Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on March 10th, 2009

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Yes.

[Michael Wernick]

Then we'd be short of grants and contributions money, and I'd have to start cancelling things for the last three weeks of the year, to make sure we didn't exceed the ceiling, which is $5.2-something billion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Okay, we'll try to get back to that. Thank you, Monsieur Bélanger.

Now we'll go to Mr. Albrecht, for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister and witnesses, for being here today.

The north and the development of the Arctic has certainly been one of the priorities of our government. The Prime Minister has visited a number of times, and I know, Minister, you have as well. And last summer a number of our committee members had the opportunity to visit Iqaluit, as an example.

I'd like to follow up on two questions. One is regarding Arctic research. I noticed a slight adjustment in these votes because of a delay. Could you outline some of the research activities our government is engaged in in the north?

And secondly, the one large reallocation is related to fuel costs. Those of us who visited the north also were very much aware of the fact that the fuel has to be purchased within a very small window, and because of that, sometimes the northern communities are forced to purchase their fuel at very high cost. I'm wondering if any current research is applied to possible alternative energy sources, whether that be geothermal, wind, gasification, or these kinds of things. Could you first talk about the research in general and then possibly the question of energy supply?

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

Thank you.

You're right that the north is important to the government. The Prime Minister seems to have a real love for it, and enjoys his trips there. He always speaks glowingly of them. Of course I've enjoyed my travels up north, as have many of you. It's an exciting area and there's a lot of potential right across the north. It's a very wonderful place, and I encourage people to visit there. It's a unique tourist opportunity within our own country and a wonderful place to go. You can pick your area. It comprises 40% of Canada, so there's a lot to see and enjoy.

I was in Iqaluit a couple of weeks ago and we announced, from budget 2009, the request for proposals on the $85 million that we're going to put into existing research facilities. We announced it quickly following the budget announcements here. We hope to have those requests for proposals in very shortly, in the first week or so of April, and make those announcements in time for the building season coming up. That $85 million will be spent over the next two years on existing facilities. It's not to build something new or grandiose, but to help northern-based universities and some southern universities that have research facilities across the north. The $85 million was very well received when we made that announcement.

In addition, we announced the request for $2 million to help design and locate the permanent world-class research facility in the north. This will be a new facility. We've also announced a short list of locations for that permanent facility. It will be in either Cambridge Bay, Pond Inlet, or Resolute--in the northwest passage area. The announcement of the $2 million will help us get world-class advice on everything from what it should look like and how it's going to integrate with local community and Inuit knowledge, to how we can maximize the benefits to northerners and the world, because this is going to be an international facility. So that's off and going.

We've continued to make investments in the international polar year, which is our flagship. We've invested more in that than any other country in the world in the science and research on everything from climate change to adaptation issues.

You asked how we handle the changing environment up there. It involves everything from technology to human adaptation, building techniques, migration patterns of wildlife, hunting methods, storage, etc. There have been studies on a lot of that, and it has to do with adaptation and how it affects the people who live in the north. There has been an important human dimension to the research side that I think is going to pay dividends down the road.

You asked another couple of questions on fuel costs.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Go ahead, Minister.

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

You're right about the fuel costs. Quite often the fuel for these remote communities is barged in. You get one chance a year, so whatever the price is, that's what you pay in the summertime. Last summer the price of oil was $150 a barrel, so the price of diesel was through the roof.

Unfortunately for many of those communities, that's when they had to fill up. Whether it was barged in, boated in, or whatever, they paid through the nose. Some of those communities simply didn't have the money to pay all the bills. It was almost a one-time expense because of the blip in the price of diesel. There is an allocation of money in the supplementary estimates C specifically to help out some of those communities. It's a significant investment, but there's really no alternative, because it's through no fault of their own. People are at the vagaries of the international marketplace. Let's hope the price to refuel will be lower.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Minister.

We will now go to Mr. Lévesque, for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good, Minister.

