Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on March 23rd, 2010

[Chief Guy Lonechild]

Absolutely. At the CCME meeting in Saskatoon...that First Nations University was a major catalyst for people entering post-secondary education, and having that as a model, for the institution itself, to be that welcoming environment for people who enter post-secondary.

Our insistence is that we need sustainable multi-year funding. ISSP just will not cut it, in terms of the program support funding that would be required to run an institution as such, and we would look to ensuring that we have a model that's going to be agreed to by our working group.

Our working group member can clarify this a little further, concerning the transitional model.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

I think Mr. Turk wanted to answer there as well.

[James L. Turk]

Let them finish, if you wish, Chairman.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

All right.

[Dorothy Myo]

Thank you.

Just to finish on the ISSP funding, it is targeted for programming and doesn't address the operational funding of institutions. There are other limitations to it as well, including the maximum amount that can be accessed through the program funding.

On the other part of this, concerning our transitional model and actually having a plan, the working group has been at this for four weeks. As a working group, we have said that we would not go to the media until we were finished our work. It has just been today that we were able to sign off on our memorandum of understanding. This has been really a work in progress. So that's the reason for it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Okay.

We have about a minute and 45 seconds left, and Mr. Lundy and Mr. Turk wanted to get in a short comment.

Go ahead, either of you.

[James L. Turk]

I'll be very quick.

There is no university in this country that operates on proposal-based funding. Every university in Canada operates on core funding. A university cannot survive when it has to exist year by year on proposal-based funding, because of the long-term commitments it has to make in terms of programs and in terms of faculty.

Secondly, allowing the funding to simply go to the students without a first nations option for them means that those who need and want that option—and there are many—will not have it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Mr. Lundy.

[Randy Lundy]

The first question from Jean Crowder was about the minister's comments about not being aware that this proposed agreement was in the works.

I think it's important to remember that the working group has been working for about four weeks now, and Indian Affairs has had observer status, with two members observing, since the inception of this working group. I'm not sure how Minister Strahl could be unaware of the fact that this agreement was in the works. It doesn't make any sense to me, but somebody will have to ask him.

Also, I read the unofficial transcripts of your last meeting, of Thursday, March 18. One of the other things I noticed in Minister Strahl's comments was that on at least two occasions he stated that the province wasn't onboard either; that he was just doing what the province was doing; and that if we asked the province, they would say the same thing, that they were not willing to fund this model either.

I'm not sure what model Minister Strahl was referring to, because the news we've just gotten is that the province is onboard. The province is willing to fund this new model. It is signed, sealed, and delivered.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Mr. Lundy. That will wrap it up.

Thank you, Ms. Crowder.

Now we'll go to Mr. Duncan, for seven minutes.

Mr. Duncan.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

You know, the committee's in a very difficult spot. Here we are, talking about an issue that's fluid. Before you appeared today and we were talking about having you appear before the committee, I expressed great concern about this, because here we are talking about an e-mail that none of us has seen. We're talking about a situation in which nothing is finalized. We're being told different things by different people.

With regard to the statements that were just attributed to the minister, there was no certainty about anything about the statements...and I think the statements made by the minister were quite appropriate at the time, and accurate and reflective of what was going on. The department has continued to take an active role and is very concerned about the situation. Of course our primary concern is with the students.

I took the time to look at the All Chiefs’ Task Force report from 2005. The problems at FNU predate 2005. It's quite clear in that report. And a lot has changed since that time. There are 60 other institutions that are receiving ISSP funding. Enrolment at all of the universities and post-secondary institutions that I have talked to, from the aboriginal and first nations community, is up, while it's down at First Nations University. The enrolment numbers that I have show that enrolment at First Nations University today is about one-half of what it was in 1995. There's been a steady decline.

There are other options. Students have exercised their ability to go where they want to go, and they've done so. At the same time, I appreciate what Mr. Lundy was saying about the faculty, the curriculum, and everything else. I think what we're looking at is a concern about administration, pure and simple.

There is something that hasn't been talked about here—and I'd like to get it on the record. There is revenue to First Nations University of approximately $1 million per year through the lease to the federal government of part of their building. That certainly is some core funding, I would say. The department released $1.5 million this month to First Nations University, or will be releasing it shortly. That's a result of two items that were being held back for late reporting.

I guess my question is whether this wouldn't cover the activities to the end of the school year for the students who are currently there, which has to be our first and foremost concern. Let's make sure the students get through this session, which ends in April sometime.

The second question I'd like to get some clarity on is where we sit in terms of this debate that's gone on about whether there are moneys in the scholarship fund or not. I know that's been batted around quite a bit, and it would be nice if we could get some clarity on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Decide amongst yourselves; if you all want to speak, we'll try to fit you all in. We're sitting with about two minutes left, so maybe you can give 30-second responses, if you're able.

[Randy Lundy]

Thirty seconds each?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Yes, about that. Go ahead.

[Randy Lundy]

I'd like to make a couple of observations. We've heard time and again that other options are available for aboriginal students in the province. I think we've made a clear case that the options of the University of Regina and the University of Saskatchewan, with all due respect, don't fulfill the needs of our students. They don't have the same programming that we have and they can't suddenly erect that kind of programming.

