Evidence of meeting #149 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 c-92.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal MaryAnn Mihychuk
We're committee bingeing, but it has been well worth it.
Welcome to the unceded territory of the Algonquin people, and a special recognition of Manitoba. I come from Treaty 1. That's where I live now in the homeland of the Métis people, but I've had the opportunity to be on many nations in Manitoba and across the country.
What is happening to indigenous children is a tragedy and the system is not working, so we are very anxious to hear from you and to hear your perspectives on Bill C-92. In this panel we will begin with the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs.
Welcome, Arlen. You can start anytime you like.
11:35 a.m.
Grand Chief Arlen Dumas Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs
Excellent. Thank you very much.
I am Grand Chief Arlen Dumas from the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs. Thanks for the opportunity to speak on this very important issue.
As our moderator said, Manitoba is ground zero for child welfare apprehensions. That validates statements made by representatives of the government who have said that it is a humanitarian crisis.
First, I want to acknowledge the land we're on, with our relatives here, and bring greetings from the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs. I want to also acknowledge the work of the chiefs and members of the women's council, who have carried the brunt of the work for the past few years, at the behest of the chiefs. I also want to commend Manitoba for the great work it has done in child welfare for the last 40 years, to figure out innovative ways to collaborate with our partners. When you have willing partners, you're able to do tremendous things.
However, today I'm bringing forward the message that the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs cannot support this legislation as is, and that if we continue to work down this path, it is going to do nothing but cause further complications. It will open doors for conflict. It will do away with the past 40 years of good work and collaboration we've attempted to do. Fundamentally, the problem is our province.
The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs—our region—was never consulted to work on this legislation. We took the initiative well over a year ago to do some groundwork, build upon the successes of our past and come up with a tangible solution and concrete plan, with our own legislation to deal with the intricate nature of our province and our history. The department invested in that past practice—that good work—and we had begun quite an extensive engagement, working with our whole region to come up with a concept that would better serve everybody. That is called the bringing our children home act, which is Manitoba-made.
Therefore, it was quite a surprise when Bill C-92 was presented to us. It was almost a slap in the face, because we had invested so much of our time in bringing forward a solution that everybody could build upon.
I've heard the aspirations of previous presenters, but the reality of our lives, in our communities, is that if you don't nail things down properly, you'll have an interim agreement for 40 to 50 years. We took the initiative, as Manitoba, to bring forward a solution that everybody could build upon.
There was no consultation. This will interfere with our operations in our communities and our nations. It will bring forward more division. It will create, as I said earlier, more conflict with our partners in our region. Therefore, the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs will not be able to support Bill C-92.
Another part of the problem with this bill is that it's pan-indigenous in nature. All of you whom I've spoken with before come from various parts of the country where you have unique agreements and relationships with your communities. This legislation will impact those individual agreements. There's actually quite a concern that you will be doing away with very important work that has been done in other regions, simply because you will be pulling the province into more of a role than they need to have. It's very problematic.
The whole issue we have in Manitoba is the province. To assume that, over time, we will have a wonderful working relationship with the very entities that are actually kidnapping our kids is wrong. We can't even get the Province of Manitoba to sign on to a carbon tax, let alone make a meaningful agreement with first nations communities or their first nations partners.
The Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs is the political apparatus for our region. There are other entities that the assembly has mandated to play specific roles in regard to working with our partners, but we represent the will of the chiefs, and the will of the chiefs is that we want to secure our own future, with our own processes and our own practices.
We've established our credibility over the past 40 years, and that is the direction we're going. We won't be able to support Bill C-92, as it comes with a myriad of issues and actually will exacerbate the problems that currently exist, as well as the fact that there are no fiscal guarantees in this legislation. It will continue to perpetuate the conflicts and the jurisdictional fumbling that happens. Therefore, the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs will not be supportive of Bill C-92.
I plead with you now that we rethink this legislation and that we bring our minds together in the best way. If we don't, I guarantee we will have conflict because we will be forced to kick the provinces out of our communities. The instruments that we've attempted to work with over the past 40 years will bring conflict to our communities. They will further kidnap our children. They will further displace people from their homes and their identities, and we will all be hard done by if we allow this to go through. That's the message I'm bringing today.
If there are any technical issues, I'm happy to provide you with whatever technical expertise you want. As I said, we have a wealth of skilled people who've brought forward our bringing our children home act, and who have engaged our communities to bring forward a true representation of what we want and need to do in Manitoba. This pan-indigenous approach won't work.
[Witness spoke in Cree]
[English]
I know time is precious.
Thank you very much.