You state on page 4 of your notes that $10 million has been added to the Food Mail Program. I recall that a pilot project had been launched when your predecessor, Mr. Prentice, was in office. We had asked that the pilot project be extended to all communities because a large quantity of perishable goods were being lost as a result of the Food Mail Program. The pilot project improved the level of service to communities. Approximately $60 million was allocated in order to provide service to all communities. Have you continued to examine this option?

I will ask you all of my questions in succession. Since you enjoy talking, you'll have an opportunity to do so after.

In Vote 10, in light of the delays in planned amendments to the Cree-Naskapi of Quebec Act, a little more than $92 million has been budgeted. Has a portion of this $92 million been earmarked pursuant to the James Bay Cree agreement? If so, what level of funding are we talking about? In the case of the Naskapi, would this payment be conditional on the passage of the Act to amend the Cree-Naskapi of Quebec Act? As we know, talks are currently under way with the Inuit within the framework of the Naskapi land claims. Will this affect the process in some way?

I don't want to take up too much of your time, so I will ask you to answer my questions.

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

Okay, thank you.

Congratulations, Mr. Lévesque.

I know it's your birthday today. You're looking in fine form. Your questions, as always, are very perceptive. So we'll wish you a happy birthday and proceed with this.

The pilot projects were part of what helped to inform our ongoing study on the food mail program, and I think there's been a call for even more investigation as to alternatives. There's a lot of unhappiness with the food mail program; people are saying that it's just not getting the job done, or there's too much spoilage and it's not an efficient way to deliver food. So we continue to look at options, including the pilot projects, for one. And we've been asked to expand pilot projects to look at some other options as well. But in the meantime, we feel that we have to fund it, because it's a well-used program and it least keeps the cost of food reasonable in the meantime. So this $10 million will help us do that. Part of what we're doing are these pilot projects that are informing our research and our decision-making as we move forward.

I should just point out that last week, when I was in Montreal, we announced the money for the runway extension at Puvirnituq airport, up in James Bay, so that the airport will be able to accept a 737 by fall—hopefully by December. They had made the point there that if we could get that runway extended, people were prepared to build lockers, storage facilities, and food-handling facilities to get cheaper and better-quality food there. So that was a welcome announcement. It shows us how sometimes, even with food mail, it's not just the program, but the facilities, the transportation links, and a bunch of things that will make food affordable in relatively isolated areas. That sort of infrastructure is a valuable part of making food and health care and other things available in a cost-effective and timely way.

I'll let the deputy minister speak to the Cree-Naskapi agreement, but it is important that we do proceed with the amendments to that agreement. As you say, there are ongoing discussions. I think these are all going well, but it will be important, eventually, to get that legislation approved to give us the legislative authority necessary to proceed with that.

On the actual amount, Mr. Wernick will continue.

[Michael Wernick]

I apologize to the minister for my handwriting.

It's a progress payment under the agreement that was reached in 2007. They will get the money when the amendments to the Cree-Naskapi Act go through; and we expect to have that bill in front of this committee this spring.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you. On behalf of the committee, happy birthday, Mr. Lévesque.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Finally, we'll go to Mr. Rickford for five minutes.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister and your staff, for coming here today.

I want to revisit the discussion around schools and just make a couple of points in advance of my question.

First of all, I think there's been a fairly overall positive review of our commitment to education for first nations people. I think when the Caledon Institute of Social Policy states that this economic plan is an impressive commitment to aboriginal peoples, we're certainly winning some people over.

Certainly I've heard from grand chiefs in my riding that this economic action plan is focused on a variety of educational activities that include skills and apprenticeship training. And there's the untold good news, like the very recent increases in program funding for maternal child health and early childhood programs—a particular passion of mine. We're seeing some communities move towards licensed day care facilities, which are really the building blocks and determinants of success in school. It is clear that we're moving forward in the right direction and making some important progress around some of those aspects, including now schools, that kindergarten to grade 12 piece, which is essential.

Mr. Minister, and certainly Mr. Wernick, perhaps you could comment on how the government will be deciding to build new schools moving forward. I know you were about to touch on that earlier, and I want to hear it for the record today.

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

Thank you.

