Evidence of meeting #22 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was provinces.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Patrick Borbey  Assistant Deputy Minister, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Michel Roy  Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Treaties and Aboriginal Government, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Mary Quinn  Director General, Social Policy and Programs Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Joe Hall  Chairperson, First Nations Finance Authority
Steve Berna  Chief Operating Officer, First Nations Finance Authority
Deanna Hamilton  President and Chief Executive Officer, First Nations Finance Authority
Tim Raybould  Senior Policy Advisor, First Nations Finance Authority

9 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton

Good morning, members and witnesses. Welcome to the 22nd meeting of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.

We welcome three officials from the department today. This morning we have Michel Roy, senior assistant deputy minister for treaties and aboriginal government. Also, we welcome back Patrick Borbey, assistant deputy minister on northern affairs; and Mary Quinn, the director general, social policy and programs branch.

Members, you'll recall that this is principally a continuation of our review of the Auditor General's report for 2009, but in our last meeting we also made reference to the report of 2008. There were some outstanding questions in that regard.

We're going to start off with comments from our three witnesses this morning, and then we'll go to questions from members. Members, because we have two sessions today, each one hour, we'll keep the questions to five minutes.

Let's begin.

Monsieur Borbey, do you wish to begin? Thank you very much.

9 a.m.

Patrick Borbey Assistant Deputy Minister, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. It's a pleasure to be here with you today to talk about our progress in responding to these reports from the Auditor General.

You've already introduced my colleagues. Michel will be speaking about claims implementation issues, and Mary will be addressing the department's continuing efforts to improve first nations child and family services.

The reports of the Auditor General are taken very seriously at Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and are appreciated for the guidance and constructive analysis they provide on our performance in carrying out our department's mandate. They serve to confirm where we are on the right track and point out where we need to focus our efforts in the delivery of programs and services and the fulfillment of our responsibilities to aboriginal people and the residents of the north.

I'd like to speak briefly regarding two matters: our evolving role in the Yukon post-devolution and our work in support of the regulatory regime for land and resources in the Northwest Territories. These two issues both relate to essential elements of the government's integrated Northern Strategy, on which our department plays the leading role. They fall under at least three pillars of the strategy, those being economic and social development, environmental protection and improved governance. And, of course, our efforts in these areas also serve to support the fourth pillar—exercising our sovereignty over the north.

Even in these times of uncertainty over the economy, the north offers tremendous potential for economic development. Empowering the territorial and aboriginal governments of the north will not only provide northerners with greater control over decisions directly affecting them, it will also give them a greater stake in the development taking place in and around their communities. By ensuring that regulatory systems in the north are efficient and effective, we can eliminate barriers to development while at the same time ensuring that development is sustainable.

With regard to chapter 8 of the Auditor General's report of November 2003, which dealt with transferring federal responsibilities to the north, I would like to describe how INAC's role in the Yukon has significantly changed since the devolution of federal responsibilities for the management of land and resources to the territorial government in 2003. That transfer was significant for the territory in that it meant the assumption by the Yukon government of most of the remaining provincial-type authorities once held by the federal government. In terms of its responsibilities and jurisdictions, the territorial government now closely resembles a provincial government and has taken an important step in its political evolution. Concurrently, our department's role in the territory has also undergone a transformation. In working on the implementation of 11 Yukon first nation land claim and self-government agreements while continuing to provide services to six Indian Act bands in the Yukon and northern B.C., INAC has felt its role being influenced by the convergence of the aboriginal and northern agendas, as well as the self-government and Indian Act agendas.

We continue, however, to carry out residual responsibilities with respect to resource management in the Yukon. We are fully participating in the Yukon Environmental and Socio-Economic Assessment Act review. We are also very much involved in promoting sustainable resource development and in contributing significantly to economic development in the Territory with federal support for geo-science, infrastructure and skills development initiatives and will continue to do so in the future.

INAC's chief role is now focused on intergovernmental collaboration and the strategic use of federal influence to support strategic outcomes of economic and political development. An interesting example of this post-devolution shift is with respect to establishing co-management regimes for the remediation of abandoned mine sites with Yukon government and affected first nations. Relying on strong intergovernmental relationships, successful implementation of these projects not only ensures sound environmental stewardship but also provides economic and business opportunities while strengthening local political development in the north.

From here we're looking ahead to effecting similar transformations in the other two territories where discussions on and preparations for the transfer of federal authorities are under way. We intend to profit from what we've learned from our devolution experience in the Yukon. In fact, these valuable lessons have already informed and improved our approaches to devolution in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut.

