CLASSIFIEDSADVERTISINGSPECIAL ISSUESONLINE SPORTSOBITUARIESNORTHERN JOBSTENDERS

NNSL Photo/Graphic


Canadian North

Home page text size buttonsbigger textsmall textText size Email this articleE-mail this page

NNSL photo/graphic

Trucks hauling equipment out of the Sahtu. A group of Sahtu beneficiaries have come together to pressure Norman Wells Land Corporation management to agree to review their land claim agreement, citing concerns with a lack of transparency within the beneficiary-owned corporation. - photo courtesy of Norman Yakeleya

'Just atrocious management'
Sahtu beneficiaries call for land claim review, citing excess spending and lack of transparency

Miranda Scotland
Northern News Services
Monday, April 13, 2015

SAHTU
Fed up with the lack of information flowing from the Norman Wells Land Corporation, Sahtu beneficiary Walter Blondin is calling for a review of the land claim agreement signed for the region in 1993.

NNSL photo/graphic

Walter blondin: calling for transparency in the way the Norman Wells Land Corporation manages its business and says a review of the land claim settlement is a way to get there.

A review, said Blondin, would bring everything into the open and ideally lead to any issues being addressed.

"What I want is transparency and responsibility for my people. Young people have asked me to assist them to do this, to either get the land claim back on track or tear it to pieces."

The comprehensive land claim agreement gave the Sahtu Dene and Metis control of more than 40,000 square kilometres of land. Additionally, the region received $130 million in tax-free capital transfers over 15 years, according to the Sahtu Secretariat Incorporated (SSI) website.

The agreement also led to the birth of seven Sahtu land corporations, including the one in Norman Wells.

The organization's vision, according to the land corporation's website, is to "achieve social and economic self-sufficiency for the Norman Wells participants of the (land claim) through strong self-governance, fair access and benefit agreements, good long term financial management and sound investment in local infrastructure."

But the current state of the organization makes these goals seem unreachable, said Blondin.

The past financials look horrible, he added, and although annual audits are conducted yearly the corporation doesn't work from a forecasted budget.

"You can't have a fly-by-night government that only moves in crisis," said Blondin.

"It's just atrocious management."

An audit report, prepared by Crowe MacKay LLP and recently presented to members, shows the Norman Wells Land Corporation posted excess expenses of $255,799 in 2013 and $184,004 in 2012.

The organization is heavily reliant on government funds. In 2013, nearly 52 percent of revenues came from the Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency and Aboriginal and Northern Affairs Canada. Another five percent of revenues came from the territorial government.

The auditor notes in the report that "management is of the opinion that operations would be significantly affected" should Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Affairs Canada ever cease or curtail its contributions to the corporation.

The Norman Wells Claimant Corporation, the organization's business arm, posted revenues of $2,250,114 in 2013, with a net income of $219,035.

However, the auditor raised concerns that the corporation is dependent on the revenue it receives from renting the Ed Hodgson building (16 per cent of revenues) to the GNWT and the marine contract (51 percent of revenues).

"If either entity should ever substantially curtail or cease its relationship with the Corporation, management is of the opinion that operations would be significantly affected," the report reads.

Blondin said he's been asking Norman Wells Land Corporation management how funds are being used, if they have a business plan and how they intend to improve the corporation's financials going forward.

The answers he's received have been vague, unsatisfactory or non-existent, he said.

Blondin isn't the only one asking questions.

Raymond Yakeleya, who lives in Edmonton but was born in Tulita, said he agrees there is a lack of transparency among Sahtu leadership and supports a land claim review.

"We need to know where we're at and where we're going. Maybe it's dirty laundry but it needs to be aired," he said. "It's something that should have happened a long time ago ... I think it's a healthy thing."

When the agreement was signed, he was made to believe membership would be informed of decisions made on their behalf and updated on the state of the land corporations, he said.

"It's just nice words but in reality we're not told stuff," said Yakeleya.

"When you don't get information you get suspicious. What are they hiding? What deals have they made in our name? With whom?"

Both Yakeleya and Blondin believe the land claim has not served the region well.

"Of all the regions in the Northwest Territories none is as pretty as the Sahtu. On the west side we've got big mountains, on the east side we've got Great Bear Lake," said Yakeleya.

"We've go trophy fishing, trophy hunting. We've got oil. We've got it all. We've got a majority First Nations population. But what do we own at the end of the day that generates revenue for us?

"We need to be the kings in our own land."

Oil and gas development stagnated in the region in 2009 after the construction on the Mackenzie gas project was halted.

ConocoPhilips and Husky Energy brought new hope for growth in economic activity. However, last year they announced they were suspending exploration in the Sahtu.

The remoteness of the region has deterred economic development in the past.

More needs to be done to ensure youth are being well educated, said Yakeleya. All too often students are graduating without the same level of knowledge as graduates down south, he added.

"We need all of the amenities, such as education, housing, social services, all those types of things. But I don't see it coming from our people. We need to be more independent," he said.

"Maybe we should have our own drilling companies. The Dene people of the North know their own lands. They know where oil seepages are. We don't have to wait for the white man to show us anything."

Anti-fracking activist Sheila Karkagie said she also believes a land claim review is needed and wants more transparency and accountability from the corporations.

Last year, Karkagie raised concerns about the Tulita Land/Financial Corporation after the organization decided to support ConocoPhillips' fracking operation near Tulita.

She alleged that four of the board members were in conflict of interest when they agreed.

She told media they got contracts for catering, clearing brush and delivering water.

She hoped to get a bylaw adopted that would prevent business owners from serving on the board but had no such luck.

"When I went down south one of the things I was told by a native who owned a business, he said ... never let your own people who have a business go on the board because you don't know if they are there for themselves or for the people."

Nonetheless, the review, said Yakeleya, wouldn't be a witch hunt. It would instead offer a chance to take account of what's been done and start working on a plan for a better future.

"(The land claim) was supposed to benefit the people, but it's really not benefiting the people. We have to address it. The sooner the better."

Martin Goldney, deputy minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, says there is a periodic review of the agreement's implementation plan happening right now, although any amendments made to the agreement would have to be with the consent of all the parties involved.

"We're starting to see the relationship, at least on the (GNWT) side, with the Sahtu communities really working well," he said.

"So we're not necessarily seeing the same concerns that some others might have with the land claim agreement. We think it's working quite well."

Neither the Sahtu Secretariat Incorporated or the Norman Wells Land Corporation returned phone calls by deadline seeking comment.

E-mailWe welcome your opinions. Click here to e-mail a letter to the editor.