Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 29th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Good morning, everybody, and welcome to our meeting.

In particular, welcome, Mr. Minister.

There are a couple of really quick housekeeping items before we start.

Last week some of you asked me if in the wintertime we couldn't hold our meetings a little further south. We have managed that. I hope you're enjoying 131 Queen Street.

It is an interesting debate, though. Would you rather drink coffee out of a plastic can up in the West Block or would you rather have Starbucks three blocks away? I'm going to go with Starbucks and three blocks away.

Anyway, good morning. On the questioning rounds for the committee members, we're going to get a presentation from the minister, and then I can appreciate that many of you are going to want to have an opportunity to ask the minister questions. We will do our normal cycle, which is seven minutes, but I would like to keep it to seven minutes. So what I'll do is when there's a minute left, I'll just say “one minute”, and we don't need to stop the conversation, but that gives both the questioner and whoever is answering the question a warning that we're into the last minute. That way, hopefully, we can get as many turns as possible.

There is one other quick reminder. For those of you who have amendments to Bill C-21, please get them to the clerk as soon as possible so that we can have those prepared for Tuesday's meeting.

At this point, I would like to call for vote 1a under Indian Affairs and Northern Development. To begin this process, I'd like to ask our special guest today, Minister Chuck Strahl, to make a presentation.

[Chuck Strahl, Conservative, Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I must say, you folks are a pretty punctual bunch.

I am pleased to be here, obviously, to have this opportunity to appear before the committee to discuss not only the supplementary estimates but the government's larger view and the challenges facing aboriginal people and the initiatives we are undertaking to address those challenges.

Although this is my first appearance as minister before this committee, I have been a member of various committees for many years. I am very conscious of the important role that committees play in the parliamentary process and I appreciate the work that you are doing.

My remarks today reference the supplementary estimates of the department. My predecessor, the Hon. Jim Prentice, appeared before you several months ago to discuss the main estimates for the current fiscal year. We're now in the next phase of the budgetary cycle.

As you may recall, this government's inaugural budget in 2006 adopted a new strategy to address aboriginal issues, targeted investments to resolve quality of life issues. This commitment was reaffirmed in Budget 2007.

This government's larger aboriginal agenda was articulated by the Prime Minister in an address in Halifax earlier this month. I was pleased to be in attendance. It focused on five areas: economic development; education; empowering first nations and protecting the vulnerable; land claims; and reconciliation governance and self-government.

To effect a real change in these areas, our approach is to build a record of results through concrete, tangible actions undertaken with willing and able partners.

The supplementary estimates helped us to achieve these results. In total, these estimates commit, through Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, $209 million in additional investments that aim to improve the lives of aboriginal people and northerners. Another $25 million is committed through Indian Residential Schools Resolution Canada.

Mr. Chairman, since my appointment as minister, I have crossed the country, meeting with provincial and territorial ministers, aboriginal leaders, and private sector stakeholders, and I have visited northern communities and first nations reserves.

I am proud to note that, with our partners, this government is making real progress—and that aboriginal people and northerners are beginning to reap the benefits.

Let me address the reconciliation first. One of my first actions as minister was to meet with the national chief of the Assembly of First Nations and a group of former residential school students in Winnipeg.

I realize that addressing the legacy of Indian residential schools is personally wrenching for many of these folks, and it is extremely complex, but it is the right thing to do, and we will do it right.

Let me be perfectly clear on the point that contrary to a recent and incorrect media report, the full $1.9 billion in support of the common experience payment for the settlement agreement is available for former Indian residential school students. The $1.9 billion in funding is managed through a trust account, minus the advance payments of $82.6 million that have already been made to 10,326 former students, which this government provided in advance of the implementation of the agreement to former students who were 65 or older on May 30, 2005.

This government is also moving to fulfill its lawful obligation to first nations through a significant retooling of the specific claims resolution process. On Tuesday, I had the honour of introducing Bill C-30, the Specific Claims Tribunal Act in the House. This progressive legislation will establish an independent tribunal to make binding decisions on specific claims that have been rejected for negotiation, or when negotiations have failed. It is the critical element in the implementation of the broader specific claims action plan announced by Prime Minister Harper on June 12.