Another area of interest to the standing committee is INAC's response to chapter 6, which focused on the development of non-renewable resources in the Northwest Territories. INAC has made significant progress in many of the areas identified by the recommendations in this chapter, and I appreciate the opportunity to provide a brief overview of our key achievements.

Working in partnership with the NWT boards, we have completed a report on best practices of institutes of public governance, a report on NWT board training needs assessment, and a general orientation binder for new board members. To complement these practical, user-friendly documents, we initiated a board training program that provided training to over 160 board members and staff in 2008-09. The program provided essential skills and knowledge that the boards need to effectively manage renewable resources, ranging from administrative law and the management of hearings, to technical courses in mining and regulation.

The department has also coordinated and supported the piloting of a multi-year strategic planning exercise that has been successfully completed by four boards, and other boards have shown interest in undertaking it. On the recommendation to create an ongoing process of consultation between the heads of the boards and the senior officials of the department, the NWT Board Forum was created. It meets twice a year and is a well-respected and well-attended venue for executive dialogue on inter-board and intergovernmental resource management and development issues.

One tangible new initiative of the NWT Board Forum, supported by the department's secretariat, is a new board website. The website provides a single public portal to the resource management system in the NWT, with links to appropriate government sites and other useful sources of information.

Regular board reporting and communications have also improved, with many boards now issuing quarterly or monthly newsletters which identify completed activities, authorizations issued and future plans.

Of course, the development and management of non-renewable resources is not static, and to ensure the Department remains current with evolving sustainable development needs, we established the Northern Regulatory Improvement Initiative to deal with operational and strategic needs. Through this initiative Minister Strahl commissioned Mr. McCrank to review the regulatory systems across the north and provide recommendations. Using his "Road to Improvement" report, OAG Audits and other information, the Department is now preparing a comprehensive plan for advancing concrete changes to the regulatory regimes in the north which we hope to begin implementing this summer. One objective of this initiative is to help clarify the evolving roles and responsibilities of Boards consistent with the associated Acts, Regulations and Land Claim Agreements.

I would note that we have already started implementing many of Mr. McCrank's recommendations, notably in the areas of capacity-building for boards and their members, eliminating unnecessary duplication between the Nunavut Impact Review Board and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, and funding for the cumulative environmental impact monitoring program in the NWT. We're also working on the development of Nunavut resource management legislation and water regulations.

INAC will build on these achievements and the ongoing work in this area, not only because they demonstrate our responsiveness to the recommendations of the Auditor General, but because we are strengthening our working relationship with the boards, aboriginal groups, and stakeholders; the quality of non-renewable resource management in the NWT; and of course our overall accountability and transparency to Canadians.

Thank you very much.

I will certainly be pleased to take questions later on.

9:10 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton

We'll carry on now with Mr. Roy and then Madam Quinn.

We're at about the nine-minute mark for both of you, so if you can work it through to about 15 or 16 minutes that will be great.

9:10 a.m.

Michel Roy Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Treaties and Aboriginal Government, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I too wish to thank the Committee for the opportunity to appear before you and for your interest in the progress we are making in addressing the recommendations of several Auditor General of Canada Reports concerning the implementation of Canada's modern treaties.

Please allow me to provide a little context.

Since 1975, Canada, aboriginal Canadians, 3 provinces and the 3 territories have entered into 22 such agreements that cover a wide range of subject matter such as lands, resources, water, and environmental considerations and often contain substantial self-government provisions.

The north has been the most fruitful region of the nation for such agreements. These innovative arrangements afford aboriginal citizens of the territories major roles in the political, economic, and environmental affairs of the north and of the nation, including ownership of significant parcels of land.

We have 11 self-governing first nations in the Yukon with attendant land claims agreements.

In the Northwest Territories, four aboriginal organizations have comprehensive land claims agreements, the Inuvialuit, Gwich'n, Sahtu-Metis, Tlicho.

The Tlicho Agreement of 2005 includes self-government provisions and we are in active negotiations with the others on self-government arrangements.

Article 4 of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement (1993) with the Inuit of the Eastern Arctic led to the creation of the territory of Nunavut, which recently celebrated its 10th anniversary.

Thus far, the 22 agreements Canada has concluded with first nation signatories affect more than 40% of Canada's land mass. I use the word concluded loosely because as we have learned, treaty negotiations are not about conclusion but rather about creating new relationships. You have heard these comments many times here in the committee.

