Evidence of meeting #8 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 40th Parliament, 3rd session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was housing.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Maria Minna Liberal Beaches—East York, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you very much for coming today.
I listened to you list your priorities. I have a fair number of aboriginal people in my riding, although I'm not in the downtown core. But the city of Toronto, as you know, has a very large population of aboriginals. The friendship centre there is very good, but at the same time it is just overwhelmed, from what I can see.
So housing, child care, education, employment assistance, they're all part of the same parcel really, and I don't think you can do one without the other. You just said something that I thought was very interesting: let's stop talking about nations and serve the people in urban centres.
We spend so much time figuring out this nation thing, nation to nation, which is fine. I won't even go there. I know there are reasons we ignore one another. My sense is that urban aboriginal people are being lost in the shuffle, in the struggle between federal and provincial jurisdictions.
You mentioned the Kelowna accord earlier, and I'm not going there because it was something our former government signed, but with something of that nature, how would you break this ridiculous constant whereby provinces want to look after urban and the federal government the other? That to me is an artificial discussion. We should all be responsible to make sure it happens, since we have a very large number of young people who are the future of this country.
What parts of the Kelowna accord would you recommend this group look at and revive so we can move on? I just want to see us move beyond the constant discussion we have.
Executive Director, National Association of Friendship Centres
I think a couple of things are important. My words are sharp, but this is my frustration dealing with nation approaches, and it's not meant to be disrespectful to them.
Liberal
Executive Director, National Association of Friendship Centres
I'm from Curve Lake. I want my nation to do well. I think people in urban communities need some focus as well. I think one of the great successes of the Kelowna accord...we were not delighted with the outcomes because we felt it didn't deal with urban enough. That single aboriginal woman in downtown Winnipeg wouldn't have been helped all that well by having aboriginal school boards or Métis-specific curriculum. I think those are great things, but we wouldn't have seen more practical service delivery on the ground. I think it would have come over time.
I think what was really important about that process is that 14 jurisdictions agreed to an action plan. Really. And then aboriginal communities, the national aboriginal organizations, agreed. It was a long time coming. Now we can dispute some of the particulars of the accord, but I think the principle of working together, coming together and saying yes, here it is, here's how we're going to move forward... There's going to be another conference on this issue eventually. What government does, what priorities...will economic development and accountability be the priority and not education? Will it be health? It will differ, but something needs to be done, and that is true reconciliation.
When we met with Associate Chief Judge Murray Sinclair and talked about residential schools, I said the irony is what truth, what reconciliation would be is reconstituting the aboriginal peoples of this country who have been decimated by the first 150 years of this country. What would that mean? That would mean something like Kelowna. That would mean significant investments and partnerships whereby Canada, the provinces, the nation governments, and ideally the service providers and others who have a role in this would come together and say this is how we're going to solve these problems together.
I think that was the value of Kelowna, which was different. It was more of a collaborative approach, and I think that kind of thing would have tremendous value.
Conservative
Maurice Vellacott Conservative Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK
Thank you.
I appreciate your being here today, Peter.
My question picks up on some of the secondary and post-secondary education issues, and I appreciate your honesty with us. As committee members, we've asked frank questions of you.
I have a couple of reserves in my riding, and I'm connected with lots of others, as I did serve for a time on the aboriginal affairs committee, too. I hear from time to time--this is at the secondary level before we get to the post-secondary level, and this is from first nations people--that they felt, as you said, somewhat ill-prepared and not fully prepared in terms of the standard, if you will, at the university or the college where they went thereafter.
Some of it seems to get back, as best as I can then gather or determine from them...they felt that the bar was set lower on those reserve schools, or wherever they were, and sometimes there's a variety of reasons that this may have been. They seem to be quite concerned now about that having happened. Maybe at that time it seemed to be a good thing, with some of the affirmative action in hiring and so on, but particularly that was a problem at the secondary level.
I will get into post-secondary education. I've often had some of these first nations kids express concern. They're urban Indians now, if you will, but connected to a particular reserve. They don't get the funding for their post-secondary education.
I know some will say that it's because there isn't a big enough sum of dollars, period. In other cases, they will tell me it's because those dollars were used for health or for housing or for infrastructure or whatever. In some cases, they also allege other inappropriate spending.
Some of them have suggested to me that if they can access that money directly from the federal government, or in some fashion like that, rather than through the reserve, then there wouldn't be these accusations of favouritism, or that chief's family or that particular family on council gets it and they don't.