This government recognizes the importance to first nations of the timely resolution of both comprehensive and specific claims. For instance, the single biggest amount in the supplementary estimates involves nearly $31 million to support implementation of the Nunavik Inuit Land Claims Agreement. Bill C-11, the bill to enact the agreement, is now before the Senate.

In addition to this legislation, we are working in partnership with Inuit and Quebec leaders in other areas of interest. In August I met with Inuit and provincial, federal, and local government leaders at a conference in Kujuuaq, with a view to opening new horizons in the development of Nunavik. We agreed to set up a tripartite working group to ensure that the spirit of working in partnership established at that meeting continues to guide the future development of Nunavik.

I am also pleased to highlight that we are making great strides in the treaty land entitlement settlements. When I met with the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs in August, I was pleased to note that more than twice the amount of land in that province was converted last year than converted since the TLE agreements were signed in the 1990s. The addition of these lands will help foster stronger first nations economies and bring economic benefits to surrounding areas as well.

The funding provided by these supplementary estimates will assist my department in delivering on another of our priorities: protecting the vulnerable. Earlier this year, a tripartite agreement was signed in Alberta allowing for the use of a prevention-based service model to deliver child and family services to Alberta first nations. The supplementary estimates allow $15.3 million toward the delivery of these services.

Let me also note that just under $9 million will go toward enhanced spending for shelters for victims of family violence and prevention-related community-based programs.

Economic development is another cornerstone of our prosperity initiatives, so we are working to create a more coherent and practical approach to increasing aboriginal participation in the economy. The National Aboriginal Economic Development Board will be assisting us with implementing this approach. In April our government named new members, and a new chairman, Chief Clarence Louie. They will provide invaluable advice in such areas as investment strategies, business creation, and access to business capital.

Since my appointment as minister, I have had the opportunity to speak with the board, and I met recently with Chief Louie in Vancouver to discuss these and other important issues.

Of course, the north is an extremely important part of my mandate as well. I have made a number of trips north of 60 in the past months, talking to territorial and Inuit leaders about their plans and aspirations. Every time I visit, I am impressed by the immense potential of this region and its people.

Our government is working to achieve real progress in the north in four priority areas: strengthening arctic sovereignty, promoting social and economic development, protecting our environmental heritage, and improving and developing northern governance. The actions we take in support of these priorities will benefit not only northerners, but all Canadians. We are establishing a Canadian Forces training centre in Resolute Bay, and a deep-water docking and refueling facility in Nanisivik provides some of the infrastructure needed to exercise sovereignty.

We have also taken other significant action. For example, further investments in the International Polar Year are included in these supplementary estimates; we will get the job done on seabed mapping; and a world-class arctic research station will yield the knowledge we need to make sound decisions on environmental, social, and economic policies.

The final point I would like to raise concerns the food mail program, in support of which the supplementary estimates call for an investment of $20 million. I discussed food mail with northern officials when I was in Kuujjuaq. I want to emphasize that although there are cost and delivery issues concerning this program—and we are working to address those and make the program more cost-effective—the food mail program should play a vital role in ensuring that people living in northern communities have access to healthy, nutritious food.

Mr. Chairman, I have outlined what I believe were some impressive accomplishments, but this government does not plan to stop here. Our parliamentary agenda is also a full one. For instance, I am looking forward to working with this committee on Bill C-21, currently before you, and on the Specific Claims Tribunal Act, which I have also mentioned.

Also, the B.C. legislature recently passed legislation to implement the Tsawwassen agreement. I will be introducing federal legislation in the near future to bring this agreement into full force and effect.

The investments outlined in the supplementary estimates and the initiatives I have talked about this morning demonstrate this government's determination to address the whole range of aboriginal and northern issues.

Assisted by the addition of $209 million to my department's total budget from the supplementary estimates, we will help strengthen aboriginal and northern communities in this country, and work with our partners towards a rich and rewarding future for all Canadians.

I will do my best to answer any questions committee members may have. I am pleased to have officials with me to help if necessary.

