Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on March 22nd, 2021

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

Based on our initial experience with the pandemic as it first broke out, understanding the limits of how my department operated, usually in the “on-reserve” context, and understanding quite quickly that COVID doesn't look at that distinction and has impacted indigenous communities disproportionately, we know the reasons and factors that impact that.

Getting those tailored resources that money can't buy, whether it's deployment of the CAF or deployment of search supports, all those, as quickly as possible into settings where we don't necessarily operate effectively or where there are other jurisdictions, provincial namely, whose primary responsibility it is.... We like to say “whole of government”, but what does that mean? That means working with municipalities, provinces and across our departments, which have sometimes been accustomed to working in silos, and deploying them into communities as quickly as possible.

The initial shock point that we saw at the beginning of the pandemic was La Loche, and their response was amazing in the face of overwhelming and quite scary COVID percentages. We've seen that happen in repeated ways. Thunder Bay, in the earlier part of the year and very recently, has been one of the examples. Our department moved quite quickly to work with the local health authority to deploy resources. Through a number of organizations we funded about $1.9 million in support through the indigenous community support fund to a number of organizations, including indigenous communities that had been advocating from the very beginning of the pandemic to support their off-reserve populations.

The Nokiiwin Tribal Council has been funded to roll out the vaccination clinics for the indigenous populations in Thunder Bay, among others, which we were able to fund for about half a million dollars. However, there are a series of a little over a baker's dozen we supported that are all doing amazing work, have never been funded properly, but we have to do it in the context of this pandemic.

I would also highlight at the same time the amazing work that has been done by the local health authorities in banding together. We're not out of the woods by any stretch of the imagination, but this is one of the areas where we have to cut through these jurisdictional juggernauts at times to see how we can best serve people in record time, because we do move more slowly than COVID. We've seen that time and time again.

[Marcus Powlowski, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON]

Thank you.

On behalf of the people of Thunder Bay, thank you very much for your assistance.

I think this is the third time I've asked you, but if you remember, as the pandemic was starting I asked what we can do to help prevent COVID from spreading to isolated northern indigenous communities. Given the experience with H1N1, we were concerned this was going to be a disaster. I think I brought it up in the fall again, and I wanted to bring it up again to give you an opportunity because I think you've done a really good job in preventing that from happening. I think the vaccine story is looking like a really positive one in those northern communities.

Can you tell us how the isolated fly-in communities in northern Ontario are doing with respect to vaccinations at the moment?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

Marcus, I would take this opportunity to highlight the amazing work that's been done by the folks at Ornge in getting vaccination rates in the 90% range in a number of communities, despite immense logistical challenges. This is one of the aspects of the mass vaccination efforts in communities. It's not over yet. A lot of communities need to get that second dose, and we'll be there to help them, whether it's the assets of the Government of Canada or leveraging those that exist in the province. Whatever works, we're there to help.

I quoted aggregate numbers at the beginning. I don't like generalizing because the rollout is still a little uneven and there are some unnatural fault lines. However, as a generalization, if you take the 200,000-plus vaccinations that have occurred in indigenous communities or in the territories, we're halfway there in terms of the indigenous population. Now that may vary from a southern to a northern community, which is why I hesitate to generalize, but this is a race against the clock, particularly in the face of a potential third wave that is fuelled by variants of concern.

The suite of tools we deploy includes point-of-care testing. We have about 400 units deployed now, including the GeneXpert ones, which were the early leaders and the reliable ones. However, whether it's the ID NOW or others, that's to help that point-of-care testing, which is complementing not only the vaccine rollout but the secure fly in, fly out communities with our health workers. The last thing they want to do is be a vector of spread. That continues, and we continue to learn, but I think Canadians can be quite proud of this, because we really focused on—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

We'll have to leave it there. Thanks, Minister.

We will move on to Madame Bérubé for six minutes.

Go ahead.

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question goes to Minister Miller.

