Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Oct. 6th, 2009

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Is it the pleasure of the committee to adopt the travel reports maintenant? Oui?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I see consensus. Okay, the reports are now adopted. Thank you for your indulgence on that.

We will now suspend for cinq minutes before our next session.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Let's begin our third hour, members.

We have the pleasure of welcoming Betty Ann Lavallée, the newly elected national chief of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples in Canada. It really gives us an opportunity to get the full spectrum of representation and leadership of aboriginal peoples in Canada.

As we discussed, Ms. Lavallée, we customarily begin with a 10-minute presentation and then we'll go to questions from members.

Members, we'll keep our questions short, to approximately four minutes, so we can get in as many as possible.

Mr. Russell.

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Mr. Chair, on a point of order, and not to take up too much of the committee's time, I want to say that as much as I disagree with the comments from my colleague in the Conservative Party, which I thought were inappropriate, I apologize for the unparliamentary language I used. I would not want to bring any disrepute to myself or any committee member for what I've said.

On a very personal note, I would never want to make comments that would hurt somebody personally. With these remarks, I sincerely apologize to my colleague if in fact she felt personally aggrieved, and I would say to my committee colleagues that I've always conducted myself, I think, with a certain amount of respect around this table, and I apologize if any of you have felt put out by my comments. I would like to let that rest on the record.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Mr. Russell. I appreciate that.

Now we'll proceed to Ms. Lavallée for 10 minutes.

[Betty Ann Lavallée, National Chief, Congress of Aboriginal Peoples]

Good afternoon, Chairperson Stanton, members of the standing committee, and fellow NAO leaders. It's an honour to be here today on the traditional and unceded land of the Algonquin people to present to the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.

I am a status Mi’kmaq who has lived all my life off-reserve. I'm from Geary, New Brunswick and I am the former chief and president of the New Brunswick Aboriginal Peoples Council.

On September 12 I was elected national chief of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples. We represent the rights and interests of status and non-status Indians living off reserve and those of Métis people.

Today is an historic occasion when two of the three national aboriginal leaders appearing before you are women. I think this fact is sending you an important message about how things get done in aboriginal communities. Traditionally speaking, Mi’kmaq culture was matrilineal and women were the leaders.

Emma LaRocque, a noted aboriginal scholar, has said that colonization has taken a toll on all aboriginal peoples, but perhaps it has taken its greatest toll on the women. Women continue to be discriminated against through the Indian Act, but through the brave work of people like Sharon McIvor and Sandra Lovelace, we are taking this legislation apart, piece by piece. We have never bought into the Indian Act, and we have stood our ground and we have lived on our traditional territories.

Through this odious legislation, we are denied our birthright and treated as second-class citizens. I am a registered Indian and classified as a subsection 6(2) Indian. Under the law, my son is not entitled to be registered as an Indian. We are graded like cattle or grades of beef. It's unadulterated discrimination. Fighting this inhuman treatment and colonial-era thinking is the central priority of the congress.

The core problem we face is the denial of the federal government that it has jurisdiction over Métis and non-status Indians under subsection 91(24) of the Constitution Act, 1867. The Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples stated that this denial was at the core of federal government discrimination. We say that this denial is wrong in law and we are seeking a judicial declaration to resolve this issue. The declaration will remove a major obstacle to negotiating a range of matters pertaining to the rights and interests of Métis and non-status Indians.

The federal government has refused or failed to negotiate with us in good faith. As a result of their legal position, Métis and non-status Indians have suffered discrimination in health care, education, and other benefits, as well as an opportunity to negotiate or enter treaties with respect to unextinguished aboriginal rights or agreements. Our priorities include health, education, economic development, housing, and homelessness.

It is difficult in 10 minutes to cover an entire range of issues. There are many more agenda items that could be included. Some are aboriginal specific and others are of interest to all Canadians. Aboriginal veterans, matrimonial property rights, the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and environmental issues are all of great importance to CAP.

Everyone on this House of Commons standing committee is aware of the health status of aboriginal peoples. It's much lower than that of the Canadian population. If you name any health issue, it's likely that the prevalence in our communities is much higher, from type 2 diabetes to heart disease, substance abuse, and fetal alcohol syndrome. These are all major health problems for our people.

The key priority of CAP is to work with the federal and provincial governments to resolve complex jurisdictional issues that impact on the provision of good health care. We want to ensure that our people obtain the same level of access and support as is taken for granted by other Canadians.

