Evidence of meeting #55 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 know.
A video is available from Parliament.
8:50 a.m.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Romeo Saganash
Good morning.
Hello, everyone.
Today I'll be taking over the entire committee.
8:50 a.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
8:50 a.m.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Romeo Saganash
We have the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs for the main estimates 2017-18: vote 1 under Canadian High Arctic Research Station, and votes 1, 5, 10, L15, and L20 under Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.
Good morning, Madam Minister.
8:50 a.m.
Toronto—St. Paul's Ontario
Liberal
8:50 a.m.
Liberal
Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON
Thank you, Chair. It's great to be back here at the committee, acknowledging that we come together on the traditional territory of the Algonquin people.
I think you know my colleagues. The associate deputy minister, Diane Lafleur, has been with us now for a year. Is that right?
8:50 a.m.
Diane Lafleur Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Yes.
8:50 a.m.
Liberal
Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON
She came from Finance, so she is a very important part of our team, knowing how this stuff works. We also have the chief financial officer here, Paul Thoppil. I am very happy to have them by my side.
To begin with, we want to thank you for the ongoing great work, and particularly the study on default prevention and management policy.
In my opinion, this policy could be a lot more effective and must be modernized.
It's really important that we get this piece of work done, and hopefully you'll be able to give us some solutions in a system that even Chuck Strahl said needed to be changed, when he was minister.
As you know, we are reviewing the previous government's policy in partnership with first nations to ensure that we are facilitating capacity and promoting self-governance and decolonization. The goal is to build capacity and not spend money that should go to the people in the communities on other things. We are very much looking forward to the committee's findings and recommendations. I assure you that your important work will inform future reforms.
As you know, I am here to discuss the department's 2017-18 main estimates. I am pleased that we have the opportunity to have that discussion with the benefit of the important context of the additional investments proposed through budget 2017. As always, we have to look at these two documents together to provide a much more accurate picture of my department's proposed spending for the 2017-18 fiscal year.
I would like you to look at the briefing note distributed to all committee members.
I regret that this is not yet translated, which is unacceptable, but we will give it to you for future reference regarding the targeted investments and the way that, hopefully, we are honouring our commitment from last year that we are indeed a department that knows how to get money out the door. The allocations are there, particularly on infrastructure. We're pretty proud of the performance to date.
The 2017-18 main estimates, if approved by Parliament, will provide the department with approximately $10.1 billion in appropriations. This is a net increase of approximately $2.6 billion, or 34%, over last year's main estimates. The net increase primarily reflects the historic investments announced in budget 2016 to improve the socio-economic conditions of indigenous people and northerners, as well as the funding required to settle specific claims in 2017-18.
It is also important to note, as we have discussed at previous estimate meetings, that main estimates do not include the further investments outlined in budget 2017. We will come back to you with the supplementary estimates in order for us to access the money that was in budget 2017. Through the last two budgets, the government has committed $11.8 billion over six years to improve the lives of indigenous people in Canada.
We are also striving to make sure that the funding allocated is distributed to the people for whom it is intended.
Of the historic investments made in budget 2016, 100% of the money allocated in fiscal year 2016-17 to my department for infrastructure, capacity-building, and employment strategies has been spent. These investments are making a significant and tangible difference in the lives of indigenous people in Canada. Some key examples of progress include the lifting the 19 long-term drinking water advisories and the 201 water and wastewater projects that are already under way. This means that nearly 200,000 first nations people in our country will soon have access to clean water, something most Canadians take for granted. All Canadians are embarrassed that it does not happen at the present time on first nations.
More than 3,200 homes are being built or renovated in first nations communities, which will begin to address the chronic shortage of homes and shocking disrepair of a significant proportion of the current housing stock. One hundred and twenty-five school projects are moving forward in more than 100 first nations communities, which will serve more than 135,000 people. Repairs and renovations to more than 200 child care centres will be completed by the end of this year, ensuring that they will provide the safe and healthy environment that every parent expects for their child. Forty-one community health centres are also under construction or undergoing major repairs and refits. Since broadening the government's approach to Jordan's principle, we have approved more than 3,300 additional requests for supports and services for first nations' children.
There is a lot left to do, but I am proud of the excellent work and the results achieved so far.
Budget 2017 will invest an additional $3.4 billion in indigenous priorities over the next five years. It builds on budget 2016's historic investments of $8.4 billion in government-wide spending on indigenous programs and will result in a combined increase in funding for indigenous programs of 27% by 2021-22. National Chief Perry Bellegarde was clear when he said, “Budget 2017 makes important and positive investments to help close the socio-economic gap for First Nations”.