I think it is important, obviously not just because there's much infrastructure needed out there, but because it also sends a message of hope to many more communities. We spend $230 million, $240 million a year on infrastructure in a general, ongoing way, but certainly this announcement is going to allow us to build those ten new schools and the three major renovations that are going to take a little bit of the pressure off in the system. There's lots of work to do, we all know that.

I just want to back you up on some of your earlier comments about early childhood interventions. A lot of that is from Health Canada's side, but I think you're on to a good track, and I encourage you. I know your expertise in this area as a long-time health worker, but certainly it's important. The money we allocated in this budget will allow us to add another couple of provinces to the child and family arrangements that we have already in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia. All of that is changing from an intervention model to a prevention model, and the prevention model is what the rest of the world, if you will, has gone to in recent years. So it's long overdue, and that will help in educational outcomes; it's one of those investments that's going to really pay dividends.

What we have in school construction is priority-based. As I mentioned, it's on the website, so it's no secret. There's a national priority-ranking framework. That framework is designed that way so it really takes the political guesswork out of it. I don't interfere in that at all. I just ask that my deputy and the regional staff do their work on analyzing needs based on a set of criteria that are objective. They're not politically driven. I don't intervene or interfere. As you saw in some of the newspaper reports here a couple of weeks ago, I'm defensive on behalf of many civil servants who say “No minister ever instructed me, nor would I accept such instructions.”

It's important for first nations and aboriginal people to know that there's not political interference. It's based on a priority list that's developed objectively, then that list is given to me, and I've not changed it one iota. I've not changed one school, I've not changed one priority. It was given to me, it was put into the budgetary process, and that's how it will be approved. I think it is important for first nations to know that, because accusations otherwise, I think, smear the professional civil servants who are doing their job of analyzing this properly--in a very difficult situation with multiple needs. They're doing the best they can to rank those systems, and I'm doing the best we can to deliver on them.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Okay, and that's just on time, Mr. Minister.

We're going to suspend here for about five minutes, but before we do that, I'd like to take the opportunity to also thank the members of your delegation here this morning, the deputy minister, CFO, and Mr. Yeates, the assistant deputy. Thank you again for your comments and advice this morning. We'll take that in hand.

Again, thank you, Minister, for taking the time to join our committee this morning.

Members, we'll suspend for five minutes. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, members.

As you know, our orders of the day were to continue at this point with clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-5. I know there have been discussions among members, and I wonder at this point whether members would be prepared to speak to a potential change in that order of the day.

Mr. Russell.

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to speak to changing the orders of the day.

I do appreciate that we invited a number of people to be witnesses here today, with a view to going clause by clause and them offering their expertise.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Excuse me, Mr. Russell. I don't mean to interrupt you, but I should maybe consult with members.

Does the committee wish to continue having the meeting televised at this point in time? Is there a consensus for that?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Please carry on.

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

I think all committee members are aware that we have had some correspondence from the Stoney Nakoda First Nation with respect to the bill before us. Things seem to be a bit late coming to us in terms of some of the concerns that were raised. Notwithstanding that, the Stoney Nakoda has done some very intensive work around Bill C-5. They present some critiques we haven't heard at the committee, and I believe we should afford them the opportunity to present that to committee on Thursday. Their representatives have indicated the chiefs of the Stoney Nakoda can appear on Thursday.

So I would recommend that we suspend clause-by-clause for now, hear from the Stoney Nakoda on Thursday during the first hour, and then move on with clause-by-clause after that. That will also give us the time to review the information they have brought forward.

Having said that, I'd also like to reiterate that, as a party, we are basically supportive of Bill C-5 and we want to move this through the process. For the record, I've also indicated we are not interested in rewriting this bill. But we are interested in hearing logical arguments and critiques that may have some influence on potential amendments we might want to bring forward.

I would recommend that we go forward in this particular fashion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Mr. Russell.

Ms. Crowder.

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

I would also support that we suspend clause-by-clause today and hear from the Stoney Nakoda on Thursday. They've presented us with a substantial amount of additional information that would indicate they have been at the table for a number of years raising concerns that were not addressed with the bill. I think it's important that we do hear from them.

Would we change what we're going to do for the next hour?