Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on May 14th, 2019

[The Chair, Liberal, MaryAnn Mihychuk]

Let's call the panel together. I see we're all ready to go.

On behalf of the committee, welcome. We are studying one of the most important issues facing Canada right now, how we treat our indigenous children in a system that looks as though it has let down our families and our nation. We're on the unceded territory of the Algonquin people.

The way the process goes, you'll each have 10 minutes to present, and after that we'll go to questions from members.

We have the Southern Chiefs' Organization and Grand Chief Jerry Daniels.

As well, we have, from the Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations, Morley Watson; and from Peter Ballantyne Child and Family Services, which crosses Saskatchewan and Manitoba, Vera Sayese.

Welcome.

Let's start with Grand Chief Jerry Daniels. Thank you for coming.

[Grand Chief Jerry Daniels, Southern Chiefs' Organization Inc.]

Good morning. Thank you, members of the committee, for allowing me some time to speak on a very important matter that affects our children, our families, our communities and the nation.

My name is Jerry Daniels. I'm the grand chief for the Southern Chiefs' Organization: 34 first nations in southern Manitoba, primarily the Anishinabe and Dakota peoples; 90,000 citizens in total.

[Witness spoke in Ojibwe as follows:]

Ogimaamakwad ndizhinikaaz Binesii ndoodem.

[Ojibwe text translated as follows:]

Leading cloud is my name, Thunderbird is my clan.

[English]

My relatives, I am happy to come and join you and to speak about a legislative act that I know is being discussed in great detail about how it can impact the quality of life of our children, how it can create opportunity. We're talking about a system that has had very detrimental effects on many of our children and our families, and has caused great harm over a great number of years. Some have even characterized it as a continuation of the residential school era.

First nations have the inherent right to self-determination and self-government. We have laws, customs and have entered into treaty. First nations have our own ways of caring for our children. What I will share with you as well is that I'm actually a member of the people who have gone through the CFS system. As a young person I was in group homes and I struggled as a young person. My family moved around a lot and I ended up there. However, in my experience I was able to meet many elders and many good people who were a part of the system and helped me to become who I am and helped me to establish some values. In fact, the first sweat lodge that I went to was through the CFS system. It was at the Selkirk Healing Centre in Manitoba.

First nations have our own ways of keeping our families and communities strong and intact. However, our laws, institutions and system have been impacted by the Canadian legal system, specifically the CFS Act.

We have been focused on supporting community-driven solutions. Since I've been in office, which is a little over two years, I have tried to focus on what's working in Manitoba. My focus shifted to the Sandy Bay First Nation where we've seen changes in the number of children who were in care. They brought down the number of children by using more practical techniques in working with families. They worked with families and with the extended family and they found other means to ensure the best interests of the child...which didn't result in the apprehension or the break-up of the family. That's where I'd like to focus, and I think that's where the priorities need to be when we think of CFS.

We have a CFS liaison at the Southern Chiefs' Organization. We are actually the primary authority for CFS in southern Manitoba. We make the board appointments to the southern authority, which is the regulatory body for all of the agencies in southern Manitoba. We have been collaborating with them over the last couple of years very intensely to ensure that the regulations are reflecting community needs and that they're supportive of what needs to happen on the ground.

We have a lot of challenges, but I don't think the challenges are insurmountable. I think we're quite capable of ensuring that families are reunited and that the best interests of the child are established, as well as the cultural values and traditions of our people, which enable our children to have a strong foundation in their identity.

I want to talk about how we really need federal intervention when it comes to CFS. We've had a great deal of trouble working with the province on finding common ground when it comes to the customary care. The Southern Chiefs' Organization supported it. I steer, with the province...and we work with them and we agreed in principle what customary care would be, which is community laws, community direction.

That would drive priorities and regulations and how children would be supported or how we would deal with a situation that isn't in the interests of the child.

It has been our focus over the last couple of years. What we are starting to see is that there is a change from where we had thought it would be—where the customary care would be really done with the community and the family—to now almost like an agency-driven personal care plan, which you can already do through the current legislation.

When I look at the proposed legislation when we're talking about substantive equality and the best interests of the child, I think that these are good things. I don't think that we're ever going to get it totally right. I think that the practicality of any legislation on the ground is subject to the people who are implementing it and subject to the interpretation of those people in the communities and throughout the region.

People in the communities care. They're not there to kidnap our children. They're there to protect our children and to do the best job that they can. I truly believe that. I don't think that people in CFS agencies, the workers, are there to do anything other than that, so if they are given the ability to direct funding towards helping families and ensuring there is a plan and that families are supported, you're going to see better outcomes.

That is why I support Bill C-92. It is really about being able to give first nations the jurisdiction, to not allow interference in that jurisdiction and to support it. Like others who are here and who have just presented at this committee, and like others, I'm sure, who have been here, I have concerns about funding: that it may not be enough for the governance side, that it may not be enough for the service delivery side.

