today as part of your study on affordability challenges in northern Canada.

     My name is Merlyn Recinos. I'm the chief executive officer of Arctic Fresh Group, a Nunavut-based, Inuit-focused business that works across food security, logistics, housing, infrastructure and workforce development.

    While I'm not an Inuk, Nunavut has been my home for many years. My wife is an Inuk. Together, we're raising Inuit children. Our family, our business and our future are deeply rooted in Nunavut communities.

     I want to begin by sharing a story.

    Last year and again this spring, Arctic Fresh worked with Canadian North, local hamlets, Innu organizations and community partners to deliver food hampers to households across Nunavut, including Grise Fiord, Canada's most northern community. The hampers contained fruits, vegetables and meats. There were no applications, no eligibility requirements and no complicated processes. The goal was simple: to ensure that every household received support.

    This year marks our 10th year supporting communities such as Igloolik and our seventh year delivering this initiative across the region. Local businesses' profits generated through our work are reinvested into employment, training, food programs, food banks and community development initiatives. This initiative has taught us that affordability is not an abstract policy discussion. It's about whether families can put healthy food on the table, whether communities have the infrastructure they need to support themselves and whether young people can build a future in the north.

    At its core, affordability in Nunavut is driven by our continual reliance on southern supply chains. Whether we are talking about food, housing materials, fuel, equipment or many other things, the cost of moving products into the communities drives up the cost for families across the territory. That is why our message today is simple: Improving affordability requires investing in northern self-reliance.

    These investments are about more than reducing costs. They're also about strengthening Arctic sovereignty and security by ensuring northern communities have the infrastructure, the workforce and the economic capacity needed to support a permanent and thriving presence across the Arctic.

    Projects of national interest such as ports, transportation corridors, energy infrastructure and housing are nation-building investments that create economic opportunity for Inuit while advancing Canada's strategic objectives in the north. When Inuit communities are empowered to build and operate critical infrastructure, affordability, economic development and sovereignty objectives are advanced together.

    We saw just how vulnerable Nunavut's economy can be during the COVID-19 pandemic and during the early stages of the Canada-United States trade dispute, when disruptions to supply chains and rising costs were felt quickly and acutely across the territory. Those experiences reinforce an important lesson: Affordability, economic resilience and Arctic sovereignty are deeply interconnected, and greater northern self-reliance must be part of Canada's long-term strategy.

     For generations, Inuit have sustained themselves through harvesting, fishing, and sharing networks. Strengthening those systems is one of the most effective long-term affordability measures available to northern communities. We need investment in harvesting infrastructure, community freezers, fisheries and food processing facilities and need to support the blue economy. We also need operational funding to ensure that the systems can function over the long term.

    Second, we need transportation and holistic infrastructure that lowers costs for families. Northern communities need more runways. They also need airport storage facilities, cold storage, warehousing, improved cargo handling capacity and better harbour and sealift infrastructure.

    Third, we need to recognize that food infrastructure must match social realities. Programs such as nutrition north can help, but they do not work for every household. Some families continue to struggle to access healthy food. That's why we need community food centres, food banks and necessary programs to strengthen harvesting and food-sharing networks.

    Finally, affordability cannot be separated from housing and workforce development. Arctic Fresh began as a food company, and we extended into housing and infrastructure because we saw how interconnected these challenges are. Every project we undertake includes training and skills development. Our goal is not to build homes, but to train Inuit for the long term to operate and maintain their infrastructure in their homeland.

     Thank you.

     Thank you very much.

    Brian, you'll have five minutes.

    Good day. Thank you for the opportunity to address this committee today.

    My name is Brian Tattuinee. I'm originally from Rankin Inlet, Nunavut, but I've called Iqaluit my home for a number of years now. I'm the business development manager for Nunavut Sealink and Supply, a majority Inuit-owned company based in Iqaluit that delivers essential sealift services across Nunavut. We transport general cargo and fuel, supporting economic development throughout the territory, and bring many years of Arctic experience and a versatile fleet to do the work.

    My role focuses on understanding developments across Nunavut and offering logistics solutions. Our customers include all levels of government, the private sector, the resource sector, industry and individuals in the communities we serve.

