Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on June 12th, 2006

[Patrick Brazeau]

No, no.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Minister Prentice, in his presentation to the committee on May 31, said that since taking office he has met with representatives of organizations across the country to discuss ways of improving the quality of education in aboriginal communities. Are you one of the organizations that have been consulted by Minister Prentice?

[Patrick Brazeau]

Just before my colleague answers, we did meet with Minister Prentice and we touched upon education, but I guess the priority was more along the lines of other discussions we had.

[Jerry Peltier, Consultant, Congress of Aboriginal Peoples]

Just to add, Madam Crowder, that's one of the things the congress and the federal government are reviewing with the minister, Mr. Prentice, in his role as interlocutor. How many roles, responsibilities, and powers does the minister have in that jurisdiction?

So leading up to the previous meetings, leading up to Kelowna, as you probably know, there seemed to be an indication that only three national organizations were being consulted, and two were being left out of those discussions: the Native Women's Association of Canada and the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples. From what we see, they're going to be included now, and the new minister is reaching out to all aboriginal groups to sit down--

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

I understand the national friendship association wasn't included either.

[Jerry Peltier]

That's right. So now that they're reaching out to us, hopefully there will be more discussions and consultations on these important issues.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

On the government side, Mr. Bruinooge.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank both of you for coming today. I would suggest that when it is suggested to you that some of your visionary ideas about reform and change are perhaps radical, then maybe you're going in the right direction. I wouldn't suggest changing your vision in any regard.

I just wanted to ask you about some of the sentiments you expressed in relation to the first ministers meeting of last year. You were on the record as saying you were very supportive of the targets but wanted to see more funds flowing off-reserve, which is similar to your statements today.

Perhaps I could get you to just expand a bit on your overall logic as to why you think that is necessary in this modern context that we live in.

[Patrick Brazeau]

Thank you very much for your comment and question.

On the comment, I have never been shy about being called a radical or not. As a young leader--the youngest leader in this country, national-wise anyway--I can say it's time for change. I'm personally sick and tired of the rhetoric. Let's start doing instead of talking. I think there's been enough talk.

Secondly, with respect to Kelowna, yes, we were there in Kelowna as one of five federally recognized national aboriginal organizations. Of course we support the targets that flowed from the discussions in Kelowna. Yet, leaving Kelowna back in November, we were a bit perplexed, because on the second day, when we got a copy of how the moneys were going to flow, we had the $5.1 billion tag on it.

It's always been our position that, first of all, this was never voted in by Parliament, so in our view it's still an imaginary figure. Secondly, it's not just a question of throwing money at problems to solve them; it's to have cooperation between different levels of government and within our own aboriginal organizations as well.

But the fact of the matter still remained that after an 18-month process, most of the funding was going to be geared towards status Indians who lived on-reserve. I have no issue with that, because there are some serious problems in the reserves. We also have been advocates to eliminate the Indian Act, but I think that's another discussion. But if you're going to target a problem, you have to target the problem from all angles.

One example is that if you have a physical abuse situation between a man and a woman, what do you do? Do you give resources to the man to get counselling, or do you give the woman resources to get counselling? If you do either one or the other, you're not going to solve the problem, because somebody is being left out. But if you provide resources for both to get counselling, then you make a strong attempt at solving the problem.

It's the same thing with Kelowna. If you're going to target aboriginal poverty, you can't just target people who live on-reserve. You have to target the majority of the aboriginal population, who now reside off-reserve. Seventy-nine percent of the total aboriginal population in this country reside off-reserve. As I mentioned earlier, 51% of status Indians also reside off-reserve. These are not our numbers; these are numbers from Statistics Canada.

That's why we were a bit baffled when we left Kelowna. I mean, sure we want to target poverty, but let's let everybody have a chance at getting the resources that are there to try to solve their problems.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Thanks.

I'm going to pass it along to my colleague.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Monsieur Blaney.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Hello.

I think your statement was clear enough.

I'd like to come back to the earlier example of the aboriginal student living in an aboriginal community. How can you help that student?

