That the committee conduct a study of no less than three two hour meetings on the implementation of the seven recommendations found in the committee’s 14th report entitled: “Supporting Families After the Loss of a Child”; that the committee invite the Minister of Families, Children and Social Development and departmental officials to appear for one hour each; that the committee invite pregnancy and infant loss stakeholder groups to appear for no less than two, two hour meetings; that the meetings be televised; and that that the committee present its findings to the House.

December 10th, 2020 / 6:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

Thank you, Mr. Schmale. That was provided as notice. It will either go before the subcommittee or before the full committee when we meet again. I presume that's okay.

We've set aside this time aside, colleagues, to ensure that we will be efficient over the break. We're not going to be meeting again until after the holidays, but we have a substantial amount of work completed on the urban, rural and northern indigenous housing study.

The analysts have asked—and I think it's an excellent idea—for us to give them some preliminary drafting instructions so that they can get a bit of a start over the next six weeks, understanding fully that we will have at least two and probably more meetings with witnesses, but this would allow them to get a bit of a jump-start to try to get some sense of what the committee might like to see.

I remind you, as I open the floor on this, that we are in public. I know that normally drafting instructions would be done in camera, but with the technology, it is what it is.

I'll lay out a few questions to frame the discussion, and I'll ask you to use the “raise hand” function to provide some direction to the analysts. I would also invite the analysts to participate in the discussion by asking questions to make sure that we have clarity on what is being requested. Don't be shy, analysts.

Here are a few questions. Do we want the analysts to integrate the PBO's findings into the draft report? Do we prefer to have recommendations integrated into the report text or presented at the very end of the document? Are there any particular themes that have been raised in the testimony to date that stood out to committee members?

I'll open the floor for any advice that you would like to offer by way of drafting to the analysts. I'll recognize first Mr. Kent.

6:45 p.m.

Conservative

Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I would say, from the Conservative side, yes, we would like to see the PBO report included.

Without sort of foreshadowing the eventual reported recommendations, I wonder if we might, in the next few days with a deadline to be set by you, submit written suggestions as to areas of emphasis and specifics.

I think we've heard some very wise counsel from indigenous leaders and band chiefs across the country. I would hope that some of these individuals with decades of history and successful entrepreneurial work, supplemented by federal funds.... I would hope that we would look very strongly at their advice and their criticisms of some of the existing protocols under CMHC's direction. As a number of witnesses have said, there's shrinkage of big dollar commitments made at the federal level by the time the money is delivered to the recipients and housing units are built.

6:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

Thank you.

Go ahead, Ms. Young.

6:45 p.m.

Liberal

Kate Young Liberal London West, ON

Thank you very much.

MP Kent raised a good point. The wise counsel from the leaders has just been amazing. I know we're going to hear much more of this, and it's great.

I just wonder about the urban, rural and northern piece. Are we separating those in our report or are we bringing them altogether? I just wasn't sure what would be the best way to present it.

6:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

Thank you.

Go ahead, Ms. Gazan.

6:45 p.m.

NDP

Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB

In terms of the PBO report, my only concern with that was to ensure that the PBO report was identified in the beginning as having some missing pieces, in terms of an overall analysis. I have a concern about presenting the PBO report. For example, it didn't include wraparound supports. We've had a lot of testimony from witnesses that pointed to their importance.

In terms of our good colleague, Kate Young, the only issue I have with separating that is that there are differences between rural and urban jurisdictional issues. Rather than dividing it like that, another way to do it is to take into consideration jurisdictional differences in terms of funding.

In terms of the layout of the report, it would be very helpful to have the analysis in a document, and then the recommendations at the back. We've seen a lot of the great work that has been done over the past years, whether it be the national inquiry or the TRC, with having a set of calls to action clearly laid out. We can put references to where those recommendations came from in the document. It would an easy, user-friendly model to present the research.

6:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

Thank you, Ms. Gazan.

Ms. Chabot, you have the floor.

6:50 p.m.

Bloc

Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Based on what we heard, the urban, rural and northern areas appear to have things in common. It's also useful to talk about the differences between the on-reserve and off-reserve situations. There has been a great deal of discussion about on-reserve populations moving to urban areas for certain reasons.