[The Chair, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Thank you, Mr. Minister. It's my understanding that you will be with us for an hour, until a quarter after the hour, after which point your officials will remain to answer more questions from the committee members.

We will proceed with questioning. When we get to the point where the minister has to leave, we'll pause for a moment for him to go, and then we will continue with questioning in the same way.

Before we start, Mr. Minister, could you just quickly introduce the officials you have with you today?

[Chuck Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

My deputy minister, Michael Wernick, is here. Neil Yeates is with me as well. Jim Quinn is here to answer all technical, monetary-type questions. And Peter Harrison, who is the residential schools expert and my DM, is here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Thank you very much.

I would like to start the questioning.

Ms. Neville, you have seven minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and welcome, Minister. I'm pleased to see you here today.

I have two lines of questioning that I'm going to ask you about. I'll put the questions out and hope we can get the answers, because we all have many questions.

I can't help noting, though—I'm beginning with a comment—that today is the second anniversary of the Kelowna Accord. One can't help but wonder where we might have been with aboriginal communities had that commitment been honoured.

We have found that the supplementary estimates are disappointing. As we read them, the total authorities for the department increased very slightly. From last year to this year the departmental authority has increased by 0.25%, which to us is effectively a cut. It fails both to take into consideration that the population is growing by 3% and inflation. In light of the large budget surplus, we find it quite disappointing to be dealing with supplementary estimates that appear to represent a cut in funding.

The two areas I'd like to focus on are two that you mentioned in your remarks. There is the residential schools survivor cheques, which you and I and all of us know is a very controversial subject, and I want to focus on the food mail program, about which we have some considerable concerns.

You made a commitment on September 19 to the 80,000 survivors who were eligible to apply for compensation that the payments would be made within 35 days. We have all heard the stories, we've all seen the press reports, and we've heard that many survivors have not received their compensation. I appreciate your remarks that the money is there, that it is committed, and that it will be honoured. What I want to know is when this money will be out to them. The 35 days is long past. How do you account for the failure in getting those moneys out? What additional resources do you need? Do you know how many of those eligible for the payments—not the elders, on the prepayment—have indeed received them, and how many more are to go?

We're also hearing much about the discrepancies between people who are coming forward with their experience and government records. I want to know what you're doing to address that.

Gong on to the food mail program—and I'm sorry I'm going quickly, but we have lots that we want to raise—a year ago your predecessor said the department would review the food mail program, I think he said “from stem to gudgeon”, and that it would be completed by March 31. A year later, we know that the Canadian International Trade Tribunal ruled last February that the contract has been unfairly awarded, and yet the department has yet to demonstrate any progress.

When will your department get around to delivering a food mail program that really and truly meets the needs of northern residents and creates a level playing field for all airlines, which is a concern? What prevents the government from using the services of Public Works and Government Services to fairly find a new cargo service provider? And why does your government continue to use Canada Post, when it awarded a contract that does not meet the standards of your new government?

Over the past year, the program costs, as you have indicated, have increased 17.5%. How much of the program's cost increase over the past decade is attributable to Nav Canada fees and rising fuel costs, and what other costs have contributed to this increase? We're concerned—we talk about nutrition, we talk about healthy children—and this food program is doing nothing or very little to assist children and families in the north.

I'll stop there. I have many more questions, but I'll stop there.

[The Chair, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

You have about two and a half minutes, Mr. Minister.

[Chuck Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Thank you very much. That was a good list of questions. I'm not going to get to all of them, but obviously we'll get you answers for those after the meetings, or you can ask officials if we don't have time to get to all of them.

On the Kelowna Accord, I would just say in passing that we don't know where we'd be, but I've heard from many people across the country what they expect from the government, and what was not clear in the Kelowna Accord was the to-do list. It was a set of promises made without any detail. They weren't sure what it was going to look like. The approach we've taken is to address practical concerns in a practical way, and we have some success stories to show for that. It's a different approach, but it is a businesslike approach that is going to work. It is working to date.