    We operate a fleet of 13 dry cargo vessels, serving all 25 of Nunavut's communities, all 14 of Nunavik's communities in northern Quebec, and resource sector clients across both regions. We play a key role in delivering cargo safely, reliably and efficiently.

    Our operations take place under some of the most challenging conditions in the world, with a short seasonal window. Every community in the north receives at least one ship per season. Some receive two, and others receive three or more, depending on demand.

    We load cargo, primarily along the St. Lawrence Seaway, in Valleyfield, Côte-Sainte-Catherine on the south shore of Montreal, and Bécancour. This year, we also plan to have an operation out of the port of Churchill, after more than a decade of not going there regularly.

    Due to limited infrastructure in many communities, we specialize in self-sustained cargo delivery, so we take everything with us when we deliver cargo for communities. We carry tugboats, barges and loaders so that we're able to safely deliver cargo to the communities we serve. However, that also takes away space from revenue-generating cargo when we visit these communities.

    Our operating season typically begins around this time of year, with the last ships returning from Canada's Arctic by late October or early November. Outside of our busy season, we focus on debriefings of operations and learning how the experience of our customers—such as Arctic Fresh Group—was with us so we can continually make improvements to our operations and also prepare for next year.

    Our Arctic is growing. We've added capacity in recent years, including, just last week, announcing an addition to our fleet. As I said, we're up to 13 ships now. At the same time, it's important for us as an organization to understand what development is coming to the Arctic so that we can continue to scale our operations effectively.

    We recognize the federal government's commitment to Arctic development through major projects such as the Grays Bay road and port project and the Iqaluit hydro project. As a Nunavummiut, I'm very excited to learn about these investments and the increased attention that we have there. We are also encouraged by the investments to modernize the Canadian Coast Guard's fleet of icebreakers, and we look forward to our continued collaboration to deliver essential goods and services to our north.

    Investments in community and marine infrastructure are particularly important. Projects like the port of Iqaluit, which opened in 2023, and smaller improvements in other communities, such as sealift lay-down areas and ramps, demonstrate meaningful progress and offer models that could be expanded to other communities. There's also the continued investment in things such as the Canadian hydrographic service to update all of the charting and navigational aids that are in Canada's north.

    Again, thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'm looking forward to the questions.

    Thank you very much.

    We are going to start out with a six-minute round.

    First up, we have Bob for six minutes, please.

    Thank you all for coming. I know it's a long journey to get to Ottawa. The flights to Ottawa are a bit better from Iqaluit, but if you're any farther north or in Cambridge Bay, it's very much a long day. Again, thanks for coming today.

     My questions will be for Brian Tattuinee.

    Brian, you live in the north. I know you have a good job with the sealift, and you also work for the co-op—the food provider in the north. I've shopped at the local grocery store there, and I see how expensive it is. That's even in Iqaluit, where it's relatively inexpensive. As you get further north, it gets far more expensive, as you know.

    You have a young family. How many kids do you have?

    I have two boys.

    You and your wife have good jobs. What is it like to buy groceries in Iqaluit?

    It's relatively expensive, I'd say. Typically, as a family of four, we probably spend between $300 to $500 a week on groceries.

    That's for a family of four, and I'm assuming you're not buying fancy things when you're buying groceries. Give us some examples of some food that Canadians would buy—milk and some of those examples. What has stood out to you? You've been here too once in a while, in Montreal. What are some foods that really stand out to you as being exceptionally expensive in Iqaluit?

     It's pretty much everything that's not eligible for nutrition north Canada—things that are not deemed, I guess, as nutritious enough to fall under the program. If we're trying to save time, some of the quick meals, the frozen meals that you prepare, tend to be more expensive just because they aren't an eligible item under nutrition north.

    However, it is expensive overall. There's really no other way to explain it. There are higher costs associated with having a retail operation in the north.

    I have the luxury of being able to say that I can afford to feed my family, but there are challenges that the retailer might have to offering good pricing. There are a lot of costs involved.

     Is it safe to say food prices have gone up in the last couple of years and haven't gone down?

     I would guess so. Inflation is a real thing, and it is certainly a challenge.