I will be pleased to speak to questions the committee may have concerning: the OAG Report of 1998 which examined Comprehensive Land Claims Agreements to that point—both the negotiation of agreements and their subsequent implementation; the 2003 OAG report concerning devolution in the north which also included recommendations regarding agreement implementation; and the 2007 Report on the implementation of the Inuvialuit Final Agreement of 1984 with Inuit Canadians of the Western Arctic.

As you are aware, these reports along with others such as the Senate Standing Committee Report "Closing the Loopholes", the Land Claims Agreement Coalition Model Policy and our own recent internal evaluation have served to point out some of the challenges we are facing in implementing these agreements. They have given us a great deal of direction on how to improve our relationships with aboriginal treaty and self-government groups. From Canada's perspective, we believe that we have done a fair job at completing the one-time or time-limited tasks that are necessary to get these new governments and government institutions up and running. We acknowledge that we need to now shift the focus to developing the relationship with these groups. In particular, we need to find a way to improve our means of resolving disputes.

In 2008, TBS issued Contracting Policy Notice 2008-4 amending contracting policies to improve the obligations to monitor and report contracts under comprehensive land claims agreements. It also fulfills specific commitments made within some Comprehensive Land Claims Agreements (CLCAs) for the federal government to monitor and report on its contracting activities in CLCA regions. I am pleased to report that INAC was chosen to lead this project and we are well underway to be able to issue the first reports, as required in the second quarter of the year.

On this issue of monitoring, INAC is modernizing and enhancing our obligation tracking system to be able to track and report more efficiently and with greater added value on the progress of federal implementation. We believe this will continue to improve the way we conduct our business in a way consistent with the past recommendations of the OAG.

In fact, we are asked to report back to the Office of the Auditor General on the progress we are making and the challenges we encounter in responding to the recommendations.

I welcome your questions.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

9:15 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton

Thank you.

Ms. Quinn.

9:15 a.m.

Mary Quinn Director General, Social Policy and Programs Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members, for inviting me to appear before your committee.

I welcome the opportunity to bring your members up to date on our continuing efforts to improve First Nations Child and Family Services on-reserve.

Since the Auditor General's report of May 2008, we have been working very closely with the provinces and first nations to improve child and family services for first nations children normally resident on reserve. I wish to assure the committee that we recognize the seriousness of the matters raised in the Auditor General's report.

I'd like to talk briefly about how the first nations child and family service program works. We do not work alone. Provinces have jurisdiction over child welfare, both on and off reserve, and in some cases, the provinces have delegated their authorities to first nations child welfare agencies and first nations staff. This explains why we've been focusing a lot of our attention on being provincially comparable and have been working with provinces and first nations agencies so that the agencies can adequately meet provincial legislation and standards while meeting the requirements of our funding agreements.

As well, the department works with first nations providing funding to first nations, their child welfare agencies and the provinces to cover the operating costs of culturally appropriate child welfare services on-reserve including the reimbursement of maintenance costs related to children brought into care.

The budget has doubled from more than $193 million in 1996-97 to roughly $523 million in 2008-09. Beginning in budget 2005, a roughly 8.5% increase in the operations formula was committed. As well, there was a commitment of roughly $1 million for agency self-evaluation and an additional $15 million to pay for rising maintenance expenditures. This was an additional investment totalling roughly $25 million.

The first nations child and family services program is under renovation and is therefore currently in transition as we move towards what we call an enhanced prevention-focused model. This is a model that focuses on prevention rather than on an out-of-home care bias. Budget 2006 marked the beginning of this transition with a financial commitment, starting in Alberta, of incremental funds of $98 million over five years.

The next step came in budget 2008, in which an additional $115 million was provided over five years to the provinces of Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan, along with first nations agencies, to implement the new model. Most recently, Canada's economic action plan has announced a further $20 million over two years to additional jurisdictions to join in this model.

To put it in perspective, this year alone $49.5 million in incremental funding will flow to the first nations child and family services agencies in five jurisdictions. Our commitment will increase to a total of $61 million annually by 2011, and we have more provinces to work in.

I would say that under this model, the Government of Canada is committed to providing the necessary funding for first nations child welfare, which will be provincially comparable, to support early intervention and prevention-specific services that work to reduce the number of apprehensions. The model has two components. The first is the development of tripartite accountability frameworks. This involves the federal government, the provinces, and the first nations agencies or organizations. This is where we develop common goals, visions, and performance measurement standards and where we speak to issues such as culturally appropriate services and provincial comparability.

