Evidence of meeting #5 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was centres.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Carol Camille  Executive Director, Lillooet Friendship Centre Society
Juliette Nicolet  Policy Director, Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres
Arlene Hache  Community Advocate, As an Individual
Lance Haymond  Kebaowek First Nation, Assembly of First Nations Quebec-Labrador

4:40 p.m.

Arlene Hache Community Advocate, As an Individual

Thank you very much.

I'd like to begin by thanking members of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities for inviting me to contribute to this very important topic of urban, rural and northern indigenous housing.

I'd like to give a massive shout-out to Adam Vaughan and Michael McLeod, who are champions of housing for the north; I appreciate their efforts, as a woman who has experienced homelessness.

I position myself as a settler and as a person with lived expertise of homelessness who came north as a young woman fleeing violence. Internally, the traumatic responses to childhood violence that I experienced revealed themselves in clinical depression, constant suicidal ideation and a sense of helplessness and hopelessness. Externally, they revealed themselves in a lifestyle of chaos, instability and risk that limited my ability to form and keep healthy relationships and to enter into and succeed in the workplace.

It was in this context that I met and connected with first nations, Inuit and Métis women and families who were similarly impacted by trauma, but at the genocidal level aptly described in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada report.

As a first-hand witness for more than 45 years to the ongoing policies and practices that had been instituted by governments and housing service providers, I can attest to the dehumanizing, disempowering and destructive ways both systems have contributed to the current condition of epidemic rates of poverty, homelessness, addictions and violence in the north.

It was those colonial frameworks, portrayed in gaslighting ways as helping indigenous people who lacked all capacity to function without support, that drove me into the sphere of advocacy and into establishing a low-barrier, peer-led shelter, which I led for 25 years.

I can confidently say that I myself and other women I know with lived expertise of homelessness—and within an indigenous context, indigenous women and families—know specifically what the problems are and know specifically what the solutions are. We can provide concrete examples of both of those things.

I'm conscious of my time, but I would like to list a few of the challenges and a few of the solutions.

The challenges are that money and resources are held by governments and service-provider organizations that operate from a colonial framework today; that the voices of indigenous people and indigenous women are excluded from decision-making and solution designs; that there is hidden homelessness, and therefore it's hard to put a number on exactly what kind of housing you need and how many housing dollars you need; that there are housing monopolies, particularly in the north, and the housing monopoly includes the housing corporation that en masse evicts people into the street and into the bush without options for other types of housing; that there are punishing policies across government departments, a lack of housing stock and the divide between the “violence against women” sector and the “women's homelessness” sector.

The solutions include a national housing strategy. We have one, and I really appreciate that national housing strategy; it just has gaps. One gap it has is an indigenous-specific stream that is controlled by the indigenous community.

We need an urban indigenous housing strategy. We need the ability to access federal dollars outside of provincial and territorial governments, simply because, at least in our area and from my perspective, they are totally immobilized and don't know how to get money out the door.

Another solution is to ensure that indigenous programs are controlled by indigenous communities and organizations. Of course, I really support the Recovery for All campaign that was initiated by the Canadian Alliance to End Homelessness and the recommendations from the Women's National Housing and Homelessness Network.

Another needed solution needed is to ensure that there is a gender-specific approach. It's not that women are more important than men at all; it's simply that they experience homelessness differently, and the contributors to homelessness for them are different.

Finally, what I could give you is two or three examples of clear indicators of what the problems are and what the solutions are, if I may. I don't know how much time I have left.

I'll just begin with one, and that is that an indigenous woman from a small community in the north won the first UN judgment under CEDAW against Canada and against the NWT Housing Corporation for racism and discrimination after she lost her housing due to partner violence. The UN recommended that the Government of Canada hire and train indigenous women to provide legal advice to other indigenous women around their rights and the right to housing.

That United Nations recommendation has not been fulfilled to this day, in spite of the calls for justice of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, and the woman who won that case remains homeless today.

The other example I'll give you is that the YWCA transition house in Yellowknife that was burned to the ground one night, and overnight, 33 indigenous families were homeless. All of those families were housed overnight in private market housing that sat empty, and they were able to get into private market housing through the use of a rental supplement.

The reason they couldn't get into it before is that the landlord who holds a monopoly in the north actually has an illegally stated policy that they don't rent to people on welfare. The Government of the Northwest Territories, which is their primary tenant, refuses to challenge that policy under human rights legislation or in court.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

Thank you, Ms. Hache. I'm sure you'll get a chance to offer your third example in response to one of the questions.

4:45 p.m.

Community Advocate, As an Individual

Arlene Hache

Thank you.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

We're a little over time. Thank you.

Next we're going to go to Chief Haymond.

You have five minutes for your opening remarks.

4:45 p.m.

Chief Lance Haymond Kebaowek First Nation, Assembly of First Nations Quebec-Labrador

Good evening. I too would like to thank the standing committee for the opportunity to present.