The other options being referred to are that our students become plumbers and welders and don't get a university education, because at the university level there aren't other options.

As we've said, proposal-based funding may work for other post-secondary institutions, but they don't work at universities. We offer four-year degrees. You have tenured faculty. You cannot proceed on proposal-based funding at a university level. That may be fine if you're training people to be welders and plumbers, but that's not what we're about here.

I'll defer the financial questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Do Chief Lonechild or Ms. Myo want to get in there? Mr. Turk wants to as well.

[Chief Guy Lonechild]

We'll both respond.

I can't reiterate any more strongly to you that we have new leadership at the helm of the FSIN. We had gained unanimous support at the chiefs in assembly that changes needed to be made, that mistakes were made. The scholarship money was a problem for the university. We need to be able to ensure that those problems don't happen again.

I'd like to have Dorothy talk a little bit about our next steps, but for the most part we've seen the problems in the last few months. Of course, the Minister of Indian Affairs has made some allowances for us to continue and make payroll, and some of the short-term objectives are to ensure that the students continue. Our efforts with the working group will point to a much stronger institution in the future.

Dorothy, if I can, I'll have you answer as well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Unfortunately, we are out of time. Whatever thoughts you had, same with Mr. Turk, perhaps you could just hold those and then in the course of our next round you'll have an opportunity to get on the floor and enunciate your point.

We'll now go to the second round of questioning. It will be even more difficult, because it's only five minutes now for both the question and the response.

We're going to begin with Mr. Bagnell from the Liberal Party of Canada.

Five minutes, Mr. Bagnell.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. You're doing an excellent job, as usual.

I'd like to start by saying nothing is in motion because we can put conditions on our funding that anything needs to be in place at the time we fund it.

I'd like you to get back to us in writing--I don't want you to answer this question now--on just the technical details of what you would get through ISSP, the maximum, why it's not enough, etc. Also, perhaps you could give us on paper the written comment on the best practice that the minister from Saskatchewan said to you.

I don't really need to say anything, because you've already said it all, but there have only been three reasons why you wouldn't get the funding restored. The most ridiculous one is that we're going to continue giving funding to the students. Well, students, as you all said, all get funding anyway, so that's a red herring. They always will get funding under the ISSP and INAC funding, so that's not an answer.

That would go on if they could go elsewhere, and as you've quite eloquently said, you can't go elsewhere if there's no elsewhere to go to continue your programming. You've given a lot of unique examples. It's like saying we'll give you money for gas for a car but you can't have a car, or we'll let you learn Cree or French in this particular university when it's not even offered.

So it doesn't help that you can go elsewhere when there's no elsewhere to go. You can't get the indigenous culture transfer, the indigenous environment programs, the dental therapist, which is really going to hurt the health minister, because the only way she can get dental therapists in Nunavut is through your university. It's not as if there's an option.

The last question, of course, which you've also answered, is the problems in the past, which everyone here acknowledges, and you've dealt with them. Any suggestion that there's a problem now that the agreement's signed would be an insult to the University of Regina, a great institution.

I don't know if anyone wants to comment on any of those. It doesn't seem like anyone in this room can give a reason now, because any of the reasons there might have been have already been answered, and I don't want to use the last of the time for it; I have one more question.

In fact, maybe I'll ask my last question, and then anyone can answer on any of these things.

What is the worst thing someone from the Government of Canada--either the minister, the minister's office, or employees of the Government of Canada--has said to you in discussions you've had related to the university?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

It's somewhat open. Who wants to go first?

Ms. Timmons, go ahead.

[Dr. Vianne Timmons]

“I don't care” would be the worst thing I heard. And “I don't care”, to me, is not the kind of answer I would expect from my federal representatives when I'm talking about the lives of students, faculty members, and staff members.

I would also acknowledge that I, as president of the University of Regina, have just stated we have a signed MOU as of half an hour ago.

If you questioned that, Mr. Duncan, I would be extremely insulted. I just said that it's signed and done.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Mr. Boire.

[Gary Boire, Vice-President Academic, University of Regina]

Thank you very much.

I'd like to acknowledge Chief Lonechild.

The worst thing I've heard is that “we don't believe in deathbed conversions”. This is a comment that I think is an inaccurate perception of the actions taken by the chief and FSIN and the assembly of chiefs. I think it's an insensitive response to the restructuring changes the working group has been working on for the past four weeks. And I don't think it's an especially helpful perception of the long-term vision of post-secondary education for aboriginal students.

It's been mentioned that the department of Indian languages and literatures program is unique in Canada. It's unique in more ways than one. It's not simply that books by aboriginal authors are taught. What is significant is that this unit is dedicated to the preservation of languages such as Cree, Saulteaux, Nakota, Dakota, Lakhota, as well as Dene. We all know that the death of a language is the death of a culture. We all know that being prevented from speaking your own language is a crime we hope never to repeat in this country.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

There are only 40 seconds left. Does anyone else want to just quickly jump in on that?

Madam Myo, go ahead.

[Dorothy Myo]

I think what I want to say is that it's not so much what people are saying; it's the fact that there isn't anything being done. It's really a case of not so much what is said but the fact that there's no action, from our perception.