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal MaryAnn Mihychuk
Thank you.
We are now moving to the Ottawa Inuit Children's Centre. We have Alyssa Flaherty-Spence and Karen Baker-Anderson.
However you want to split your time or whoever is going to speak is up to you, so please begin.
May 9th, 2019 / 11:40 a.m.
Alyssa Flaherty-Spence President, Ottawa Inuit Children's Centre
[Witness spoke in Inuktitut]
[English]
Good morning. Thank you for having me here. My name is Alyssa Flaherty-Spence. I'm the President of what was previously known as Ottawa Inuit Children's Centre, now Inuuqatigiit Centre for Inuit Children, Youth and Families. We created this new name to reflect our community.
Thank you for having us here, members and Madam Chair. At Inuuqatigiit, we serve Inuit children, youth and families in the city of Ottawa. Our objective and mandate, in partnership with parents and the community, is to foster strong Inuit children, youth and families by providing a learning environment that will enhance the children's overall development through foster parenting, support and education, while encouraging Inuit to be proud of their Inuit culture and language.
We were established in 2005 by parents and children enrolled in the head start program in Ottawa. Today we are a multi-service Inuit organization that provides cultural, educational, recreational and social support services to children, youth and families of Ottawa's growing Inuit community. By providing equitable access to services and family support networks, Inuuqatigiit encourages Inuit children, youth and families in Ottawa to be strong, healthy and proud community members with knowledge of their cultural connection to the local Inuit community. We do this work through strong, culturally based programming and individualized services for children, youth and families, all with a view to improving their ability to live good lives. Inuit principles form the basis of all our programs and advocacy work.
Whom do we serve? As many of you may know, there is a large Inuit population in Ottawa, and they have come here for many different reasons—professional and specialist medical services and appointments, education, work, serving detention times and the needs of Nunavut children related to foster parenting, adoption and group homes. Overall, this bill will affect our Inuit community here in Ottawa and across southern Canada, because we are a service delivery agent for Inuit children, youth and families, with a focus on assisting in areas concerned with child and family services.
How will this bill affect children and youth in Ottawa? Inter-jurisdictional consequences and realities come into play here. As I mentioned, a lot of Inuit children are coming to Ottawa from Nunavut. Currently we have a large number of Inuit in Ottawa who need access to essential services simply because they are not provided in their homeland in Nunavut. This issue gives rise to inter-jurisdictional concerns that need to be addressed in this legislation. A large number of Inuit children need to access basic services here in Ottawa, and many have to avail themselves of child and family services in Ontario.
The second aspect of this legislation is data disaggregation and collection, specifically in paragraph 28(a), as Natan Obed, my colleague from the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, mentioned the other day. Currently we have incomplete data for Inuit children and youth in care in Ontario and in southern Canada generally. However, because we are an ongoing, on-the-ground agency focused on community partnerships, we have relationships with people like CAS, but this is not the case for all agencies and we can be taken as an exception.
Where are our children? This is what we need to know with this data collection. Inuuqatigiit knows that we have a large population of Inuit accessing services like CAS here in Ottawa, because we are on the ground assisting families day to day. However, we still need this data collection and we have Inuit-specific data needs.
We need provinces and territories to have exact numbers to ensure Inuit children are being serviced outside Inuit Nunangat in a way that is accessible, equitable and culturally appropriate for Inuit.
On Inuit-specific data—my colleague to my left mentioned this—we have a pan-indigenous approach right now under paragraph 28(a). Inuuqatigiit is successful because we provide Inuit culturally based programming and services for Inuit children and families, and we take pride in this. We need active and ongoing Inuit-specific data and reports to understand where the needs are for Inuit children, youth and families and to provide equitable, accessible and culturally appropriate services.
One part I will commend you for is paragraphs 9(2)(a) to (e), connection to culture and continuity. This section is vital to the well-being of Inuit children as they are involved with child and family services. Many children we service need this cultural continuity more, given the distance and isolation from their homelands in Inuit Nunangat. Homesickness and being away from their communities in Inuit Nunangat can have harsh consequences and can cause more harm than anything. Inuit are coming to Ontario and other provinces from their homelands, and this can have a strong influence on their livelihood.
Last, but certainly not least, are the funding gaps that are not within this legislation. As we are children and youth service providers, we are currently doing this work, as is, without resources. Children, youth and family agencies look to this type of legislation and wonder what this type of legislation is going to do that we aren't already doing. Inuuqatigiit and community-based organizations do this work but with little to no resources. It would be disrespectful to Inuit children, youth and families in Ottawa and within Inuit Nunangat if I did not make this a priority and speak to you about it. I'm asking for funding to be incorporated into this legislation. I'm hoping you strongly consider this and, if so, in a distinctive and equitable way for Inuit.
