44th Parl. 1st Sess.
May 1, 2023
- 03:52:17 p.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, everybody, for being here today and for the work that you've been doing with your own respective organizations to move this legislation forward.
I think everybody agrees that there are very good components to this legislation and that it's going to make a big difference in the lives of people across the country.
Mr. Daniels, I want to start with you for a minute.
You and I started having a conversation about the concept of monetization way back in 2021. I know that seems like forever ago with COVID and all that stuff in between, but we started the conversation back in 2021. We talked about all kinds of things, like how the multiplier effect of leveraging could create upfront investments to really work at closing the infrastructure gap. We talked about the fact that inflation didn't allow the increase in capital grants that are provided at, say, a 2% per year increase to keep up with inflation. We talked about own-source revenue definitions and how the expansion of those could actually lead to more opportunity to leverage some of those revenues to attack that infrastructure deficit.
Today, in one of the presentations, it was already mentioned about the report on barriers to end indigenous economic development and how this committee unanimously endorsed the idea of testing this concept out with a pilot project of some kind.
Could you expand on that just a little bit? Just take a couple of minutes and talk about how this concept of monetization is really a huge opportunity to close that infrastructure gap in indigenous communities.
272 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 03:56:21 p.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
I'm sorry, but I don't mean to cut you off. I'm going to run out of time, and I want to sneak one more question in for you, Mr. Daniels. I'll come back to the other members in a later round.
In those conversations you and I had, you also talked to me about the fact that in the regulations, the Minister of Indigenous Services could have undertaken a pilot project without a change. We didn't need this legislation for that to happen—the provision in regulations was already there.
I know this conversation has been happening since at least 2020. It's identified actually in the departmental plans of CIRNAC starting in 2020. It's there in 2021, and again in 2022. We've been talking about this for three years, and now it's finally coming to fruition here, which is good news—don't get me wrong.
Can you maybe speak to how the lost time of three years is impacting the ability to close that gap, based on the rise of inflation and some of those challenges we face? If we had started three years ago, we could have built lots more homes, if I'm understanding your approach here. Would you agree?
214 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 03:57:35 p.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Very specifically, what kinds of challenges does that create for the communities, for the people on the ground? Can you speak to the challenge that this lost opportunity has created in the last several years?
35 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 04:57:09 p.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Thank you.
I'll make my question very quick. I'll come back to Mr. Daniels again.
One reason I'm interested in the amendments is the change in the definition of a “borrowing member”, as Mr. Daniels talked about. He referred to the ability for tribal councils to now be involved in this process. The Meadow Lake Tribal Council had an interest in borrowing from the FNFA to fund the development of a new OSB mill that would have created like 500 jobs in my riding over the last couple of years. That opportunity has not been granted because of the limitations of the act.
Mr. Daniels, could you talk quickly about that change of “borrowing member” and how the facilitation or utilization by tribal councils would be very significant to the investments in economic opportunities in communities?
143 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 05:11:48 p.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Thank you, Chair.
Mr. Daniels, I want to follow up where we were kind of cut off in the last round about this idea of the increased definition of “borrowing members”. We talked about tribal councils.
Another specific example I have in northwest Saskatchewan is the Pelican Lake First Nation. I think you're aware of the situation with the Pelican Lake First Nation, which has about 1,700 members in northwest Saskatchewan. They're working with Pinehouse, which is a Métis community in northwest Saskatchewan with a population of about 1,000 people.
In those two communities, there is a volume of electricity available that is about a third of the national average. They're proposing to build a couple of biomass facilities. They have the fuel. They have the sources. They have the arrangements with SaskPower where they could proceed with this, but they are looking for the opportunity to get funding through your organization.
However, we have a Métis community and a first nation, which I don't think fits the definition of any of this yet. I'm just wondering if you have some thoughts on where this might have to go. Where could we go with this at some point that would allow this kind of arrangement? It would have all kinds of positive benefits like replacing the unreliable diesel generators and solving the shortage of available electricity for communities like this in a riding like mine.
Take some time and just explain how we could get there based on your understanding of the act and where we might have to go.
273 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- 05:14:11 p.m.
- Watch
- Read Aloud
Thank you, Mr. Daniels.
I'm going to pass my time to Mr. Schmale to finish off.
17 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