In the votes in the supplementary estimates (C), I see no appropriation requests for building and renovating housing. However, we know that, in Indigenous communities, groups of people have to live together because of the lack of housing. That is not ideal, especially in a pandemic. In addition, we know that we are short more than 8,000 housing units for First Nations in Quebec.

What is the federal government doing to improve the supply of housing for Indigenous peoples in Quebec?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

We have a number of initiatives, Ms. Bérubé.

I could mention the rapid housing initiative recently launched by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. It has subsidized the construction of 55 housing units specifically for seniors in Cree communities in Quebec. That initiative comes under the responsibility of Minister Hussen. Of course, since budget envelopes for housing are generally shared among a number of departments, the responsibilities are also shared among a number of ministers, such as Minister Bennett, Minister Hussen, who is responsible for the CMHC, and myself. My department is therefore not automatically the sole point of contact for matters of housing.

Clearly, there is a shortage of housing in Indigenous communities. More work must be done, whether it is in the Far North or in communities that are closer. In terms of COVID-19, we know that people living in overcrowded housing carry the virus. That will be a factor to consider following this pandemic.

We must invest in housing to ensure that we really eliminate this shortfall in infrastructure and housing. We must consider housing to be important as a medical issue. Experience has shown that overcrowding in Inuit communities in the Far North is definitely a factor in transmitting disease and in outbreaks. That was the case for tuberculosis, just as it is also the case in the current global COVID-19 pandemic.

You raised a very good point. I must point out, however, that a number of departments share the budgetary envelopes for housing.

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

You also are aware that the Bloc Québécois is proposing that the federal government use as a model the strategy being used by the Government of Quebec in Bill 66, in order to speed up the construction of the infrastructure and the housing needed to improve the health conditions of Indigenous communities. One aspect, for example, is housing for seniors.

Are you using Quebec's strategy as a model?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

Ms. Bérubé, I am not the only decision-maker in cabinet, but I am certainly aware of it. You will see that I will pay a great deal of attention to any initiative that supports indigenous communities, whether it comes from the Bloc Québécois or any other party.

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

You are also aware that we want to see the federal government reverse its decision to cut 8% of the funding for the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation's On-reserve Non Profit Housing Program for 2021.

Are you going to maintain the funding or, even better, increase it?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

We would always like to increase funding, but I will have to examine your proposal in more detail before I can comment on it in the context of this committee.

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Is there any hope?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

There's always hope.

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Earlier, you talked about drinking water. The Office of the Auditor General of Canada concluded that the department had no regulatory regime in place for access to safe drinking water in First Nations communities.

Why has the department not developed and implemented a regulatory regime for drinking water in First Nations communities? What steps is the department taking to develop and implement such a regime?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

With all respect, Ms. Bérubé, I would not want people to think that there is a legal or regulatory void. We have an entire team at Indigenous Services Canada that works with communities to check that quality standards for drinking water are upheld. Without that, we would not be able to know which communities have a long-term advisory or a short-term advisory as to the quality of the drinking water. We are constantly doing tests.

The fact remains that the legislative framework put in place by the Conservative government was very roundly criticized by First Nations peoples, because it provided no resources with which to eliminate long-term advisories on the quality of drinking water. That, of course, was not appropriate, given the context.

But thanks to our work with the Assembly of First Nations and others, we now have a number of initiatives for reforming the regulatory framework. I do not want to leave people with the impression that there is a legal or regulatory void. The standards used to determine whether a water quality advisory should be for the long term or the short term are very strict, and for good reason: safe drinking water for people in Indigenous communities is vitally important.

The Auditor General did indeed express some criticism in this area, but I was somewhat opposed, given the regulatory context that is in force today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

That brings us to time.

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Thanks very much.

Rachel Blaney, you have six minutes please.

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

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for being here with us today to answer these very important questions.