I will now pass the mike on to my colleague and executive director, Karen Baker-Anderson, who has been involved in the community for many, many years.
11:50 a.m.
Karen Baker-Anderson Executive Director, Ottawa Inuit Children's Centre
What she's saying is that I'm old.
Dear members of the standing committee, I'm honoured to be here to speak to you about a topic that I am completely passionate about, Inuit children and child protection.
As the Executive Director of Inuuqatigiit, I have walked the journey with these families who have had involvement with child welfare. I have witnessed the look in the child's eye as they leave our centre and are put in the car of a complete stranger, not knowing where they are about to go. I have seen the eyes of a mother who has lost her child and know that the pain cannot be described.
If this legislation can result in positive change for our Inuit children in this country, then Inuuqatigiit fully supports this legislation and the work, and we support the views of ITK. We support Bill C-92 in hope that it recognizes, in order for this legislation to put the rights of children at the centre of all court decisions, the change from a systemic point of view must occur at the same time and on the ground. We cannot wait for this bill to be passed. We already know what the issues are. Otherwise, this legislation just becomes an attempt to solve a problem from a political viewpoint but truly without a foot in the reality of the community and the children we see every day.
How do we as Canadians ever accept in this country that 52% of the children in care are indigenous while they only represent 7% of the population?
The connection of this legislation to the calls of actions under the TRC are to be commended. As an agency that serves Inuit children from all four land claims, we have worked with our Ottawa CAS to build a relationship with them to ensure that families stay together. It isn't perfect, but we know that real change is happening in Ottawa. Child protection services are required in this country.
Canadians need to realize the context for why we have so many kids in care. Inuit have lived experience of years and years of multiple levels of trauma. This trauma has a profound impact on them, including on their ability to parent their children. I do feel this is acknowledged in this legislation.
If trauma is the root cause, and Canadian government takes ownership of the causes of that trauma, then why are we here just talking about legislation? We need funding. We need to ensure that the healing process is happening now.
In reviewing the files of the children in care in Ottawa, we can tell you that the causes.... I have actual stats on the number of Inuit children in care and what the causes are for them being apprehended. I can you tell you that they are trauma based.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
11:50 a.m.
Executive Director, Ottawa Inuit Children's Centre
Okay. The last point I want to make is that we talk about this being a child welfare issue. It is a system issue. We know that children are being apprehended through many systems. We know the calls are coming from schools, police and pediatric care. We need to ensure that this is a system approach that ensures the intent of Bill C-92 to turn around the children protection situation in this country. We owe this to our Inuit children so that the story of the next generation of our children is filled with hope and not dismay.
Thank you.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal MaryAnn Mihychuk
Thank you.
We are now at our last presenter, who is Natasha Reimer, Director for Manitoba, Youth in Care Canada and Foster Up founder. Welcome to our committee. You can begin any time you like.
11:55 a.m.
Natasha Reimer Director for Manitoba, Youth in Care Canada and Foster Up Founder, As an Individual
Tansi. My name is Natasha Reimer. I'm an alumna from the Manitoba child welfare system.
I want to thank the committee for inviting me to speak before you today.
I come before the committee speaking of my own lived experience and the experiences of those within my community. I do not speak for all indigenous children and youth in care, but I wanted to share my story and hopefully provide some insight on how the system has affected my life and how we should be moving forward.
I was one of the many kids who grew up in foster care. I first entered the system at the age of one. I was then adopted into a white family. My name was changed and I never got to reconnect with my biological family again.
I didn't get to grow up learning about my culture, my languages, and I spent a lot of time wondering who I was, where I came from, if my real parents were alive. This isn't uncommon for kids in care. Kids in care are being placed in homes that aren't equipped to deal with the sensitivity regarding the intergenerational trauma of residential schools that indigenous children have.
For me, growing up was kind of a living nightmare. I then re-entered the system due to my adoption failing at 14, and at that time, the message was just “Survive, kid.”
Those within the system are disadvantaged due to the challenges they have to face in the system. When you are in foster care, secondary school or even a higher level of school is not something social workers or foster parents talk to you about. The challenges you face in the system include the cost of moves, and for me, it was over seven different foster homes, transitioning from rural to urban and long transition periods when I started school. The long transition periods were due to bouncing around from foster home to foster home in the middle of semesters.