I guess those are the two questions: lowering the bar, and the issue of how you get the funding and ensuring that it gets to the students, the good students who need it.
Executive Director, National Association of Friendship Centres
On the first question, I think a lot of the education reintegration programs that were developed in the early 1990s had a lower standard, absolutely. I think it became readily apparent when people came out of them ill-prepared for whatever trade or job they were going into.
In the late 1990s and early 2000s I started an alternative school in downtown Toronto, partnering with the Toronto school board. Ultimately, Jarvis Collegiate was our host school, and credits and diplomas flowed through them. I'm not speaking ill of them, but the original idea was to take the basic level of programs, and we resisted.
We said, “Let's do the advanced level of programs. Let's have that as a standard. If people honestly can't meet the advanced standard, then we'll make accommodations. Let's not have the basic level as the default.” I think it's true that there is a general stream of consciousness that because of all these challenges and because they dropped out, or whatever, they aren't going to be strong enough academically.
We were pushing back against that. I think it's probably the same across the country. That's the default position unless you push back. That's the standard at which it is going to be applied.
What's your second question again? I apologize.
Conservative
Executive Director, National Association of Friendship Centres
I'm aware of the debate with Calvin Helin's recent idea of an RESP set-aside when a status Indian is born and it grows over the duration, or the recent study that they apply through... Maybe with this Speech from the Throne it's unclear how the post-secondary funding is going to flow ultimately.
I think what is important is that funds geared for education go to education, so I don't think block transfers are helpful. That's my own opinion. I think we should be focusing on academic achievement and graduating more people. I think it speaks to the larger lack of funding in communities. If they are allegedly taking it for other areas, then we need to ask questions about why that's happening.
I certainly agree that we need to make sure that funds targeted for education are spent on education. There's a variety of ways of getting that done. I only encourage that this occur through partnerships.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
Thank you. That's all the time we have.
You've done a fantastic job of answering a lot of questions in a very short amount of time. I'm going to ask you one really quick question, just to follow up on Mr. Vellacott.
Are you finding, even anecdotally, that there is an issue with boys falling behind? We're seeing that in non-aboriginal populations, where girls are really excelling, where girls are graduating, going to university. Personally, I'm concerned that we have a problem with young men and with boys.
Are you finding that as well? We really just have a moment.
Executive Director, National Association of Friendship Centres
There's no question about it.
I've heard it from our provincial body in Ontario, where they have done a lot of work on young aboriginal women in sports and recreation education. They're seeing that they have been successful. Now they're saying that they have to focus on young aboriginal men.
We're going to publish a book this year about the urban statistics I've been telling you about, the education statistics I was talking about, on how young men are falling behind and we need to find a way.
It's not even anecdotal. We can show you the evidence that young aboriginal men are falling behind, and we need to ask for specific interventions.
Bloc
Yves Lessard Bloc Chambly—Borduas, QC
Madam Chair, I think that all our colleagues will agree to allow Tony to ask a final question given that he gave up his turn on two occasions.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
Thank you.
If everyone is fine with that, we'll let Tony have three minutes.
Mr. Martin, go ahead.
NDP
Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON
En français--that will be a challenge.
Thank you very much. I do have a question. I wanted to go back to a comment you made earlier. One of the challenges we're going to have with this committee is deciding on a measurement of poverty. There are a number of vehicles out there that have been used, and we'll be talking about those. You mentioned earlier the community well-being index.
Could you expand on that a little bit and why you think it's an important measuring tool?
Executive Director, National Association of Friendship Centres
I think it's an important measuring tool only because its numbers provide the numbers for us. It's a housing indicator of a core need and overcrowding. It's an employability measurement between unemployment rates and participation rates, income levels and education attainment. There are probably other successful or maybe more important data that could be made available. This is the data we have today, which is why we utilize it. It really helps to begin to compare where disparities exist across the country. We can share with the clerk our methodology for doing that.
NDP
Tony Martin NDP Sault Ste. Marie, ON
I imagine that would be great for our researchers, because they're working on a report for us, and they will make recommendations.
Executive Director, National Association of Friendship Centres
We have a whole chapter on methodology and would be happy to share it with you.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Candice Bergen
Great. Thank you very much, Mr. Martin.
Again, thank you to our witnesses.
The meeting is adjourned.
