18.08.2013 Views

gambling in alberta - Research Services - University of Lethbridge

gambling in alberta - Research Services - University of Lethbridge

gambling in alberta - Research Services - University of Lethbridge

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Table 60 illustrates that the largest beneficiaries <strong>of</strong> the FNDF have been the 5 First Nations that<br />

host cas<strong>in</strong>os. However, there is considerable variability with<strong>in</strong> this group <strong>of</strong> 5, with the Enoch<br />

Cree First Nation (River Cree Cas<strong>in</strong>o and Resort) and the Tsuu T’<strong>in</strong>a First Nation (Grey Eagle<br />

Cas<strong>in</strong>o) be<strong>in</strong>g the ma<strong>in</strong> beneficiaries (Figure 47). This is almost certa<strong>in</strong>ly due to the fact that the<br />

River Cree Cas<strong>in</strong>o is just outside <strong>of</strong> Edmonton and the Grey Eagle Cas<strong>in</strong>o is just outside <strong>of</strong><br />

Calgary, whereas the other 3 cas<strong>in</strong>os are located <strong>in</strong> rural areas.<br />

$40,000,000<br />

$35,000,000<br />

$30,000,000<br />

$25,000,000<br />

$20,000,000<br />

$15,000,000<br />

$10,000,000<br />

$5,000,000<br />

$0<br />

Figure 47: FNDF Allocations for the 5 First Nations that Host Cas<strong>in</strong>os.<br />

Enoch Cree<br />

Nation<br />

Tsuu T'<strong>in</strong>a<br />

Nation<br />

Cold Lake<br />

First Nations<br />

FNDF Revenue as a Proportion <strong>of</strong> Total Revenue<br />

Alexis Nakota<br />

Sioux Nation<br />

Stoney<br />

Nakoda<br />

Nation<br />

2006-07<br />

2007-08<br />

2008-09<br />

2009-10<br />

The primary source <strong>of</strong> First Nations revenue has traditionally been federal government<br />

payments through Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC). The fund<strong>in</strong>g formula calculates<br />

<strong>in</strong>dividual First Nations fund<strong>in</strong>g levels based on populations. 94<br />

In the case <strong>of</strong> the 5 communities that host cas<strong>in</strong>os, these <strong>gambl<strong>in</strong>g</strong> monies represent a<br />

significant portion <strong>of</strong> their overall revenue. For example, Enoch’s FNDF disbursement <strong>of</strong> $35<br />

million <strong>in</strong> 2008/2009 was 303% more than its INAC’s budgetary allocation (Table 61). Similarly<br />

Tsuu T’<strong>in</strong>a received more than $28 million, which was 142% more than its INAC budget.<br />

Despite lower than expected returns, <strong>gambl<strong>in</strong>g</strong> revenues also contribute noticeably to the<br />

Alexis Nakota Sioux Nation’s and the Cold Lake First Nations’ overall budget. The Stoney<br />

94 Because there is no stipulation about what percentage <strong>of</strong> INAC fund<strong>in</strong>g bands should provide to <strong>of</strong>f-reserve<br />

residents, <strong>in</strong> most cases these monies are spent exclusively on reserves to the detriment <strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong>f-reserve members.<br />

225

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!