Evidence of meeting #131 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was million.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Yves Robillard  Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, Lib.
Alex Lakroni  Chief Finances, Results and Delivery Officer, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Paul Thoppil  Chief Finances, Results and Delivery Officer, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Sony Perron  Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

The Chair Liberal MaryAnn Mihychuk

Hello, everybody. Let's get started.

Pursuant to Standing Order 81(5), we have supplementary estimates (A), 2018-19: votes 1a, 5a and 10a under the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, and votes 1a, 5a and 10a under the Department of Indigenous Services Canada, referred to the committee on Wednesday, October 24, 2018.

We are the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs, and we will have the opportunity to hear from two ministers whom we deal with directly.

Before we get started, we always recognize the fact that we're in a process of truth and reconciliation in Canada and that, in fact, these Parliament buildings are on unceded Algonquin territory. We do that when we are anywhere in Canada, and I encourage all Canadians to review the history of settlement and our relationship with indigenous peoples.

Today we start off with the Honourable Carolyn Bennett, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations.

Welcome once again to our committee.

3:45 p.m.

Toronto—St. Paul's Ontario

Liberal

Carolyn Bennett LiberalMinister of Crown-Indigenous Relations

Thank you. It's great to be back.

Thank you, Madam Chair, for inviting us to be here with you all today.

I would like to begin by acknowledging, as you have also mentioned, that we come together on the traditional territory of the Algonquin people.

We're pleased to be here this afternoon to discuss the supplementary estimates (A) for the Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs, specifically as they relate to my responsibilities as Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations.

I am joined by Daniel Watson, our new deputy minister, who I don't think has been with us here before. He comes from Parks Canada, so he knows a lot about reconciliation. I am also joined by Alex Lakroni, chief finances, results and delivery officer, both for the Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada.

We are appearing in the context of the ongoing changes to the departmental organization and ministerial responsibilities to fulfill our commitment to replace the colonial structures that were conceived at another time with a different kind of relationship.

As you know, to better support our government's commitment to renew relationships with first nations, Inuit, and Métis on a foundation of recognition and implementation of rights, respect, co-operation and partnership, as the Prime Minister put into the mandate letters of all ministers, the Prime Minister announced the dissolution of the old Department of Indigenous and Northern Affairs in August 2017.

The dissolution of the Department of Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada reflects the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, and the two new departments, we believe, are already better serving the distinct needs of first nations, Inuit, and Métis.

The first nations and Inuit health branch has already been integrated into the new Department of Indigenous Services, and Minister Philpott, whom you will be hearing from later today, is focused on improving outcomes for indigenous peoples by delivering more effective, distinctions-based services, as well as focusing on prevention.

I'm focused on advancing reconciliation with indigenous peoples by redressing long-standing historical injustices while accelerating our work to support first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples to implement their visions of self-determination.

We are committed to moving from a denial of rights approach to one that recognizes and affirms rights.

In support of that vision, we are working in partnership with first nations, Inuit, and Métis peoples to create a new recognition and implementation of indigenous rights framework. Among the points of consensus from indigenous partners is that the framework should include accountability measures to ensure that Canada is fully implementing indigenous treaties and rights and acting transparently.

Our continuing engagement is building upon the more than 100 sessions I have personally attended, with more than 1,700 participants, which have been held coast to coast to coast to ensure that the framework reflects the views of indigenous peoples.

Engagement with our partners is ongoing, and we are moving forward, together. We are absolutely determined to get this right.

In August 2018, Minister LeBlanc assumed responsibility to lead our government's work in the north, including the new Arctic policy for Canada. I remain focused on strengthening and renewing the relationship between the federal government and the indigenous peoples of the north. Minister LeBlanc and I work very closely together to ensure that northern policy is developed by northerners for northerners, and that it reflects the unique perspectives of indigenous peoples in the north in a manner that respects their distinct cultural traditions and identities.

These and other initiatives are ensuring that we close the socio-economic gap between indigenous peoples and non-indigenous Canadians, advancing reconciliation and making foundational changes to accelerate self-determination.

The supplementary estimates (A) reflect a net increase of $1.7 billion, which brings the total appropriation for 2018-19 for the department to $4.9 billion. The vast majority of these requested funds are to resolve long-standing litigation and to support concrete self-determination measures, including the $155 million for the sixties scoop settlement, $666 million for special claims out of the Williams Treaties, $239 million for the Little Red River Cree Nation agricultural benefits specific claims, and $53.9 million for other out-of-court settlements. There is $116 million that is to be reprofiled back to the specific claims settlement fund, and $129 million to support the implementation of the government-to-government relationship with the Manitoba Metis Federation.

The Sixties Scoop is a dark and painful chapter in Canada's history.

The requested $155 million will fund the approved settlement, which resolves the issues raised by the longest-standing case of ongoing litigation and similar class actions. Sixties scoop survivors have also identified their desire to reconnect with their communities, and that is why the settlement includes $50 million for a foundation for healing, commemoration, education, language and culture.

