Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on May 14th, 2019

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you to our guests.

This is a complicated bill. We've had groups in the chair that you are in, Grand Chief, from Manitoba that absolutely despise this bill. And Vice-Chief Morley Watson, it was the same from our province of Saskatchewan

Here we are, we are five hours in each day here and now you are the panel that likes this. It's interesting because the panel before you didn't like it.

Grand Chief Daniels, you talked about how you've had trouble finding agreements with the Province of Manitoba on customary care. You talked about that in your address, so you must have concerns about the coordination agreement provision of this bill, which would have the indigenous governing bodies still negotiating then with the provinces and, in your case, with the Province of Manitoba. Don't you have an issue with that?

[Grand Chief Jerry Daniels]

Of course we do. We have to be able to work as collaboratively as possible. When that has been exhausted, however, we have to be able to move on. My hope is that the federal government can intervene in that instance. That's why I asked, long before there was ever any drafted legislation, how you're going to intervene if the province decides that it doesn't want an agreement at a federal level.

That's my wholehearted question, and that is why I've always collaborated with the province to try to have an agreement that would continue to get towards where we're trying to go, which is community-driven strategies and first nations laws being recognized. That's the endgame here. We need it to be funded properly.

When I have to work with the province, when I have to work with the feds, I've continued to be adamant that we're here, we're at the table. We're the ones appointing the board members to the southern authority, which is the current regulatory body for southern Manitoba. It's our responsibility to ensure that the people who are our partners, our treaty partners, are well informed and that they're reflective of what's really happening on the ground. That's what we've tried to do. We've been constantly meeting with the executive directors, the agency directors, to get their opinion and trying to bridge the communication between them and the southern authority and how their relationship works.

That's really on the ground that it's being implemented. Then we have to deal with the government regulatory level. We tried to inform that table as well—and that's what I'm doing here—so that you have an understanding of how it truly is rolled out in Manitoba, in southern Manitoba. That's how we've done it.

We're the only ones doing the Doula Initiative where we have our women and our doulas supporting families. They have anywhere between 200 to 300 mothers they support through the process right at birth. From what I hear, it's going to be quite successful in the way that it's going to impact families.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

I was on your website here, and you have five areas of CFS and agency complaint resolution processes, and I congratulate you on that. You have your five areas.

We're going to go over to First Vice-Chief Morley Watson. Unfortunately, I think you just got moved into this position. I think Vera can help you.

We talked about subclause 14(1)on preventative care. You talked at length about prevention and you mentioned six items. It was number two of the six that you mentioned. What we have on preventative care, is it enough? Would you add anything to it? It's rather short, and yet priority-wise, it may be number one or two in the whole thing.

[Morley Watson]

When you look at our history, there's always been a level of distrust between our people and governments. That started way back in the residential school area where the Indian agent and the schoolmaster and law enforcement who were there to protect us did not do that. Anytime we move forward, there's always that doubt about whether this is best for us.

Some of our communities still have that doubt about whether this is good for us. We are going to have some very cautious communities that aren't sure. For the most part, however, we realize that if we're going to take control of ourselves, our lives, and our future we have to start somewhere. The best investment we can make is in our children.

We'd like to bring our children home and raise them just as all of our families do here. We love our grandchildren. We want to make that investment in our own communities. Having to overcome some of the great things like residential schools.... Our grandmothers were ready, and I believe we're ready today.

[Kevin Waugh, Conservative, Saskatoon—Grasswood, SK]

Vera, we're looking at foster care for the Peter Ballantyne Cree Nation. Deschambault Lake, Pelican Narrows, Sandy Bay, Denare Beach, Sturgeon Landing—you cover such a wide area.

If you don't mind me asking, how is foster care...? I know you're located in Prince Albert but you cover such a wide range here.

[Vera Sayese, Executive Director, Peter Ballantyne Child and Family Services Inc.]

If you've looked at our website and if you've read up on Peter Ballantyne Child and Family Services.... We're a multi-community band. That's been one of the issues with our funding.

