The Assembly of First Nations’ (AFN’s) regional chief has come out strongly against proposed changes to federal laws that govern environmental assessments in the territory.

Mike Smith, a former Kwanlin Dun chief elected to the AFN national executive in 2012, today echoed calls by regional leaders for public hearings in the Yukon as a Senate committee moves into its second week of hearings in Ottawa.

Smith said he opposes would-be amendments he believes would chop the limbs off an arm’s-length body, curtailing its independence and violating the spirit of the Umbrella Final Agreement, with repercussions for Yukon residents and the environment.

“We want to protect the land, we want to protect the air and we want to protect it for future generations,” Smith said in an interview today. “That’s the intent of our land claims agreements.

“We basically support the position that was advanced by CYFN (Council of Yukon First Nations) that the changes are not in the best interest of Yukon First Nations. Local hearings might be a first step.”

Smith said “the big issue” concerns that slice of proposed legislation that holds an independent assessment board subject to binding political direction from Ottawa or, if the minister of Aboriginal Affairs chooses to delegate those powers, the territorial government.

“The other one, of course, is that First Nations are always at loggerheads with the Yukon government over, for example, the Peel watershed,” he added.

“If you transfer the responsibilities to the Yukon government — which absolutely wants to open the Peel watershed to mining — and then they’re given the responsibility to look over the First Nations’ interests in maintaining the integrity of the Peel River valley, we see a complete conflict to of interest.

“They’re not going to protect our rights, absolutely not,” Smith said.

Bill S-6, currently before the Senate committee on energy, the environment and natural resources, would also replace an independent board with one led by a federally appointed chairman.

Smith said that may invite a legal challenge based on provisions set out in the Umbrella Final Agreement and First Nations’ final agreements.

CYFN Grand Chief Ruth Massie, who flew to Ottawa for the committee hearings this week, has already threatened to sue over perceived violations.

“It’s costly for First Nations to go to court and spend thousands of dollars on legal fees just to maintain the integrity of the agreements,” Smith noted.

Chapter 12 of the Umbrella Final Agreement affirms “the need to protect the special relationship between Yukon Indian People and the Yukon wilderness Environment” as well as “the cultures, traditions, health and lifestyles of Yukon Indian People and of other residents of the Yukon.”

While the agreement is not a legal document, CYFN notes on its website, “it represents a ‘political’ agreement made between the three parties” — 11 of the Yukon’s 14 Nations, the territorial government and Ottawa.

Senator Dan Lang said the proposed legislative changes came after “full and intensive consultation” with regional stakeholders, including the CYFN, individual chiefs and resource development companies.

“I think the point that should be made is it should go through the hearing process, because I think there’s answers to ... some areas of the bill that some parties are questioning,” Lang said in an interview Friday.

Lang noted the vast majority of recommended policy changes were agreed to by the stakeholders.

He joined MP Ryan Leef in telling the Star he is open to the idea of local hearings: “It always would be nice if there’s hearings.”

Yukon NDP Leader Liz Hanson said the proposed legislation’s final wording was drafted in secrecy after a meeting between the government and five industry groups.

“There’s been a lot of stealth around the process of change here,” she said at an NDP-hosted town hall meeting held in Whitehorse earlier this month.

The official Opposition said the proposed changes violate the collaborative spirit and procedural balance of the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Act (YESAA).

That act stems from tri-partite agreements negotiated among First Nations leaders and the territorial and national governments.

“The collaborative approach taken in the negotiations was meant to foster a co-operative approach to the important issues that arise when assessing the implications of proposed development in Yukon,” the party stated in the release last week.

“Many Yukoners have expressed their frustration that these amendments were tabled in the unelected Senate.”

The YESAA legislation would limit the amount of time groups would have to request more information from a proponent, although it would not truncate the time companies would have to answer.

Bill S-6, which also impacts Nunavut’s regulatory processes, further proposes removing the requirement for a new assessment by the Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board (YESAB) when companies change their project. That would become subject to the board’s discretion.

The federal government says the bill is intended to produce more predictable and timely reviews, reduce duplication, strengthen environmental protection and provide meaningful aboriginal consultation.

“These improvements will result in further unlocking the economic potential of the North, while ensuring sound environmental stewardship and help the territories remain an attractive place in which to live, work and invest,” states a government release from earlier this year.

Industry supports the changes, said Samson Hartland of the Yukon Chamber of Mines.

He questions whether the bill would allow political direction of the assessment process. “I don’t see that specifically in the amendment.”

The bill reads: “The federal minister may, after consultation with the board, give written policy directions that are binding on the board with respect to the exercise or performance of any of its powers, duties or functions under this act.”

The bill was introduced in the unelected Senate instead of the House of Commons. It has gone through second reading in the upper house and first came before an 11-person Senate committee last week for possible revision.

Bill S-6 will still have to pass reading in the House of Commons, which could also hold committee hearings in the Yukon.

See letter.