My hope is that the substantive equality provision will reflect that and that it will translate into enough funding so that we get it right. The fact that Manitoba has such a high number of children.... It is ground zero for CFS. We have to be given an opportunity to take direct control of CFS, and it needs to be funded properly. We are prepared to do that. We've been doing that. We've been working with CFS directors. We've been connecting them with our community leadership. We've been including our women and our grandmothers in the process. That is the approach that we're taking, so it's my hope that people continue to work to move the agenda forward, to focus on supporting families and the community. If we can allow for them to take the lead on this, I think you're going to see child and family services, child welfare, delivered much more effectively in the community and supported much more effectively.

It's time for government, really, to get out of the way and to allow for that. They're going to make mistakes the same way government has been making mistakes for the last hundred years, and they're going to continue to make mistakes. However, we learn and we adjust, and we continue to build off knowledge from those situations.

That's our argument. We do not think that Bill C-92 is going to be the end-all for CFS. We think that it's going to be an interim measure. Like any other act that is passed through this Parliament, it's going to have to be changed and adjusted through the experience that's lived on the ground.

That's what I'm here to communicate to you. I hope that this bill is moved forward so that we can get on with supporting the development of laws at a community and regional level, and focus on what substantive equality really means and how that's actually going to look through the comprehensive negotiated agreements that are going to have to take place after the bill is passed. Those are going to include community members. They're going to include people in the community. They're going to include regional bodies.

That is going to be the final agreement in the interim, once again. It's an agreement, but it's still a wait and see, because you have to see the impacts. The quality of life of those people who are ending up in jails, who are ending up on the street, is going to improve, because you're going to have a community-driven strategy. That is the most important part of this bill.

Meegwetch.

[The Chair, Liberal, MaryAnn Mihychuk]

Thank you.

We move to Morley Watson, First Vice-Chief, Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations. You have had a long trip from home, B.C., and thank you for coming out.

[Morley Watson, First Vice-Chief, Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good morning to our senators, members of Parliament, as well as our Assembly of First Nations staff who are with us. I want to thank you for the prayers offered to us this morning. I want to, as you did Madam Chairman, acknowledge the Algonquin nation as we are meeting on its territory.

I am Vice-Chief Morley Watson, and I hold the portfolio of health and social development for the Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations.

Bill C-92 contemplates critical and long overdue reconciliation of jurisdiction over first nations children across Canada. It is the top issue for first nations in Saskatchewan as we realize that we have the second highest number of children in care and more than 80% of those children are our children. We have also endured, and continue to endure, one of the most dysfunctional child welfare systems infested with some of the most racist and derogatory attitudes that effectively produces results contrary to the fundamental values and principles of child welfare.

From residential schools to the sixties scoop, to modern-day decisions to apprehend children, when healthier and safer alternatives are available, first nations children are ultimately the victims. Provinces are failing the first nations children and families for which they have been delegated responsibility for protecting and supporting. It is time for our provinces to step aside and support those who actually are passionate about supporting first nations children and families.

Here are why six provisions of Bill C-92 are so important to us.

Number one is clause 18, the affirmation and recognition that is our inherent right to provide for our children, to care for them, and to keep our families together.

Number two is clause 14, that the priority must be on prevention and keeping our family units together.

Number three is that if a child is removed, the priority must be on placement in the family and in our communities.

Number four is that birth alerts must be stopped. The trauma of removing children in hospitals is so traumatic to the mothers and family that it represents everything that has failed about a provincial child welfare system imposed on our people. That is also in clause 14.

Number five is clause 9, that the best interests of the child must be interpreted with understanding of our identity, connection to our families, culture, languages, territories and values.

Number six is that poverty and poor health are not reasons to remove a child from our families and communities.

We know this bill was not co-drafted with first nations. Canada drafted it on its own, but shared a consultation draft with our federation. It was developed with our input into the process and our office met with the current and former minister many times, as well as with officials. We submitted briefs and positions to inform the changes we believed were required. Canada did not accept all of our policy positions, but we urged Canada to include predictable, sustainable needs-based funding provisions.

In Saskatchewan, the 74 first nations of the FSIN, for over 50 years, have built distinct, co-operative institutions to serve our people in our communities, such as the First Nations University of Canada, the Saskatchewan Indian Institute of Technologies and the Saskatchewan Indian Gaming Authority. Other bodies have been created and operated with great impact.

We are rebuilding our nation, supporting our young people to provide them with the education their grandparents were denied. We want to build more supports for our first nations in relation to child welfare. Our demonstrated ability to create jobs for our people and economically enhance opportunities for the people of our region is a key goal and issue. By building capacity, first nations will not be looked upon as an economic burden, as we currently are. We will build our own economies with more opportunity and jobs from this bill, and we will build families at the same time.

The bill needs to reference the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Bill C-91 has a “purposes” section that references the United Nations declaration, because the protection of human rights and the implementation of the United Nations declaration is the framework for this cultural, language and family-building work that we must do together in Canada.

I thank you for this opportunity to address this important bill for our first nations people in Saskatchewan. We know this work is difficult and it will take many strategies and collective efforts. We urge you to accept the importance of this bill and to make improvements, but not to delay it. The FSIN and many of our other tribal councils and first nations are working to implement their authority and laws for children and families.

