Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Dec. 8th, 2010

[National Chief Shawn A-in-chut Atleo]

That is what I said when I spoke. You're correct. What I said was that funding of child welfare is by no means the whole story. This really has to be about systems reform, and it must be done, if it's going to be successful, jointly.

This also has to do with the recognition of first nations' jurisdiction. As is articulated in the recently endorsed United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, when it comes to reforming policy, we do so together. It brings into question policy suggestions that would be the government imposing a solution on communities. So that point, I think, is entirely accurate.

I wouldn't necessarily describe it as provinces, because provincial-territorial boundaries, and indeed international boundaries, are not the constructs of first nations. First nations existed here and entered into treaties even before Canada was formed. This is really about inter-jurisdictional recognition and the fact that first nations have principally a relationship with the federal crown. As such, the federal crown has a very specific area of responsibility, particularly with the endorsement of the declaration to jointly reform areas such as child welfare and to recognize first nations' jurisdiction.

It's not necessarily the notion of one-size-fits-all. Areas may very well agree to tripartite arrangements, as some have, in certain instances.

It's a very comparable conversation in the area of education. Mr. Lemay, you had left the room when I responded to your earlier question about education and the role of the provinces. It's a similar assertion we would make, which is that first nations must be directly involved in designing it, and that is exactly what our people desire.

I think it is right and proper for Canadian society to put the responsibility where it belongs, which is with the first nations people and communities.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Mr. Payne.

Yes, we are out of time. Actually, we're over time a little bit.

Members, I have three members left on the speaking list. I know that we are nearing the usual time for adjournment. Is it the pleasure of the committee to take each of the three with five minutes, or would you prefer that we narrow that down some? I'm happy to go through the three, but it's your discretion. It's 15 minutes if we take the five minutes each, or we can take, say, three minutes each, whatever would work best.

Does anybody have to get out the door at 5:30?

[An hon. member]

I do.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Okay.

So we'll narrow it for the last three. Maybe just take half the time, two and a half minutes each.

We're going to go to Ms. Crowder, and then to Ms. Glover, followed by Mr. Bagnell.

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

I have a very specific B.C. question for Ms. Blackstock.

I think you're aware the B.C. Auditor General was here by teleconference the other day. Despite what other efforts have had, actually the numbers of B.C. aboriginal children in care have gone up since the Auditor General report.

We know Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond has been very critical of B.C. She's the child advocate in B.C., and she's been very critical of the B.C. system. In your presentation, on pages 3 and 4, you specifically talk about the fact that B.C. has “been advised that INAC plans on eliminating the current approach for funding maintenance in that province as of April of 2011 and replacing it with reimbursement at actuals”.

For us laypeople, could you put that into English about what that will mean for first nations agencies delivering services in B.C.? Because they're in the apprehension model, not the enhanced model already.

[Dr. Cindy Blackstock]

To try to just put it very clearly, there are two streams of funding, principally, under the directive. One is maintenance. That is when a child is brought into care, there are reimbursements for the costs of those children. The second is operations. That is done not on the needs of the children and their families, it's driven strictly by population count.

Why this is a problem in British Columbia is that the first nations tend to be smaller in British Columbia. The directive was formed on an arbitrary assumption that there were 1,000 status Indian children in child welfare care, and the amount for operations drops. And in operations is all your family's support moneys to keep kids safely in their homes. The services that Mr. Clarke talked about to break the cycle, they're all included in that. And if you are below 801, you get 75%; if you're below 501, you get 50%; if you're below 251, you get 25%; and nothing below that.

Those operation figures crunch the agency's. So the B.C. INAC region for the last decade has given this average cost of maintenance instead of doing it on actual costs. That has resulted in a little bit more cushion of funding to offset the shortages in operations. Without that, if they go to actually “you spend a dollar on a band-aid and you get reimbursed for that for a child in care”, then you have the actual costs of maintenance and almost nothing to keep kids safely in their home, even at a worse level. The dire situation becomes almost untenable for first nations children in British Columbia.

So we had recommended a Wen:de approach, a specific strategy to address the needs of first nations that fall below 1,000, and particularly linking, as the Auditor General points out, to the needs of first nations children and families as being a key indicator in the development of any formula, not population counts.

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

I have just one comment. In other words, if this goes through, children will be worse off April 1, 2011, than they are now.

[Dr. Cindy Blackstock]

Yes.

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

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Ms. Crowder.

Ms. Glover.

[Shelly Glover, Conservative, Saint Boniface, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I didn't think I was going to get any time.

I want to voice my disappointment. I hear people say we have too many reports, too many evaluations. And then I hear someone suggest there is not enough money to do more evaluations. My heart is breaking to hear that. These kids needs our focus.

This new enhanced prevention-based approach was very much a partnership with first nations people. I don't know, Mr. Thompson, where you got that information, but let me quote from your regional chief in Quebec, Ghislaine Picard, who said: “This investment is very much appreciated by the First Nations of Quebec, and we want to thank the AFNQL, the First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Health and Social Services Commission...for all of their hard work over the past several months in this file, which is of the utmost importance for our children”.