In foster care, we have 17 transition homes. When we talked about lack of housing—therefore a lack of foster homes—we're probably one of the only agencies in Saskatchewan that has 17 transition homes, from emergency homes when we apprehend in our bigger communities, such as Pelican Narrows.... We have two emergency homes where we would place children. Then we have receiving homes if we didn't have placement for.... They are regular homes; they are in the community. We still have foster care, but with the policies in foster care, we're very limited because every home is already over the limit of people in the home. The policies in foster care and in the Ministry of Social Services are very limiting.

That's why we have those homes ourselves—to have our children. We have receiving homes and we have peer homes. Peer homes are independent homes for adolescent children before they age out. We have homes for them for their life skills and to get them ready to transition out into community living or on their own. We also have a six-week program at a family wellness centre where we work with the family unit before we return them from their foster homes.

We do a lot in foster care.

[The Chair, Liberal, MaryAnn Mihychuk]

Thank you.

The questioning now moves to MP Rachel Blaney.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

I want to thank you all so much for being here.

You probably heard in the last question that my biggest concern is about having this sustainable funding that we really need. I thank you so much, Vera, for what you just outlined because that's the very core of the need. What do you do when you don't have enough houses or when you have too many people in one house, but you're trying to keep the children in the community and keep them connected to their history and their families? I think those are the core issues.

I'm wondering if you could speak to the fact that there isn't anything in the legislation that specifically speaks to funding. Do we need to make sure that is in there as a measurable outcome?

I would be happy to start with Grand Chief Jerry Daniels.

[Grand Chief Jerry Daniels]

Although we do believe that it would be nice to have that in there, I think it's important that we identify what substantive equality really means. Substantive equality might actually mean that you fund first nations much more than you fund non-first nations because of the equity position in which first nations have found themselves over the last hundred years. We're in a deficit when it comes to our opportunities and the different quality-of-life indicators if you look right across the board. We need institutions like CFS, education, and other areas to be an anchor in terms of improving the lives of our citizens.

It's important that we identify the level of funding that is attached to this bill, although I wouldn't want to lock it in, so that it continues in some..... One of the biggest problems faced by Parliament and people making decisions around funding is that funding might not necessarily have to be the same. Through the implementation of this bill over the next number of years, you're going to see that there are going to be areas where you might want to increase it. There are areas that may not need so much. That is based on how it looks on the ground at the community level.

I would argue that Pauingassi, Poplar River and Little Grand Rapids—the ground zero in southern Manitoba, which is really for the whole country—need much more resourcing than anywhere else. That's really how I've tried to focus and contextualize CFS because you want to deal with the areas where you're having the most trouble. In those instances, you might need more funding. You need much more funding and support than you would need in other areas.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Thank you.

Mr. Watson.

[Morley Watson]

Absolutely; as the Grand Chief mentioned, some of our northern communities, very remote communities, face the same issues we do. I really think we ask for not a lot. What can we do the job properly with? What can we carry out our responsibilities with? That's what we ask for.

There's the cost of living. There are so many issues and factors that we all face. I think in a lot of our communities, it's just for the love for our children—for them to remain in our communities, for them not to be lost in leaving our communities. The kids have to feel good about themselves. I think a lot of our agencies don't ask for a lot. They ask for just enough to do the job properly. It's a responsibility of ours. If we can have that, as I said, to do the job properly, I think all of our nations in Saskatchewan and other places would be happy with that.

[Rachel Blaney, NDP, North Island—Powell River, BC]

Thank you.

Is there anything you'd like to add, Vera, or did he capture it all? Okay.

Mr. Watson, you did talk a little bit about something that also concerns me, which is the definition of “best interests of the child”. Right now it's been defined by a lot of legal places in this country. A lot of courts have defined what that is. When we look at this legislation, if this is not defined somewhat more clearly, or if it's not given to the power of the nation to decide the best interests of the child, I'm just scared that it will be interpreted the wrong way, and we'll see, again, these colonial systems imposing what that is on communities across this country.

I'm wondering if you could speak to that concern a little bit.

[Morley Watson]

Again, as both the grand chief and I mentioned earlier, we'll always act in the best interests of our children. We have some challenges ahead of us, there is no doubt, but I really think that at the end of the day it's about working together. Getting this bill to where it's at today took work. It took understanding on behalf of all parties. I really believe that in anything we do in the future, as long as that respect is given to the first nations to make some decisions that affect our lives, affect our children's lives, there is nothing we can't overcome here.

