Natural Resources Committee on Oct. 9th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you.

We'll turn it over to Mr. Hogan, for five minutes.

[Corey Hogan, Liberal, Calgary Confederation, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses.

Ms. Gale, in your opening remarks, you mentioned a changing landscape, and you said that more than 500 impact benefit agreements had been signed. Many more have endured environmental damage with little to no lasting benefits. As we've heard from all of you, engaging at the ground floor and supporting capacity to assess projects are a huge part of it, but I suspect there's also more.

It doesn't need to be specific projects, but I'm wondering, to help fill out the picture for the committee, if you can give characteristics of good agreements that provide the kind of long-term benefit you've discussed and characteristics of bad agreements that provide little to no lasting benefit.

[Sharleen Gale]

As a chief, I had to deal with a lot of negotiations. I think that success means a Canada where first nations are more than parties with whom the Crown or the project component engages or consults. It needs to be based on relationship building, where first nations are the economic partners and environmental stewards. Ten years ago that wasn't the case. I think things are changing for the better and we're having those discussions, but success looks more like indigenous integration in any project and into the supply chain and meeting that full value.

It is about first nations owning the mines and the infrastructure that comes with them and first nations having the ability to supply and service these mine sites—and also having our people working at these sites, not just on the ground but through the ownership, at the board level and at the management level. There's so much that we look forward to in owning these projects. In my community, we're going to be the 100% owner of a geothermal facility. Our people are really excited about that opportunity and what it's going to bring to the local economy and the relationship it's going to build with our treaty partners.

[Corey Hogan, Liberal, Calgary Confederation, AB]

Can you also give examples of maybe characteristics of deals where there is not lasting benefit? Are there areas we should be very careful to avoid or very careful to discourage in terms of the structuring of agreements of a certain type?

[Sharleen Gale]

I think that when industry or government comes in, the first nation government looks after the rights and titles, and the corporation of the nation looks after the deal and what can be done. Both are two important pieces because, through the negotiations of the chief and council, you can really do some things for your community and move beyond just payments and towards partnerships.

When oil and gas came into our territory, they said, “No impact benefit agreements. No equity.” It left us at a standstill. What happened was that the only place where we had a right to say anything was at the gas plant, because all of the permits were piecemeal up to that point. There were a lot of court cases—and there have been a lot of court cases across Canada—and we were successful in winning those court cases.

Fast-forward into this new way of doing business, I think we're seeing a lot of successes. However, a lot of things need to be improved, on the government level especially, so there's shared decision-making in policy and in incorporating our indigenous values and our laws into those processes so that we all can be successful.

[Corey Hogan, Liberal, Calgary Confederation, AB]

The chair informs me I have one minute left, so I want to quickly ask about economic participation, which builds on many of the questions today. Witnesses at this and previous committees have talked about the ability to consider different financial structures.

Mr. Fantauzzo, you touched on this. Can you expand on different models of indigenous participation, very briefly now and maybe in a written submission after?

[Shaun Fantauzzo]

Yes, I am happy to respond to this question.

I will just quickly reiterate what I mentioned before. Equity investment today is looked at as a bit of a panacea, but, especially when looking at the critical minerals sector specifically, employment, procurement, business supply, and lasting benefit sharing are all components of economic participation. There's not only one model, is what I would say. We're seeing an emergence of different elements of indigenous economic participation in these projects, and some first nations will value different routes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you.

Monsieur Simard, you have two and a half minutes, followed by Mr. Martel and MP Danko.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Gale, as I told Mr. Wuttunee, I find it fascinating to see how the first nations have become investors who can raise capital just like other investors.

I would like to talk a bit about a fund model used back home in Quebec. It involves labour‑sponsored funds and regional development funds. Before filing my tax return, if I decide to invest in labour‑sponsored funds, I'll receive a tax benefit. This model often leads to labour‑sponsored funds being invested in mining projects, natural resource projects or various other projects of this nature.