Our government knows there are other claims that remain unresolved, and we are committed to addressing the remaining harm suffered by other indigenous children as a result of the sixties scoop.

The funding of $666 million is to make settlement payments to the seven Williams Treaties First Nations, which will resolve the Alderville litigation. The Williams Treaties First Nations have been fighting in court for more than 25 years to redress injustices involving compensation, land and harvesting rights dating back to 1923.

Earlier this month, the settlement of these long-standing claims was celebrated at a moving ceremony that I was honoured to attend with the Williams Treaty chiefs, community members and the Government of Ontario. Achieved through dialogue and in partnership, it includes financial compensation, recognition of treaty harvesting rights and entitlement to add additional reserve land.

Canada and Ontario also apologized for the negative impacts of these treaties.

As Chief Kelly LaRocca has said, “this settlement agreement marks the beginning of healing for our people.”

Canada has also been negotiating with 21 first nations to resolve specific claims alleging that Canada failed to provide agricultural benefits under Treaty 8.

Agreements have been signed with 18 First Nations, and funds have been paid.

The related $239 million in supplementary estimates is to fund the settlement with Little Red River Cree Nation, which is one of three remaining first nations, out of the 21, still to receive payment.

As these concrete examples show, our government understands that negotiation rather than litigation is the best way to right historical wrongs and settle past grievances. I also think it's important to highlight that these settlements resolve legal liabilities of the Government of Canada. We believe that resolving litigation out of court is not only the right thing to do, but the most responsible and effective way to manage taxpayers' dollars. Negotiated settlements are not only often less costly, but able to achieve investments in healing, commemoration, wellness and culture initiatives, in addition to the compensation.

We are also moving forward with renewed nation-to-nation, government-to-government and Inuit-to-Crown relationships.

The funding of $129 million is for the implementation of a renewed government-to-government relationship with the Manitoba Metis Federation. This includes funding to support governance capacity to assist the Manitoba Metis Federation in its transition from a corporate entity to a government and to implement its vision of greater self-determination. Its negotiations with the Government of Canada represent the first self-government negotiations between Canada and a Métis collective south of 60 and will include discussions to establish a long-term self-government fiscal relationship.

The funding requested through supplementary estimates (A) supports our government's commitment to honour treaties, resolve claims through negotiations and accelerate indigenous self-determination.

I urge you to approve these supplementary estimates, and I look forward to taking your questions.

The Chair Liberal MaryAnn Mihychuk

Thank you, Minister Bennett. You're right on time.

We'll open up the questioning with MP Mike Bossio.

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you so much, Minister, for making the time once again—as you have so often—to come to our committee and hear our questions and expand on some of your remarks.

In your remarks, you outlined your broad approach to the rights recognition and implementation framework. The government said from day one that it would renew the relationship with first nations, Inuit and Métis peoples “based on the recognition of rights, respect, co-operation, and partnership”.

We have heard a strong expectation from indigenous partners that the framework be properly co-developed. There seems to be a desire for continued engagement. As the national chief said, indigenous groups aren't necessarily saying no to the framework, but they do want to make sure they are not rushed. Members of the committee, who presumably will be involved in the review of any legislation, are also very interested in the timing of the process.

Can you update us on how long you think the consultation process will take and when we will likely see legislation introduced?

Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON

I think it's really important, as the Prime Minister spoke about in the House of Commons on February 14, that the framework have both policy and legislation. I don't think there's any question that people want us to change these policies, which are terribly flawed—the comprehensive claims policy, the specific claims policy and the inherent right policy. We are working with our partners to move forward on those now. I think a lot of people feel that the sooner those changes are made, the sooner the impediments are out of their path to self-determination.

On the legislation piece, there are things that self-governing nations and the Land Claims Coalition have been asking for for a very long time—changes to the Interpretation Act, perhaps putting in place a dispute resolution framework. As I spoke about in my remarks, there is a need for treaty oversight...and what the UN declaration called treaty violation. How do we hold Canada to account when we sign an agreement to make sure that it takes place?

We will work on that kind of co-development and that kind of legislation at the same time. That tends to be with the self-determining nations, the Inuit as well as the Métis. For the first nations, the Indian Act bands, it's quite clear that National Chief Bellegarde and the bands within the AFN want the time to co-develop any legislation that would affect them.

But we are very clear that nothing will be imposed on anyone. The legislation, in its inception, was really to hold Canada to account in the way that we end up being accountable to our partners for the agreements we have signed with them.

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

There seem to be a number of views out there about what the framework is and what it's meant to do. I know you touched on a few aspects of it in your comments just now, but can you please explain to the committee what the framework is meant to accomplish, and just as important, what the framework will not do?

4 p.m.

Liberal

Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON

The framework is the movement on what has been flawed policies: changing them and getting the problems removed from what was the comprehensive claims policy, the specific claims policy and the inherent right policy.