Keep in mind that the government has to understand that we now have that ability, not only to make decisions but more importantly to look after our children properly. We have to get away from colonial thinking. We do have the ability. In each and every one of our first nations across Canada, we have the ability to do things if and when we're given that opportunity. I certainly hope we're given the opportunity with Bill C-92.

[The Chair, Liberal, MaryAnn Mihychuk]

Thank you.

We are now moving to MP Robert-Falcon Ouellette.

[Robert-Falcon Ouellette, Liberal, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you very much, everyone, for your testimony.

I'm wondering if you could discuss a little bit more what I think will actually be a fairly substantial change. This is going to perhaps coalesce around the idea of treaty territories or nations and not just individual communities exercising authority and jurisdiction and self-determination. How would organizations, indigenous communities, come together to pass their own laws? Do those institutions yet exist? I know that Treaty No. 4 has a kind of specific territory. Will it be along linguistic lines or cultural groups? Will it just be the Dakotas or the Cree peoples or Oji-Cree peoples?

Perhaps you could talk a little bit about that and your vision for that.

[Grand Chief Jerry Daniels]

In southern Manitoba we've been challenged with this, not only on CFS but really along many different lines, with the discussion around Treaty 1, Treaty 2, the Dakota governance, Treaty 5, and the already long-established Treaty 3 and Treaty 4.

What unites many of us in southern Manitoba is that we're all Anishinabe people. We have Dakota people. There are really only two nations, when you think about it, but we like to negotiate with Canada based on the treaty, really because we need to remind Canada and remind Canadians that we've never relinquished our jurisdiction. No person of sound mind would ever do that or relinquish their title to the land.

The way in which we want to create the narrative in terms of our government-to-government relationship is through an internationally recognized treaty. That's how we approach these things.

The way we've done it in southern Manitoba, and the way I see us proceeding, is the recognition of the inaakonigewin, the Anishinabe law, and later the Dakota law. These things are going to be done at the community level. They are going to be done at the tribal council level, and they are going to be done at the treaty level. We're working towards an SCO-level law.

The way that is developed is the harmonization of all those laws. Those laws at their core come from the community, so it's community by community. However, as a lawmaker, a legislator or a regulator who wants to ensure that indigenous children are protected and that families are supported, we have to do it community by community. Where there's an instance in which there's an opportunity to have a regional law or agreement, we should do that, and later on, much more, at a higher level.

It's the same way that Canada would go about trying to rectify Alberta's laws with Quebec. You have very diverse cultures, but you have to try to find a way to support all of them, their own ambitions and their own interests. That's how we do it in southern Manitoba.

[Robert-Falcon Ouellette, Liberal, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Would you see yourself also having a legislature of some type at some point?

[Grand Chief Jerry Daniels]

The chiefs are the ones who make the decisions. The way we've structured it is very similar. At SCO we have a director of families and a chief of families. We do the same thing with health. We are structuring to do those sorts of things, but we do want to support the treaty government as well. We want to support their priorities, vision and strategy, and include that as part of what we're doing.

There are different interpretations around it, but I think we're kind of going the same way. Really what it comes down to is jurisdiction at the community level. That's where it is.

[Robert-Falcon Ouellette, Liberal, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Suppose you have full jurisdiction and are exercising your jurisdiction under the Constitution. Let's say there's a case where, after passing all your laws, someone wants to contest. They don't believe their child should have been taken for whatever reason. Do you believe you will be setting up your own form of dispute resolution, your own court system within that?

Maybe the others would like to answer.

[Grand Chief Jerry Daniels]

We have a restorative justice program at SCO, so we have restorative justice committees in the communities. Actually, I'm heading over to the indigenous justice conference right after this, and we're going to be talking about Southern Chiefs' Organization and the work we're doing on restorative justice, as well as mediation.

What do I see happening in terms of court systems? We recreate a whole new indigenous court system and justice system that can resolve these sorts of problems because it shouldn't be up to Canadian colonial justice systems to decide for us what is in the best interest of our communities or our families. It has to be our own people doing these things.