The second component involves working directly with first nations child welfare practitioners and provincial officials in developing a funding model that is specific and comparable to the particular province we are working with and meets the needs identified by workers at the front line.

While work is under way on this renovation and shift to the enhanced prevention model, the other track we're working on is program management. In the Auditor General's report, she's raised issues in both areas.

I'm just going to briefly sum up in one minute, if I may.

9:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton

That would be great.

9:20 a.m.

Director General, Social Policy and Programs Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Mary Quinn

We have taken a number of measures in terms of reporting and compliance to improve our activities.

I want to note, as committee members will know, that Ms. Crowder's motion on Jordan's Principle was adopted by the House in December 2007, and we are continuing to work with provinces and partners on Jordan's Principle.

9:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton

Excuse me, we're having a problem here with the audio.

9:20 a.m.

Bloc

Roger Gaudet Bloc Montcalm, QC

It's fine now.

9:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton

Okay, carry on. Just a short summary, then we'll go to questions.

9:20 a.m.

Director General, Social Policy and Programs Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Mary Quinn

While we're working hard towards the enhanced prevention model, which focuses on prevention rather than putting the bias on the apprehension and protection of children, we're also moving on the project management side. So with respect to the issues that the Auditor General has raised on compliance and monitoring and reporting, we are in the process of implementing some activities that we hope will bear fruit and give us the evidence and results that people expect of us.

In closing, I wanted to acknowledge Ms. Crowder's motion and the work that the federal government and departments and members of the first nations have been doing on Jordan's Principle.

Thank you. I'd be pleased to answer any questions.

9:20 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Bruce Stanton

Thank you very much.

We'll now go to questions from members. Let's start with Mr. Bélanger.

Mr. Bélanger, your speaking time will be only five minutes because this morning's meeting is only one hour long.

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Madame Quinn, I wanted to follow up on the March report of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. Are you familiar with that one?

9:20 a.m.

Director General, Social Policy and Programs Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Mary Quinn

Yes, I am.

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON

There were a few recommendations. One of them was about the funding formula. It recommended that we go away from an assumed fixed percentage—what was it, 6%?—because it varies from zero to twenty-something. What's happening there?

9:20 a.m.

Director General, Social Policy and Programs Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Mary Quinn

There are three aspects of the funding formula under the tripartite agreements. The 6% applies to one of those three aspects. It is done as a national average. The second aspect of the funding formula concerns the prevention services. In this new area, we sit down with provinces and first nations to see what is needed in the way of culturally appropriate prevention services. The third area is maintenance. Maintenance is produced on the actual number of children in care. As to the 6%, we know that the Auditor General has raised it and the public accounts committee has continued to raise it. We believe, with the three provinces and first nation organizations we've worked with, that the funding formula is workable and effective.

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON

You mean the current one?

9:20 a.m.

Director General, Social Policy and Programs Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Mary Quinn

I mean the one for the three-party models. I'll get to another one, without trying to complicate this too much. We will have an evaluation of the renovated model starting late in 2009. We will look at the results of the evaluation and continue talking to the two new provinces and the first nation organizations that will join the model this year.

The previous funding model would apply in the five provinces where we're not under renovation. It takes in the 6% feature, and it has some limited capacity for prevention. But what we're really working towards is the new model, because it has business plans and flexibility and offers the same ability for the first nations agencies. We think it would be the better and more effective way to go.

9:20 a.m.

Liberal

Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON

In your second example, are you suggesting that you're getting resistance from the provinces about changing the funding formula?

9:25 a.m.

Director General, Social Policy and Programs Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Mary Quinn

No, we haven't had any resistance from the three provinces where we've developed new agreements.

9:25 a.m.

Liberal

Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON

I understand a bit how the system functions. And if you're currently negotiating new funding formulas, the likelihood is that there will be more funding required. Do you have any projections? What's the outlook, and is it being included in the estimates?

9:25 a.m.

Director General, Social Policy and Programs Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Mary Quinn

Once the minister announces the two additional provinces that will be joining that model this year, we'll have five provinces. Then we'll be halfway, plus the Yukon Territory, to our goal of having all the provinces under the enhanced model. Based on the funding that has occurred so far and the amounts that have been announced in previous budgets and in the economic statement, we have a round number in mind about what it should cost. But until we sit down with the provinces and see what kinds of services they offer, because the models are quite different in the provinces—

9:25 a.m.

Liberal

Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON

Are you prepared to share that number?

9:25 a.m.

Director General, Social Policy and Programs Branch, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Mary Quinn

I would rather see if I can do that. I don't think we've made it public yet.