This in itself is a disruption of children's growth journey. Kids in care have really low.... In Manitoba we have a 33% rate of graduating from high school. These systems need to look at reducing the number of transitions happening to these kids.
I feel that indigenous kids are the most vulnerable children in Canada. I agree with what the bill says about ensuring that cultural and traditional practices are accessible, but I think it's more important that we make sure that.... My problem is with paragraph 16(e) when it says “other adult”. I fell into that category of “other adult”, and I don't wish that on anybody, to grow up disconnected from their community. I think that section needs to be looked at, and if you are going to have other adults outside the community who are non-indigenous taking care of indigenous children and youth in care, you need to make sure they have the adequate training and knowledge and education surrounding the legacy of residential schools, the trauma of colonialism, the harms that have been done to indigenous peoples.
As well, it's important to recognize that Jordan's principle was never given reference in this. We need to also look at what we consider the best interest of the child. Youth have a voice. They know what's good for them. They have important ideas and they know their situations better than anyone else.
The last point I want to make is about post-care. Aging out of care in Manitoba is 18. I was lucky to have an extension of care until 21. Still, there's nothing mentioning the transition to out of care and there's nothing mentioning the supports for these individuals. There's nothing acknowledging the difficulties these individuals face while in care during their youth and childhood, the fact that they may not even graduate from high school by the age of 18.
We need to look at how we are going to support these individuals. They should not just survive but be able to thrive. They should be able to have opportunities to access post-secondary education, to live their best lives. That is something I find a little concerning, that it is not really mentioned in this bill.
That's all I have to say. Thank you so much for listening to me today.
Noon
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Cathy McLeod
Thank you for that very compelling testimony, and to all the witnesses.
We'll start our first round, with MP Dan Vandal—
Noon
Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs
I apologize. I wasn't aware of your protocol here. I actually skipped over allowing my co-witness to speak, because I assumed that she would be given her own time, her own opportunity.
Noon
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Cathy McLeod
We're five minutes late in terms of our witness time. We could give you a couple of minutes.
Noon
Conservative
Noon
Cora Morgan First Nations Family Advocate, Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs
Thank you. I'll do my best to be very quick.
I just want to acknowledge the territory and the families that we serve at the First Nations Family Advocate Office. I hope that I do justice to what we are struggling with in Manitoba.
Right now, we have over 11,000 children in care under the child welfare system in Manitoba. I think about this as a sports stadium or arena, where those seats are filled up with children who are without their parents. Of the 11,000 of them, 9,000 are first nations children. When we factor in the parents of those children, because they are suffering too, we're looking at another 20,000 people at minimum. When we factor in the grandparents, that's another 40,000. All our first nations people in Manitoba are touched by the child welfare system in one way or another.
I want to share a message from one of our elders, William Lathlin. He says the most violent act you can commit against a woman is to steal her child or take her child from her. We see that every single day at the First Nations Family Advocate Office, which is part of the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, who have been committed to addressing the atrocity of Manitoba Child and Family Services for the last 30 years in Manitoba.
I want to acknowledge that between 2008 and 2016, there were 546 first nation children who died in the child welfare system in Manitoba, and that rate of death is higher than the average for children in the residential school period nationally. We're talking of just our province alone.
What we have going on right now we don't like to compare to residential school, but in the days of residential school our children spent their most fundamental years of life with their parents, and that was from birth until they were four, five or six years old. Right now in Winnipeg, we have the highest rate nationally of newborn apprehensions. This Monday alone, our office responded to four newborn babies about to be apprehended in just one day. That was this week, and that happens every single day.
I want to believe that we're living in a moment where something that is comparable to or potentially even worse than residential school is going on. I want to believe that in the days of residential school, mainstream society wasn't aware of what was happening to the children, and today, we do. Although we can never fully feel those intergenerational effects, they crop up in every aspect of our lives as first nations people. The trajectory for our first nations children in care is bleak. They have high rates of homelessness, mental health issues, incarceration, suicide, post-traumatic stress, addictions, poverty, low education levels, loss of identity—and it goes on and on.
What we do today and in this moment will affect thousands of people. There's a lot at stake. One of the elders who I used to spend time with about 15 years ago had said to me, when those settlements were coming out for residential schools, “They can keep my money, just ensure that this never happens to our children again.” At the time, I didn't understand it, but I do now.
We've had lots of tragedy. I spoke about the deaths, but in 2005 we had Phoenix Sinclair, who died in the child welfare system. Eleven years later a report came out, but the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs took action because they weren't satisfied with the engagement. They created their own engagement and precipitated the beginnings of the bringing our children home act, which was the “Bringing Our Children Home” report.