If you look to different examples throughout the world, you will see that indigenous peoples have always focused on the harmony of the community, not necessarily on the punishment of people. When you do that, you see the perpetrators to be much more understanding of how their actions have impacted the community. The community is also much more accepting, and works with those people who have made those decisions.

[Robert-Falcon Ouellette, Liberal, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Would you like to answer, Mr. Watson?

[Morley Watson]

Absolutely. We have, I guess, 74 first nations in Saskatchewan. We bring our chiefs in council together four times a year and take direction from them. They take direction from their membership. I think we deal with a lot of that.

We do have a first nations advocate, and we realize when we go into these things that they may not be perfect, but we always will act in the best interest of our children. Sometimes that means making the tough decisions, but we've made those. We will always act in the best interest of our children who will need that guidance and that protection, and we believe that our agencies currently provide that.

Like I say, we will continue to improve. We're not perfect, but we're getting there on that road. I would like say that the important thing is that we're allowed to look after our own children and have them remain in our communities. I think that's paramount.

[The Chair, Liberal, MaryAnn Mihychuk]

That is a strong message to end our panel.

Thank you very much for coming out. Your comments will be part of the official record. If you have submissions, we will also take them. You can pass them on to the clerk or submit them online.

Meegwetch. Thank you.

We're going to suspend because we have another panel coming in.

[The Chair, Liberal, MaryAnn Mihychuk]

We're going to get started.

We have two panellists, both appearing via video conference. I'm happy to see you. I'm hoping that our sound system works, and that we're ready to go.

We are here in Ottawa on the unceded territory of the Algonquin people. It's a goal for all Canadians to reflect on our history, whether we're part of a nation of settlers or part of a community of indigenous people who were here first. It's something that Canada has started a process on, a process of truth and reconciliation.

We are on an important subject: how Canada treats indigenous children. Is the system working? Our statistics indicate that major changes have to happen.

We look forward to your comments and advice. We will give each group up to 10 minutes, and then after that there are opportunities for MPs to ask questions.

We will begin with Lyle Thomas and Bernie Charlie.

[Lyle Thomas, Cultural Advisor, Secwépemc Child and Family Services Agency]

Thank you. Good morning.

[Witness spoke in Secwepemctsin]

[English]

I'm a member of the Neskonlith Indian Band, but I reside with my wife, who is from the Kamloops Secwépemc. We have five children and one grandson. I work for the Secwépemc Child and Family Services Agency. My title with the agency is “cultural worker”. We are caregivers for the agency, and currently we have two little girls who are part of our family.

I'm honoured and thankful that, on behalf of the agency, I can share a small part of the thoughts on the new Bill C-92. However, before I get started, I'd like to recognize that these proceedings are taking place on the unceded territory of the Algonquin people. I would like to thank them for allowing me the chance to share what my feelings and thoughts are for the children and families who we serve.

After reading Bill C-92, the first thing that I thought was this: How does it affect the families and the culture of those families as a whole? Yes, Bill C-92 focuses on the child or children who have a chance to be placed with extended family or with members within their community. However, what is most important is how it keeps the family connected.

For children, their main want is to be with their parents. With these thoughts and feeling of reconnecting, this needs to go beyond the children and should involve their parents. It should allow them to grow together and to learn and reconnect. This love will always be between a child and a parent as a group, and they will find their roots in remembering who they are.

It is exciting to see that the government, with the introduction of Bill C-92, is recognizing how important it is for individuals to be grounded and to have a place and a sense of identity. However, there are also times to remember that these children may be in a different nation or territory learning their ways and traditions. There may be something from the past of the parents that has made them move to another nation, that has made them move away to protect the children they love from their own nation, their own reserve, their own people. For the interests of the children, they may be placed with caregivers from those host nations who treat and love that child like their own. They have a connection with the family, but most of all, they teach the child in their home with the same values, the same love and the same respect that all nations have.

Bill C-92 may be as strong as the language in the assurances in the old law that families will be afforded the opportunity to remain connected throughout any interaction with child and welfare services.

I'd like to thank you for allowing me a brief time to speak. Now I'd like to pass it on to my colleague.