GNWT adopts new definition of Indigenous business in procurement

After five years of research, the NWT government says it has a new definition of an Indigenous business for procurement reporting purposes.

In the GNWT’s words, under the new definition, an NWT Indigenous business is one that is registered:

• a) under the GNWT Business Incentive Policy; and either
• b) on the Government of Canada’s Indigenous Business Directory or
• c) on a publicly available business registry maintained by an NWT modern treaty partner.

Most NWT businesses are already registered for the Business Incentive Policy – or “Bip” – as it provides preferential treatment in many procurement settings.

The new definition is currently “for information and reporting purposes only,” the GNWT stated.

“It does not change how contracts are awarded, introduce procurement preferences, or alter existing procurement rules.”

Instead, finance minister Caroline Wawzonek said, the definition “gives everyone a common understanding to work from [and] allows us to have more informed, evidence‑based conversations.”

Published GNWT procurement reporting will reflect the new definition from the 2026-27 fiscal year onward.

NWT ‘outsourcing’ thorny issue

In an analysis published last week, law firm Lawson Lundell said the change was a long time coming.

Pointing to engagement on the issue that began in 2021, Lawson Lundell partner Tim Syer wrote: “Five years on, this reporting definition is what we have to show for it.”

Syer called the GNWT’s newly adopted definition a “sensible and low-risk” approach.

“The territory has effectively outsourced the Indigeneity qualification. By relying on the federal directory and on Indigenous governments’ own registries, it sidesteps the thorny job of deciding who counts as Indigenous,” he wrote.

“It isn’t entirely clear what appeal mechanisms the Indigenous governments offer for their registries, but the federal directory has its own reconsideration process. So if you have a beef with a determination that your business doesn’t qualify as Indigenous, you can take it up with the feds or with the relevant Indigenous government — not with territorial procurement staff.”

Syer added he expects the definition to “find its way into an actual Indigenous procurement policy eventually,” instead of remaining only a reporting tool.

“The government says the definition does not commit it to future policy changes, but reporting under it begins in the 2026-27 fiscal year. The data it generates is the most likely foundation for an eventual Indigenous procurement policy,” Syer concluded.

“Contractors and procurement teams should track the annual reporting and be ready for the definition to acquire real teeth down the road.”