     According to Statistics Canada, 58.1% of people in Nunavut live in food insecure households, many of whom are your neighbours and people I've met. Kevin stands out to me. It's a very difficult situation. It's the highest rate in the country and more than double the national average.

    You didn't say this, but I'm going to. The Prime Minister said last year, “Canadians will hold us to account by their experience at the grocery store, when they are paying their electricity bill, when they or their children are looking for a place to live.” People might say, “Look, food has always been expensive in the north”, but northerners took him at his word when he said he would be measured by the price of groceries, and it hasn't gone down; it has gone up.

    For me, that comes back to the second part of affordability, which is having the ability to buy food. It's one thing to have expensive food, but if you have a good job—and you and your wife have good jobs—you can afford a house and you can afford food. Even though it's expensive, it's affordable, technically.

    You spend a lot of time at a key piece of infrastructure, which you mentioned: the port of Iqaluit. It's a key part in building a vibrant economy in Nunavut. Could you explain the difference that the port of Iqaluit has made, maybe as a sealift business but even to making food cost less or making it more affordable?

     Certainly.

    The port of Iqaluit is a beautiful piece of infrastructure. I think it was long overdue. Iqaluit is a growing community, but it's also Nunavut's biggest community. That piece of infrastructure has increased our efficiency in being able to deliver essential goods to the community. We went from taking 10 to 14 days to off-load a ship within an hour of high tide to being able to deliver cargo throughout the regular workday rather than trying to meet a specific tide. We went from off-loading two or maybe three barges per tide to being able to deliver consistently throughout the day.

    For our operation, it has increased efficiency, and having a safe area to work always reduces the risk of any damage happening. These are some of the real benefits that we've seen since this important piece of infrastructure was made available.

    That's not the same across other communities. Other communities have much more limited infrastructure. If we could see more of those kinds of investments, not ports in every community but even something as little as improving the ramp or lay-down areas in communities, that would make a huge difference for us and would make things safer, more reliable and more efficient.

    Thanks, Brian.

    Thank you.

    Lori, go ahead for six minutes, please.

     Qujannamiik, Iksivautaq. Thank you, Chair.

    Thank you to the witnesses.

    [Member spoke in Inuktitut]

    [English]

    This is what I said. First of all, thank you for appearing.

    Specifically to Inuaraq, I hope that as you are a productive young adult going into adulthood, you remain a hunter all your life. I think that being a hunter is such an important skill.

     I want to ask my first question of Merlyn.

    We met a few weeks ago, and you talked about some of the challenges you have in making sure there can be more self-reliance, as you mentioned. I wonder whether you can share some recommendations as to what this government can do to help make more self-reliant communities so that businesses can help make sure that we have a more affordable cost of living for Nunavummiut.

     Thank you, Lori, for taking the time to speak about that.

    It all goes down to giving the opportunity, the skills and the tools to capitalize on that opportunity. I'm going to be fully transparent: The north has definitely been great for opportunity. There have been many opportunities coming to Nunavut. Unfortunately, we have not been given the skills necessary to capture the opportunities. Therefore, a lot of the time, opportunities end up escaping Nunavut and going to southern Canada.

    If today we did a full study on the workforce in Nunavut, we'd see that a lot of it is a transient workforce that comes to Nunavut to capitalize on opportunities. That's great for southern Canada, but when a southern person comes to Nunavut, they don't spend on food. They don't spend on accommodations. They're not buying trucks, skidoos or anything like that to support their families. A lot of those funds are exported back to their homes, which is totally okay, but then that leaves individuals at the community level wanting to participate but unable to participate because they don't have the skills. Developing the skills to allow them to take control of their futures is what is needed.

    The opportunity is there. Every single day, we talk about construction, housing, infrastructure, ports—a lot of opportunity—but there has been very little communication in regard to how we can build up the population to capture that opportunity and, even more so, ensure that opportunities are also on par with the culture.

    Right now, we have 82% Inuit content across our projects. We employ around 284 Inuit, and we make sure that when the belugas are coming or it's fishing season or hunting season, there are no questions asked; they're allowed to leave work for that. We have specific requirements to fulfill those needs, because—

    Thank you. I'm sorry to cut you off, but I also want to ask questions of Brian, and I don't have enough time.