The pandemic of the H1N1 flu virus is of great concern to us. It is one of the most urgent health challenges we face and it highlights the vulnerability of our communities.

Let us be clear about health. There needs to be a policy change in the way the federal and provincial governments are dealing with health, including pandemic viruses. Governments need to coordinate with all national aboriginal organizations to increase readiness against this pandemic strain of influenza and any future strains that may come upon us.

Our first and central consideration is the fact that the health status of our people is well below the national average. We need intelligent health policies to overcome these disparities. We need to be involved. We need the capacity to be involved, and we need an integrated and transparent process to find solutions.

I've recently written to Minister Aglukkaq concerning the importance of renewing the aboriginal diabetes initiative. Type 2 diabetes is an epidemic in our communities. Dr. Stewart Harris, one of Canada's leading authorities on this disease, has reported that the prevalence has skyrocketed. If the aboriginal diabetes initiative for off-reserve and Métis is not renewed in a timely fashion, we will lose our network of front-line prevention and education coordinators. All the gains we have made in the last 10 years will be lost, and the epidemic will continue to grow in our communities.

The education of our children and youth is a public policy priority of the first order. Aboriginal youth have the highest dropout rates, the lowest levels of literacy, and the lowest levels of skills development. It is education that improves our lives. It is education that is integral to reducing poverty in our communities. We view the needs of aboriginal children and youth from the prenatal period to university as a priority. Federal, provincial, and territorial jurisdictions need to make a clear commitment to improving the school experience of aboriginal students and making aboriginal education a priority focus. This will require fundamental changes in the way education systems operate, to ensure there is consultation with us in development of policies, tools, and rules and implementation of structures.

Back in 1996, the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples recommended the federal, provincial, and territorial governments cooperate to support early childhood education for all aboriginal children, regardless of residency. We view ECD as an essential program to ensure our children have the very best start in life by receiving all possible stimulation and nourishment. The goal of kindergarten to grade 12 should be to produce graduates with a sound education that is relevant to aboriginal culture, values, and history.

At the February aboriginal summit on education, we were encouraged by the discussions concerning strengthening aboriginal successes in education. The provincial and territorial ministers of education have recognized that in the next 15 years aboriginal students will represent over 25% of the elementary student population in some provinces and territories. Urban aboriginal families are in a particularly difficult situation because in the urban setting they lose the cultural influence and supports.

The most urbanized aboriginal people are non-status Indians and Métis. Métis and non-status Indians do not have access to the post-secondary education support services that are provided to reserves and the Inuit. This is a major barrier to increasing the numbers of aboriginal people who have post-secondary education. CAP recommends expansion of the federal post-secondary education programs to include status and non-status Indians and Métis. We are also seeking resources to provide bursaries for our students in order to assist them in pursuing higher education and skills development.

A third priority is economic development. CAP is committed to working with the federal, provincial, and territorial governments to secure programs and services that support our full engagement in the Canadian economy. We are seeking an opportunity to engage in economic development programs, which have been historically denied to our constituency. We need to have access to these programs, including regional economic development initiatives and the implementation of a network of aboriginal economic development officers.

The core of CAP's economic development relies on the aboriginal human resource development strategy, which is a basic building block. This is in jeopardy because the program sunsets at the end of March 2010. The CAP AHRDA needs to be maintained because, without this organizational platform, new initiatives will be uncoordinated.

In economic development initiatives, there must be a focus on the needs of aboriginal women. Their capacity to support themselves and their families is limited by a lack of education, skills, and training. In any labour market agreements, child care costs must be included.

CAP has been a long-time advocate for aboriginal people with disabilities, and there is a need for employment and training programs for this sector, which represents the most marginalized and poorest of the poor in our communities.

A final priority is housing and homelessness. The housing crisis being faced in our community requires a national aboriginal housing strategy and action plan. Our organization was the driving force behind the establishment of the rural and native housing program. This program resulted in action on the long-neglected housing and shelter needs of our constituencies. It produced thousands of housing units across Canada, but today many of these units need to be replaced or repaired. CAP has just renewed a protocol agreement with the National Aboriginal Housing Association. NAHA has been working since 1994 to advocate for the interest of off-reserve Métis housing.

