Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on May 27th, 2010

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

Absolutely I have. I know those negotiations have continued. As you know, I've said not just in cabinet but publicly that I hope that deal can be done. I think it should get done. I've said that. I think it can be done.

Having said that, these are precedent-setting negotiations. When you get a small community that wants to take over major administration of justice, for example, or child and family service, which in Yukon is another big issue and is even a big issue in my province, the problem is how do you create, what arrangements can we make? I'm not doing the negotiation on this, but what comes back is what arrangements can we make that will allow a community to efficiently administer justice or child and family services when you may be talking about only a few hundred people?

Certainly in my riding I have 5,000 Sto:lo in Chilliwack, and even at that, it's difficult to find arrangements on child and family services, for example, that allow that to be administered effectively. That's one of the things that is a constant debate on how to do that.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

I don't have much time, I'm sorry. Thanks, that's great.

On the second point of championing people, as you know, aboriginal children in care get significantly less funding than non-aboriginal people, who the provinces take care of. It's been a big issue. I'm sure you're aware of it. The federal Attorney General is going before the Human Rights Commission next Tuesday to try to get that case thrown out.

Are you objecting at all, or are you trying to stand up for aboriginal people who would like to get a fair amount of money for their children in care and would like the commission to hear the case, not to take one side or another, but to hear the case fairly, as opposed to having it thrown out?

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

They need to hear the case fairly. I don't think your question or suppositions are fair. We can show... Obviously we believe we do make considerable investments, including some tripartite arrangements I've made and which I mentioned in my remarks: additional funds to add provinces to the list of not only matching the funds, but tripartite arrangements that deal with the administration, so first nations get to deal with the administration and provincial involvement as well, so first nations children who don't live on reserve are also part of the mix.

These are proving to be very effective. As you know, it started in Alberta, but we've been able to work our way across the country and are making those tripartite arrangements in several provinces now. I think that is showing not only good faith, but it proves that it's not just a funding issue, it's also how the issue is managed. I think the way to manage it is working hand in hand with first nations to make it not just a dollar issue, but it's what are you funding--are you funding a prevention-based model, or do you just want to warehouse these kids? I say we should move to a prevention-based model. It's not just a matter of how much money do you want to--

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Todd Russell]

Thank you, Mr. Minister. We're going to have to call it there and go over to our colleague Mr. Clarke for five minutes.

[Rob Clarke, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Minister, for coming in.

First, I'd like to use my allotment. If I could borrow Mr. Rickford's stopwatch just to make sure I get the proper time, it would be much appreciated.

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

Canada's economic action plan.

[Rob Clarke, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

First of all, one of my colleagues, Mr. Bagnell, mentioned the championing of first nations issues. Being a first nation member myself—I'm the only first nation member in the House of Commons—working with the ministerial office and working with you, Mr. Minister, I've never seen a minister work so close in hand on first nations issues. Your door has always been open to deal with issues that are very pertinent to Canadians, aboriginals and non-aboriginals.

Sitting here today and coming forward on these estimates, I think I heard you mention the consultation process in the food mail program. Could you break that down even further and just explain the process of the consultations and how they were addressed with the stakeholders in the communities in the North?

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

Thank you.

A couple of throne speeches ago, we promised that we were going to look at reforming the food mail system. Following that, of course, we had our own internal analysis, because those things are done in an ongoing way, but I wanted some outside advice as well. So I hired an outside special representative to spearhead that for me and to make sure that he could travel to communities that were on the food mail program and talk to everybody, from the air carriers to the points of entry folks to you name it, and then come back with what his observations were and make recommendations.

In addition, there were some 70 different meetings with stakeholders in communities; 70 separate meetings were held. I sat in on several of them. I met some folks here in Ottawa and others in the field. I think everybody is honestly trying to find the best way forward to make the system work better.

There were some pretty common themes to the complaints. The lack of accountability has already been raised: How do we know that the savings or the subsidy is being passed on? Why is it sometimes used for products that are not food, let alone nutritious food? Also, a complaint was “You're just not listening to us; there's no way we can get information to you if there's a complaint or a problem, because it's run out of Ottawa, or run by Canada Post, and there's no way we can have the influence that recipients of the program deserve to have.”

I think we've addressed many of those things and tried to shorten the supply line here. We have the private sector, I think, fully engaged. I think we have free enterprise principles applying to this—that is, what's the best way to get the most food, and the most nutritious food, to the most people at the best price?

