Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on May 14th, 2019

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to our guests for being here today.

In the 2018-19 departmental plan for Indigenous Services, for 50% of the targets for the year, their planned outcomes are left blank. For the scheduled date by which to achieve the targets, 55% of those are to be determined, and 61% of the results for 2016-17 are unavailable.

This government has repeatedly stated that there is no relationship more important than that with indigenous peoples. They've made ambitious promises. Why is the plan lacking follow-through or being undermined entirely?

[Jean-François Tremblay]

I would need to see the documents. We can report back to you on this.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Is it the departmental plan?

[Jean-François Tremblay]

Yes.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

A whole bunch of lines are left blank.

[Jean-François Tremblay]

That's what I need to check, whether it's because of the transition, and we moved from the old DPR from INAC to the two new ones. Maybe that's the reason. That's why I would like to look at it.

I can tell you that the outcomes.... If you go on the website and check what we're doing on housing, what we're doing on water, and what we're doing on the key priorities, including, for example, what I was talking about in regard to the grants, we actually achieved the outcomes and the output we were looking for for most of our priorities, so I'm a bit surprised by that.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

It's interesting that there's no reference, then, to the fact that this line had been moved over to the other department.

[Jean-François Tremblay]

I will need to check, but that's one of the issues. There was one DPR, and there are now two departments, which may have created confusion in the reporting. I'm sorry about that. We can come back to you with more information about what it means on our side.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

The other thing is that, for over half of the targets we're looking at, they said the results are yet to be determined from 2016-17. Is there any reference to why that is?

[Jean-François Tremblay]

I need to see the documents. I'm not going to speculate.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Okay.

It's just interesting, I guess, the fact that it's the departmental plan. To divide it up between the two, how that.... It seems that the department doesn't even necessarily have a good idea as to what is going where, essentially.

[Jean-François Tremblay]

There have been some transformations, but there are still some elements that need to be clarified.

To be honest, 95% of this was done quite quickly. The biggest element for us was that all the services were transferred to ISC, including the first nations and Inuit health branch that was previously at Health Canada. We talked a lot about the division, but we didn't talk about the fact that we also reunified services by having health on our side, which wasn't there before. So no, sorry, but I would beg to disagree. Most of the big elements of the department were already clear from the get-go.

The implication on the internal services has been more difficult on who's going to go on which side. You end up with children in the custody of both parents, if you will. That's something you need to clarify at some point, what's going to remain to serve the two departments, what will go on his side, and who's going to go on my side. That's more for internal services.

On the program side, the ones who deliver services, manage the relationship on the ground and negotiate treaties and so on was quite clear from the get-go.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Is there a place we can go that says, this is how it used to be organized and this is how it's currently organized?

[Jean-François Tremblay]

We can share with you; if you go on the website, it's there. If you look at the legislation, you see the legislation established the services. We can show you the organigram of the two departments and we can show you exactly where the principal services are.

There was an ADM, for example, in charge of social services. It's on my side. Everything that was on first nations Inuit health is actually on my side. Economic development has been a bit more complex because it does include, also, works on lands, and that's something we're working on. For the rest, treaties and negotiation was on this side, and northern affairs on this side, so it's actually quite clear.

[The Chair, Liberal, MaryAnn Mihychuk]

Thank you.

Questioning now moves to MP Will Amos.

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

I'd like to continue in the vein of how this decision of the department actually will produce results on the ground.

I'll start by inquiring. What is it that is so necessary about an order in council? I know member Bossio went to this a little earlier, but it's still not clear to me why we couldn't remain in a state of order in council for an indefinite period. The regulatory body that deals with flood planning, flow management in the Ottawa River, has existed since the early eighties as an order in council, both at the provincial and federal level. Why not the departments?

[Jean-François Tremblay]

I was deputy minister of Infrastructure Canada and there was no legislation. It was under another income. You can always ask, should they have legislation or not? That's a good question.

I think in our case, it was necessary to have legislation because there was already legislation. There's one that actually recognized INAC as a department, so we needed to replace INAC by something. The legislation allowed us to do that. The legislation also established more authorities of the two ministers in Parliament, so in front of you. OIC is really executive; it's really more a relationship between the prime minister and the executive and the minister. In this case it gave us some legal authorities that we would not have through an OIC, especially, for example, on management of data and especially regarding who's responsible for legislation that is established. That's something that is there.

We have a legacy. The First Nations Land Management Act, the other legislation that related to first nations, Inuit and Métis, was mentioned. It was important to establish, through legislation, who is responsible for those authorities.

There's no science, machinery. There's a lot of art, to be honest. There are departments that can live with an OIC, but in this case, given the importance of the issue, too.... We're talking about two departments. If you look on my side, and I don't want to diminish anything from the other side because it's as complex.... If you go into the provincial governments, you will not find a department that manages health, social, economic...as well as infrastructure and others. It is actually a very complex area, and getting a legislative base is actually quite useful for us.

[Daniel Watson]

I would add to that. I spent a decade of my career working for provincial governments. Two of the biggest departments in any provincial government are health and social services. They consume an inordinate amount of time of that government's thinking. To have all of that activity tied in together with redefining aspects of the way we understand this country and the Crown-indigenous relations is very difficult.

I'll add one last thing, quickly. The Interpretation Act says that an act is always speaking. In the way that the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development Act existed previously, the intention was that it would always exist. I think that is symbolically important because one thing that is in the legislation for Indigenous Services Canada is it actually requires it to, over time, transfer the services that it delivers to other bodies. I think that's something that could not have been achieved through an OIC.

[William Amos, Liberal, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you for those comments.

As you are probably aware, my riding of Pontiac has many public servants who work very hard for both of these departments. Many have great job satisfaction, but some will comment to me—quietly—that they have had frustrations in the past with Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada being a very hierarchical and top-down civil service institution. They felt their voices couldn't be heard. Many of them were indigenous.

How has the scission of the two departments brought in the voices of those who are not senior public servants? Can you tell Canadians that the department officials at all levels have had their opportunity to really have a say in how this is being transformed?

[Jean-François Tremblay]

Transformation is a subject of discussion inside the department. It has been and will be continue to be, on an ongoing basis. As soon as we heard about the OIC, we engaged the staff. We actually had sessions with employees by themselves, and we did engagement sessions.

More than 3,400 employees participated in those sessions, which were chaired and organized by the employees themselves. They developed the recommendations and they continue to work on the transformation, so they have been involved and engaged since the beginning.

[The Chair, Liberal, MaryAnn Mihychuk]

Thank you.

We now move to MP Kevin Waugh.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Welcome everyone.

How does the Department of Justice work with these groups? I see you're pretty well connected with both of them. Have you also had an increase in staff? Can you maybe just talk about your role in this whole...?

[Suzanne Grondin]

If you will allow me, I will speak about my organization, which is legal services. Now we are serving both departments, but in terms of increasing, no, we did not have an increase in the number of FTEs. For now, I would say, it's not necessary. We are facing the challenges with both ministers with our FTEs right now. It doesn't mean that it won't change in the future, but as of now, we have not had any increases.

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

So everything is kind of the same, even though the departments are split. Am I right?

[Suzanne Grondin]

I wouldn't say it's the same because we have more people to deal with, but we're still part of the team. We are here to help them when they have legal questions. On those grounds, nothing has changed.

It is a bit more complicated because we have been involved in departmental legislation and other issues that haven't come up before. Basically, though, we're still part of the team and we're working together as we did before.