Jason Rasevych would like to see corporate Canada do more to put into practice what they put on paper.
The president of the Anishnawbe Business Professional Association (ABPA) notices that mining companies often make statements in their annual sustainability reports about how they’re working progressively with First Nation communities. Most of it is centred around promises of jobs and business opportunities.
What's missed is how mining activity will impact a community's culture.
While companies often say they are committed to reconciliation, Rasevych asks, “How are they reporting on that each and every year?”
ABPA is working in tandem with the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law and its International Human Rights Program on an upcoming report on the impact of mining operations on First Nation communities in Northern Ontario. Their focus is on the Ring of Fire.
Beginning with companies' annual sustainability reports, their research starts by marrying up those best intentions with resulting action to assess their actual commitment to Indigenous relations and engagement.
“Companies walking the talk,” said Rasevych.
“We’re looking to hold companies accountable related to how are they doing so and what type of measures are they putting in place so that they monitor and evaluate this,” he said.
There’s a global push to secure critical minerals and the province is promoting Ontario as the world’s leading jurisdiction of a reliable and responsible supply of these commodities.
One can’t talk about critical minerals without mentioning the Ring of Fire — the remote region in Ontario’s Far North that has never seen industrial development, but contains vast, untapped mineral wealth.
But plenty of discussion needs to take place with First Nation rightsholders before there’s any hope of turning those mineral prospects turn into production, Rasevych said.
To make headway on mine development and eliminate project risks, he suggests it’s high time for companies and government to move beyond the basic duty to consult with First Nations toward a new engagement model.
Ontario has a legal obligation to consult with Indigenous people where it contemplates decisions or actions that may adversely impact established Indigenous or treaty rights.
The ABPA wants to set the bar higher.
Rasevych said there needs to be a better framework to ensure that the voices and perspectives of the Indigenous rightsholders are heard in the planning and decision-making of mining projects.
Rasevych’s organization is appealing for companies to adopt UNDRIP (United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People) and FPIC (Free, Prior and Informed Consent) into their corporate principles to create a new benchmark for Indigenous relations and reconciliation action plans.
In sifting through various statements of claim launched by First Nation communities against government and mining companies, consultation issues remain a recurring theme.
“This just shows that in the present day there are still issues with duty to consult and the approach by the province,” said Rasevych.
“Consultation, to be meaningful, is just the bare minimum.”
He suggests companies adopt the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Call of Action 92 as policy. It doesn’t cost a company anything out of pocket.
“They create a mechanism of building trust,” Rasevych said. It will de-risk projects, should provide access to capital, and improve the brand reputation of a company.
Moreover, Rasevych said, companies need to understand a community's individual protocols on decision-making, the specific laws in their treaty area, and understand what the local expectations are.
Ultimately, it also plays into a company’s ethics — from senior management on down to boots on the ground — to understand the rights of the communities in making a commitment to reconciliation, he said.
When ABPA's preliminary report is released in early March, Rasevych hopes it will offer a road map on what companies should be doing from a sustainability and corporate reporting perspective. A final report comes out in June.
They also hope to come up with a formula on how to place a non-financial value that rates companies' relationship with First Nations that, he believes, will appeal to the capital markets.
But change has been slow to come.
Despite numerous reforms to Ontario's Mining Act over 15 years, Rasevych said it hasn’t resulted in consent-based agreement-making.
He points to British Columbia as the most progressive jurisdiction in Canada for signing UNDRIP into law in 2019.
It means the province will share decision-making power with First Nations on land management matters regarding forestry, mining and construction.
While B.C. may offer the new gold standard, legislatively, Rasevych said it’s still a political hot potato when it comes to turn policy into real action.
That province’s Association for Mineral Exploration said in November that delays in B.C.’s permitting processes in mining cost the industry $38 billion. But it’s unclear whether those permit issues are chalked up to inconsistent timelines and poor communication with Indigenous communities.
Nevertheless, it’s seen as a starting point to replicate the same model in Ontario.
Rasevych said part of their framework proposal will assist companies in developing mutually agreed-upon project timelines and on how to properly identify and engage all the impacted rightsholders, instead of only relying on government sources on which communities to consult.
It will also offer advice on what data needs to be collected to assist companies in their sustainability reporting.
That involves examining the impact of mining operations on the socioeconomic and cultural values of impacted First Nation communities close to the deposits, but also farther out in various corridors and the regional watershed.
With the foundation of a framework in place, Rasevych said they’re looking to research other jurisdictions and invite feedback from leaders involved in mining in Northern Ontario and community members willing to participate.
“We’re looking at the balance, too, from those that embrace the traditional way of life and want access to the land with those who have had opportunities to work on the exploration side or with companies that employ or contract Indigenous services.”
