Natural Resources Committee on Oct. 9th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Give a short answer, Mr. Wuttunee.

[Sheldon Wuttunee]

Yes, I agree. I think we need investments in teachers. I think we need investments in broadband and in technical resources. There are great advancements being made globally, but, again, formal, specific investments in on-reserve first nations education are crucial to the future of the country.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you.

We will move now to Monsieur Simard for six minutes.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Wuttunee, can you hear the interpretation clearly?

[Sheldon Wuttunee]

Yes. I had just turned my interpretation to English. My apologies.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

We'll start the clock from the top.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Wuttunee, thank you very much for your presentation.

I found it interesting that you talked about consultation and collaboration. I understand that, for both first nations and us, technical information on certain projects isn't always understandable or accessible when we're new and don't know the mining sector in depth.

Do you think the government is being transparent enough with first nations before undertaking major projects that will have an impact on the territory and on the communities' health and environment? Do you think the federal government is being sufficiently transparent?

[Sheldon Wuttunee]

In my experience, I would say, no, there isn't sufficient information forwarded to first nations. To go back to my earlier point, I think many of our nations are caught off guard in many respects. Depending on which level of government the consultative process is entered into, if you will, there are deadlines in terms of first nations' responses to a project or to aspects of a project. To your point, that becomes extremely problematic due to perhaps the lack of information, or of fulsome information, that's forwarded.

Then, from a leadership perspective, you need to fully understand it to make well-informed decisions. Those lead to aspects of FPIC, or free, prior and informed consent, as it relates to a project if we're speaking from an UNDRIP perspective. Then we're also looking at inherent treaty rights and the cultural perspective as well. When you look at the leadership of a first nation, they have their own consultation to do as well with their respective members—the elders, the youth, other leadership around the leadership table, and band membership—because these projects can benefit, but they can also have adverse impacts, once again, that we're left with.

My short answer would be no, and I guess that provides an opportunity to increase the level of capacity in first nations for understanding.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

I don't want to unduly pin the blame on the federal government because I understand that the current direction of the government is to involve first nations more actively than in the past. However, nothing is perfect.

In your presentation, you talked about first nations consultation mechanisms that would be established by the first nations. I'm intrigued. Do you have any examples where this type of consultation mechanism has been put in place? Do the provincial government—in this case the Government of Saskatchewan—and the federal government formally recognize this type of consultation?

[Sheldon Wuttunee]

I would say aspects of it, but from my knowledge, there hasn't been a formal recognition of a first nations-led consultation process.

In looking back at some of the work we've done over the years, we've actually taken the liberty to develop consultation policy templates for first nations to utilize. However, the experience that we have had is that the consultation duty-to-consult policy framework has largely been developed without meaningful first nations involvement, which has of course created some problematic issues that have led to, in many cases, first nations not supporting projects.

I think as we start to better understand each other and what those demands are globally and create frameworks around meaningful involvement for first nations, that being from a consultative perspective but also, again, going back to our economic and socio-economic opportunities, the relationships are getting better and the understanding is increasing, but we still have a long way to go.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

I have only one minute left. We won't have time to go over the entire issue, but I'll come back to it later. If time permits later, I would like to come back to your vision of first nations as partners and stakeholders in certain major mining projects. We're increasingly hearing from the mining sector stakeholders that they want fairness for first nations. That is also the case for infrastructure. We'll run out of time, but if you have any information on that, I'll come back to it in the next round of questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Hold that thought, Mr. Wuttunee, and we'll come back to you. Mr. Simard will come back to you on that in another round.

Colleagues, we've finished our first round.

We're on our second round.

We'll start with Mr. Malette, and then go to Mr. Guay, Mr. Simard, Mr. Martel and Mr. Hogan. We'll see where we are then. We may have to move on to the next panel.

Mr. Malette, you have five minutes.

[Gaétan Malette, Conservative, Kapuskasing—Timmins—Mushkegowuk, ON]

Mr. Wuttunee, going to your life experience and your path, what lessons can be applied to reduce project delays while ensuring meaningful indigenous equity? What could you tell us from your experience?

[Sheldon Wuttunee]

I'll be really quick with the first part. I think we go back to ensuring that the first nations, whether they're determined to be impacted by the federal or provincial government or whether they're determined to be impacted by the nations themselves, need adequate capacity to understand projects—not only the environmental, cultural and traditional way of life impacts, but also those opportunities that rest in terms of equity, supply chain and workforce development.

If we're starting to look at it from a holistic notion in terms of a file on a project, to your point, opportunities for equity are an increasingly aspect of our involvement. I can't stress that enough, of course. We've seen some of the loan guarantee programs come into effect, but there is also a perspective that our equity is already being put forward with the land and the resources. When we're tasked with going out to borrow additional equity to participate as partners in a project, that's a concern and an issue in itself.

As we look at these opportunities that arise in the race for critical minerals across the globe, how do we best participate? I would say unequivocally those opportunities for equity participation are important, but we also recognize that we have a nation-to-nation relationship as first nation governments with the Government of Canada. We also have a first nation relationship with the respective provinces across Canada.

When it comes to resource revenue sharing or royalty sharing, those are increasingly important aspects that need to be considered by the respective governments. When projects move past the red tape, as was mentioned earlier, into operations, it's a multi-billion dollar industry, which, to date, we don't see much of as first nations. That's an important component to be mindful of in terms of your future deliberations within your respective level of government.

[Gaétan Malette, Conservative, Kapuskasing—Timmins—Mushkegowuk, ON]

Thank you.

Again, has the Government of Canada taken sufficient steps to move beyond consultation and effectively engage with first nations to ensure they have a meaningful voice and genuine autonomy in project negotiations under the Impact Assessment Act?

