Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on March 10th, 2009

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

Mr. Minister, I want to thank you and your officials for joining us today. I have several questions for you. If possible, I'd appreciate it if you kept your answers brief.

I'd like to start with Vote 25c. Funds have been allocated to the Office of the Federal Interlocutor for Métis and Non-Status Indians.

Are any discussions under way with groups that claim to be Métis, or would like to be considered as such, but have not yet been recognized? Will these funds be used to conduct the necessary studies so that talks on this subject can be initiated?

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

I'll just let the officials look up the actual numbers.

I can tell you what we're doing on the Métis front in a general sense. We signed last fall the Métis Nation protocol with the Métis National Council, and in that protocol is a list of activities that we've agreed together we're going to pursue. They involve everything from benefits for Métis veterans to an engagement process with the provincial governments, for example, to engage the provincial governments in a more formal way, and a list of issues that we've agreed are important. They've had contract work over the last year or two, and one of the things they're doing is they're concentrating on identifying Métis people within the settlement areas and elsewhere, people who have self-identified as Métis, to put together a list of people and expand that list so we have as good an idea as possible of how many people are Métis and inform them of their rights and what we're doing with that protocol in other ways.

[Michael Wernick]

That's all correct. The $900,000 is specifically for the Métis part of our work on consultation and accommodation, which involves all aboriginal peoples, first nation, Métis, and Inuit. So this is the Métis part of that consultation process.

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

And those who are seeking to be recognized. So then, discussions are under way.

[Michael Wernick]

It's a debate.

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

Vote L30c concerns loans to native claimants.

Mr. Minister, you have been sent a letter about this matter, but I would understand if you had not yet received it, because it only arrived at my office yesterday. The letter concerns the Wendake Huron Nation, which is located near Quebec City. A year ago, members of this nation requested some funding under this native claimants loans program, in accordance with the conditions approved by the Governor in Council.

Can they expect to receive an answer of some kind in the coming days? They have already been waiting a year.

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

We'll try to get the answer here while we're at the table, but we will get an answer for you on that.

The Wendake First Nation has been a very successful first nation in business development and economic development. They've done some good work, and I've been able to be there for some of their celebrations and announcements. I don't have an answer specifically on this and whether it relates to item 30, but we'll find that.

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

I understand. I was unable to submit my questions earlier. You will be receiving a letter about the Wendake Huron Nation.

Regarding Vote 45 that has to do with the First Nations Statistical Institute, I'd like to know if we can expect to see any results in the next year. The committee heard from representatives of the Institute several weeks ago. I note that $4.3 million have already been paid out and the only obvious result is that some staff has been hired.

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

Of course, this is new. The statistical institute is only this year up and fully functioning. The board is fully staffed now. We've had negotiations with them on the budget they needed in order to run the statistical institute. They've submitted both a business plan and a plans and priorities document with us. As I said, the board is now fully staffed and they have a work plan that we expect them to keep to, and this budget is part of those negotiations that will help them complete the work plan. This was the start-up year, so you're right, you haven't seen a lot of glossy reports, because this is a new board, a new function, and they're now just up and running.

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

In the column “Vote 10“—and I'm not sure what your answer will be—the following is noted, and I quote: “Incremental funding to address health and safety pressures for First Nations communities“.

Can someone tell me what these pressures might be? What exactly will this funding be used for? Are any protests expected? How much money are we talking about? The reference is on page 105 of the French version, under Vote 10. It's the second item, namely “Incremental funding to address health and safety pressures for First Nations communities“. Funding for this purpose will total $26,377,000.

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

I had it at $26.4 million. That was to meet federal obligations in cases of floods, fire, emergency evacuation. For example, when we had to bring some of the people out of the James Bay area and evacuate them, that money was from that allocation.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Mr. Lemay and Mr. Minister.

We will now hear from Ms. Crowder.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Minister and departmental officials, for coming.

In your speech you touched on two things I want to ask questions on. Regarding page 83, items included in the supplementary estimates, I specifically want to talk about the provincial education and maintenance of personal care homes. I'll ask both of my questions and then let you take the time to respond to them.

The first one has to do with the personal care homes on reserve. This is not my question, it's just a statement. The Oneida Nation of the Thames has a licence to build a long-term-care facility, but they're having trouble finding capital money now. We're hopeful that under the infrastructure funds that are announced for the next fiscal year that may be possible. But once the facility is built, they will need an operating grant, and you're specifically referencing the operating grants in your speech and in the supplementary estimates. I wonder if INAC will be able to help pay for preferred funding for elders who were not eligible for CPP prior to the seventies. I think that's going to be an issue for a number of the personal care homes. I don't know if part of this money that's being transferred is part of that kind of thing.

