Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Feb. 8th, 2011

[Mary Polak]

That is a very complicated issue.

I too have an education past; I spent ten years in governance over the largest school district in British Columbia, so it is something I've had the challenge of wrestling with for many years.

We have not, I think, in British Columbia or anywhere else, succeeded very well with our aboriginal children in terms of improving their educational outcomes. There is still a very large gap. While there are programs that we can note and say, well, this pocket has been positive and this one hasn't, we nevertheless are still really on a quest to find those things that will trigger greater success.

But we are learning some things, and we know some key things. We know that the transition years are the most risky. We know that if we can keep a child in school between grades 7 and 9 or 10, even if we provide them with very little else in the way of additional support, just making sure they continue to attend school during that transition increases their chances of graduating significantly.

In many cases, you see that even very simple programs.... For instance, an aboriginal support worker might make direct contact with a family when a child is absent, just to say, “Hey, Joe didn't come to school today. I wonder if I could stop by and see what's going on.” It's small pieces of outreach. It's direct human contact. It's caring.

Again, it's a very complicated issue, and one that we have still not successfully addressed, I think, in virtually any of our provinces.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Richard, what do you think?

[Kenn Richard]

I agree that the issue of success in school is complicated. It involves so many variables that we could be here all day. But I will tell you that a solid family life, with parents who are productive themselves and providing role models to the children, and accessible and sensitive schools, sensitive to who you are as an aboriginal person, would go a long way in improving the situation.

Our agency has taken on education because we were told to--by the youth themselves. We had the benefit of a youth group that worked with us. Their strong message to us was that they needed two things. They needed housing supports and they needed educational supports. We followed through on both of those.

We run, in conjunction with the Toronto District School Board, a “native way” high school that is graduating some kids who have been given up on by the conventional system. We intake about 40 of those kids a year. We graduate about 15. Another 15 don't necessarily graduate that year, but they come back and they do better. A few we lose along the way.

So these kinds of special programs for those kids who are failing have been working very well.

In terms of the overall thrust, I agree, it's complex, and it needs all kinds of other considerations.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

Do I have two minutes left, Mr. Chairman?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Yes.

[Richard Nadeau, Bloc, Gatineau, QC]

There is the school proper, but there is also young people's identity. Adolescents, for example, ask themselves who they are and what environment they find themselves in. First Nations members, be they Ojibway, Cree, Algonquin or Abenaki, have an identity that is specific to their nation. It is somewhat like the two political nations we have in Canada, that are recognized by the House of Commons, namely Quebec and the rest of Canada.

In the case of the First peoples, this identity issue is very present for young people. I mentioned nations that are mainly found in central and eastern Canada. In the case of the First Nations that you have in British Columbia, what approach do you have in order to allow these young people to identify proudly with their heritage and to move forward in this regard?

[Mary Polak]

One of the most powerful ways that we can improve that aspect of a young person's life—that identity, that pride, that feeling that they have a place in this world—is by connecting them with their elders. We have seen huge success in areas where young people previously were getting into all sorts of trouble, having all sorts of problems. When they are attached to the work of elders, they regain their pride. They regain their confidence in their identity.

I have seen many examples. For example, there was a young man who had the typical challenges that young men can get up to, along with a group. The elders in that community wanted to have this structure on their camp rebuilt. At first the young people weren't all that interested in it, but when they got to work on it and the elders started telling them the stories, these young people rebuilt the building, did more than they were asked, and took great pride in the result.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We'll have to leave it there.

Thank you, Mr. Nadeau.

Let's go to Ms. Crowder.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and welcome to our guests, particularly Minister Polak. I'm glad to see somebody from British Columbia here.

I'm going to reference a couple of documents. The first document is by the Canadian Council of Provincial Child and Youth Advocates, a report they did for June 23, 2010. In the report they're critical of the data-gathering. In fact, estimates vary because of incomplete or inadequate reporting in information systems. They go on to talk about the number of children in care.

In this same report, they cite British Columbia and they say:

In British Columbia, Aboriginal children are six times more likely to be taken in care than non-Aboriginal Children, and as of March 2010, represent 54% of the province’s In-care child population.

I have a question related to this. The fact that the data-gathering is inadequate likely means that more than 54% of the children in care are of aboriginal ancestry, because the identification processes aren't all that accurate.

When the B.C. Auditor General came before us he said:

Specific to the issue of funding, the audit found that the ministry had not identified the needs and resources required for aboriginal child protection services. It lacked sufficient data on the level of child protection services needed by aboriginal children and their families. It had not been able to determine the staff resources required by aboriginal children and their families.

For these reasons, the ministry was unable to determine the cost of delivering culturally appropriate child welfare services. Nor was it able to develop a persuasive business case to negotiate for both provincial and federal funding. Thus, the ministry was facing funding gaps within these critical labour- and resource-intensive services.

You've indicated that there has been some progress. Has the ministry been able to identify what it costs to deliver culturally appropriate services, and are you confident that your data-gathering reflects an accurate number of aboriginal children in care?

[Mary Polak]

I'll deal with the data-gathering first. We're confident in terms of the numbers of our aboriginal children in care. Some of the challenges in data-gathering in British Columbia--in fact, most--are related to a very outdated legacy system of technology, one that we are in the second phase of replacing. We anticipate that we will have much better ability to gather and cross-reference information in the future, and that will certainly improve our planning capacity.

I'm glad you raised the Auditor General's report. We were very pleased to work with him on it and found that his recommendations were those that we agreed with as well. That report has helped to guide much of our work in terms of improving our services to aboriginal people.