To navigate this, I think that we should avoid proceeding on a witness-by-witness basis. Instead, we should look at the similarities and differences. We're also looking at programs. We could conduct a flexible analysis if the type of issue allows for it. This is more about building or writing. Basically, we could put the Parliamentary Budget Officer's report at the end and not incorporate it. That's what I would want.

6:50 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

Okay.

Thank you, Ms. Chabot.

Mr. Vaughan, please go ahead.

6:50 p.m.

Liberal

Adam Vaughan Liberal Spadina—Fort York, ON

Thank you.

I have a couple of thoughts. Particular observations and components of the report are needed that relate directly to urban, rural and northern. My experience within the housing sector tells me that the construction timelines in the north require an approach that is different. The land values and some of the economic challenges of rural Canada are very different from urban, and also the land costs are very different in urban space, plus the multinational nature of the urban population is also a challenge to be reckoned with.

I would support splitting them into three distinct streams with distinct recommendations, but I also think the strength of this program will be made more profound if it's all included under one program. I would structure it in four ways: I would have general commonalities, and then specific recommendations around the urban, rural and northern dimensions, in terms of four distinct sections.

Secondly, I agree with Ms. Gazan in terms of the PBO report. It left out provincial transfers and didn't get into some of the social supports that need to be integrated within a housing system. While the PBO report was helpful, I wouldn't rely on it as a foundational document, because it doesn't cover the full scope of the testimony we heard.

From my perspective, in terms of where emphasis needs to be placed in helping the ministers responsible to deliver this program, we really need to have a firm understanding of the scale of the problem we're trying to address across all three sectors, what the populations are in all three sectors, if that's possible, and also a very firm, very principled and very strong statement about it being indigenous led, indigenous designed and indigenous delivered, and the importance of this program being standalone. While it may rely on CMHC for some expertise that it can bring in house, it is important that it be a standalone program in the same way that the AFN, the ITK and the Métis Nation are separate and distinct governing bodies.

I think we heard very clearly, especially from Mr. Swain, how critical it is for it to be an indigenous-led, indigenous-designed and indigenous-delivered program. That emphasis can't be understated, otherwise we will have failed in our mission.

As well, in terms of Mr. Kent's advice of submitting some details around evidence that we have access to in our notes or in testimony that might have been delivered to our offices away from the committee, because actually a lot of people have been following this online, if we could submit to all of us so that we can make sure we're all working from the same pages when we get back, it would be very helpful for the committee administrator to share the written submissions that come.

The last thing I'll say on this is that we had testimony, advice and observations and understandings from treaty-rights or treaty-holding organizations, as well as on-reserve housing programs. They are served by other programs in very distinct and very intentional ways, and we need to be careful to make sure we understand and adhere to the clear testimony that came from those people, particularly working in the urban spaces, about how far away from accessing those dollars, urban, rural and northern communities are. If we conflate them, we will end up doing an immense disservice to the 87% of indigenous people who live off reserve.

The program was meant to focus entirely on off-reserve experiences and modern treaty experiences in the distinct way they are not served by the three NIOs, and I think that's the whole point of the study. I can't overstate that enough, having looked at it for a couple of years now.

6:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

Thank you, Mr. Vaughan.

Mr. Schmale.

6:55 p.m.

Conservative

Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON

Thank you, Chair.

A lot of what I was going to say has already been said. I'll try not to repeat myself and others.

I agree with what Mr. Vaughan just said about the report, focused on those members who have left their communities and moved and migrated to urban centres. That is an important thing to focus on, the fact that there are so many of these issues and organizations trying to pick up the pieces on this. I agree that it has to take an urban focus.

Also, we heard from testimony that there are a number of issues on reserve that still need to be worked on, especially around opportunities and how we get there. We heard from a number of chiefs, including the one from Mr. Vis's riding, about what they are doing on reserve to provide opportunities for the people who want to stay or are able to stay, that type of thing. We just need to include that so we are aware and are able to deal with the problems, or at least hear about them in the report, and maybe some particular solutions on both sides.

The rest was already said by Mr. Kent as well.

Thanks.

6:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

Thanks, Mr. Schmale.

Mr. Turnbull, please.

6:55 p.m.

Liberal

Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON

I agree with everything that's been said. I would just say that, if we can get a summary of the testimony in evidence that's maybe themed, based on the analysis that the analyst does, that would be very helpful in formulating recommendations. Then perhaps we can all submit our recommendations and then have deep discussions and debates about how those get combined.

