Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on March 8th, 2016

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you, gentlemen, for this excellent presentation.

Mr. Chartier, I wanted to start with you. One of the volumes in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was the treatment of the Métis in the residential schools. The Prime Minister has committed to meeting all of the recommendations. One of the recommendations was about those who are excluded; the day scholars and the Métis were excluded.

Can you just fill us in quickly, because this process is winding down? I could be wrong, but my understanding is that once it's wound down, there will be no further claims accepted. Has there been any discussion with the present government about resolving the exclusion of the Métis? What would we need to do to make sure that the Métis who suffered through the same situations are treated fairly?

[Clément Chartier]

Actually, if you look closely you will see a sliver of our presence in the final report. I think I read it differently. I don't read that the Métis are being dealt with in that report other than stating they should sign on to whatever everybody else signs on to, which does not address the matter.

We did have a meeting with Minister Bennett up in northwest Saskatchewan when she was there to visit La Loche and particularly the Île-à-la-Crosse boarding school, which is unique in itself.

It's not just day scholars. People, I shouldn't say “like you”, but most people when they talk about Métis and Métis residential schools just talk about day schools.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Sorry, just to be correct, I said the Métis and the day scholars. I didn't say they were the same.

[Clément Chartier]

Okay, but most people when they talk about it talk about day schools, not residential schools.

There aren't that many Métis residential schools, and I don't think you can deal with them both at the same time. You have to deal with residential schools and look at day schools as well, the same way you do for first nations people. I know there are schools in the Northwest Territories, and I believe in Labrador, that were left out. There are quite a few.

I don't think we can now expect to get in at the tail end of this process. I think that work is over. There will have be a new agreement with the people who have been left out, at least in terms of the Métis residential schools. Of course, day schools should be addressed as well, but Métis residential schools definitely need to be addressed.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Have there been any steps to deal with this, or is this part of the desire of the Métis to have action from the new government?

[Clément Chartier]

Nothing concrete has come out of it yet, except that there was meeting where that issue was discussed and there's a willingness on the part of Minister Bennett to have a real look at it. I spoke on the Île-à-la-Crosse boarding school with Premier Wall last week, again, revisiting that whole issue. There seems to be a hesitancy to look at it, as if they're not wanting to set any kind of precedent.

I think we're a long way from resolving this. Certainly I don't think the Truth and Reconciliation Commission reports will have any benefit for the Métis nation.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Obed, we've heard about the issue of food insecurity in the north, and we have seen across the north problems with the nutrition north program. Certainly in my region it's a huge issue. The main estimates for this year say there will be a $14.5-million cut to nutrition north. The new government has promised a $10-million top-up to nutrition north, but if that cut stays in place we're still looking at a $4-million shortfall.

Has there been any discussion with the new government about whether or not that shortfall is going to continue or what do we need to do to make sure that we end the terrible food insecurity in the northern communities?

[Natan Obed]

I have been in conversations with Minister Bennett about the nutrition north program, but not specifically about the dollar amounts, because I think that's a secondary issue.

The primary issue is the purpose of the program. If the purpose of the program is that it's a social program with 100% of the money going to the people who need it in Inuit Nunangat and other northern remote communities, then we need the program to be completely transparent and accountable. I don't think we're there with the current program.

A point-of-sale rebate is a marketing tool, but it is not an accountability mechanism in the way that it is being used. Until we fix these systemic problems that make the nutrition north program open to interpretation, I think people will continue to say that it isn't working for them and that they demand a better nutrition north program.

We are very thankful that such a large social program exists to combat the 70% food insecurity that Inuit face in Inuit Nunangat. I would never want to give the impression that we are not thankful for the subsidy. I would say that the animosity and anger towards the program is rooted in the fact that indigenous people are being asked to sign on to something that they don't necessarily know the structure of, to its core.

Fix the accountability and transparency of the program and I'm sure you will have more buy-in no matter what the amount.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Thank you very much for that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Andy Fillmore]

You have 50 seconds left.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

I would have gone on to the suicide issue, which I think would be much more than 50 seconds, so I guess I'll just have to leave it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Andy Fillmore]

Thanks.

We'll move on to Mike Bossio.

As we mentioned, Mike will have a shortened four minutes.

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Thank you.

I have so many questions I want to ask.

To start with, Mr. Obed, I have what I hope is a short question. You spoke about self-determination, and I couldn't really get my head around how it's working. Maybe that's part of the problem.