The second piece is around education. I went back to the performance report ending March 31, 2008, and that report references the tripartite agreement with British Columbia and the fact that it has come into effect. Then in the report on plans and priorities, once again the B.C. tripartite education agreement was referenced, and in the supplementary estimates it talks about those transfers of provincial tuition dollars.

I have two questions under education. First, could you give us an update on the status of the B.C. tripartite agreement? It is a thread throughout these documents, yet I understand that as yet the full funding arrangement hasn't been put in place, and part of the sticking point is the provincial funding.

Second, when you appeared at the committee before, you talked about the new education funding being proposal driven. My understanding is that there is a small line on those proposals that requires provincial sign-off. I wonder, in the context of signing tripartite agreements—and I think a number have either been signed or are under way that would involve first nations control of education—why you would continue to require provincial sign-off.

Those are my three questions. Thank you.

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

Thank you. They are both good questions.

Typically, on long-term-care facilities--and the Oneida Nation is one example, but they're here and there across the country--what we've done in times past where infrastructure or investments have been made is try to bring them up to a certain provincial standard. When they reach that certain standard then the provincial governments typically kick in with funding to help with some of the operation and maintenance to do that part of it. Of course it's important to reach that standard. If it's an elders lodge--some of them might have different names across the country--if it doesn't meet that provincial standard, then typically first nations find it very difficult to maintain out of their own operating budget, because they just don't get any provincial assistance and they don't meet that standard. So they're in a catch-22.

We can get you some specific information on the Oneida application. My understanding is that they're going to be applying, I believe in this next fiscal year, for funding. I'm not sure. Sometimes when they put in an application we either don't have the money to do upgrades or there are some other i's to dot and t's to cross in order to get that funding. My understanding is that they'll be reapplying for fiscal year 2009-10, and that will go into the infrastructure list of the many demands that are on us across the country. We'll just have to look at that when that application comes in.

Your question was on our position on long-term-care facilities, and that's how we do it, typically.

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

Sorry, Mr. Minister, it was actually to do with the preferred funding for elders who are not eligible for CPP. Many of the elders don't get CPP, so they don't have that kind of pension income. So there is a preferred funding for elders--it is my understanding--that helps pay for elders who are on reserve in long-term-care homes. I just wondered if that was going to be available.

[Michael Wernick]

It's not part of this package.

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

Okay, so that money they talk about in terms of the maintenance of personal care homes isn't actually attached to specific--

[Michael Wernick]

That was just an opportunity to provide some top-up funding to six homes in the Manitoba region--about 184 beds. It was just some useful maintenance money. The issue you're raising is a more long-term income support kind of thing, which we'll try to follow up with.

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

Great, thanks.

And on the B.C. education...?

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

About a month ago, when I was last in B.C., I met with representatives of the aboriginal communities that are part of the FNESC system. They raised the problem of the provincial sign-off. Of course it was originally designed as an attempt to ensure, on the objectives of the FNESC agreement--or any of our other tripartite agreements across the country--that everybody was aware of what everyone else was doing, so to speak. When you get provincial sign-off, the intention was to make sure that the province is informed of what the first nation is doing, and vice versa.

You're quite accurate. In B.C.'s case they made the argument that they had provincial support on this--the province is onside and they're well aware of what's going on--but because they have this FNESC agreement, they shouldn't have to go to the province and get them to literally sign on the dotted line. So I've asked officials to follow up on that front. What I think they had or what they were willing to get was just a letter from the provincial government saying that they supported the initiative, that they were aware of it and were behind it. In other words, it was a comfort letter, if you will, rather than actually signing on the dotted line.

It was a point of principle with the first nations, not an attempt to get around the intention of that signature, which was to make sure everybody's in the loop. It was simply them saying if we have legislation, we're a stand-alone in administering this, and we shouldn't have to go cap in hand to the province and get them to sign off before it becomes legitimate. In other words, they're looking for another way to get that approval, and I told them we would investigate that. I think it's possible.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Great. Thank you, Ms. Crowder.

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

And funding...?

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

The funding issue is still being negotiated, although I think we had a good meeting the other day and we're looking at some creative ways to address some of the issues they raised with me. The signature thing is just a case in point. I think there are other ways to address their needs.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Minister and Ms. Crowder.

Now we're going to go to Mr. Duncan for seven minutes.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Good morning, Minister, and Mr. Wernick, Mr. Yeates, and Mr. Quinn.

Minister, the committee is scheduled to deal with Bill C-5 legislation, the Indian Oil and Gas Act amendments, clause by clause. I wonder if you could remind us of the process used in developing this piece of legislation. And could you tell us the possible ramifications if the committee proceeds with amendments that will change the bill currently before us?