Mr. Wuttunee gave us an example earlier of the royalties that his community receives. Does the federal government offer you this type of incentive to raise capital? If the goal is for the first nations to become proponents of infrastructure projects, you should be entitled to tax benefits to do so. Is this currently the case, or is it something that you have already considered?

[Sharleen Gale]

About 10 years ago, when I was chief, we got many investments. We got money from different agreements, so we decided to invest in stocks. We have seen growth in our bank accounts over the last decade that has added tremendous value and enabled us to build up our own communities. At the same time, when you have that kind of money and you are getting into a project for the first time, you don't want to take that risk and use your money, especially when you have seven generations to care for. I think that is really important, and I am really thankful for the indigenous loan guarantee program and the Canada Infrastructure Bank, because those give us the tools to be able to be involved in these projects meaningfully and financially.

What I think you'll see is, once these tools are utilized.... We have seen it, like you said, in Quebec with the first nation. They needed the support to get the initial funding to get stage one of the project done, and they have been in operation for several years now. There is tremendous community investment and infrastructure building happening. Also, through their own-source revenue, they are able to fund the second phase of the project without having to go back to the indigenous loan guarantee program or any other financial vehicle, because they are able to do it with their own funds.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you.

The last two speakers are MP Martel and MP Danko, each for five minutes.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll be sharing my time with my colleague, Jonathan Rowe.

Mr. Wuttunee, my question concerns decision‑making and unanimity. Should every development project on indigenous land require unanimous consent from all the communities involved in order to proceed?

[Sheldon Wuttunee]

It is a bit of a complex question, but I will try to be very quick. I think that the intention and practice should be to achieve consent from as many nations as possible, if not all, if that is possible. Many times projects get approved when nations intervene. One of the difficult things we find oftentimes is that industry can choose winners and choose losers. If there are nations that, perhaps, don't support a project, they may or may not get as much attention as those that do. This leads to benefits.

I think Canada and the respective provinces have a big role to play. Ms. Gale mentioned it a bit earlier, but those legislative and regulatory regimes play into that decision-making, first-hand. The shared decision-making model, as it moves forward, becomes increasingly important when it comes to unanimity, as you mentioned, with respect to supporting projects. In that shared decision-making, I think it is very important to understand that there are relationships with proponents, there are relationships with regulators, and there are Crown relationships as well that first nations are navigating all at the same time. They are trying to figure out, in these opportunities, who's going to hold companies accountable and who's going to enforce legislation and regulatory aspects.

These are all part of a complex picture that we continuously navigate when it comes to considering projects in our lands, but that shared decision-making model to achieve consent as we move forward is extremely important. We live it every day, and we see projects where, after the fact, when equity opportunities are presented, those that support the project will get that opportunity to become owners in projects at the expense of some of the other nations that do not get that same opportunity, which is very problematic. It think that is something that's very important for the committee to be mindful of as your discussions move forward.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Mr. Chair, I won't be sharing my time after all. The response was longer than expected.

Mr. Wuttunee, I'll continue with you. How can we strike a balance between respecting indigenous rights and the need to prevent projects from remaining blocked for years?

[Sheldon Wuttunee]

I'll refer to some of Ms. Gale's comments. We've talked a lot about meaningful engagement and consultation. The value that a project brings to enhancing local first nations' infrastructure is very important. Again, I'll go back to some of my earlier points. Concepts and notions around resource revenue sharing and royalty sharing are extremely important. To what one of the previous speakers said about the Quebec fund, perhaps that's an opportunity to utilize some of those resource royalties and put them into a fund for future first nations' investments in their respective provinces. That's a great opportunity, I believe, here in Saskatchewan.

Regarding the benefits from projects, as we look forward to consent and perhaps not blocking a project, it's going to take some very important work and serious considerations on behalf of the proponents and on behalf of the respective governments in terms of how legislative and regulatory regimes are developed. Free, prior and informed consent and how we look to achieve it is always in our minds.

When we're talking about funding, we're talking about capacity and we're talking about meaningful inclusion. Those are all very important aspects that will really be within the perspective of the nations, but that's a big journey ahead for the proponents and the government.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you, Mr. Martel and Mr. Wuttunee.