These are the things the Prime Minister talked about on February 14. From a denial of rights approach, where people had to claim their rights and then go to court to prove those rights, we are moving to an approach that means that those rights are recognized; they're section 35 rights recognized up front. Then we go to the table to discuss how communities want to exercise and implement those rights.

That's the new approach. It is not to define rights or to enforce any rights; I think there is some misinformation out there. It certainly isn't to describe what a nation is or what their governments would be. That will be up to nations to decide themselves.

4 p.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

It's not just about moving toward self-determination as quickly as we possibly can to offload Canada's responsibilities. This is also working toward a certainty of accountability of the Canadian government to honour those agreements once they are in place.

4 p.m.

Liberal

Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON

That's correct.

There are certain places where we are correcting previous agreements that were signed, which had things like cede and surrender, and extinguishment.

Two processes are going on for the Gwich'in Nation. One is their process to self-determination, but they are also modernizing their treaty to make sure that cede and surrender, and those real barriers to others wanting to embark on the path of self-determination, are being eliminated.

We are eliminating them in practice at the rights recognition tables. We need to have them removed in policy and/or legislation.

4 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal MaryAnn Mihychuk

You have 30 seconds.

4 p.m.

Liberal

Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON

I'll end it there. I don't think there's enough time to get into the next question.

4 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal MaryAnn Mihychuk

Questioning now moves to MP Cathy McLeod.

4 p.m.

Conservative

Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

Thank you, Minister. I always appreciate it when you come here.

This committee has been lonely and underutilized. We have been expecting significant commitments by your government in a host of areas. Just to name a few, child welfare legislation and the indigenous language act are nowhere to be seen.

You talked about the rights and recognition framework.

You promised. The Prime Minister stood up in Parliament and said, “it is our firm intention to have the framework introduced later this year and implemented before the next election.” That's over-promise, under-delivery.

The other thing he promised to do.... Not only was there going to be talking with first nations and engaging, but also talking to civil society, industry and the business community. Has any work been done in that conversation?

4 p.m.

Liberal

Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON

Absolutely.

I think it's important that we point out that pieces of legislation are coming forward in protecting and revitalizing child and family services and indigenous languages. In terms of other calls to action, there will be a change in the oath of citizenship. There is also the reconciliation council. This will address four of the calls to action. Pieces of legislation are coming forward.

As we go, I think there is no question that we have to do a better job with the 95% of Canadians who are not from an indigenous background. I've certainly been interested in your help as parliamentarians as to how we can make sure that all Canadians feel part of this. This was the criticism of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, that Canadians didn't feel part of it or understand it.

We did a round table in Dryden on anti-racism with the Dryden Area Anti-Racism Network, DAARN.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

Okay, thank you, Minister.

Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON

We would love to be able to do more of that. Certainly Natural Resources Canada did their senior-level sessions with industry, and they will be doing even more.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

I appreciate that. Thank you.

The addition to reserve was buried in the budget. It was division 19. I asked that we look at that at this committee, and I was denied the opportunity to have any conversation around division 19.

Again, it was buried in the budget; we had no opportunity to look at this piece of legislation. The Senate did have some opportunities. Of course, what happened when it went to the Senate was that some of the major proponents—some of the people who would be most impacted—said they had no idea that was coming down the pipe.

Minister, when you have the people who are going to be most impacted by legislation that is buried in a budget bill saying, “I had no idea it was coming”, and chiefs across this country saying, “I got a letter, but I really didn't know what it meant”, my question is this: Is this your idea of proper consultation before you introduce legislation in the House? Is it to bury it in a budget bill, not allow the indigenous affairs committee to look at it, and not even talk to the proponents of the legislation?

Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON

Cathy, even when I sat where you were sitting, or maybe I was down here as third party at this committee.... The problems and the slowness with which ATRs are accomplished are still an issue.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

We're not questioning that it needed changing. What I am questioning is not having it in the budget, contrary to your promises, burying it in a budget bill and not allowing proper scrutiny by us. From all appearances, having that proper scrutiny would have enabled us to see that indeed the proper consultation—which you committed to as a government—has not been done.

Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON

I think that most of the problems with the ATR have been administrative. Our government is too slow—and previous governments have been too slow—in actually making the changes.

These are quite often where a first nation has purchased a piece of property and it's up to us to make that reserve land. It really hinders their economic development.

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

I'm not questioning that, but when you have the Manitoba—

Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON

I will tell you that Dr. Philpott is working very hard on that. It falls within her responsibilities with the Indian Act bands and—

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

Thank you, Minister. That leads me to the next question.

There was going to be legislation to separate the two departments. I understand there was an order in council that we have not been privy to in any form. Is it accurate that you still have to sign off on everything in the department as the senior minister, in terms of some of the measures that go ahead, because we haven't had proper legislation tabled?

Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON

As you know, we continue to consult on where things are best placed. Obviously, moving the first nations and Inuit health branch over to Dr. Philpott was a very significant piece of work. We needed to consult with the public servants. I think we're well on our way—

4:05 p.m.

Conservative

Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

Are you still the senior minister?