The cuts in funding aren't really cuts in funding. This is the trouble when you're dealing with estimates in isolation. You always have your main estimates. They never look quite right because you always get your supplementary estimates, but you don't get your supplementary Bs until later. It's never the whole picture in any one set of supplementaries.

Certainly we're spending a record amount of money on aboriginal people. The forecast for 2007-08 totals about $10.2 billion from all sources. Portions come from Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, but significant amounts of money, understandably and properly, are spent through Health Canada, through HRSDC, which goes to development training, for example, through CMHC for housing initiatives, and so on. Not all the funding comes through our department, for one thing. Second, the supplementary estimates don't show the entire picture.

In total, the overall forecast spending is at $10.2 billion, which is at record levels. I'm pleased about that. Obviously, it's not just the amount of money on most of these things; it's also how it's--

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

Can I ask if that includes the residential schools agreement?

[The Chair, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Ms. Neville, the time is up, but we can follow this up on the second round.

[Chuck Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

It does include the residential schools.

[The Chair, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Mr. Lemay.

[Marc Lemay, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Honourable Minister, I thank you, as well as the persons from your department who are here with you, for coming to meet with us today.

I would be very happy if at the beginning of next year, you could spend two hours with us, not to talk about estimates but to raise issues about the upcoming budget. I would have many questions to put to you and to your officials regarding the next budget. For now, I would like to put one question and then let my colleague Yvon Lévesque, who is involved with the far north and very concerned by the situation of the Cree and Inuit in Nunavik in Quebec, put one or two questions as well.

In the supplementary estimates, I do not see anything that would be meant for improving education among the first nations. Somewhere, I saw a $1.8 million transfer. In any case, education is going through a tremendous crisis, and I am talking only about the primary and secondary levels. I am not even mentioning the post-secondary level. There is a shortage of funds. I wonder why I do not see any supplementary funds requested for this. The sole objective consists in bringing aboriginal students up to a level comparable to that of white students. In many first nations primary and secondary schools, if not in all of them, there are no computers and there is no library. There is no vocational training at all.

Would there not be some way of transferring funds in order to improve first nations education?

[Chuck Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Thank you.

Obviously education is one of the keys for first nations, as it is for any modern nation. Education is a key component of what we can do to help first nations help themselves. We are spending more money on education this year than ever before.

On the other hand, it's not always just about money; it's also about the management of that money and how it's spent and how it's managed. For example, in British Columbia we have signed a tripartite agreement with first nations and the province, talking about the things you've talked about--everything from a culturally sensitive curriculum development, about mobility of the students within both the first nations and the public school system, teacher professional development, and so on. We've allocated more money in the supplementary estimates to back up the legislation that we enacted last year to make this effective.

Also, we've allocated in the budget around $31 million for the Nunavik agreement. That's an example of how we can help an aboriginal community that's ready to take control and move ahead with it. We can help as soon as we get that done, passed, and through. That money is available through the supplementaries to make sure they have it in their hands.

We have signed a couple of other agreements in principle with several provinces on, I hope, a similar tripartite type of agreement. In the end, I'm thinking especially for K-to-12 education that the tripartite solution is the right solution. It reflects the modern reality of the mobility of these students who go back and forth from on-reserve, off-reserve, the reality of first nations' desire to control the education, and our desire to help both fund it and work with the province to make sure we have common standards for these children as they work through the system. It is important to us, and I think the tripartite arrangements are the best way to move forward on it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

You have about two and a half minutes.

[Yvon Lévesque, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Mr. Minister, I thank you, as well as the officials accompanying you, for being here with us.

We hear that $20 million have been earmarked for the Canadian north, especially Nunavut and Nunavik. I understand that it would only serve to cover the indexation of the assistance. However, we asked for a better service from Canada Post so that the material and the food supplies could be shipped as quickly as possible.

[Chuck Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

We will have to give Mr. Lévesque a little more time because my receiver was off.

[The Chair, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

You have an extra 30 seconds.

[Yvon Lévesque, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Regarding the Food-Mail Program, I thought I heard that the $20 million would only serve to cover the increase in shipping costs. However, we asked for the previously implemented experimental program to be extended to all communities. In fact, we demonstrated that this program responded to many needs and that it was clearly an improvement. When you came to Nunavik, you were told that the railroad could be a better way of shipping food in a more regular and safe manner.

