Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on June 5th, 2006

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

So people will have an opportunity to sign off on whatever the final document is.

[Line Paré]

We have our respective approval process, so within the Assembly of First Nations, in our terms of reference for our committee, it says that the draft policy framework will be approved by the AFN chiefs committee on education. Then the document will come to the Department of Indian Affairs, and at some point it will go into our official and formal approval process.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Thank you, Madame Paré.

Mr. Bruinooge.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I might have to share my time with one of my honourable colleagues.

I don't know if we're still going forward with our in camera session or not.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

No. I'm going to continue and make sure we have good use of the witnesses today.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Very well.

My question is in relation to outcomes specifically on reserve.

In the off-reserve education system, as in your typical city, there are various secondary schools that perhaps could have an outcome that is entirely focused on post-secondary. Others might have an outcome that is entirely focused on college or maybe a technical vocation. Who is able to choose the outcomes for these on-reserve schools?

Then a follow-up question would be about the experience the department has had with school boards on reserve. Has it been a good experience, and are they functioning well?

[Paul LeBlanc]

In answer to your first question, by and large the discretion rests with first nations leadership in the community.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

So it's the band council.

[Paul LeBlanc]

The band council and the school administrating body, but these communities and these smallish schools face very considerable challenges because there is the factor of isolation. There is little, if any, secondary school system support. There are some tribal council or other services that provide some support but very rare instances of anything that would approximate what we know as the full school board type of system.

On your question about where it works, the best example we have is what we call the MK--Mi'kmaw Kina'masutithe--the Mi'kmaq Nova Scotia school board arrangement, where you have a transfer of jurisdiction to about 11 first nations. The feds passed a law that allows the first nation to opt in. They pass band council resolutions taking on the jurisdiction for education. They, in turn, all 11 of them, delegate certain things: teachers' certification, curriculum standards, school accreditation, and so on, these things that are very central to a school board type of functioning body. They delegate them to this arm's-length body and two things happen. There is some distancing between the management of the school and the individual band political leadership. That is one factor. The other factor is that there's an aggregation, an economy of scale, that takes place that's really not possible in the individual first nation.

By all reckoning, it's working very well. There's a strong partnership among the first nations. There's a strong, functioning early development school board there, and also, very interestingly, there's a very strong partnership between that group of first nations, as expressed through their aggregate board, and the provincial system.

The provincial government has bought in. There's a strong transfer of knowledge. There's a strong mutual engagement and cooperation, something that's not easily measured in monetary value but is worth a great deal, obviously.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Would you be able to recommend any particular individuals associated with those boards as witnesses?

[Paul LeBlanc]

Absolutely. Yes, we'd be glad to identify people you may be interested in. We'd be very pleased to provide information to the committee.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Great.

How much time do I have?

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

We still have three and a half minutes.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

I'll pass it along to my colleague.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you again to Mr. LeBlanc and the team.

I remember that in previous presentations your department showed us the dramatic difference between aboriginal and non-aboriginal peoples in birth rate. What kind of preparation and forecast do you have in mind to deal with the possible need for additional capital funds to construct schools and to create adequate spaces for educational opportunity, especially for the aboriginal people on reserves?

[Paul LeBlanc]

That is a very prominent factor. It will figure in the research work I mentioned earlier that's going on here into the spring of 2007, in terms of the cost analysis that is going to be done, in terms of developing an appropriate funding formula and looking at enhancements to the current funding approach, and in terms of the basic quanta and volume challenges that are before us.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

I have one quick follow-up question.

In the 1996 report there was a comment made on page 65 that sometimes surplus funds are saved by local educational authorities and it appears that some of those funds were occasionally used for non-educational purposes.

Has that been addressed? What kind of progress have we made on that, in terms of the recommendation from 1996?

[Paul LeBlanc]

In general, funding agreements with first nations are multi-purpose funding agreements. A first nation will have moneys for social programs, education, and a whole series of things. Within those agreements, certain base obligations have to be met. They have to be accounted for, they're subject to audits, and they're reported to the department.

