Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 24th, 2010

[Christine Cram]

The complaint is still being processed. The federal government filed a motion to challenge the tribunal's right to hear the matter. We entirely agree on certain matters that the tribunal should handle, but, in this situation, it is the federal government's view that the tribunal is not entitled to hear the case. We haven't yet heard the tribunal's decision.

In a recent decision on the NIL/TU,O appeals, which the minister referred to in his presentation, the Supreme Court ruled that childhood and family matters are under provincial jurisdiction. That's very important in this case. We believe the tribunal should take that decision into consideration.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Do you know when this process will finish?

[Christine Cram]

Pardon me, I don't understand.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

When will this process finish?

[Christine Cram]

No, it's continuing.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Yes, but how much time will it take before a decision is rendered?

[Christine Cram]

I don't know. It's up to the tribunal to decide. The tribunal heard the motion in June of this year. We're awaiting a response from the tribunal, but we don't know when that will come.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

All right.

Unless I'm mistaken, there are six tripartite agreements. What percentage of aboriginal people do these agreements cover? What about the other provinces with which we haven't yet reached an agreement?

[Christine Cram]

The six current agreements concern 68% of all children normally living on reserve. To determine the remainder, you have to subtract that figure from 100%.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

But—

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Sorry, we're out of time, Mr. Weston.

We'll go to Mr. Bagnell, to be followed by Mr. Clarke. We probably have time for maybe one more question after that, if somebody is still interested.

Let's go to Mr. Bagnell.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Thanks, Chair.

Thank you for being here.

I just want to change to a totally different paradigm for delivering first nations child and family services. I'm the member of Parliament for Yukon, and as you know, in the Yukon land claims agreement, one of our witnesses who's coming has requested to...or working on taking down this power, which they have the right to do under our land claims. It is the Carcross Tagish First Nation. I know that Kwanlin Dun is also looking at it, but Carcross Tagish has been at it for some time.

Do you know the status of the negotiations?

[Christine Cram]

I think I'll need to get the status on that. I know there have been discussions, and I know there's been a pilot project, but I'm just not sure.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

That's okay. If you could get back to the clerk in writing, that would be great.

[Christine Cram]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

[Inaudible--Editor]...child and family services, though?

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Yes. It's okay. She knows what it is.

I have another quick question, then I'll leave it to Todd for one question.

In that situation, not talking about that particular first nation but in that model, who would be paying, or how would the payment go, for a service that was previously delivered by INAC that will now be delivered by the first...or the Yukon government, which will now be delivered by the first nation?

[Christine Cram]

My understanding of how it works now is that Indian and Northern Affairs provides the funding for child and family services for any status Indian child in the Yukon.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

But after the negotiations, once they take it down, then who would pay?

[Christine Cram]

We provide that money to the province. If they took down jurisdiction, then that funding would be part of—and I'll use language you probably know—the PSSP agreement. There'd have to be a funding agreement, which is part of their self-government, so that would be included in it. It would probably become part of their self-government grant. That's my expectation.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Would that be the same amount that INAC is now spending on the delivery?

[Christine Cram]

They would have to figure out what it would be. There's also incremental governance costs normally that are associated with self-government. I'm not an expert on self-government, so I don't know how that would work.

I think you're aware that one of the challenges in the Yukon is that there aren't any first nations child and family service agencies now, so the province is delivering. You would need to have some entities to provide that.

[Hon.Larry Bagnell]

That's fine. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Todd, go ahead.

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

There's the wonderful assumption here that we move to a new model in Alberta, everything is working fine in Alberta, and therefore we'll take it now and move it right across the country in a very similar form--without an evaluation, by the way, or no completed evaluation, on the model in Alberta.

Up to this time, have there been any reservations about the model in Alberta expressed by the child and family agencies there? Either to you or the department, have there been any people saying, “Let's take a second look at where this is at now, because it may not be the perfect way to go”? Has there been any of that at all?

We've taken one model and are shifting it across the country without an evaluation. You're saying some good things are happening, but can you tell me if there are some reservations being expressed, some concerns being expressed by agencies in Alberta or by the provincial government in Alberta? Do you guys yourselves have any concerns?