The guidance on it comes from the advisory board. We've asked Elizabeth Copeland to chair that board, and we're going to get a representative group that will not, by the way, represent any vested interests. We're not looking for people from organizations or from corporations or something. We want people who use the program, who represent all of the regions that are involved. From that, it will assure people that the consultation we've had to date, which was in good faith and I think pretty extensive, doesn't end when the program gets announced.

It's important that people feel that as we go forward, if they see a glitch in the program, if they see a problem moving forward, they can get hold of that advisory board and get it fixed before it gets entrenched. That was one of the problems previously.

[Rob Clarke, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

In the consultation process, you met with the first nations leaders, Métis leaders, the Inuit, and also the non-aboriginals—correct?

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

Yes. It's available to everybody in these communities, so we certainly met with everybody.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Todd Russell]

For the stakeholders, once the consultation process was complete, what was one of the main general findings in terms of proceeding with this new program?

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

Briefly, there are themes that I mentioned previously, but the other things that were obvious were as simple as how recipients could even know what was going on in the program. There's no signage in the store. There's nothing on my receipt. I get the receipt from the grocer and there's no way of knowing what the subsidy for the community is. What's the rate of subsidy that goes into that, so that they have some sense that the federal government is actually providing something here, when it isn't reflected on their receipt?

If there was one common theme, that was it. People just did not believe the subsidy was getting to them. That was pretty common.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Todd Russell]

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

That's great; we're just a little over, so we're getting better.

We're off to Mr. Lévesque for five minutes.

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

Good afternoon, Ms. Jauvin, Mr. Minister and Mr. Wernick.

No doubt, Mr. Minister, you expect me to ask you about the new project, although I asked the committee this week to hold a meeting specifically on this program.

But I do have one question. It comes on the heels of the meetings we had—and Canada Post was involved in those discussions. We know that in Nunavut, for example, there was some argument over Canada Post's administration of the program. One question, in particular, emerged: is it possible that the definition of the program, especially regarding the products in question, was not clear enough and could allow products to pass that should not? Should we blame....

You said that it cost $2.5 million a year to have Canada Post administer the program. That is definitely not reflected in the total cost of the program.

That being said, do you think the advisory board you mentioned will be able to carry out audits in each of the communities served for the same price as Canada Post?

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

For example, as you know, the Minister of Health is from the north, and when she travels in the communities in Nunavut she often takes her cellphone camera and just takes pictures while she's in the stores.

She gets a picture of the $200 turkey and asks how can a turkey cost $200? Then as soon as it's brought to people's attention, they say that was just a mistake, it should never have cost that; it's still expensive, but it's only half that much, so don't worry about it. And what she says, and what I've heard quite often from others, is yes, but it happens too often. The $200 turkey is one thing, the $60 pineapple is another one. And when it's brought to people's attention, often they'll say that was just a mistake, sorry about that; it actually shouldn't be that much.

The problem is we need to have a stronger audit provision. I don't suggest that the advisory board has to go to every single community all the time, but what they need to be able to do is call on a robust audit system to say show me the money; show me how it's being translated into cheaper, more nutritious food being more readily available in those communities.

They may have to travel some, I don't know, but it seems to me a lot of their work is going to be following the audit provisions that will be established between INAC and the retailers to say let me review this; I want to see what's being done; I want to be able to follow it.

They're going to come from all over the place, so they're going to have first-hand information, but a lot of their work is going to be ensuring that complaints are dealt with, that audits are properly followed up, and that they can see the results on the bottom line.

So they don't actually have to do the audit. The audits will be part of the agreements with the retailers, but they'll be able to review it and they'll be able to make recommendations based on that. As well, the relationships with the retailers will also demand things like signage in the store that says this area here is the most heavily supported by the Nutrition North program. It's fruit, vegetables, eggs; these are the healthiest foods.

As well, Health Canada will be part of a program to actually teach healthier cooking, healthier eating, about things that are better for you and why and how to use them, because a lot of these products are relatively new to northerners. So they will give advice on how to eat nutritiously and have nutritious everything, from snacks to main meals.

They don't need help on how to integrate country food into their diet, but as part of this Nutrition North program, Health Canada has provisions in there to actually help promote healthier eating and healthier preparation of foods to make sure people get the full benefits.

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

Mr. Minister....

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Todd Russell]

I think that will do it. We are at 4:59, so the five minutes are up.

