Evidence of meeting #20 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was study.
A video is available from Parliament.
7:45 p.m.
Liberal
7:45 p.m.
Bloc
Sylvie Bérubé Bloc Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Duhaime, I have a question for you. How can we secure food resources in the north?
7:45 p.m.
Professor, Université Laval, As an Individual
There are many ways it could be done. In the short to medium term, the solution would be to secure indigenous peoples' rights to hunting, fishing and other practices, including gathering.
The way to go about it is to apply simple principles, such as the precautionary principle. Obviously, other users might not be thrilled. For example, each time that a decision has to be made as to allocation of land and developments rights for mining, you would have to apply the precautionary principle. If you do not know what the repercussions will be in terms of food security and resources, you would have to apply that principle before giving authorizations or carte blanche for development.
The same thing could be done with the principle that residents' food security takes precedence over other interests. That's a possibility. These principles are already included in certain treaties and could be applied.
Long term, it's a different ball game. If you really want to secure residents' long-term access to food resources on the land, if you really want to establish a dialogue between nations, then you will have to think about developing something like a third level of government in Canada. It could be a similar set-up to that of the territories, with the authority to manage natural resources.
7:45 p.m.
Bloc
Sylvie Bérubé Bloc Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC
Can you tell us more about the extent and depth of poverty?
7:45 p.m.
Professor, Université Laval, As an Individual
I talked about it briefly with my colleagues just a little while ago. I checked the official statistics and the measures used by research institutes and statistical agencies in the regions.
When you use consumer prices that have been established by the department, and not those that we measured in our studies, the poverty rate average is 37.5% in the northern territories, as I stated earlier. I think the lowest rate is 27%, but it goes up to 44% in Nunavut. That means that half the population lives below the poverty line. Obviously, those that are living above the poverty line by $10, $100 or $1,000 are not considered rich by any stretch of the imagination. This is a huge factor which has a major impact on households.
A few years ago, 45 households participated in a study to see what impact prices had on their budget. You will find that study in one of the documents I sent to the committee. It states that for low-income households, 50% of their budget is spent on food. When you factor in housing, 70% of the budget is used, and that is for only two budgetary items.
It's an extremely tight situation. There are a few ways to fight poverty. I could talk about them if you wish.
7:50 p.m.
Bloc
7:50 p.m.
Professor, Université Laval, As an Individual
Actually, there are a few ways. First of all, we would have to factor in the high cost of food when paying local employees. That is part of the inequality that we see in every study that we do. Locally hired employees do not enjoy the same conditions or benefits than those who are brought in, who receive an allowance for food shipping, for example.
The same thing applies to transfer payments made to households. All the social programs use payment scales that have been established for households in urban centres like Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver. The scales are the same up north, whereas the food basket costs from 50 to 100% more.
There's also the question of tax credits. The Government of Quebec, under pressure from Nunavik authorities, applied certain measures such as tax credits for residents to take into account consumer prices, and these have worked extremely well.
In the northern regions, one of the major factors that increase poverty is the housing crisis. This housing crisis has unfortunately been made worse by the departure of the federal government, who withdrew from social housing programs for many years. We have to put an end to this. The housing crisis in the North has been going on for a long time and we have the means to fix it, but nothing is done.
Finally, local production by and for communities would have to be supported in a big way, and not only on a commercial basis. In fact, a commercial model is not necessarily what the communities want. When we surveyed people in all the regions that we visited, they said that they were ready to commercialize some things, but not at any cost. The people wanted to use certain species first and foremost as food for residents, with a view to selling any surplus if the money could then be used to finance their operations.
7:50 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bob Bratina
Thank you very much, Mr. Duhaime.
Ms. Blaney, you will close it off. Go ahead for six minutes, please.
7:50 p.m.
NDP
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to the witnesses, as well, for presenting to us today on this very important subject.
I'm going to go to you first, Professor Duhaime.
You talked a lot about poverty and the impacts of poverty on people's access to food.
One thing I've heard several times is around the nutrition north program and the fact that it's not very transparent. There may be a better idea of moving it from a subsidy program into more of a social program, so that the resources are reflective of people's incomes and it puts more resources in the pockets of the people who are in those high levels of poverty.
