Public Accounts Committee on Feb. 12th, 2009

[Michael Wernick]

Well, let's see how the rest of the period goes.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

The day's not over, right?

My next question comes from paragraph 16: “Finally, we found that INAC has little information on the outcome of its funding on the safety, protection, or well-being”--I believe this was somewhat asked earlier, but I'd like to hear a more fulsome answer--“of on-reserve children. It does not know whether its program makes a positive or significant difference in the lives of the children it funds.”

Thirdly, you made reference in your opening statement to Jordan's Principle, and you said, “The federal government is implementing Jordan's Principle, with the provinces, so that the needs of children are addressed first.”

Yet in the Auditor General's report, on Jordan's Principle, exhibit 4.3, page 17, she says, in the last sentence:

However, in our view, a dispute-resolution mechanism will not work in the presence of irreconcilable differences and without a change in funding authorities. Such difficulties need to be resolved if this proposal is to result in better and timelier services to first nations children.

You're saying it's being implemented. The AG is pointing out a roadblock. I'd like to know how you're managing on that roadblock.

Also, you offered to give us a copy of the report for your meeting coming up in April. I'd like you to do that, but in addition would you send us the one from late last year? Because if I understood correctly, I think you said you meet twice a year and there are reports coming from that. You've offered to send us the next report. I wouldn't mind also seeing the last report, the one that wasn't offered.

There's more, but I'm out of time, so I'll leave it at that, Chair, and I'll leave it with you, Deputy.

[Michael Wernick]

Thank you, Mr. Christopherson.

I would check whether we actually got to a mid-year report, because the report was tabled in May. If there is a report, I'd be happy to provide it.

It's our practice to put all internal audits, all evaluations, all Auditor General chapters, and all follow-up reports on the Internet site. They're there.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

These too?

[Michael Wernick]

Yes.

With regard to Jordan's Principle, the observation was correct at the time it was made, but it's no longer accurate. We moved on. We're going to Treasury Board with Health Canada. We will reset the fence post between the two departments and the issue will go away.

In the meantime, we've been very actively involved with Health Canada and the provinces--particularly Manitoba, where this has come up--and we have active case management. Kids are being dealt with, and the principle is being applied.

I would be happy to provide more written detail on that, if you'd like.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Yes, on paragraph 16 in particular.

[Michael Wernick]

Yes.

I would ask Ms. Fraser and Mr. Campbell which five provinces they looked at. They obviously didn't go into all ten in order to draw observations. I suspect it's British Columbia or...?

We have tripartites with three, and they looked at five.

[Sheila Fraser]

Manitoba, Quebec, and....

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Well, they looked at five, and three didn't have agreements.

[Michael Wernick]

And we don't.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

How does that work? And what is the world of difference between having an agreement and not having one?

[Michael Wernick]

The tripartite approach: we have agreements with particular agencies, with 108 of them, so each agency has its own funding agreement. What we did not have in the past was a tripartite arrangement among ourselves, the province, and the first nations about how we want to work and how to go forward. There's been one in Ontario for some time. It dates from an earlier time. We've now added Alberta, Nova Scotia, and Saskatchewan, and we hope to do another couple this year.

It takes a look at the whole province. We sit down with the provincial child welfare people and the agencies and agree on an approach going forward. So at the time they did their fieldwork, no, there wouldn't have been tripartite agreements in place. Those are more recent creatures.

I'm not sure if I got all your questions there, but we'll read the transcript--

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Perhaps you could deal in writing with paragraph 16, where the AG says there's “little information on the outcome”. It's a macro question, so it needs to be dealt with in writing.

[Michael Wernick]

Yes. The outcome--as I think Ms. Johnston had a go at in terms of validation--we can pursue in writing for you, Mr. Christopherson.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you, Deputy, and thank you, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Mr. Shipley, four minutes.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Wernick, for coming in, and thanks to your staff.

Obviously, thanks to the Auditor General also.

The budget has gone up from two and a half times, over the last 10 or 11 years, with another $20 million; I think that's focused a little differently. Has that budget gone up proportionately over those 10 or 11 years? It would appear that the $20 million...it takes about $10 million to implement the enhanced prevention approach. If I understand correctly, that started in 2007. But I also believe money doesn't solve all the issues.

Secondly, can you give me an idea--you may have said this already, but I was a little late getting in, for which I apologize--of when you would know to what degree that implementation is working?