    Brian, you mentioned that some of the things that might help include sea floor mapping, sealift lay-down areas and ramps. I'm wondering if you could share with us if you think the government investing in those kinds of things would have an impact on affordability for the north.

     Any kind of infrastructure that's improved will always make operations run smoother, with less likelihood of any sort of damage taking place. I'm not opposed to any kind of infrastructure development anywhere in the north, because we're so deficient in it. Any sort of investment that improves the supply chain across the north will always make a difference for affordability. Part of it is about making sure our cargo arrives safely. When we have safe places to work and lay down our cargo, it will always improve the overall operation.

    A year or two ago, a sealift was grounded, and I'm wondering if you could share, from your experience, whether that was related to the lack of bathymetry that has happened or whether there needs to be an increase in that activity to help make sure that sealifts can happen across the north more safely.

     I don't know the exact details of that particular incident first-hand, but again, if the federal government made investments to improve the charting we have, the ice surveys that take place or the navigational aids that are established across the north, that would make significant improvements to our operations. It would be safer for us to transit areas where perhaps there aren't as many spots that have known depths. It's identified on maps where there are general areas that are safe for passage, but in between those points, there could be an anomaly or something that wasn't initially picked up. That is why investments in scanning or the Canadian hydrographic service offering updated charts and typical transit routes would make a significant difference for us.

     Thank you very much.

     Mrs. Gill, you have the floor for six minutes.

     Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you to our witnesses for being with us today and for making this very long journey. I must tell you that I'm the member for Côte‑Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, so I don't represent Nunavut. However, there are still many similarities in certain places.

    By the way, Mr. Tattuinee, I read on your LinkedIn profile that you often talk about infrastructure. You talked about it today. I see it as one of the keys to development. You also talked about safety for northern populations. Could you tell us a little more about that? It's really very interesting. You say that by being on the ground, you can foresee what's coming and what's needed not just for development, but also for the populations. Could you tell us more about the strategic infrastructure northern populations need?

    I know that, where I live, certain infrastructure assets are currently at risk, so I can understand how infrastructure is the cornerstone of life in the north.

     I'm sorry; I was trying to listen to the live interpretation at the same time as the question.

    I speak a lot about the challenges we have, and quite frankly, I try to ensure the public knows that the things I post are meant to teach the wider public or our stakeholders about some of the challenges we have. The logistics timelines of the federal budget or any government budget don't meet the sealift deadlines we have.

    If a major project is moving forward and it's a government project at any level, April 1 is when money becomes available, but it's already too late for the season. That often leads to increased costs for projects, because the timeline for funding becoming available doesn't match the logistics that are required to deliver on those projects, especially if they're larger projects. That is why it's important for any government to involve us as the logistics service providers earlier in the conversation. It's so that we're all prepared to deliver on these important projects across all of our communities we serve.

    Those are some of the things I would say a government can look to make improvements on. Try to match the timelines for projects with the logistics that get projects to those communities.

     Thank you very much.

    Young people are rarely at the table when committees meet. Unfortunately, as you said, they're the ones most directly affected.

    Mr. Recinos, you spoke about what young people need to live in the north, because it's something they may want to do.

    Mr. Angutimarik, I believe you also spoke about young people who want to work in the north and pursue opportunities there, but struggle to do so.

    What conditions would allow young people to say not only that they have a future in the north, but also that they have the future they want?

     Mr. Recinos and Mr. Angutimarik, you may answer. We want to give youth a voice.

    People in Nunavut want to live and thrive in Nunavut, but a lot of the time, due to housing and education, they leave their communities. The chances of them coming back are slim to none. We get them to get educated, but then they can't come back. There is no housing. There is no opportunity for them to come back. That's one of the things we need to ensure.

    The second aspect is education. We just announced the university for Arviat in Inuit Nunangat. Nunavut Arctic College runs some things, but we have never really looked at how we can deliver better education at the level of the community and the workforce on the ground. We need to ensure that we're doing that.

    We're a company, a business, and we're doing socio-economics at the community level, creating education, creating jobs and creating capacity. We can't do it alone. In order for us to scale, we need partnership.

    Thank you very much.

    You can also send us a written response, if there's any additional information you'd like to provide.