As far as education, health care, resource extraction, and the environment go, how much self-determination is there for the Inuit community to actually have control over their territory, and to have control over these programs to determine that they are going to define the curriculum, determine what resource extraction happens, determine the environmental policies as to how that extraction will occur, and determine the delivery of health care?

[Natan Obed]

This gives me an opportunity to talk about our vision statement, “Canadian Inuit are prospering through unity and self-determination”.

The ITK is a vehicle for self-determination for Inuit. The expression of self-determination at this table, say, is that Inuit have a chance to speak to you clearly without any limitation about the priorities we have and the way in which we would like to interact and work with you.

On the other side, the federal side, there sometimes is an assumption that the federal government, or any number of government levels, can decide for Inuit what is best for Inuit, or can interpret, based on statistics or other measures, what things will or will not work, such as the nutrition north program. The fact that Inuit are not participating in defining what the eligible items are for the program shows that we have a lack of self-determination in the way in which that program runs. Canada is deciding what healthy foods will be subsidized and will be on our store shelves.

In this era and this time, we expect to have participation in the way in which those major decisions are made, decisions that affect our lives. In just about any different way, whether it's the implementation of land claim agreements, or the ability to represent ourselves and have the government respect the way Inuit represent ourselves, these are things that are works in progress. We're always driving towards higher goals and aspirations.

We have limitations to self-determination now, especially in the way that our colonial history and all the hurts of the past still affect our people today. We talk about it through historical trauma and intergenerational trauma, where the dysfunction we see in our society is often linked to the times when Inuit were brought off the land and coerced into communities, or our children were sent away to residential schools, or our dogs were killed, or our loved ones were sent away for tuberculosis treatment and never came back, and we weren't told what happened to them.

People still have to overcome all of these things. I think a big challenge to our self-determination is our ability to get over that colonial process. That's why we're here talking about how programs can be improved and about the priorities we have as a people that we know will get us towards the path that we need to be on.

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

I guess I don't have time for my question for the Métis council.

[The Chair, Liberal, Andy Fillmore]

Thank you, Mr. Bossio and Mr. Obed.

Mr. Obed, Mr. Chartier, and Mr. Weinstein, on behalf of all of the committee members, thank you very much for joining us today and allowing us to learn from you.

I apologize for the shortened time. It was out of our control, I'm afraid. However, I would like to invite you to leave behind your notes, if you'd like to. Or if you'd like to submit something to us after the fact, we would very much welcome that. I encourage individual committee members to continue a dialogue outside of these walls, too, if that's helpful to anyone.

A warm thank you to all.

We'll suspend for a couple of minutes while we say farewell and welcome our next guests.

[The Chair, Liberal, Andy Fillmore]

Welcome to the committee today, and thanks very much for making time for us. We're very grateful that you could be here.

We're going to dive right in here. I think you heard the explanation in the first half of the meeting about how the timing works. We have an established order so that our committee can ask you some questions. Given that we lost some time today, I'm in the unenviable position of having to be a little bit firm with timing. You'll see me getting your attention with our yellow card when you have one minute left for answering, and when we're right out of time, with a red card. I apologize for the formality of that.

We're going to hear now from the National Association of Friendship Centres, in particular, Christopher Sheppard, vice-president, and Jeffrey Cyr, executive director.

You have the floor.

[Christopher Sheppard, Vice-President, National Association of Friendship Centres]

AteliKai. Distinguished members of the Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, it's an honour and a privilege to appear before you, and I thank you for this opportunity to share with you the work of the friendship centre movement, and the National Association of Friendship Centres.

Before I begin, I wish to acknowledge the Algonquin nation, upon whose traditional territory we are meeting today.

My name is Christopher Sheppard. I'm Inuit. I'm originally from Postville, Nunatsiavut, but I now live and work in St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador. I grew up in the friendship centre movement having been involved in their aboriginal youth council, and I'm currently in my first term as vice-president of the National Association of Friendship Centres, also known as the NAFC.

Accompanying me today is Mr. Jeffrey Cyr, a proud Métis from Manitoba and the NAFC's executive director, as well as Pamela Ouart, NAFC's director of research and special projects.

With our time together I would like to give you a brief overview of the friendship centre movement, the NAFC, and the urban indigenous population in Canada. I would also like to share with you some of the NAFC's strategic priorities and provide you with some examples of the critical work that the NAFC, our provincial and territorial affiliates, and key partners are doing to support indigenous people in urban settings.

Lastly, I would like to highlight the NAFC's priorities for the 42nd Parliament and share my perspectives as to how each of you can support the friendship centre movement to advance our goals of reconciliation, improving Canada's social infrastructure, and advancing social finance opportunities for aboriginal people living in urban environments in Canada. Of course, time permitting, I will do my best to respond to any questions you may have.