Part of the framework in which we're operating, including our work with INAC, is to produce the appropriate costing around what those services would look like. There is an additional challenge in British Columbia given that rather than a homogenous system of governance for services for first nations in British Columbia, we have instead moved, with the urging of our first nations, to a situation where our work with individual first nations allows them to direct and guide the way in which they will interact with us. For example, while some first nations are interested in pursuing the delegated agency route, there are others who are not interested in pursuing that and wish to pursue other means of working with us. To a certain extent, that also adds to the complexity of addressing the cost issue.

Nevertheless, we continue to work with the Auditor General's recommendations and with his office in terms of ensuring that we meet the recommendations he made.

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

Have you done work specifically around delivery of culturally appropriate services or comparable services? I know they're two different things.

[Mary Polak]

In terms of the cost?

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

Yes.

Ms. Fraser, the Canadian Auditor General, said that INAC needs to define what is meant by “reasonably comparable services” and find ways to know whether the services that program supports are reasonably comparable. INAC has always argued that the work hasn't been done around “reasonably comparable”, but in the “Wen:de Report” back in 2005, INAC, in fact, participated in a national policy review around federal funding.

Again, back to costing. Has the province done the work around the costing for comparable services on reserve versus off reserve, and have you actually costed “culturally appropriate”?

[Mary Polak]

The new costing framework we have developed doesn't address whether the services are on reserve or off. It looks at an overall community in a culturally appropriate response.

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

Just on that point, are you saying that people on reserve get exactly the same funding--

[Mary Polak]

No, I'm not. What I'm saying is--

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

Because there's up to a 30% difference.

[Mary Polak]

Yes, but what I'm saying is that if you're asking for detailed work that we've done to compare the cost of services on reserve versus off, we wouldn't be able to give you a direct comparison. What we have done is looked at what culturally appropriate services look like and what they cost, but we haven't, in our work--I don't know if INAC has--created a comparative that we could look at and say that it's this per cent or that per cent different.

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

So you don't know, then, the difference between the cost of delivering the services on reserve versus the cost of delivering the services off reserve?

[Mary Polak]

We could take a look at individual budgets, but as an overall comparison, I wouldn't be able to tell you that across British Columbia it's always this percentage different or that percentage different. It depends on what types of services. If I think of an individual community.... For example, some of our delegated agencies actually deliver services to non-aboriginal people as well. Again, it's the differences between communities. I wouldn't be able to give you a provincial number. We would have to take a look at an individual community and we'd have to ask what the comparable services are. In some cases these services delivered by the delegated agency may be expanded, may be different, and in some cases they may be fewer than what are provided in the general community. Now, some of that may be a result of what they are allowed in terms of funding, but in other cases it may be a result of decisions they've made as to which services they think are appropriate in their community.

I hope that explains it sufficiently.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We're out of time.

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

It sounds awfully confusing.

[Mary Polak]

I'm sorry.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Ms. Crowder.

We now move on to the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.

Mr. Rickford, you have seven minutes.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses, Minister Polak and Mr. Richard.

I have some degree of familiarity, coming from the great Kenora riding out in northwestern Ontario. I appreciate your coming so far to speak with us today.

I did a bachelor's degree at the University of Victoria in nursing and worked at the Arbutus Society for Children, and subsequently in Klemtu, B.C., as an outpost nurse. It's beautiful country out there, and I'm well aware of some of the challenges you face in these regards, and certainly the broader perspective with a health and legal background working in these capacities.

I want to talk to you first, Minister, for just a couple of minutes, about the enhanced prevention-focused approach and the difficulties you alluded to in your speech with respect to 20-1, I guess we'll call it. Just briefly, by way of review, we have the 20-1 model, we have the enhanced prevention-focused approach, and we have the 1965 welfare agreement. The objective of the federal government, of course, is to have, by 2013, all jurisdictions participating in one funding model that obviously puts its focus on prevention.

In my own briefings and my own understanding of it, certainly from working in health as well, when we start to transition into prevention, we do see a little bit of a spike in the need for services, because, similar to health, we're involved in a more robust process of identification of some of the challenges and issues we face.

As a federal government, we take a look at a broader set of statistics. In fairness to my colleagues in the official opposition, over the past 10 years, the federal government has doubled its investment in this area. The only quantifiable statistic, I think, that we can gain some measure of hope from is that 5.3% of children are in care on reserve. That statistic has stayed steady for the past four years, and I think you said you've actually seen a little bit of a dip in British Columbia.

That should never make us very comfortable. That statistic is still too high. But it suggests as well that at least it's not growing.

From an investment perspective into this agency, I guess we concern ourselves with the idea that it may not just be a question of resources. I know that Grand Chief Atleo applauded the investment, and we've heard testimony from other witnesses this fall, as I understand it, that looked at some of the structural challenges agencies face at the community level with respect to the provincial government and the federal government.

To my question, you mentioned that 20-1 was not helpful for the strategic objectives of the province. I'm sure resources may be part of your concern, but I'd be interested in your discussing a little bit more your involvement in the tripartite discussions and perhaps how they look at two things: one, the broad question of resources; and two, a concern that I hope to get to Mr. Richard about, that I'm not always convinced it's a question of resources from the outset when our departments do so many different things and make investments in so many things. They're just not sufficiently integrated. As federal departments, we don't look closely enough at our superordinate goals.

Can you speak to those two ideas? I appreciate that they are difficult and different ideas. Maybe you could speak to that for a couple of minutes.