mt_ignore
Legal Feeds
Canadian Lawyer
jobsinlaw.ca

Feds pouring big money into aboriginal litigation

Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada is at the top of the list of federal departmental spending on legal fees as newly released public accounts figures show the government is pouring big money into litigation over First Nations issues.

Feds pouring big money into aboriginal litigation
Click here to enlarge image
In a year that saw aboriginal concerns take centre stage with the Idle No More movement and Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence’s hunger strike, public accounts figures for 2012-13 released at the end of October show Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada with a legal tab of $106 million. That amount far exceeds the legal tab at the Canada Revenue Agency, the department that was next on the spending list. The CRA spent $66 million.

With the federal government aggressively pursuing economic development on lands subject to claims by First Nations and movements like Idle No More providing aboriginal groups with “political capital,” the legal process is becoming even more complex and difficult to get through, according to David McRobert, a member of the Ontario Bar Association’s aboriginal law section.

The fact that aboriginal communities are gaining political capital also means the federal government is under growing pressure to spend more money to move things along, says McRobert.

The Aboriginal Affairs Department’s spending was also at the top of the list last year, when it racked up $110 million in legal services.

When it comes to significant unresolved legal issues, land claims also top the list in this year’s public account documents. Comprehensive land and specific claims make up a significant portion of the “large and significant” matters pending against the government.

“Comprehensive land claims arise in areas of the country where aboriginal rights and title have not been resolved by treaty or by other legal means,” the public accounts report states.

“There are currently 81 comprehensive land claims under negotiation, accepted for negotiation or under review.”

According to government estimates, “to a point where quantification is possible,” it has a liability of about $4 billion in comprehensive land claims.

According to McRobert, there have been resolutions to about 24 comprehensive claims so far in Canada.

The process is “incredibly time consuming,” says McRobert. “Usually, you’re talking about a lot of money.”

Since the early 1980s, there have been more than 175 cases brought before the courts involving corporations that want to pursue development on aboriginal lands, says McRobert. In 90 per cent of cases, “the aboriginal people win,” he adds.

In a recent landmark ruling, the federal government lost a 13-year legal battle over Métis status. The case was “a travesty,” says McRobert, adding there’s “absolutely” a better way to resolve these issues.

“The direction from the Supreme Court of Canada has been fairly clear — resolve these things, resolve these things with the aboriginal people. . . . You have to work with First Nations.”

The drawn-out process is also “a tragedy for [First Nations] communities,” says McRobert. Even when the parties reach a deal and the communities have to pay 10 per cent of their settlement to lawyers, “that’s money not spent on education,” he adds.

Instead of lengthy legal battles, the parties should be engaging in “serious” roundtable talks, according to McRobert.

In the public accounts, the government noted it would “pursue a settlement agreement with the First Nation when a claim demonstrates an outstanding lawful obligation.”

The document also says there are “thousands of claims and pending and threatened litigation cases outstanding against the government.”

“These claims include items with pleading amounts and items where an amount is not specified. While the total amount claimed in these actions is significant, their outcomes are not determinable.”

In terms of specific claims, which deal with “the past grievances of First Nations related to Canada’s obligations under historic treaties or the way it managed First Nations’ funds or other assets,” there are currently 448 of them under negotiation, an increase from 439 in 2012.

The government estimates a liability of $3.8 billion for specific claims “that have progressed to a point where quantification is possible,” according to the government.

For its part, Aboriginal Affairs maintains it’s doing a good job of spending taxpayers’ money. “Our government treats taxpayers’ money with the utmost respect and we require that government business be done at the lowest possible cost to taxpayers,” said spokeswoman Erica Meekes.



Comments   

+1 # Fred Bellefeuille 2013-11-15 14:54
Mean while there are many First Nations with no potable water. Kids with sores, even the dogs can't stomach the water.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
+1 # Stewart Vriesinga 2013-11-13 19:09
So I have a couple of questions related to this: (1) Has the Canadian government through NAFTA and other FTAs granted foreign corporations access to Native land it has not yet legally acquired? (2) Under the terms of existing FTAs would Canada have to compensate foreign corporations billions of dollars for lost investments and lost future profits if they could not guarantee these corporations access to un-ceded First Nation lands? (3) What happens if First Nations don't trust the federal or provincial governments to responsibly administer the lands in question and decide to retain administrative control over said lands? Is that what they mean by non-quantifiable?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
+4 # Pam Bevan 2013-11-13 11:33
Having once worked for the AANDC's Treaty office, the trouble is at many negotiations with First Nations, the government sends people to the table with no decision-making power. So negotiations can really drag out and even stall.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
+2 # Mukhtiar Dahiya 2013-11-12 21:54
What is written is an interesting read. You cannot 'undo' the past through expensive court battles. Instead we should use taxpayers money to further public betterment and amicably should correct past national mistakes.
My request to politicians, bureaucrats, lawyers and aboriginal leaders is to work together to boost the rule of constitutional law and respect charter rights of every citizen to live with dignity.
Canada can only prosper if we adhere to the principles of the founding fathers otherwise we are doomed.
City Law Centre
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
-3 # Naomi 2013-11-12 18:46
There's always talk and big numbers thrown out about what is being spent on First Nations and outstanding legal issues. What do Canadians cost to First Nations who hold legal title to land and resources that continue be occupied without payment and extraction of resources since contact? 40% resource revenue is held in trust for First Nations. What is the rational that the Crown keeps 60% to this day and manages the 40% that belongs to First Nations. What Canadians cost First Nations likely make these numbers look ridiculously small.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
+1 # Barry 2013-11-12 07:47
AANDC spending big dollars on legal battles.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
+11 # Mukhtiar Dahiya 2013-11-12 12:45
Quoting Barry:
AANDC spending big dollars on legal battles.

So what it proves. This country is being run by mafia with extortionists flourishing in parliaments, senate, judiciary, police and bureaucracy with access to public purse who misuse and misdirect public funds for their selfish ends. Billions of dollars on unnecessary aboriginal litigation/trials while homeless Canadians for want of legal services in trivial matters commit suicide in the streets of Toronto?
The street people who for some reason cannot look after themselves (shunned by the legal profession)
have charter rights too to access justice before they die. So far 726 homeless deaths are reported in City Law Centre records in Toronto.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote

Add comment



More Law Times TV...

Law Times poll

A Law Times column this week argues that people should not have to get undergraduate education before going to law school. Do you agree with this position?
Yes, going to get an undergraduate education is a waste of time and delays a lawyer's entry into the work force.
No, getting undergraduate education teaches students critical thinking skills needed for law schools.