[Patrick Brazeau]

Thank you for your question.

First, as I indicated, we have provincial affiliated organizations across Canada, which are themselves comprised of off-reserve communities. The smaller communities scattered across the province form an aboriginal group. There can be registered, non-registered or Métis members.

We help these people by lobbying the governments, particularly the federal government. At the provincial level, we can assist the provincial affiliates when they request our help, not only in terms of education but for any issue involving aboriginal peoples.

We are responsible for delivering the message and telling the story. All aboriginal people don't live on reserves. Those who have problems don't all live on reserves. This has always been a matter of federal-provincial jurisdiction as to who will provide assistance to our organization and provincial affiliates.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

It is indicated in the Parliament Library notes that you published a report in 2004 in which you indicated that there are more and more off-reserve aboriginal people who complete high school. In 2001, the rate was 48%...

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

We don't have time.

[Steven Blaney, Conservative, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Mr. Merasty, we're in the five-minute round, so be concise with your questions, please.

[Gary Merasty, Liberal, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks for your presentation, Mr. Brazeau.

I think one of the things that we've been getting a conflicting message on was when we had the Indian affairs department talking about population at one of our previous committee meetings. For example, 60% are on-reserve and the trend is growing upward. Secondly, on post-secondary funding off-reserve, it's my understanding that, at least in Saskatchewan and in certain other regions as well, a lot of on-reserve post-secondary funding programs actually fund regardless of residence. I know that has happened. There is off-reserve post-secondary funding. Is there enough? No, there's not. I agree with you on that point. Do we need improved mechanisms to do that? Absolutely.

I'm glad you clarified that all five national organizations were in Kelowna.

In regard to the money, at a finance committee meeting, a senior federal official said the money was there. Unfortunately, the government decided to go a different route.

One of the big issues is with respect to moving forward. I agree that what you're talking about is interesting. I'm probably one of those guys who would like to see some radical change. How do we get over some hurdles today when we need to address the realities of the students today? There's a pressing need.

The Métis in Saskatchewan say they represent all the Métis, regardless of residence on-reserve or off-reserve. The first nations in Saskatchewan say the same thing. What is your view on the portability of treaty rights in that context? How would you attempt to reconcile the relationship?

Unfortunately, I'm giving more of a Saskatchewan context than anything else. You didn't mention Saskatchewan before on organizations regionally.

How would you begin to reconcile it in time to address some of the day-to-day issues that we have right now?

[Jerry Peltier]

Mr. Chairman, can I take a stab at that, if I may?

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Certainly.

[Jerry Peltier]

I think there's been a good start. Last week the collective work of all parties in unanimously passing the budget was a good start. We're now going to see some money start flowing to off-reserve Indians.

[Gary Merasty, Liberal, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

I wasn't there, but I heard it passed.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

He didn't endorse it.

[Jerry Peltier]

I think the position we're taking is that yes, those rights are portable; they're just not confined to a first nation territory.

When the officials appeared before this committee back in June, when we monitored their presentations to you, I think there was a good start there. I want to quote what Mr. LeBlanc said:

INAC, through the federal interlocutor, works with aboriginal organizations, as well as with provincial governments where appropriate, to find practical solutions to improve the life chances of Métis, non-status Indians, and urban aboriginal peoples....

We want to follow up on that with those officials. We want to see how they're going to be reporting back to you.

As I said, those are two big steps. We're going to see money flowing, hopefully, because the budget's been passed, and then we're going to see the interlocutor's office taking more of a proactive approach in dealing with these issues. We're going to be working with them very closely on that.

[Gary Merasty, Liberal, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

The issue is that this year's budget of $150 million will not go very far to begin to address some of the housing and educational issues that are definitely out there. Unfortunately, I didn't see anything for Métis in the budget, so I'm very concerned that none of these initiatives you talk about will even get off the ground. I don't see a vehicle through which that will happen.

Have you made requests to this government to significantly increase funding to achieve what you'd like to see and what you're described, or are you pleased with what I described with the funding situation this year?