One theme that stands out in my mind is that I think we heard very strongly that there needs to be some kind of a national coalition that's indigenous-led. Something else that stands out to me is that I think we heard a lot about innovative models about culturally based services. I would say that the report should centre on lived experience, which I think is really important.

Something else that stood out to me was the economic reconciliation and the opportunities to ensure that addressing homelessness and housing furthers indigenous people's economic self-sufficiency and self-determination.

Thanks.

6:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

Thank you, Ryan.

One of our analysts wants to chime in.

Go ahead.

6:55 p.m.

Brittany Collier Committee Researcher

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a quick question for the committee. There was a bit of a discussion about members submitting suggestions for themes or recommendations.

How does the committee wish us to proceed in this manner if, for example, members submit ideas or themes that conflict or are quite similar? How should we choose what to include, or is this happening at the report consideration phase?

6:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

I'd like to maybe take a run at that question, and we have a couple of other people on the speakers list.

You're getting a bit of a barrage of ideas. I'm not sure that there's any real conflict in any of them so far, but my sense of this is that you probably shouldn't be limited to the advice that committee members give you, either in terms of content or in terms of time, given that we're going to have at least two or maybe three more meetings before we get to any final drafting of a report and consideration of the report.

My view would be that all members should be encouraged to provide whatever guidance they wish to you. Once you see those written submissions, if you have questions, you're more than welcome to pose them to me, and then I can go back through the committee on an informal email basis over the break if that's what is necessary, but my thought is that we should maximize the opportunity for input, knowing full well that we'll have the chance to revise it, because this is still a work in progress. Nothing that is said or done would be final. That would be my gut on it, and I welcome the views of others.

Mr. Vis, please.

7 p.m.

Conservative

Brad Vis Conservative Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC

The only thing I really want to add is that I wish everyone a merry Christmas, happy Hanukkah or Kwanzaa. I hope everyone takes some time. I just wish everyone a wonderful time to relax with their families. It's been a really crazy year for everyone.

We get a little heated sometimes, but generally we keep good spirits in this committee, and I wish everyone a restful break. Take care.

7 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

Thank you, Mr. Vis.

Ms. Gazan, please.

7 p.m.

NDP

Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB

Thank you, Mr. Vis.

I'm going to destroy the moment by getting back to talking about work. I apologize.

One last consideration, I think, would be really helpful, particularly because the government is currently in the process of releasing a national action plan and response to the MMIWG report. We had a number of witnesses testify about housing related to indigenous women and girls and 2SLGBTQQIA. That's a very specialized area and, certainly, an area in desperate need of attention, whether it's safe spaces or more housing. I think it might be a worthwhile consideration to have a separate piece of the report specifically geared to that.

Also, in saying if there was anything that I noticed was missing, maybe in the future we need to have a disability lens on all research, certainly because the intersection between disabilities and being indigenous creates totally different scenarios. It'd be nice to learn more about that going forward.

With that, I wish everybody a happy holiday. I'm tired as well. I'm sure everybody is, and I hope you have a restful break.

7 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

We've reached the end of the list, so I have a couple of points.

Members, feel free, at your leisure, to provide supplemental advice or direction to the analysts. To the analysts, if you have any clarifying questions or concerns about a potential conflict in terms of input, I'd be happy to quarterback a response informally through the committee to make sure you get what you need.

With respect to the PBO issues, my recollection is that we had given a mandate letter to the PBO. I'm not sure we actually received the full report that was mandated, but even if we have, I really think one of our meetings or part of one of our meetings should be dedicated to questioning the PBO on the report. I expect that we'll get a little more clarity on that when we have a report and are afforded the opportunity to ask questions about it.

I hope this has been of some assistance to the analysts for the project to work on over the next month. I remain at your disposal for any further questions if things aren't clear enough.

Is there any other business to come before the meeting?

To all of the House of Commons folks who support us, thank you. To all of my colleagues, thank you for your courtesy throughout. I wish you nothing but the very best in the upcoming season and look forward to working with you again in the new year. Like you, I look forward to seeing the end of 2020.

Thanks, colleagues. Have a good evening.

The meeting is adjourned.