We are fully supportive of the NAHA's call for a national office of housing strategy. It's remarkable that no such strategy exists in Canada. There have been numerous reports and studies on the aboriginal housing crisis, and there is increasing evidence that urban aboriginal people are facing a worsening housing situation. In 1998, the Big City Mayors' Caucus declared homelessness a national disaster. Homelessness should not exist in a country as wealthy as Canada. It's an embarrassment to all Canadians. It is an outrage that British Columbia intends to forcibly move homeless people off the streets during the Olympic Games. Homelessness is an urban epidemic of poverty, and our people comprise the largest sector. The overrepresentation of aboriginal peoples constitutes a powerful image of the move by our people to urban centres.

The Canadian public continues to associate aboriginal issues with Indians living on-reserve, but the reality is that 80% of the ancestral aboriginal population live off-reserve, and 60% live in urban areas. This is the most significant demographic factor for policy-makers, yet it is the one where the least action takes place.

[Witness speaks in her native language]

Thank you. Merci.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Ms. Lavallée.

Now we'll begin questions, and we'll first go to Mr. Bagnell.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Thank you for coming. It's wonderful you could be here to give us some direction and help in our work.

I'll make a couple of comments before I ask my first question.

First, we have a Métis association in the Yukon looking for recognition and funding. As a Métis person, I hope you'll be supportive of that. Second, it was interesting that three of your major areas—housing, education, economic development—were pillars in the $5 billion Kelowna agreement.

You mentioned that a majority of aboriginal people live off-reserve. But sometimes it seems like they fall between the cracks and all the attention is going on-reserve. One of the service providers off-reserve is the friendship centres. I was the president of our friendship centre, so I'm aware of the good work they do, but their funding has been basically frozen for maybe a decade. Of course, the cost of everything goes up, so I would assume you would be in support of my efforts to try to increase the funding to the national friendship centres across the country.

[Betty Ann Lavallée]

I would be in support of trying to increase national funding to any national organization that's off-reserve. As it is right now, we can barely provide the basic necessities to run an office.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

With the complex myriad between governments of members of first nations or bands, especially when people move off and on the reserve or move to an urban area, maybe you could educate the committee on how some of these people fall between the cracks in getting services from governments. For instance, they say it's this government, maybe, or that government, or another government. Maybe you could educate the committee a bit on some of those problems.

[Betty Ann Lavallée]

I can use a personal situation.

My father had prostate cancer. We reside off-reserve, and the health care was devolved to the band. We're registered against the Shubenacadie Band in Nova Scotia. My parents and grandparents were all born in the city of Saint John, New Brunswick. My family has never, ever lived on-reserve. In order for my father to travel from Geary to Saint John every day for eight months of treatment, he, a veteran on a pension, had to pay for it out of his own pocket. The other solution was to have somebody from Shubenacadie, who's paid to drive people back and forth, come up every day and drive him to Saint John, then drive back to Shubenacadie.

This is just one example of how aboriginal people are falling through the cracks.

The Indian Act limits jurisdiction of the chief and council to the boundaries of the reserve. Once you step across that invisible boundary, you're no longer entitled to services. You become a provincial responsibility. The province, unfortunately, will tell you to go back to your chief and council and get services. Well, that's not always possible. For someone like my child--my son is unable to be registered because I'm a subsection 6(2)--there are no appropriate mechanisms in place to assist him or his children.

So we're constantly falling through the cracks. The social welfare departments don't know how to deal with our people. To put it bluntly, just because they've moved to this side of the tracks doesn't mean the intergenerational problems that plague our communities are going away. They're still there. They still have to be dealt with, in particular with our youth.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

With that, we'll have to wrap it up and go to our next questioner.

Monsieur Lemay, quatre minutes.

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

Good afternoon Ms. Lavallée.

I will say the same thing to you as I said to your predecessors and that is that I think the Confederation of Aboriginal People is causing problems.

You say you represent off-reserve aboriginals, but if they are Indians within the meaning of the Indian Act, then they have a band number. An Indian who lives in Val-d'Or, but is registered in Pikogan, near Amos, receives services from Pikogan, an aboriginal community, even if he lives off reserve. I have a real problem with that. What bothers me even more is that you say you represent the Métis of Quebec. Both the federal government and the Quebec government say that there are no Métis in Quebec. In my riding, 425 people from the Wikanis Mamiwinnik community near La Sarre, say they are Métis, but they are not recognized by anyone. In section 6 of the Indian Act, even with the amendments the government is about to propose, there is no mention of Métis. The Métis are out west.

What are we to do? How could I recognize your association? I would be grateful if you could help me out. I am listening. Good luck.

[Betty Ann Lavallée]

You do have Métis in Quebec.