I would like to begin by stating some facts to set the context for the work of the friendship centre movement. As you may know, 75% of Canada's indigenous people live off reserve. Nearly 60% live in urban areas. Further, the indigenous population is growing at a faster rate than the Canadian average. This means that there are approximately 840,000 indigenous people living in Canadian cities.

The Canadian indigenous population is also young, with approximately 50% being under the age of 24. This presents a tremendous opportunity for Canada's future social, cultural, and economic development. However, as you have heard from previous presentations, some indigenous youth live in challenging social and economic circumstances.

Since the 1950s friendship centres have become professional service-delivery experts with extensive experience; continual innovation; and deep partnerships with provinces and territories, civil society, and the private sector. The friendship centre movement is the country's most significant off-reserve indigenous service-delivery infrastructure. For over half a century, friendship centres have helped urban indigenous people access the vital services they need to succeed in urban settings across Canada. Friendship centres understand the challenges facing our communities, and their unique wraparound service delivery model ensures we are are equipped to tackle them. Across the country, friendship centres provide culturally appropriate programs and services for indigenous people living in urban centres and have become a place for indigenous and non-indigenous people to come together to share traditions and learn from one another.

Friendship centres are a significant part of Canada's social infrastructure backbone, with more than two million client contacts annually, serving Canada's most vulnerable urban indigenous populations. By creating a space for indigenous people in urban settings, friendship centres provide culturally adept wraparound services and have been catalysts for reconciliation in Canada since their earliest days.

The NAFC is a national association created by friendship centres in Canada in 1972 to be the voice of its members nationally and internationally. The NAFC's membership now comprises seven provincial or territorial associations and 118 friendship centres across Canada, including many in your ridings. The NAFC has a long and unique relationship with the Government of Canada. For the past 30 years the NAFC has been the administrator of national programs delivered to friendship centres and other indigenous organizations on behalf of the Government of Canada. While a not-for-profit network rather than a politically representative organization, the NAFC enjoys a productive relationship with many other indigenous organizations.

In partnership with the Government of Canada, the National Association of Friendship Centres is now administering the delivery of $43 million in programs and services under a realigned urban aboriginal strategy.

This funding has assisted friendship centres and other urban aboriginal service delivery organizations to not only increase services, but also to build and expand partnerships with a range of partners including all levels of government, non-profit organizations, the private sector, and the charitable and philanthropic sectors to support indigenous people living in urban centres to achieve their goals. Through these partnerships, friendship centres have been successful in leveraging funds. In fiscal year 2014-15, friendship centres leveraged, for every federal dollar invested, at a ratio of 7:1.

I would now like to walk you through some of the NAFC's priorities and highlight some of the initiatives that are being implemented to advance these priorities and address the challenges that are experienced by some indigenous people in Canada's urban centres.

In June 2015 the NAFC launched Action for Indigenous Women, a comprehensive initiative to end violence against indigenous women and girls. Action for Indigenous Women builds on proven culturally relevant friendship centre movement initiatives to provide support and change the conditions that lead to violence. This was done through the creation of A4iW Live, a digital community for indigenous youth and the expansion and promotion of NewJourneys.ca, an online resource created by the NAFC supporting indigenous people who have or are planning to relocate to the city.

The NAFC hosts the Urban Aboriginal Knowledge Network secretariat, which is a research network of urban indigenous communities, policy-makers, and academics engaging in community-driven research with the goal of contributing to a better quality of life for urban indigenous people in urban centres. Social innovation and social finance present tremendous tools with which to build on those strategic relationships to develop new, and just as important, skill-up and skill-out existing initiatives so that they can have broader impact.

In British Columbia, the B.C. Association of Aboriginal Friendship Centres has undertaken a number of initiatives to move social innovation and social finance forward. My colleague Paul Lacerte, the executive director of the B.C. Association of Aboriginal Friendship Centres, has spoken extensively about these opportunities.

In Quebec, the Regroupement des centres d’amitié autochtone du Québec has a history of bringing together stakeholders, civil society, and the provincial and federal governments to address social and economic development issues. The Val-d'Or Native Friendship Centre has developed co-op housing for first nations families.

Here in Ontario, the Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres has also been working with key stakeholders to develop concrete social enterprise and social financing initiatives, including a program that provided training and development to support friendship centres to build capacity and assist in developing local social enterprise ventures.