Monsieur Minister, I appreciate it, but with very little time for questions after this, do you have another few minutes, or is your time...?

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

I hate to say my time is yours, because it's not, because I do have to go, but do you want to go once more back and forth?

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Todd Russell]

Yes, I was thinking that if we could just do one more, and then go to Ms. Crowder, that would be great.

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

Okay, certainly.

If I could, on the food mail, Monsieur Lévesque, on the Nutrition North program, by all means, if there are any briefings you would like on the program, about how it's going to be managed, I think you may be having officials coming here, but if you want any briefings ahead of time or privately, we members of Parliament obviously need to get that, and we can make those available to you.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Todd Russell]

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Lévesque.

We have Mr. Dreeshen, I understand, for five minutes.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Thank you. I may be able to share some of my time with my colleagues here. I'll try to be as quick as possible.

The supplementary estimates for the fiscal year indicate there's $136 million of additional funding to support the implementation of the first nations water and waste water action plan. I just wonder if you could give us a few more details on that line item. That would be my first question.

My second question again relates to the estimates. There's almost $16 million to strategically manage the Métis and non-status Indian litigation, to implement the proactive reconciliation and management for Métis and aboriginal rights. I'm just wondering what those funds are designed for.

Perhaps I could just throw a third question in to see how it can fit in there. I want to talk as well about the supplementary estimates for the first nations schoolnet youth initiatives. Could you explain what those initiatives are like and perhaps even try to tie it in to some of the memoranda of understanding you have with the Assembly of Treaty Chiefs of Alberta, the Government of Alberta, and the Government of Canada, which is trying to ensure that first nation students receive comparable education and are managing to get comparable results, whether that instruction is located inside or outside of reserves?

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

Thank you. If we don't have time to get through them all, we can get you those details.

With regard to water and waste water, there are a couple of things I could say on that. The first is that from 2006 to 2012, the period from the time we took office to the end of this budgetary document, the Government of Canada will have invested about $2.3 billion in first nations water and waste water infrastructure. This is a major priority for first nations, and it's a major priority for us. It's still a major priority, although I must say that in the last three years it has come in behind some of the other things that are obviously of top priority. I think that people have seen our genuine effort on this front.

We've announced our water and waste water action plan, and the $330 million--the amount you mentioned--is the one-year portion of it. That's supporting construction of infrastructure across the country. It also deals with training of water plant operators. As you know, often the case is that you might have a pretty good plant, but if you don't have a good operator, it's not so good, right? We have seen sad examples of what happens in that situation across the country, so there's more money invested in training of personnel through the circuit rider program, for example, to make sure that they get certified and stay certified so that they can run those plants.

I mentioned the legislation that's coming forward. I think establishing a legislative framework is going to be very important moving forward. One of the reasons the Atlantic Policy Congress is interested in being the pilot group for this is that when I've talked to them, they've said they see the need for a legislative framework. Right now we have policy in place and we all do our best, but when you put legislation in place, you bump it up to a level of everybody then knowing what it is they have to do, who is responsible, what the standards are, what the regulations are, and who has to deliver them. It's a much more robust way of handling water and waste water for first nations.

They don't have that. I don't think most Canadians realize that there is no legislation. They're dependent on the goodwill of the government, if you will. I think that if we can get legislation and all agree on how this is going to move forward, it will be a big step forward for all of us. Every other Canadian lives under legislated and regulated water standards; we have policy, but not legislation. I think we need to move ahead on that.

In this action plan there are also resources for monitoring the water. We work with Health Canada to make sure it's probably monitored. We also take part in public health activities, whether it's public education or other public health initiatives, to make sure that people know how to use and protect their water systems and the intakes of them, especially on reserves.

It's quite an action plan, quite a detailed plan, and it goes through all of those parts.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Todd Russell]

You have 30 seconds.

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

With regard to managing Métis and non-status litigation and implementing the reconciliation that you mentioned, this is funding that we use to work with Métis organizations to strengthen Métis governance and membership systems. We work with them to address legal and constitutional questions on how aboriginal rights in Canada can be addressed following the Powley decisions. It's quite commonly called the “Powley money”, because it follows that decision.

Part of that is identification of Métis harvesters as well as engaging the provincial governments and territorial governments. For example, we had the first and most successful--it was the first, so it was the most successful--Métis economic development conference in Alberta. It was well attended, and the western provinces especially were there. It was a big conference and a big success that I think we will be able to build on.