We are working in partnership with first nations, Inuit, and the Métis to ensure that these investments lead to meaningful positive change for indigenous peoples in Canada. These investments are being made in the priority areas of indigenous communities, including health care, education, housing, and other critical infrastructure. These new budget 2017 investments will build, repair, and improve infrastructure on reserves and in northern and Inuit communities; provide support for post-secondary education, skills development, and training for indigenous people; deliver better health outcomes for first nations and Inuit; support Métis organizations in building their capacity; and preserve and promote indigenous languages.
While the 2% cap has been lifted through the historic investments in budgets 2016 and 2017, new long-term fiscal arrangements must be designed in full partnership with first nations. We have signed an MOU with the AFN establishing joint technical working groups on sufficiency, predictability, and mutual accountability, and the work is already under way. Through this joint process, we will establish a new fiscal relationship with first nations, which will provide predictable, sustained funding to support their communities' priorities. We are also working on the funding arrangements with the self-governing first nations.
In a poll released last year, 79% of non-indigenous youth believe they will see meaningful reconciliation in their lifetime. Canada's young people want to see meaningful reconciliation.
They are pushing us in that direction and the government will do everything it can for us to reach our objectives.
A fundamental part of achieving that meaningful reconciliation is making the necessary investments to close the socio-economic gaps between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples in Canada. The investments outlined in the 2017-18 main estimates, along with those in budget 2017, represent significant progress toward closing those gaps.
Meegwetch,mahsi' cho, nakurmiik. I look forward to answering any questions you have.
9 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal MaryAnn Mihychuk
Thank you so much.
Questioning now begins, and our first questioner is MP Bossio.
9 a.m.
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
Thank you so much, Minister, for being here today. I think we all celebrate the historic investments that are being made for indigenous communities. It is going to make such a significant improvement in so many lives, for indigenous people across this country.
My first question is regarding a local issue of my own indigenous community, the Mohawks in the Bay of Quinte. They are one of the largest reserves in the country. Some of the concerns they have revolve around recognizing the needs of larger reserves and those in the southern part of the country, because their needs are also great.
They feel that sometimes, because they are in the south and are located close to urban areas, wealthier areas, there is a perception that they are also wealthy and therefore can take care of themselves to a great extent.
In my community, last summer 40% of their wells went dry. Most of the reserve has GUDI wells and, therefore, is subject to boil water advisories. Last summer in particular, they were waiting upwards of a week, and more sometimes, for tankers to bring water to their tanks because of the overwhelming need that they have.
We recognize the massive need that exists in the north, and the message has gotten through very clearly. Can the minister ensure that the southern ridings will also receive the kind of attention they need for their own water and infrastructure needs?
9 a.m.
Liberal
Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON
Thanks very much.
I think that's a really important question because the perception of people in various communities is reality. We need to make sure that people understand that in the water situation in Tyendinaga, for instance, or for the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte, we are moving on all water systems across the country.
It's not only that. We inherited a huge deficit in the water and wastewater systems, but as we have committed to lift all boil water advisories, it means that we're not only working on the communities with boil water advisories, but are also working on all of the communities that have medium- or high-risk systems that could tip into boil water advisories. It means that we're trying to get all systems across this country down to a low risk. That is happening for the Mohawk at the Bay of Quinte, where we have lifted all the boil water advisories for which our department has direct responsibility. There are private systems that we are concerned about, and we will work with the community on those, but it is a matter of going forward.
The flip side of that, Mike, is that sometimes it is the larger and sometimes southern communities, the communities with more capacity, that are much better able to do the project or proposal-driven funding, and get the money for those. Even on housing, we found that we had to do it in three tranches so that we could build up the capacity of the most needy communities, because otherwise the money went to the proposals sent in by the communities that have the most capacity to fill those proposals out.
It's a bit of both, because I think that in the north they would ask, “How come these communities that have better capacity are gobbling up all the funds?” I think we're trying to show that we're trying to be very fair about this. It's needs-based in a way, but we really do have a direct responsibility to the larger urban communities or closer southern communities—the less remote, absolutely.
9:05 a.m.
Liberal
Mike Bossio Liberal Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON
Thank you very much, Minister. I know that the Mohawks of the Bay of Quinte will be happy to hear that you've said their concerns are being heard.
I'd like to move to third party management. I know that you're probably going to get a number of questions on it, but initially I would like to say that in our study of third party management, the one thing that seems to resonate most is that all the carrots are with the third party managers, and all the sticks are with the indigenous communities that are being impacted by it.
By that, I mean that it's very difficult for these communities to dig themselves out of the hole that exists and, in a lot of cases, not through their own fault. It's just that they have rapidly growing communities and the funding hasn't kept up with that. Third party managers come in and are rewarded handsomely to be there, and that further penalizes those communities that are stuck in this hole.