As mentioned, my name is Lance Haymond. I am the chief of the Algonquin community of Kebaowek. I'm the portfolio holder for housing for the Assembly of First Nations of Quebec and Labrador. I also am the co-chair of the chiefs committee on housing and infrastructure at the national level with the AFN. I co-chair with regional chief Kevin Hart from Manitoba.

I have with me Guy Latouche, who is an urban planner and who works as an adviser for the AFNQL on the housing and infrastructure file.

We have been informed that the committee is interested in barriers to housing for indigenous peoples. Please note that we are concerned about this issue on an ongoing basis. In addition, we have well documented the housing needs and issues facing the first nations in Quebec.

It has long been recognized that aboriginal communities face significant housing issues. Since 1996, such major reports as that of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples and that of the Public Inquiry Commission on relations between Indigenous Peoples and certain public services in 2019, have largely addressed this issue.

The state of the housing situation in first nations communities in Quebec has been well documented over the past 20 years. We have been collecting data since 2000, updating it every four years, and we have the best data on housing needs in the country.

It should be noted that our current housing stock is made up of 15,541 housing units, but we must add 10,000 units, renovate 8,000 and provide infrastructure to more than 9,000 sites to meet needs. This means there is a financial need of nearly $4 billion just for the Quebec region.

The need for new housing units arises in particular from overcrowding of houses, population growth over a five-year period, and the need for housing for members who currently live off reserve but would like to live in their home community.

The migration of members accounts for nearly 20% of the housing needs in Quebec. The housing situation outside the communities is not well documented; however, we know that aboriginal people who migrate to urban areas often find it very difficult to access adequate and affordable housing. It is not uncommon for these to be, in reality, off-reserve members whose band council is unable to serve them because of gaps in government programs.

This brings me to talk about the role of housing in society. Housing has decisive effects on the health and well-being of individuals and communities, on the efficient functioning of the economy and on many aspects of the social and cultural characteristics of society. We often hear that housing is a determinant of health. It is true, and it is even more true in the context of the current pandemic.

It is also a determinant of the academic success of our young people and the economic development of many of our communities. Let us not forget that it is an essential factor of social inclusion.

In his report, Commissioner Viens noted that the severe housing crisis affecting first nations people appears to be the epicentre of many problems experienced by first nations in Quebec.

Several indications show that first nations housing is an underfunded sector. Over the years, federal budget allocations have not evolved in line with need. On average, between 225 and 250 housing units are added annually to the communities' housing stock. I remind you again that the current needs are for 10,000 housing units over a five-year period. This again is well documented.

Existing federal programs meet less than 15% of the on-reserve housing needs. The housing problem of first nations in Quebec is worrying. Populations are growing, the sector is underfunded and the gap between needs and achievements is widening.

I would add that one of the side effects of the pandemic is the explosion in construction costs. I fear, even if the status quo is maintained, that less housing will be built in first nation communities with the regular budgetary envelopes of Indigenous Services and Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.

The accumulated backlog is concretely reflected in the living conditions inside the housing stock: overcrowded housing and outdated units, many of which need major renovations.

The situation worsens if we consider the various challenges faced by first nations that create difficulties in implementing housing projects. In fact, our first nations must deal with a series of obstacles in the implementation of their housing projects.

We have identified five.

One is chronic underfunding and difficulties to access capital, as access to all currently available housing contribution and ministerial loan guarantee programs is, in effect, driven by the financial situation and resources of the community.

Second is the lack of capacity at several levels, starting with basic infrastructure. I am talking here about public water and sewer services, which are an essential prerequisite for any housing project and a prerequisite to access funding from our federal partners.

In some communities the problems arise even further upstream. They do not have the necessary land base to pursue new housing development. We must never forget the human aspect. Human resource capacities must be improved in several first nations.

Then there is location. Many communities, particularly those located in remote or isolated regions where the economy is not flourishing, depend heavily on social housing. However, the CMHC program barely makes it possible to build 60 social housing units per year in first nations communities in Quebec.

I find it wise to invest in housing within first nations communities. When we admit that housing plays a capital and central role in society, it is easy to imagine all the benefits of upstream intervention for all levels of government. This avoids having to deal with repeated crises.

We have a strategy in Quebec to get out of this crisis. It is based on three pillars: improving skills and capacities within the communities, implementing a housing catch-up project, and a new governance approach. This strategy calls on all stakeholders, and I will be quite blunt; we cannot hide from the fact that additional federal investment will need to be made so that we can start bridging that ever-increasing gap.

Thank you very much.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

Thank you, Chief Haymond.

Now we'll begin with questions, starting with the Conservatives.

Mr. Schmale is first, for six minutes.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON

Thank you very much, Chair. I appreciate the testimony from our witnesses. I'll be splitting my time with Ms. Falk as well.