Thirdly, you have some willing provinces. Are the other provinces, the ones that are not on the program, keen to come on and adopt it?

Fourth, I want to go back to the residential schools issue. This comes out of the Auditor General's report. A good thing happened, and we've had some bad results from it. It would appear that sometimes when money flows, people who are not used to handling it may cause some social issues in terms of drugs and alcohol.

So I'm wondering if we can have some help. I'm looking for assistance. Should something else come along where we're asked to dispense money, we don't want to be creating more problems just by doing something that is good, that is needed. I think that was a concern.

Finally, with regard to the money that is transferred to the provinces for the administration--the implementation happens through the bands--is there any discretion on that money?

Thank you.

[Michael Wernick]

I'm going to try to do these very rapidly. Then we'll read the transcript and follow up.

In most cases, the money passes directly from us to a child protection agency, not to the band government. They're a distinct entity. In Ontario it does go through the province because of an old arrangement. We give the province money and they flow it to the agencies.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Is there discretion on that?

[Michael Wernick]

It's under an agreement. It has to be used for particular purposes. It's a typical federal-provincial cost-sharing or financial kind of agreement, which we'd be happy to provide to you, if that's interesting.

On residential schools, that might be an issue you'll want to pursue later. Payments went out under the common experience payment, and payments are going out under the independent adjudication process to about 79,000 individuals. It's human nature that there are going to be some unfortunate results for some people who come into that kind of money.

What I could do, with other colleagues, who, by the way, were at the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs on this very subject at ten o'clock this morning.... We've worked with communities, social services agencies, the RCMP, and financial institutions to try to reduce and mitigate those results. This cannot be error-free. It cannot be without some problems. People were very attentive to that. All the parties to the settlement agreement were very attentive to that and tried to do prevention, but there will be cases. Overall, I think, the experience has been a positive one. We could come back on that if you wish.

In terms of other provinces, as soon as we had our first agreement with Alberta, we were in contact with all other provinces. The minister was in contact with his counterparts and we were with others to say, “Here's something interesting and would you like to discuss it?” That's how we knew we had eager partners in Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia. We know we have others that would like to join.

The problem with a tripartite is that you need three parties at the dance. You have to get the province ready. You need to have the first nations agencies ready. You have to come to some agreement on the accountability bargain. That's actually a lot of work. We think we have at least two or three other provinces in the on-deck circle.

[Bev Shipley, Conservative, Lambton—Kent—Middlesex, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Shawn Murphy]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Ratansi, for four minutes.

[Yasmin Ratansi, Liberal, Don Valley East, ON]

I will ask two questions, one to the Auditor General and one to Mr. Wernick.

Madam Fraser, in your audit, you state that INAC “is informed of deficiencies” in meeting the requirements of provincial legislation and standards for child welfare services, and that “it should follow up to ensure that timely remedial actions are taken”. In what way can INAC ensure that the requirements of the provincial legislation and standards for child welfare services are met? If you could, I will ask that you park that question.

Mr. Wernick, have you developed an action plan with timelines and roles and responsibilities to address the issues that have been raised in this audit? If you go to page 13 and what the Auditor General has laid down, it appears that INAC doesn't know what it's doing. You've not analysed and compared services. There's variation in services. It does not know nationally how many children are placed in care, etc.

I don't want to repeat what has been going on. I just want to know. The only main indicator that you had as a performance indicator, or an indicator whereby you have outcomes, is that 82 first nations agencies are being funded. That's very loose, so could you tell us if you have something concrete and specific? If you do, could you send it to the committee?

[Sheila Fraser]

Mr. Chair, on the question about the agencies meeting provincial requirements, they are, as has been mentioned, subject to provincial requirements. We obviously don't audit the provinces, but I would presume there would be some sort of inspection compliance activities carried out by the provinces. The federal government does actually obtain that information; it's then the follow-through afterwards to make sure that things are addressed. They also have the ability to do compliance audits, and the deputy mentioned that they were doing more of those or were beginning to do more of those.

[Michael Wernick]

Very quickly, yes, we have an action plan in the sense that we're pursuing these various initiatives. That was the undertaking I made at the beginning: that it would be going to my audit committee in the month of April and we'd provide it to the committee. It will go through each recommendation and give more specifics on what we're doing or what we already have done.

If you're in agreement with that, Mr. Chair, we would provide it to the committee as soon as my audit committee has blessed it, and we would be in discussion with the staff of the OAG.