I'll just say that I know there isn't much time left for you, and I'm sure other people will ask the same question, but I'd like to hear about what you feel are some of the potential solutions to help resolve these third party management issues.
9:05 a.m.
Liberal
Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON
I think you know that I've never understood third party management. I think it doesn't build capacity, it's too expensive, and it doesn't work. We're pleased that we're now down to 10. I think Paul tabled this chart on third parties with your committee
On co-management, for all of those, these are resources out of the community that could be going to their people. I'm really interested in the work this committee is doing, whether it's with the First Nations Financial Management Board, or even with CESO, where 700 volunteers are willing to go to help with better reporting and better ways of building actual capacity so that the band managers can be from the community and have great jobs in the community.
We want to work on this, and even with our post-secondary dollars, where a lot of the polytechnics and community colleges are teaching that kind of work, so that we can have those community members being able to set priorities and to do these kinds of administration jobs, not just accounting.
9:05 a.m.
Liberal
9:05 a.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
Thank you, Minister, for joining us today.
I have a bit of a framing of my question, but in the end, it's actually a pretty simple question.
A year ago you went to the UN and indicated that we were going to implement the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This year, of course, you said at the UN that you were removing the objections of Canada to the paragraphs around free, prior, and informed consent. I thought that was included the year before, but having said that, I note that it was official this year.
According to The Globe and Mail, you said that “'free, prior and informed consent' merely means there is a commitment to developing policies in conjunction with Indigenous people on matters that will affect them”. Also, stated the Globe, you said, “'This is about making decisions together' from the inception”, and that it's not about “'putting some fully baked project in front of people and getting them to vote yes or no.'”
Of course, National Chief Perry Bellegarde continues to say that the UN declaration gives communities the right to say yes and the right to say no.
I'm going to target that. We know that there are complicated issues such as pipelines, but there are also very simple issues, and we have a simple issue in the riding I represent. It's a KGHM mine called “Ajax”, and it's important for the industry, communities, and first nations to know what this is going to mean. The first nations in the area, the SSN, undertook an extensive environmental process, and they have definitively stated that they do not give free, prior, and informed consent to this project. They've been very definitive. They went through an extensive process, as it's a mine.
The federal government now needs to make a decision about that mine. In regard to the fact that the SSN has said definitively that they will not give free, prior, and informed consent, does that mean definitively that the federal government will say no to this project?
9:05 a.m.
Liberal
Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON
It's a great question, because I think there are the bigger pipeline questions that involve a number of first nations, and there are also projects that are very specific. I think the reason that the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers and so many other industry organizations are very much in favour of clarity on the UN declaration on free, prior, and informed consent is that, in the past, without developing projects together, you ended up in court or with blockades, and eventually the project doesn't go forward anyway.
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
Thank you, Minister, but I guess this is a really cut-and-dried example.
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
There was an environmental assessment process done by the SSN. They have worked with the mining companies since the beginning. They have said no. Does that mean the federal government is saying no?
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON
I will defer to my Minister of Natural Resources and the Minister of Environment. We are setting in place a new process for approvals that includes indigenous knowledge and the communities. I can't tell you right now, but it is really important that we honour our commitment.
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
The expectation of the community, the SSN, is that it definitively means no. Obviously, it creates great confusion for industry, for investment, that you weren't able to give a definitive answer. Having said that, I think we're still no clearer about what you said at the UN and what your commitment to implementation is actually going to mean. I think this confusion continues.
The next area I want to focus on is the inquiry into missing and murdered indigenous women. I think all parties are now on board. Canadians are in favour of having an inquiry that is successful. I'm hearing an increasing concern from families and a number of people. In regard to this inquiry, we've heard about communications officers being fired, about the lack of an appropriate database, and about regional meetings being cancelled. We've also heard about budget offices not being set up. Significant dollars, however, have been spent already without the inquiry actually meeting families.
To what degree are you monitoring this and are going to engage and ensure that this process is successful?
9:10 a.m.
Liberal
Carolyn Bennett Liberal Toronto—St. Paul's, ON
Thank you for the question.
I think it is really important that this commission be successful and that they fulfill our mandate to put in place concrete solutions to end this terrible tragedy.
I am also hearing excellent stories on things like the family information liaison units and what Kim Murray is doing here in the province of Ontario—setting up support and retreats for families of missing and murdered indigenous women and girls. As we go forward in navigating the system, I think we will see that it's working. We are working on shelters, on housing. We've always said that we're not going to wait for the results of this commission to get going on the things that have to be. For me, overhauling the child welfare system is the most important thing. As we heard in the pre-inquiry gatherings from coast to coast to coast, the attachment to a child welfare system, by victims and perpetrators alike, was very much part of the problem and that's why we have to fix it.