I have two big questions on a couple of big topics. In my previous role on the committee for indigenous relations, I met a large number of community leaders and financial stakeholders regarding housing and fresh water—that kind of thing—and access to it. The underlying theme, it seemed to me, was that indigenous people should be making these decisions and also working with different ideas on how to finance them.

My first question is on the funding side. Would a partnership with indigenous communities through infrastructure capitalization agreements, like Alberta's $1.1-billion indigenous opportunities fund, be a potential answer to issues like housing, water treatment, education and that kind of thing, specifically to create new revenue streams for communities to leverage that capital to further economic self-determination?

4:55 p.m.

Kebaowek First Nation, Assembly of First Nations Quebec-Labrador

Chief Lance Haymond

Whom do you want to respond?

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON

I can have either respond, or if one has a particular passion on this topic, I'd love to hear from them.

4:55 p.m.

Kebaowek First Nation, Assembly of First Nations Quebec-Labrador

Chief Lance Haymond

Ms. Hache spoke first, so I will give her the floor.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON

I can't hear her, Chair.

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

Neither can I.

4:55 p.m.

Community Advocate, As an Individual

Arlene Hache

Can you hear me now?

4:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

We sure can. Go ahead.

4:55 p.m.

Community Advocate, As an Individual

Arlene Hache

I said it would depend on what the partnership looks like. At the end of the day, in my experience, partnership has such rigid parameters around it that it doesn't accommodate the way community people do things and the way that they are. Money matters, so it depends on who controls the money and who controls the structure of the partnership.

Of course, an influx of money that would build capacity in the community and create revenue streams makes sense. I think I would rely on an example in Ontario. It was amazing. The federal government moved more toward making sure that if somebody said they were working with indigenous communities, the money had to be held by the indigenous community, not by the support group. Ontario followed that model, and it was very interesting.

I work for a small native women's group. When that policy change happened, our group went from having $100,000 to meet all of the women's needs in our community to over $4 million, so it all matters. Who controls the money? Who controls the decisions? Is it really a partnership, or is it a co-optation?

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON

To quickly build on that—I do have to split my time—do you see the Indian Act as a hindrance to being able to make those decisions that you just mentioned, specifically in terms of control? Would you support, potentially, the abolition of the Indian Act, providing communities that want to get out of it an off-ramp to do so and those that want to remain the opportunity to do so?

4:55 p.m.

Community Advocate, As an Individual

Arlene Hache

I'm going to turn that discussion over to the chief.

5 p.m.

Kebaowek First Nation, Assembly of First Nations Quebec-Labrador

Chief Lance Haymond

Good afternoon again.

To go back to your first question, I agree with Ms. Hache. I really think the partnership needs to be clearly defined. The challenge when you talk about provincial entities—and in particular, Quebec—is that they are quick to tell us they are not responsible for indigenous housing on reserve. That's an immediate challenge.

We have seen instances, and the best example that comes to my mind is in B.C., where the provincial government is investing significant amounts of money to address the shortcomings in the federal funds. Thus, it will lead to more housing on reserve for the communities living in British Columbia. I think that if more provinces were open to having those kinds of dialogues it would be an interesting start and another option for us to look at.

In terms of whether that can be achieved inside or outside of the Indian Act, I really don't think it is relevant to the discussion. I think the political will and the nature of the partnership to be determined will ultimately lead to outcomes. It's not really necessary to simply remove the Indian Act to be able to develop investment funds that build capacity, generate income, and start helping us address meeting our housing needs across the country.

5 p.m.

Conservative

Jamie Schmale Conservative Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON

Thank you.

I turn the rest of my time over to Ms. Falk.

5 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

Forty seconds of it.

Go ahead, Ms. Falk.

5 p.m.

Conservative

Rosemarie Falk Conservative Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK

Thank you, Chair.

Ms. Hache, I want to thank you for sharing your testimony and your experience. I think that's courageous and so wise because you have firsthand experience of this.

I'm really interested in rural and remote.... I know you talked about violence against women. How does access to safe housing have an impact on the health and safety of indigenous people, especially in rural and remote areas and locations?

5 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

A brief answer, please. We're out of time.

5 p.m.

Community Advocate, As an Individual

Arlene Hache

May I answer?

5 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Sean Casey

Yes, please, briefly if you can.

November 19th, 2020 / 5 p.m.

Community Advocate, As an Individual

Arlene Hache

At the end of the day, safe housing is everything in rural and remote communities. Who defines safe housing is the question. How you access safe housing is also the question. We find that women are often flown from remote communities or rural communities into cities and into regional centres, where they're also at risk. It's just a different level of risk and a different type of risk.

Because they're not involved in the decisions about what that looks like, it creates another problem and a different problem. For example, when women are flown in from small communities, they often end up losing their children to child welfare. They often end up on the street and in a different kind of violence because they're not able to navigate cities or regional centres as much as they are the communities.

I actually think that's a broader conversation that needs to be explored further in a more open-dialogue way.