I quote other first nations people who are very much involved in this. In P.E.I., I'm going to quote once again from Chief Brian Francis:

Over the past two years, the staff of MCPEI PRIDE Program through Director Marilyn Lefrank worked tirelessly to help develop a program to provide support and outreach services to families and children in our communities. Today’s announcement is the culmination of those efforts. Securing a long term funding framework will allow us to continue to foster strong, healthy children and families.

In Nova Scotia, Chief Lawrence Paul states:

I am very pleased with the Government of Canada's approval of this framework for the Mi'kmaw Family and Children's Services of Nova Scotia. The multi-year funding included with this framework will support the Nova Scotia child and family services framework and provide the appropriate working environment for staff to ensure First Nations children on reserve have access to culturally appropriate prevention and protection services that are integral to ensuring their well being.

I have personally spoken with a number of first nations people who were involved right from the get-go, which is why I believe we are on the right path. I believe from the pit of my heart, and I have a million stories to tell. As a Métis woman, I've seen the worst. I was a pregnant teenager. I'm part of the stats. I was from a violent home. My mother was in jail because she was violent towards my father. But I'm telling you we are standing here shoulder to shoulder with you asking you, begging you, to let us help these children. You're in partnership with us. It's not about evaluations. It's about action. I'm begging you to remember this was not done alone. This was done in partnership with first nations, with the provinces and the Government of Canada. Let us help these kids.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Ms. Glover.

Mr. Bagnell.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

I won't have enough time for the response, so I'm going to ask three questions and you could submit the answers to the clerk, because you won't have time to answer them all.

First, could you do a detailed response to what Ms. Glover just put forward? I think that would be helpful. If she has any more quotes for the committee, that would be great.

Second, Cindy, could you go back to square one? You have people here who haven't read all those reports, who don't even know there's a funding program. We need to go back. We just need one sheet on the facts. Are they getting less money? If it's true, then give us some figures.

My main point is for Chief Shawn. I know you've been to the Yukon and you understand this problem. It's the tip of the iceberg; it's not just for this service but for all of them. The Carcross First Nation met with the deputy minister and, as is allowed constitutionally by their self-government agreement, tried to get them to take down these types of things. They were told that the federal government was not interested in a balkanized system of child welfare and that INAC is interested in the tripartite approach exercise in Alberta.

They are allowed by law. They signed agreements. They should have that right. I know you are familiar with this. I appreciate you coming to the Yukon so much. You took note of this concern and I really appreciate it.

If the three of you could get back to me on those issues, I would be grateful to you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

You have about a minute left.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

So maybe Shawn could use that minute, and the rest could be sent to the committee clerk.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Please go ahead, National Chief.

[National Chief Shawn A-in-chut Atleo]

Thank you.

The story I was alluding to was the death of the late Sherry Charlie. We ended up asking the then provincial minister, who's now deceased, and the government of the day and the leader of the opposition to come into a big house on my territories. What was private then became very public. And, God rest his soul, we really loved and appreciated the late Minister Stan Hagen in B.C. We said, “You will not have our children as a football in your political arena”. We made it abundantly clear that first nations would continue to advocate unrelentingly for change for our kids.

I know that all of you are faced with a difficult reality when it comes to issues like this. This is a time for leadership on what must be considered one of the number one social issues in this country, aboriginal children. They are the biggest potential this country has. I continue to say to the country that if we support their success, they will contribute upwards of $180 billion to the Canadian economy by 2026. These are the very same kids we're talking about.

We, as leaders, are charged with tackling issues like this. We have choices to make if we're going to choose to overcome the divisions that have plagued us and not allowed us to make the kind of progress that we can and must make. It touches a chord, when it comes to children, for all of us. If there's something we have to come together on, it is our children. Here, I really thank Cindy for her unrelenting advocacy. We will continue to support the work she does.

I know that each of you is charged with difficult challenges when it comes to the issues that confront us as a society and as a country. This issue we're confronted with we can do so much on in terms of education. If we could just choose to do this work on child welfare together, that is what I want to conclude with.

I know that each of you in your respective roles make choices for valid, important, and honourable reasons. I also know, though, that given the reality of what we face in this country with an issue like this, we can fall into complacency and into not addressing it in the manner it rightfully deserves. You are to be congratulated for taking this as a study, and I thank you for the opportunity to hear very strong words of advocacy for the kids I meet.

I know that each of you has your own story as well, but I compel you to consider what we're suggesting strongly here. So let's do this work jointly. That's what we're charged to do. If we do, I think that's the leadership the kids are looking for.

The late Sherry Charlie didn't have that opportunity. She became a political football in a forum that just wasn't right. And we're still trying to do this work in regions like British Columbia, as you just heard. So we have to find a way to reason with one another.

This is one area, Mr. Chair, that I feel strongly we must come together on.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Very well.

I want to take this opportunity to thank each of you for being here this afternoon and putting up with our late start, and to thank members for their attention to our committee this afternoon as well.

Recall, subcommittee members, that we have a meeting at 9:15 tomorrow morning in Room 112N.

Members, we are back here on Monday afternoon to consider our draft report on Nutrition North.

Thank you very much, and have a wonderful evening.

Again, thank you to our witnesses for your presentations this afternoon.

Merci beaucoup.