But the agreements are also designed so that there is flexibility. If there are periods of surplus, measured against any given stream, the first nation has the discretion to transfer moneys to other areas covered by the funding agreement in order to manage their affairs. If there's a lull in demand here, they can respond with more resources over there. They are designed to provide discretion, to promote efficiency, to allow decision-making and self-determination on site by the people who are best....

The downside is that it's subject to criticism on occasion--criticism about whether money for education was spent on housing, for example. But this transfer flexibility is a part of the funding agreement, and it is legitimate and reasonable, in our view.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

The part that I am pleased to hear in the answer is that once the educational objectives are met, accounted for, and audited, then the flexibility is there. I would agree with that.

[Paul LeBlanc]

Last week the Auditor General was asked--I think it may have been at the other committee--about auditing the Accountability Act and auditing first nations. The Auditor General indicated that the broad areas of activity are subject to independent audit through our funding agreements, so there are audits in place, and the department has the benefit of the outcomes of those audits.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Thank you.

We'll move on to Madam Neville.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Thank you very much.

Again, thank you for appearing here today.

I have a lot of questions. I'm going to put out a number of them and just ask you to answer in whatever time you have.

Let me begin by commenting. I'm concerned when I listen to you talk about developing your national policy, because I'm always concerned, and I've been involved in education—and aboriginal education in an urban setting—quite extensively: what's happening to the children now, while you're planning? I'm curious to know what flexibility in response you have while you're responding.

I'd like to have a comment from you on the Berger commission and their recommendations for Inuit people on revamping their whole re-education system, and how you are looking at responding to these.

I'm interested in knowing how you have evolved over time in responding to off-reserve education. I know when I was involved what the responses were and were not, but I'm interested in knowing what the evolution has been.

I'm also struck by your constant reference to school boards and educational authorities. I'm interested to know what your discussions are—with the Assembly of First Nations particularly—related to education and the options for school boards: what their views are and how you are working that process through.

I have more questions, but I probably don't have time.

[Paul LeBlanc]

I'll perhaps start with the last one, and my colleagues and I will share the other questions.

In terms of school boards, or school board-like or aggregate services, there are bodies out there now providing these services. The department provides several million dollars annually for support through these bodies for school board-like services—not a full system, but significant support.

All of this is done, clearly, in consultation with first nations and their representative groups, because these are representative groups through which these supports are provided for the services to be extended—some tribal councils, or tribal council-like organizations, or education-dedicated organizations.

[Anita Neville, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Can I interrupt you?

When you talk about that consultation, is it done at the local level, or is it done with the AFN leadership, or how does it take place? And is it specific to school boards, or to voucher systems, or to any one of a number of ideas that are being floated about?

[Paul LeBlanc]

It takes place nationally in fora such as Madame Paré talked about, at times with formal engagements through joint committees that the AFN and we may have together; it takes place at the regional level between officials of the department in a given region, as in Saskatchewan, along with the aboriginal leadership in that province. In some cases at the regional level, it may be with the regional component of the AFN, and more often, I would say, probably with a kind of cross-cutting membership that would include the AFN but also first nations organization beyond the AFN—related to the AFN, but not the AFN proper.

There is regional consultation that goes on to determine outcomes that are useful within that region but that fit broad policy parameters. Our objective is to keep enough flexibility for there to be imaginative outcomes in different parts of the country. There is an asymmetrical system out there, for sure.

The consultation at the national level is on these systems. There's work ongoing in the management of the existing networks—about 14 or so organizations that provide these kinds of services—and we provide $15 million to $17 million annually. As to the prospects of revamping or remodelling this approach by tying it to the legislative outcomes, for instance, where these could be more formalized, school board-like institutions, that dialogue will go on with the AFN nationally.

And that too is happening in the regions. The example I give about Nova Scotia in fact occurred eight years ago, between INAC, the province, the AFN, and other first nations leadership in that province. There are examples of this at different stages of development going on in other regions.

Involved in responding to off-reserve education...? I just want to make sure I get the other elements of your question.