Moreover, the first negotiations that you held regarding the James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement included an agreement about housing. There was an error in evaluation, and today, many residences are infested with mould. Some public buildings are also infested. We are getting ready to hand the management over to these people, and I find that $3 million will not cover the cost of cleaning up.

[The Chair, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

You have 30 seconds.

[Chuck Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

I don't have a lot of time, but I'm sure we're going to come back to the second issue as we proceed.

On the food mail program, a lot of the additional costs are for the increase in fuel costs. Of course, there were huge increases during the course of the program year, so much of that money went to pay for that, although there are more people using the program than ever before.

As well, those pilot projects you talked about are part of the review process, and that involves everything from how the food is being delivered to where it's being sourced from, where it can be flown in from, and so on. So the lessons from those pilot projects are part of the review that's taking place right now, and we hope to have the complete analysis of that as quickly as possible.

[The Chair, Conservative, Barry Devolin]

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Ms. Crowder, you have seven minutes.

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

Thank you, Minister, for coming before the committee. I have a couple of comments on your opening remarks.

First of all, I was quite heartened to see that you were talking about protecting vulnerable populations, so I'm ever hopeful that the government will see fit to make it a priority to address Jordan's principle, once it's passed in the House, and commit to putting first nations children first.

About residential schools, I have just a quick comment. Part of the challenge with the estimates, of course, is that the formatting changes year over year, and it's very difficult to follow the money. That's why sometimes there are misleading stories that come out around estimates.

I, too, want to speak to education, but I'm going to deal with the bricks and mortar part of it. It may just be, again, how you follow the money, but in the analysis the researchers did for us, they said the community infrastructure planned money--and it's on page 2 of the document they prepared for us--the forecast spending for 2006-07, was $1.3 billion, and in 2007-08 it was $1.2 billion.

When we talked about the building of schools in a cost-drivers project that we did on access to information, they talked about the fact that capital and facility maintenance expenditures have actually declined, and that at this stage the per capita expenditure on capital has declined from $1,660 to $1,225, or a 35% decrease in dollars. They are saying that money is moved around in capital expenditures because of these funding shortfalls, making schools a priority.

Interestingly, there was an estimated five-year incremental capital requirement as part of this document, and the overall shortfall over five years was $1.6 billion. In this document--this is a department document, by the way--just in the numbers I was able to add up from here, there was a $202 million shortfall on building schools. Interestingly enough, British Columbia had one of those shortfalls, with a $20 million shortfall for school construction.

Of course, I think we've all heard heartbreaking stories from reserves. Attawapiskat is a good example, where the school has been contaminated. I have Manto Sipi Cree Nation and Mosakahiken Cree Nation, which are just some of a number of places where schools just aren't being dealt with in a timely way.

I guess my question to you is that with the community infrastructure dollars going down, I didn't see anything in the supplementary estimates to reflect the need for new school construction. So I wonder how you plan on addressing how many schools need to be built or expanded or renovated to meet the government's own stated goals about K to 12 being a priority in education.

[Chuck Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

We do an analysis on the school requirements. There are a lot of needs, as you have said, and especially in some of those communities you mentioned.

I was able to go to Kahnawake, for example, for the sod turning on a $10 million project there. There are some good stories out there. There are some good schools. I was up at Baker Lake recently, for example, and they have a nice new school. So there are schools being built. They are obviously much appreciated. And they're part of the answer, but only part of the answer in the education mix.

The other complicating factor is that--

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

Minister, do you have an inventory of the requirements that you could provide for us about either new schools on the books that still haven't turned sod or schools on the books that you know need renovation or expansion?

I wonder if we could have those numbers, because the audit of funding of school facilities in October 2006--it was an internal audit--actually indicated that the department didn't have a very good handle on some of the schools. It says:

INAC management should establish an oversight (or quality assurance) function at headquarters to ensure regional offices are adequately monitoring and documenting both the construction of new schools and the maintenance of existing schools.

It might be helpful for the committee to look at that.