As we collectively look ahead two weeks from today to the first budget of the new government and beyond, I would like to share with you the priorities of the friendship centre movement for this 42nd Parliament. The friendship centre movement will support communities and grieving families as the work of the national public inquiry on murdered and missing indigenous women is formally established and carries out its critical work.

The NAFC will continue to work with all partners to achieve reconciliation in Canada by implementing the calls to action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

The friendship centre movement looks forward to working with the government and opposition parties to improve the lives of urban indigenous people in Canada. This will be achieved through core funding investments in friendship centres so that they continue to have the capacity to operate and to meet the needs of these communities. It will also be achieved by committing infrastructure funding and investing in friendship centres. Retrofitting, fixing, expanding, and reinvigorating these pillars of the community not only provide employment while increasing sustainability and accessibility, it also provides safe community spaces for some of the most vulnerable members of Canadian society.

In closing I would like to reaffirm that there are community-based solutions to complex problems, and friendship centres are harnessing the creativity, energy, and knowledge that can unlock new ideas and new thinking, which will lead to enduring social change and contribute to the full inclusion of indigenous people in Canada's economic, cultural, and social fabric.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Andy Fillmore]

Thanks very much, Mr. Sheppard.

We'll go right into the presentation from the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples, and then follow that with questions.

Please, you have 10 minutes. Thank you.

[Chief Dwight Dorey, National Chief, Congress of Aboriginal Peoples]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee. I thank you for inviting me here today.

I also would first like to acknowledge the Algonquin people on whose traditional ancestral homelands we are assembled today.

I have appeared before this committee and other standing committees in the past. This will be my first under this Liberal government. By way of introducing myself I am a treaty Mi'kmaq from the Millbrook First Nation in Nova Scotia. Throughout my life I have been involved in advocating for the rights of indigenous peoples and I intend to continue doing so for many years to come.

In 2000, I served as national chief of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples for six years, up to 2006. I returned to the congress in 2011 when I was elected as vice-chief. I remained in that position for a year. In September 2015, I was re-elected for the fourth time as national chief of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples. I am pleased to say that I am back.

For those of you who may not know us let me tell you a little about the organization. The Congress of Aboriginal Peoples is one of five national indigenous organizations that are recognized by the Government of Canada, and it is recognized by provincial and territorial governments and by the international community as well. For 45 years, since 1971, the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples, formerly known as the Native Council of Canada, has been a national indigenous representative organization that has represented the interests of the Métis, off-reserve status Indians, and non-status indigenous peoples living in rural, remote, urban, and isolated areas throughout Canada, including the Inuit of southern Labrador.

CAP has been at the forefront of issues that matter most to indigenous peoples for many years. Here are some examples.

CAP fought to ensure that the word “Métis” was included in the Constitution during the constitutional talks of 1982. In fact, it was our former leader, Mr. Harry Daniels, who was widely accredited for getting Métis in the Constitution.

We were also successful in 1999 when the Supreme Court of Canada ruled on the Corbiere case declaring that all bands holding elections under the Indian Act would be required to extend voting rights to their band members living off reserve.

In January 2013, the Federal Court of Canada affirmed the position that CAP had fought for since 1971, that the Métis and non-status aboriginal people are Indians under section 91, class 24, of the Constitution Act of 1867. This historic ruling granted long overdue recognition and equality to over 600,000 of Canada's forgotten indigenous peoples. We now await a final decision from the Supreme Court.

Fundamentally, CAP seeks to ensure that all indigenous people have equal access to programs and services across the country and that our indigenous and treaty rights, as recognized under section 35 in Canada's Constitution Act of 1982, are given equal protection regardless of residence or Indian Act status.

I would also like to provide you with a quick overview of how the congress operates and what we do.

CAP works closely with its provincial-territorial organizations, referred to PTOs, and advocates on their behalf on the national level. Each of our PTOs is a provincially or territorially incorporated organization that provides research and advocacy support to their members and carries out a range of programs and services for their constituents.

In terms of our youth council, with the ever-growing indigenous youth population, CAP is committed to ensuring that the necessary tools and supports are in place to enable our youth to live successful and productive lives.

On the aboriginal skills and employment training strategy, ASETS, indigenous peoples face a number of challenges when entering the labour market, including constitutional, jurisdictional, and geographical gaps. The ASETS program, which started in 1999, fills those gaps by providing skills training, employment counselling, wage subsidies, and self-employment assistance.