     Mr. Recinos, I have time for one last question. At worst, you can give me the rest of the answer afterward. You talked about crises. We know that northern communities are vulnerable when a crisis hits. It doesn't take long, because they're cut off from the mainland. That's a strange way to say it, but it's what we say at home, too. We're cut off from all contact. The impact on food, health and other areas is awful.

    What needs to be done? We see that there's a gap. It's clear that communities are vulnerable. How do we address this vulnerability and make communities resilient?

     That will have to be in writing too.

    I could wait until the second round for the answer, if there's a second one.

    Do it in writing, please, since there were only 15 seconds.

    That's no problem.

    Thank you very much.

    Now we go to MP Zimmer for five minutes.

     Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    I have some very brief questions for you, Brian.

    First, how much does a house cost in Iqaluit?

     Oh my goodness. It's a lot more than what I paid for the house I have now. I'd say it's probably getting pretty close to $1 million for a home in Iqaluit. It's high.

    You're not talking about a fancy house. This is pretty basic. I've seen your house. It's a nice house, but it's still fairly basic. To replace that house now, it would be close to $1 million.

     I'd say it's probably pretty close to that, yes.

    That's if you can even find one to buy if you have $1 million to buy it with. It's a very challenged market for inventory.

     Absolutely. The City of Iqaluit has been working to have expanded areas of development. That is certainly part of the challenge in a community like Iqaluit. Also, more widely across the territory, the availability of developed land and the infrastructure to hold, carry and build those homes are challenges.

    I have a last quick question. I know this is tough to summarize, but maybe in 30 seconds, Brian, you could tell us your story. You have a really amazing story about how your family was almost couch surfing at one point. There was a pivotal change around housing that changed the direction, really, of the lives of your family. Could you explain it as best you can?

     Absolutely.

    Early in my life, my parents didn't have a home. They lived at either of their parents' houses or with our aunts and uncles. As a very young person, I remember sleeping in overcrowded situations and in laundry rooms. I can definitively say that there was a change in my life when we were given the opportunity to have our own home. That has a tremendous impact on anybody who has been given those opportunities.

    I am where I am today because my parents were successful in getting a home in 1987. I remember that. I was four years old. It was like a light switch. It changed my life and the trajectory of my life. Where I am today is the result of the opportunity to have housing, to get out of overcrowded situations. Those types of investments make a big difference in an individual's life, including mine.

    I'll finish with this, because I know your story. Your dad became a tradesman and your mom is now an elected MLA. Congratulations to your mom. She was elected early this year.

    It really changed the whole outlook, even as a professional, and opportunities jobs-wise. It really was such a life-changing experience.

    I'll pass the rest of my time to Jamie Schmale.

    Thank you.

     Thank you, Chair.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Zimmer, for these few minutes of your time.

    Merlyn, you talked a few times, when you were addressing Ms. Idlout, about wanting to build the future and unleashing the population to reach its full potential. I've never been to Nunavut. It's on my list of places to go, and I hope to do that very soon.

    Please help me understand. You used the word “allow” a lot. You said, “allow us to do this” or “allow this”. To help me understand, what's stopping you and what's stopping the population from reaching the full potential you talk about?

    The reality is that there is a lot of red tape around everything that is done. I'll give you an example. In the 1980s and 1990s, the Inuit were building homes by themselves. Later, there was a transition, so you needed to have a Red Seal, the paperwork, the education—all of this—to be able to do it. A lot of the people who had that capacity were sidelined for individuals brought in from the south to build homes, even though they could do it and they could demonstrate the capacity to do it. Because they did not have the certification to do it, they weren't able to. That extended beyond just the trades and beyond things at the community level.

    The reality is that today, we are trying to see how we can take that back. Going back to education, it's about doing education at the community level without people having to leave their community. When I say “allow”, I mean that education is run by government. How a certification is done is run by government. All of this is run by government. What I mean by “allow” is let's work together to find a common pathway to success for everyone.

    The more the government got involved, the worse things got.

    That's all the time we have. I have to go to the next speaker, but thank you for that.

    MP Hanley, you have five minutes.

    That's not what I heard.

    Voices: Oh, oh!