The reality is that out west you have the Métis National Council, which we commonly refer to as the big-M Métis. In Ontario and eastward, because we've been under at least 400 years of contact, we call it the small-m métis, in the French connotation of “a mixed-blood”.

I'm a mixed-blood, and at one time, yes, back in the early 1970s when the movement got started, I referred to myself as a Métis. But as things progressed, as legislation started to change, we have now started in some cases.... I myself identify as a Mi'kmaq. It has nothing to do with an Indian registry card. A number is all that is. That's not what makes you an Indian; that's not what makes you a Mi'kmaq, or a Maliseet, or a Cree, or a Mohawk. It's you, how you're raised, your culture, and your beliefs.

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

I understand what you are saying, but the problem is that the federal government—which is not insignificant—does not recognize the Métis in Quebec. In fact, it says there are none. The Government of Quebec also categorically denies the existence of Métis in Quebec. Is there currently a case before the courts to have this right recognized?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Answer briefly, please.

[Betty Ann Lavallée]

Yes, there is. I won two of those cases in New Brunswick. Harquail, Fowler, Lavigne, they're there. What has to happen is that these individuals in Quebec will probably have to go the same route as I did and spend thousands and thousands of dollars to prove it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Merci beaucoup, Monsieur Lemay.

Now we'll go to Ms. Crowder, for four minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Congratulations on your recent election. I know you have many challenges ahead of you, and you've certainly outlined some of the issues that are facing first nations and Métis living off-reserve.

I think you've actually come to the heart of the matter when you talk about how people are categorized. I don't know if this is true, but I would suspect that part of the reason—and this isn't a partisan remark, by the way, because it doesn't matter which federal government has been in place, this has been going on for generations—is that the heart of the matter is funding. So it's in the federal government's interest to continue to say that people don't have status, however that's recognized, because then it becomes a provincial responsibility for funding.

Ms. Corbiere Lavell rightly pointed out that under Bill C-31, with the second generation cut-off in subsection 6(2) of the Indian Act, in fact we are already starting to see reserves where the last status person is being born. So bands will not have funding for all those people who are considered non-status, and then it becomes a provincial government responsibility.

Do you want to comment on that?

[Betty Ann Lavallée]

You're quite right. There has been a study done. There are some reserves on the east coast that they're saying will be totally populated by non-status children by 2017. These are children like my son who, currently under section 6 of the Indian Act, is not entitled to registration.

What happens when there are no real Indians there? The government then has the power under the legislation to legislate that reserve or community out of existence. So what you have now is legalized genocide by the pen rather than by the sword. That's the sad fact. That's our reality.

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

I just want to add to that.

In fact, there are two reports by Clatworthy Smith: a report that was done in the mid-1980s, and then a follow-up report that actually did some estimates on reserves across the country. It estimated when the last status person will be born across the country on key reserves.

[Betty Ann Lavallée]

Yes, unfortunately it will start with some of the smaller reserves on the east coast, because we have some reserves with a total of 25 people in some of the communities. Unfortunately, as aboriginal people, we're like any other Canadian citizens in that there are things we can control in our lives, but who our children marry is not one of them.

Our organization said back in 1985 that Bill C-31 was not going to work. Quite simply, it wasn't just a women's issue; it affected men equally. It just so happened at that time that there was women's liberation. There are people like my father who was in the military and was enfranchised. It was a double whammy for me, as I joined the military and married a non-aboriginal man. Those are two strikes against me. I'm enfranchised. It wasn't until 1985 that I got my status back. Well, I am registered as a 6(2). My brothers are registered differently and are able to pass on their status to their children, but my son is considered less than an Indian.

The reality of the situation is that nobody has the right to tell us who our children are or are not going to be. Aboriginal women are the only women I know who go into the hospital and come out with white babies, to put it bluntly. It is my responsibility as a mother, as a Mi'kmaq woman, to determine how my son or daughter is going to be raised and what their ethnic or spiritual background is going to be. I'd like to see any law put in place that would tell someone in Quebec, Manitoba, or someone from any ethnic group what their child is or is not going to be.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Ms. Lavallée.

Thank you, Ms. Crowder.

Now we'll go to Mr. Duncan for four minutes, followed by Mr. Russell and Mr. Rickford.

Mr. Duncan, go ahead.

[John Duncan, Conservative, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Thank you very much.

Welcome to the committee.

Congratulations on your election on September 12. My notes said it was September 11, and I was going to say that it just proves good things can happen on September 11, but you clarified that it was actually on September 12.