I'm wondering if you have anything to say about that from the work you've done.
7:50 p.m.
Professor, Université Laval, As an Individual
That would be a very useful avenue to explore. As to nutrition north Canada, this program was poorly received in all the regions where I worked. People saw it at a form of abandonment.
The price of certain foods deemed healthy according to the program was indeed lowered.
When the program was set up, local authorities in many places, and I witness this myself, said that the federal government wanted to change the Inuit into rabbits. But the Inuit do not eat carrots. Foods chosen by the Canadian government because of their healthy or nutritional value were not necessarily the foods favoured by the local population.
There is a hint of neocolonialism in the lists of items that were deemed healthy and subsidized by nutrition north Canada and that were forced onto the communities, telling them what defines healthy eating. Many people would be thrilled to see the lists disappear.
There should be transportation subsidies for all items that can be bought in stores. As you know, these general stores sell everything, including hunting and fishing equipment, but the government prefers to subsidize fresh fruits and vegetables which, as many witnesses have said, are not necessarily fresh by the time they are on the shelves. Why not subsidize hunting and fishing gear which would allow local people to get the healthy foods they prefer?
Budgetary limits imposed at the start of the program have created an untenable situation for local community representatives. The representatives understood that they were made members of the nutrition north Canada Advisory Board to be part of the decision-making process and take food items off the list, but this was not what they wanted. I don't know if this is still the case, but it has happened that representatives from northern communities left the room because they felt that they were legitimizing the program in a way.
The program should be extended. Just because you have road access does not mean that prices are necessarily lower. I surveyed prices in communities accessible by rail and the prices there were 57% higher than in urban areas. Prices in communities that are an eight-hour drive from the city of Québec via a forestry road were 40% higher than those in the closest town.
All these communities are ineligible because of reasons linked to the history of the program, which to my mind is unfair.
7:55 p.m.
NDP
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
Thank you so much.
My last question for you is around food storage infrastructure. We heard again and again from other testimony that local food storage infrastructure is a challenge, but also for stores, there's just not enough storage space for food. There were discussions about food being sent and then largely wasted because they didn't have the appropriate storage quickly enough in those very cold temperatures and food was lost.
I'm wondering, in the work you've done, what you heard about food storage, and if people proposed to you any particularly unique or interesting solutions.
That's my last question, Chair. Thank you.
7:55 p.m.
Professor, Université Laval, As an Individual
Absolutely. There are possibilities, as long as you stop seeing storage infrastructure as a business subsidy or as something other than a port, for example. What is the difference between building a port so that boats can unload their cargo securely, and building a warehouse nearby? Every port in the world has this set-up.
7:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bob Bratina
I appreciate that. Thank you very much.
Thank you to both of our witnesses, and my apologies once again to Nellie Cournoyea.
I would ask the committee if her presentation could be adopted as.... Perhaps it has not been in translation, and I'm sorry about that, but would we accept that or shall we wait for a further opportunity to have Ms. Cournoyea's submission? Are there any thoughts on that?
8 p.m.
NDP
Rachel Blaney NDP North Island—Powell River, BC
Mr. Chair, if we get an opportunity to have her in person, I think that would be great. Maybe as a secondary step...?
That's just my thought.
8 p.m.
Liberal
Marcus Powlowski Liberal Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON
Chair, I think as a procedural item, given the fact that operating virtually is pretty new, it would seem to me a pretty fundamental denial of her democratic right to participate in the democratic process if people like her, who come from places that happen to have poor Internet, are not allowed to participate in things like this because of the lack of ability to have simultaneous translation.
As a procedural thing, we ought to look at alternatives in this kind of situation—for example, allowing her to testify and afterwards providing the translation in French.
8 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bob Bratina
That would be accepting the speaking notes. We'll leave that there, because that's a discussion we need to have.
Once again, that was brilliant testimony. Thank you so much to Monsieur Duhaime and Ms. Verishagen.
We now need to leave the meeting and come back for the in camera portion.
[Proceedings continue in camera]