We cannot be held back any longer. Our children deserve better than the status quo of today. We hope that this bill will help to influence continued recognition of inherent and treaty rights, title and jurisdiction in future co-developments. We know that the only way to maintain healthy and thriving communities is by supporting our people to raise their children in accordance with our own history, culture, languages, customs and laws.

We know that our children are not subjects or commodities to be owned or to be considered property. They are a gift from the Creator. It is a sacred responsibility to protect and nurture our children. It is inherent to us, as people, to care for our children according to our laws, no matter where they reside.

In all aspects, children are considered—always. This was true even at the time of treaty. Our elders wanted to ensure health and happiness for all of our children, as long as the sun shines, the grass grows and the rivers flow.

Madam Chairman, thank you for this opportunity.

[The Chair, Liberal, MaryAnn Mihychuk]

Thank you.

Now we're moving to the Peter Ballantyne Child and Family Services.

Vera, any time that you're ready, you can go ahead.

[Morley Watson]

Madam Chair, it's okay. Vera is with me to give that technical support, as I am brand new to my portfolio. I have spoken with her, and we've agreed that she will support me in the technical aspects.

[The Chair, Liberal, MaryAnn Mihychuk]

She'll answer the questions.

[Morley Watson]

She'll answer all the tough questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, MaryAnn Mihychuk]

Okay.

We're going to move on then to the question period.

We begin with MP Dan Vandal.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

First of all, thank you all very much for your presentations.

I'm going to begin by reading directly from the bill and asking for comment from both of you.

Clause 22 talks about, in my opinion, the nexus of this bill. The really powerful part is the issue of paramountcy. It gives indigenous nations paramountcy over federal and provincial law.

I want to read directly from the bill:

22 (1) 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 federal 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.

Morley Watson, can you perhaps comment on this provision and how you see this?

[Morley Watson]

Thank you, my friend, from I believe, Manitoba.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

Yes, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital.

[Morley Watson]

Thank you so much, Dan. It was a pleasure to meet you at Christmastime.

I guess the big thing is that we say, as nations, we've always been able to govern ourselves. History tells us that. Unfortunately, when you've had governments doing that for you, that's where we say that we have that ability. We've always had that ability. Unfortunately, a lot of times we're not given that opportunity to make those decisions for our people and our communities.

I believe that the times have changed. We've always wanted to accept that. We've always wanted to be given that opportunity.

If given that opportunity, Dan, we've always acted in the best interests of our people, and our children are no less important. We would always act in their best interests and help to make those decisions that are best for them.

I think all we need, my friend, is that opportunity to be able to lead, and fully lead our communities and our people. If granted that, I am sure, given history and given what we know, we would certainly do a tremendous job at leading our people.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

Thank you, Morley Watson.

Jerry, do you want to comment on what I just read?

[Grand Chief Jerry Daniels]

Sure. The ability for a first nation to structure its own laws that will then be recognized by the province and the federal government is something that we've long advocated for. It's a long time coming. We believe that we definitely will be quite capable of ensuring that the strategy or the plan that is implemented within the community or the region is going to reflect the values of the community.

I truly believe that the quicker we get to the transfer of jurisdiction the better off we're going to be. No people or government accepts the imposition of laws by another, and what you see when that happens is resistance. There is a non-co-operation in that sort of arrangement. That doesn't work. It really has to be a community-driven approach. If the laws and jurisdiction of first nations are recognized properly, I think you will see that communities have much more of an interest in their own well-being than people in Ottawa or throughout the country tend to think. We want to ensure that our children and families are given the best possible opportunities. You are definitely going to see that, once they are able to come to a very comprehensive agreement on how child welfare is going to be legislated at the community or first nations level.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

Chief Daniels, how many child welfare agencies are in your jurisdiction?

[Grand Chief Jerry Daniels]

I think we have about 14 in the south.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

How many first nations are there?

[Grand Chief Jerry Daniels]

We have 34.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

Talk a little bit about the co-development process. Were you involved in this or the consultation process?

[Grand Chief Jerry Daniels]

We had conversations. I wouldn't say that we were consulted because I don't think that the threshold in terms of consultation was quite there. I think we had a conversation. I think we've always been proactive in engaging in the discussion around whatever policy is on the agenda that day.

The question that I posed at the time when we had a conversation with the regional office was how are you going to deal with the provincial contribution to CFS, because right now the province has 40% of the funding? They cover 40% of the funding for CFS, so how are the federal regulations going to supersede if the funding is coming from the province? I address this because it comes down to the ability for us to provide for our children. For us to do that, it comes down to funding. That's where my concern was when it came to the federal law.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

You have 34 first nations, 14 agencies. I'm assuming that since you are clearly supportive, your constituency first nations are also supportive?

[Grand Chief Jerry Daniels]

Yes. I'm comfortable in saying that there are enough first nations in southern Manitoba that want to see movement that we can support the bill.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

How do you feel as—

[The Chair, Liberal, MaryAnn Mihychuk]

I'm sorry, you are out of time.

Perhaps MP Kevin Waugh will be asking something similar, but we have to move on.