    Brendan Hanley: I'm going to ask all three of you questions.

    Get ready, Inuaraq.

    I'll start with Mr. Tattuinee.

    Speaking of government investment, there was almost $64 million from the federal government towards the deep-sea port in Iqaluit, which you referred to. Obviously, these federal investments are incredibly important.

    I wanted you to touch briefly on what you are looking for in opportunities for defence investments and how they relate to the infrastructure needs that you see, particularly with your sealift experience.

    If the government is thinking of making significant defence investments in the north, it would be good for us, as the logistics supply industry, to understand what's coming so that we can best meet them.

    In terms of priorities for what the government should be spending on, I think I'll leave it to the Department of National Defence to decide what they might see—

    On a point of order, there's a lot of conversation going on. It's hard to listen to the testimony.

     Go ahead.

     I was just saying that in terms of where priorities might be, I would leave that to the Department of National Defence and what they see fit to prioritize.

    If they're planning major infrastructure projects anywhere in the north, we, as the logistics service providers, should be involved in those conversations so that they can run more smoothly. The earlier we're involved, the more effectively we can provide a service.

    That's good advice. Thank you.

    Inuaraq, you talked quite powerfully about the importance of being able to stay in the community. Mr. Recinos's father referred to that link as well.

    Tell me what keeps youth in the community. Not just for you, but for your friends and your peers, what are the elements that we need to add to enable youth to be trained, to learn and to stay in the community as a key to addressing the economic development of the region?

    What would keep youth in Nunavut would be workforce development, food affordability, more housing infrastructure and local independence.

    When southerners are brought to Nunavut to work in construction or other things, a lot of the money goes back to Canada. That's not a bad thing, but it leaves a lot of money bleeding and going outside of Nunavut instead of generating more money in Nunavut.

    That's great. That gives me time to pass to Mr. Recinos.

     You rightly weave together the themes of Arctic sovereignty, infrastructure development and nutrition. Clearly you have a lot of expertise and experience.

    In addition to the infrastructure needs that you point out, as you know, nutrition north itself is under review. Within the sphere of nutrition north, what would be maybe your top three recommendations for the minister on how we can do better with nutrition north?

    You have 37 seconds, so you can probably do one and then send two in writing.

     That's not a problem.

    My top one would be.... When the food mail program was running, prior to being replaced by nutrition north, the Government of Canada had a contract with Canada Post for the freight and logistics of the food. I recommend that the Government of Canada go back to that model, allowing them to negotiate in bulk on the logistics side of shipments.

    Thank you very much. Send the other two in writing, please.

    For the last two spots, we have a Conservative spot and a Liberal spot. There was some discussion. We're going to do a quick two minutes and two minutes.

    MP Schmale, are you doing the two minutes for your side?

    Sure.

    Okay, go ahead.

    I'll pick up where we left off.

    In the 1980s, you were building your own homes. You figured out a way to do it. You were keeping the money local. People didn't have to leave their community. Then the government came along and said, “We need A, B, C, D, E and F”, and it went on, and they brought workers in who sent the money out, and things didn't seem to be improving. Then we had one government program after another, but as we're seeing here, especially with our young friend in the middle, people want opportunities in the north.

    We talked earlier on about education and how it hasn't been so great up north, yet the government runs that too. How do we fix this if the government seems to be controlling everything but delivering not great results?

    After you answer that—I apologize—MP Gill has two and a half minutes. She'll have some time as well.

    I'll let them answer this question and then go back to you.

    Thank you very much. I apologize.

    That's no problem.

    How do we fix this? Was that your question?

     Yes. It seems that more local control is better than sending it to a centralized government.

     A lot of the time decisions are made without real involvement of the community or an understanding of the community or what's really going on at the community level. For those decisions, a lot of the times there are great intentions, great ideas, but the execution can be extremely hard because there has not been consultation or communication on how the deliverables will be done.

     One of the biggest failures for the Arctic is delivering. You have to understand and know your space to be able to deliver, and a lot of times everything is done great, but the delivering is where we get hung up.

    Thank you very much.

    MP Gill, you have two and a half minutes, please.

     Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    I think you are giving me more speaking time. It's very generous, no matter who gives it to me. We're all here for the same thing.