When Tina Fontaine was murdered in 2014, the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs again responded by creating the First Nations Family Advocate Office. It opened on June 1, 2015. This got the attention of Minister Bennett. Minister Bennett came and visited the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs and me as the first nations family advocate. She met the families we worked with and met a newborn baby who we helped prevent the apprehension of.
When INAC divided, Minister Philpott committed to honour those commitments made by Minister Bennett, and then furthermore, they committed to a memorandum of understanding with the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs in December 2017.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Cathy McLeod
Ms. Morgan, could I get you to wrap up? We do want everyone to get at least one round in.
12:05 p.m.
First Nations Family Advocate, Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs
Sure.
At the end of the day, we do not have a great relationship with the Province of Manitoba. Their reforms over the years have been more detrimental. The number of our kids in care has continually grown. Their current reforms are really dangerous for our families. Our Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs experts, elders and women's council members have invested a lot of time in creating the bringing our children home act. I believe that our families in Manitoba deserve nothing less.
I don't believe there is going to be a will for the province to accept Bill C-92. Because the question of finance and funding is so up in the air, I could hardly see them doing a paradigm shift and, on top of that, investing in this. Because the funding isn't spelled out, you can't have the expectation that our provincial government will contribute.
Meegwetch.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Dan Vandal Liberal Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB
Thank you very much.
First of all, thank you for all of your presentations. They were very good.
I've worked on this for a while and the nexus point of the bill is really to affirm the inherent right of all indigenous nations across Canada, including Manitoba, to develop and to implement their own laws regarding child welfare.
I want to read directly from the bill. Clause 22 talks about indigenous nations and federal laws, stating, “If there is a conflict or inconsistency between a provision respecting child and family services that is in a law of an Indigenous group, community or people and a provision respecting child and family services” that is a federal act, “the provision that is in the law of the Indigenous group, community or people prevails to the extent of the conflict or inconsistency.”
Subclause 22(3) also concerns relations with the province:
For greater certainty, if there is a conflict or inconsistency between a provision respecting child and family services that is in a law of an Indigenous group, community or people and a provision respecting child and family services that is in a provincial Act or regulation, the provision that is in the law of the Indigenous group community or people prevails to the extent of the conflict or inconsistency.
My question is for Grand Chief Dumas. I haven't read your bill, but if there is a conflict with either the province or the federal government, your law would prevail. Based on that, I'm having a hard time understanding where the conflict is that you or the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs have with this bill.
12:05 p.m.
Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs
If I may, Dan, I'm a little surprised at your question as I had called you into my office specifically with former chief Jim Bear to discuss this issue almost two years ago. I'm surprised you haven't read the bringing our children home act, as you're from our province.
If you follow the logic of the legislation, fundamentally the minister has overarching authority. I would also bring forward the examples of what I had said earlier. At this moment, this government is having a difficult time having provincial governments sign on to a carbon tax agreement that is federal law. I'm no lawyer, but I'm sure you've heard of the notwithstanding clause. I'm sure you have heard of divisions of powers and all of those arguments and all that rhetoric that's going to happen. Fundamentally, if you truly want to deal with this issue, take a look at section 88 of the Indian Act. Remove that and we'll be able to move forward. That already exists.
It's not going to work, Dan. I'm telling you that, and we're bringing forward 40 years' worth of attempts of trying to work in good faith. We developed agencies. We developed authorities, but fundamentally the province's authority is recognized before ours. The legislation can say that but the actual implementation of it is another thing.
12:05 p.m.
Liberal
Dan Vandal Liberal Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB
You're saying that, in spite of the words in the bill that give you paramountcy over provincial laws and federal laws, that's not going to happen.
12:05 p.m.
Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs
It won't happen. You also need to have a full appreciation of the history of precedent that has been set. The whole history of all the litigation that has happened and all of those other pieces will be incorporated into the ongoing operations of our system.
12:10 p.m.
Liberal
Dan Vandal Liberal Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB
Grand Chief, with all due respect to your opinion, we've had constitutional experts sitting where you are now, saying that the provisions in this bill shall override the provincial perspective, or even the federal perspective. We have spoken to a lot of people—constitutional experts—who have an opinion differing from yours.
12:10 p.m.
Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs
Well, with all due respect, Dan, I've heard constitutional experts tell me for 30 years that my section 35 rights were an empty box. Magically, within the last three years, I've been told that my constitutional section 35 rights are full. At the end of the day, we know the history and legacy of this issue, and if we don't take the opportunity to do it properly, with people who have the proper insight, then it won't move forward.