We're going on to our last questioner, MP Danko, for five minutes.

[John-Paul Danko, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Thank you, Chair. I'm going to pick up on the point that Mr. Martel was making.

My experience and my perspective is in southern Ontario, where often the elected band councils are seen as a colonial construct and you have various iterations or groups of hereditary chiefs, some self-appointed development groups and multiple first nations that can each have a stake in the same projects. They all have a myriad of different organizations and groups that also have some sort of stake in that project. From a government perspective, it can be really frustrating when you think you have a constructive, collaborative approach and you move forward with a project, and then, as Mr. Martel was getting at, there's a protest or it's frustrated when you get to the site.

Understanding that you're working with the First Nations Major Projects Coalition and also in Saskatchewan with multiple first nations involved, how do you see these overarching coalitions fitting into helping move these projects forward and working collaboratively in a more constructive relationship with first nations?

[Sharleen Gale]

This is one of those situations where you have different first nations and they have different laws, different languages and different values, so the indigenous governance can be really complicated at times, including by colonization. Typical band governments are on reserve, and hereditary chiefs are in the traditional territory. It's really important to have conversations and build trust with both leaders and members.

For the First Nations Major Projects Coalition, we're not project-specific. We do not propose projects to our members. Our members are the ones who come to us and ask for the capacity support; that's very important to understand. At times, yes, it can be very complicated and complex based on the different nations, what their needs are and how they want to engage in the consultation process.

[John-Paul Danko, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Thank you.

With whatever time I have remaining—I think this is the end here—I wanted to give the three of you an opportunity to offer any closing remarks you wanted to share with the group.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

That's a great idea.

[Sharleen Gale]

Thank you. I appreciate it.

This goes into the question I had from another member. Our research shows that there will be more than 500 natural resource projects built in Canada over the next decade. As I said, these projects will be built on indigenous land and they will represent over $630 billion in capital investment. Using our internal calculations and estimates, we project that $50 billion of that could represent first nation equity investments, which will need to be financed—and that's just investments. This doesn't include any of the procurement, employment or other opportunities that first nation businesses will want to be involved in through our membership. These projects will generate billions in economic benefit for first nations in the form of revenue sharing, impact benefit agreements, jobs, procurement and training, which is really important for the Canadian economy.

I want to say that indigenous partnership is not a barrier; it is Canada's strategic advantage that needs to be nurtured and supported through real investment in capacity. Mr. Wuttunee talked about this. I think every successful project in the next decade will really depend on it. When indigenous rights and ownership are embedded from the beginning, projects will move faster, you'll face fewer disputes and you'll generate shared prosperity for all Canadians.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Mr. Wuttunee, we'll have the last word from you, and then we will have to adjourn.

Go ahead.

[Sheldon Wuttunee]

Very quickly, thank you very much for your comments, Ms. Gale. I certainly echo them.

One of the things that I would like to continue to encourage is that the members really consider what types of strategic priorities there are in terms of available government programs for first nations to better participate in intergovernmental processes, for one, but also as owners in major projects. That capacity funding, whether it's an ICSP with the Impact Assessment Agency or an INRP with NRCan, is an important pot of funding for organizations and first nations to be able to access, especially as Bill C-5 comes forward and the Major Projects Office is structured, implemented and deployed.

Remember, we also have our work—which is ongoing—at organizations like FNMPC and the centre that do work on behalf of our nations and at the direction of our nations, which is very important. We're mandated organizations that do very important work.

I'll leave my comments there. I think that was an important one.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you to all our witnesses this morning and afternoon. There was very rich testimony providing very important first nations' perspectives, which is an important part of the motion that we passed and that guides our study. We will be having other indigenous witnesses: first nations, Inuit and Métis.

This has been very important for us to hear today. Thank you so much.

Also, thank you to my colleagues for great questions—good and focused questions—and a very productive session.

I wish all of you a very happy Thanksgiving in connecting with your families and your communities. We'll see you back here on the 20th.