[Sheldon Wuttunee]

When I think back to some of the work we've done over the past handful of years, there have definitely been some positive strides. Does it go far enough? In my experience, I think that first nations need an increasingly developed process to ensure there is consistent oversight when it comes to a project, so that when advice is provided or rights assertions are provided, we have a clear understanding on how that's received and how that information finds its way in terms of the overall future of a given project.

Many times, as first nations, we discuss with the Impact Assessment Agency or the Canada Energy Regulator, but once we've shared what our concerns are of potential impacts, we don't necessarily understand where that information goes, how it's deliberated on or how decisions are made based on the assertions of first nations.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you to you both.

Mr. Guay, go ahead.

[Claude Guay, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Wuttunee, for participating today. It is much appreciated.

I have a couple of questions for you because I truly appreciate the centre of excellence model you've created for Saskatchewan first nations. We owe it to you to learn lessons from you and the first nations that you represent.

You mentioned equity. You mentioned royalties. The ministry of natural resources, the office of major projects and the government would be more than interested in your thoughts.

We've announced a loan guarantee program. We actually increased it from $5 billion to $10 billion. We're making a massive investment from that side. I understand, from you, that there are many other considerations in creating agreements with first nations.

I would be interested to hear from you. Maybe you could talk a little bit today, but I would also be interested if you could submit to the committee, as part of our study, templates of what it should look like. I am not asking for a certain percentage. I'm asking for a sketch that we could start with that actually covers all the elements that should be a part of it.

Can we leverage that fund? What else should we consider? What would be a good template?

[Sheldon Wuttunee]

I've given lots of thought to this for many years. I know that we have only so much time today, but I would be happy to follow up and share more after today.

In Saskatchewan, we have gotten really good at building institutions that serve the collective, which is the 74 first nations in Saskatchewan. As referenced earlier this morning by Mr. Tochor, the Saskatchewan Indian Institute of Technologies is a sister organization to us here at the centre of excellence. Our mandate is to serve our first nations.

We also have another organization, an entity called the Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority. With this, first nations have come together to wholly own seven casinos in Saskatchewan. With respect to benefits and dividends associated with our gaming and casinos, we have developed what we call a first nations trust among the first nations in Saskatchewan. That consists of all 74 first nations. Fifty per cent of the net revenues from our gaming, from the Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority, are disbursed every quarter to each first nation on a per capita basis.

When we look at some of these major projects, whether critical mineral projects or energy projects, that model is definitely an ongoing consideration for how we come together relative to opportunities in the future.

As it goes with the consultative process, communities in the vicinity of the project perhaps see a greater level of impact than those farther away. Some of the conversations that we've been having are with regard to what opportunities are required by those nations in the vicinity of the projects that see an impact. What are their aspirations? What are, for the sake of today, those tier-two opportunities associated with the collective?

I think that brings not only the opportunity for a broader consultative process but also the opportunity for first nations to come together on the aspect of an equity framework and what our collective first nations are looking forward to potentially investing in any given project.

Those are some of the equity frameworks that we are working through now with respect to some of these major projects—namely, some of the opportunities in nuclear—moving forward.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you, Mr. Guay.

Thank you, Mr. Wuttunee.

We are on to Mr. Simard for two and a half minutes, Mr. Rowe for five minutes and MP Hogan for five minutes.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Wuttunee, I'll go back to what we were saying earlier. I was asking you how first nations could be partners, even stakeholders. I find the answer you just gave about your association's revenue trust very interesting, since it suggests that first nations may be economic players or investors in these projects.

How is that being done on your end? Do you have any examples where first nations have been equitably involved in mining projects?

[Sheldon Wuttunee]

To date, some of the opportunities that our nations have been involved in or are currently negotiating are from a royalty share perspective in the province. Moving forward, those aspirations are there for first nations, whether it's individually or collectively coming together to invest in a project as an equity partner.

Further to your question and further to my earlier point, we look at those initiatives being separate. There's a nation-to-nation relationship based on inherent and treaty rights with the Crown, but then we also look at a separate relationship with the potential proponent of a mining project or a nuclear project, whatever the case may be.

As we look at those opportunities from an economic standpoint, we're taking advantage of loan guarantee mechanisms. I'm also a board member of the Saskatchewan Indigenous Investment Finance Corporation. There are opportunities that have come forward in renewable energy projects and potentially in the SMR deployment here in Saskatchewan. Those conversations are occurring. It's not necessarily in the mining sector to date, but there certainly are opportunities.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you both.

Mr. Rowe has five minutes and Mr. Hogan has five minutes. Then we will take a break to change panels.

[Jonathan Rowe, Conservative, Terra Nova—The Peninsulas, NL]

Thank you for having me here today.

Mr. Wuttunee, it's clear that you see the importance of industrial mining and development across the country, and you mentioned how you are fighting for indigenous groups not only to engage and participate in this development but also to have equity and leadership in these developments. You mentioned how it's important to protect lands and waters while, at the same time, having responsible development.

The Liberal government, through the recent signing of the Kunming-Montreal global biodiversity framework, has a plan to prohibit development on 30% of Canada's lands and waters by 2030 and 50% of Canada's lands and waters by 2050. Do you think prohibiting development on half of your lands would have a huge negative effect on indigenous communities, especially those that rely heavily on natural resource and mining sectors?

[Sheldon Wuttunee]

Coming back to our role here at the centre, in terms of impacts and those types of notions, that's the importance of the consultative process. Each of the nations that are interacted with and are consulted will have differing opinions, but I do think that, from a personal perspective, we need to ensure that for the future and for our kids there are opportunities to practise our cultural and traditional ways of life in a clean way. We need to ensure we are afforded the ability to carry out our inherent and treaty rights—not only hunting, fishing, trapping and gathering but also others that people in nations see as their respective rights.