Regarding our third annual national grassroots engagement tour, the grassroots engagement tour is an opportunity for indigenous peoples living off reserve in rural and urban areas to engage in town hall-style events and discuss the issues that matter most to them. This year's tour began in Victoria, B.C., and to date we have made nine stops in communities across Canada. Another 13 town halls are scheduled or in the planning stages in the coming weeks. From these sessions we have identified themes that best represent the concerns of our constituents including housing, education, and the Harry Daniels court challenge that is before the Supreme Court.

Now I would like to turn our attention to the promises made in the Liberal platform during this recent election. We are hopeful that this government wants a renewed relationship that includes all indigenous peoples, regardless of where they choose to live. The congress is also committed to working in close partnership with the government and all national, regional, and community indigenous organizations to bring about the much-needed change in recognition for our indigenous peoples.

This is what real partnership must look like. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau promised real change. The Prime Minister also committed to a new nation-to-nation process that will renew the relations between Canada and all indigenous peoples. In fact, the mandate letters that went out to all cabinet ministers contained specific priorities and directives for each portfolio, and also wording on the Prime Minister's overall expectations.

Let me read one excerpt:

I made a personal commitment to bring new leadership and a new tone to Ottawa.... No relationship is more important to me and to Canada than the one with Indigenous Peoples. It is time for a renewed, nation-to-nation relationship with Indigenous Peoples, based on recognition of rights, respect, co-operation, and partnership.

I also want to reiterate what we have said in the past with respect to nationhood. Traditionally, the indigenous peoples in Canada identified with their own specific nations of peoples, such as mine which is Mi'kmaq. There are Maliseet, Mohawk, Ojibwa, Chipewyan, and there are many more. These are examples of some of the 60 or so nations of indigenous peoples in Canada. The reality is that indigenous nations of peoples have been systematically divided by the federal government through Indian policy, the disinheritance of indigenous peoples' birthright, identity, and the dispossessing of access to their lands and their resources.

Today we have countless classifications for Indian, far too many, and far too confusing. For example, we have status Indians, non-status Indians, off-reserve Indians, on-reserve Indians, registered Indians, treaty Indians, band members, non-band members, beneficiaries, non-beneficiaries, and so on. This list now includes distinct and non-distinct classifications of who is an Indian.

Who is an Indian, or an aboriginal or indigenous person? The definition is very clear under section 35 of the Constitution Act. It says, “'aboriginal peoples of Canada' includes the Indian, Inuit and Métis peoples of Canada”.

The Constitution was meant to be inclusive, not exclusive. However, under this new government's commitment to a nation-to-nation relationship with indigenous peoples across Canada, the big question being asked by many of our people is where do urban and rural indigenous people fit into the government's concept of nation-to-nation relationships.

On December 13, 2015, Christine Martin, the executive director of the Vancouver Aboriginal Transformative Justice Services Society, said to a CBC Vancouver radio host:

I'm not going to lie, I think we're a little concerned about how this is going to roll out in the urban aboriginal community. It leaves out a huge population of approximately 65 per cent of us who don't live on our reserves, and not many of us have connections to the bands that we come from. Some of our people who live here in Vancouver have never been to the band that they come from, let alone be active participants in it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Andy Fillmore]

Mr. Dorey, I'm afraid we're out of time. If you want to give us your concluding remarks, in the interest of fairness we need to move on to the questions.

My apologies for rushing you.

[Chief Dwight Dorey]

Okay, thank you.

I expect to be meeting soon with the Honourable Carolyn Bennett, Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada, to talk about our own nation-building strategy. The congress is in political accord with the government and the road map for renewal and reconciliation. This is how we see our government-to-government relationship or process being developed.

We propose a road map that sets out seven topics for action. They include economic development; education and lifelong learning; governance and accountability for and within indigenous communities; family security, including child and family support systems on reserve and off reserve; indigenous and treaty rights, including access to those rights by the indigenous people regardless of their status or residency; implementation of international standards for the rights of indigenous people, which includes mainly the declaration of the UN on the rights of indigenous peoples and the ILO's convention number 169 on the rights of indigenous and tribal peoples; and an assessment of, preparation for, and response to the court's decision in relation to the inclusion of both Métis and non-status Indians within section 91, class 24, of the Constitution Act, 1987, the Daniels decision.

[The Chair, Liberal, Andy Fillmore]

Mr. Dorey, I would welcome you to leave behind your notes. They would become a formal part of the record, but I'm afraid we must move into the questions now.

[Chief Dwight Dorey]

All right, I'll make one final point for your information. As of today—

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

On a point of order, Chair, if that happens, then we have to discuss time.