    Mr. Recinos, you didn't have the opportunity earlier to answer the question about how crises highlight the vulnerabilities of the north and how we should actually strengthen or improve resilience. I'll give you the time I have left to answer.

     Thank you for that.

    When the COVID-19 crisis happened, one of the things we saw in the trades was that we were extremely vulnerable. When flights started to not fly to the north, we realized that food and things....

    Again, it's about independence and self-sufficiency for those communities. When you garden, you have food; you have things. It's the same thing. Supporting the social and local economy is key, as is ensuring that opportunities are capitalized on by local communities.

    It's totally okay to have capitalization across Canada and everything else, but let's make sure that there is some allocated to local communities as well.

     Are you finished, Mrs. Gill?

    Do I have a few seconds left?

    Yes.

    I'd simply add the issue of food sovereignty. We've talked a lot about nutrition north, but this does not empower the population. Is there anything else that can be done when it comes to food sovereignty?

    I'm sorry; I missed a bit.

    Go ahead and ask it again.

     I wanted to add the matter of sovereignty because we talked about nutrition north. You talked about disruptions when a boat doesn't arrive or is late. There's also the issue of supplies brought in by airplane.

    How can food sovereignty be improved in the north and communities be empowered?

     There are multiple ways now. The community has been introduced to western foods and vegetables through the nutrition north program. The food mail program wasn't part of that, but nutrition north is. There are schools teaching hydroponics—how to grow things. We're doing this with the Canadian Space Agency in a pilot project, but it's needed across.

    There's also country food, harvesting and supporting harvesting supports, as well as the interchanging of country food between communities. Some communities have fish, others have walrus and others have muktuk. Nutrition north wouldn't subsidize that unless it's certified by a Health Canada processing plant. Why? We're used to eating country food. Let's allow transportation, and let's cover the costs of transportation without certification.

    Again, it's about working together with communities.

     Thank you very much.

    The MP for Labrador has two minutes, and that will be the last of our question-and-answer period.

     Thank you.

    Hello, Brian. I just want to say that I consider myself fortunate to call you a friend.

    I'm going to try to get two questions in for all three of you.

    The highest food cost in Canada is in Nunavut. Historically, the lowest fuel cost in Canada has been in Nunavut. Jet fuel is cheaper, gas is cheaper and diesel is cheaper. Could you tell us why you think that's so?

    My understanding is that the Government of Nunavut has something that covers all of the cost of delivery. Where it's not seen is in places like Nunavik, where there are much higher rates for fuel than anywhere in Nunavut.

    My understanding is that the territorial government itself subsidizes part of the costs that are involved at the pump. They pay the distributor for the delivery of the fuel, and they buy the fuel. All of those are things the Government of Nunavut does, and that is not really seen anywhere other than maybe the NWT. I don't know what it's like in the Yukon, but in Nunavut, it's certainly PPD that covers all of those.

    Mr. Recinos, do you have a response?

     Sure.

    It's also about buying in bulk. The Government of Nunavut goes out and buys in bulk and is able to negotiate a much better deal, and it's not so volatile to conflict and other things across social economics.

    Lastly, in 30 seconds—this is for one of you or both of you—do you see a way that we could integrate the airline freight service and the marine freight service to get better results for people who live in Nunavut?

    It's a great question.

    We're very seasonal, but we also have a much shorter window. In terms of the airline, they have their challenges as well. All I can say is that from my experience working in both worlds, they each have their own specific challenges, and it would be difficult to integrate some of those things into how it all works, because they're so used to working in silos.

    Thank you very much for your testimony—

    Mr. Chair, can I just interrupt?

    Yes.

    It's just for 20 seconds.

    I just want to thank all the witnesses for coming today.

    Brian and Inuaraq, I know it's very intimidating to sit in the hot seat, but you did a great job.

    Thanks, Merlyn. Albert Netser sends his best. He says you're pretty good, so you're good in his stead.

    Thank you, Chair, for having them today.

    Thank you very much. You just said what the chair needed to say.

    Thank you very much. Chi-meegwetch.

    We're going to suspend, and we're going to come back in camera and hopefully finish off the policing report.

    [Proceedings continue in camera]