Recently, I was approached by a grade 1 and 2 split class through their principal Jasmin Marshman from Henderson Elementary School in Powell River. They were very concerned about the lack of safe drinking water in first nations communities across Canada. They have seen information about it in the Auditor General's report. They were so motivated that they wrote multiple letters to the Prime Minister and made sure that I also received a copy of them so that their voices could be heard. I think it's quite telling when a grade 1 and 2 class in Powell River is willing to stand up and talk about this. They want to hear more about what you're going to do about it and what this government is going to do about it, Minister.

I appreciate that there has been some success, but we saw in the Auditor General's report that very clearly there still isn't enough support. The percentage of water systems assessed as medium and high risk stays around 43%, so even with the successes, there are still continual things popping up. This means indigenous people continue to face challenges.

I always think of one of the chiefs in my riding who said that what we continue to see with levels of government is incremental justice. It's a little bit of justice when it's convenient, and I think this is something we really need to look at.

Minister, I'm wondering if you could talk a bit about the plans that your department may have around updating operations and maintenance funding formulas. We know that those were developed 30 years ago and can't possibly reflect the advances in technology and the actual costs of maintenance. That's important, because what we're hearing from indigenous and first nations communities is that their water system operators are being paid 30% less than folks in other places. This is an ongoing concern of not having the resources they need to legitimately start a system while making sure that the regulatory process is clear, consistent and makes sense to everyone.

Minister, I hear your resistance around the legislative framework, but we need something stronger than this. We are obviously not paying people right and are looking at systems through a 30-year-old window frame. I'm wondering if you could speak to that.

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

Yes, absolutely. Thank you for that.

You'll note that with the lifting of the Wet'suwet'en long-term water advisory, that leaves only one left in B.C. We're cautiously optimistic about that in the next little while. It'll be something to really celebrate and lift up.

Clearly, there are a number of elements in the Auditor General's report that are very compelling. When I was named minister about 15 months ago, I sat down with my team and said that there may be elements that perhaps don't fall strictly speaking into the context of lifting the long-term water advisories and that we need to address through additional funding, through a number of other elements. This was before COVID hit. I asked my team to sit down and come up with what that might look like.

What came back with a lot of the engagement was obviously the O&M, the operations and maintenance, of what is a critical water asset. Communities were telling us that it was important to get to the deadline of lifting all the water advisories—I think that is something that is important for all first nations, whether they're on long-term advisories or not—but a lot of questions came with that. What are you going to do after March 2021? Where are you going to be? Are you going to disappear like you did before?

These all turned around the very important points that you raise, which are around the deficiency in the funding model. For the benefit of everyone, I note that it was an eighty-twenty model. The government would give 80% and the community would be asked to contribute 20% . With a state-of-the-art asset like a plant, particularly some of the new ones that are being built, the people in there need to get equal pay for equal work, as you've said. Those people are the pride of their communities. You can't blame someone if they want to go somewhere else, or if they get pulled into another community, which is often non-indigenous and is paying them more. It just isn't fair.

There were a lot of discussions around the funding model and making sure that there was more of a perpetual funding model that would allow us to fix the O&M gap, because it contributes precisely to that point, as you said, which is the insecurity, the risk model and profile that the Auditor General looked at.

When I saw the medium-to-high risk category, that risk is with respect to the integrity of the asset, because it is threatened through people that aren't paid properly and perhaps through cutting corners to get people to work there. That puts the integrity of a critical asset at risk. There are some issues with the sensitivity of what that is measuring, because it's not as if you're looking at crumbling infrastructure. You're looking at all the investment and maintenance in and around a critical asset system for a community.

Those are aspects that perhaps fall outside of what would be taken to lift the long-term water advisory—i.e., producing safe and clean water—but they are so critical to the lifespan and the asset span of a plant, for example, and they weren't necessarily addressed in prior funding models. The announcement in late November of $1.5 billion was, yes, designed to address some of the challenges and the costing around dealing with the global pandemic and increased costs, and what we might do to support communities that want to build through a pandemic, but also that O&M that you raise, which is so critical.

It is part of a greater approach to water safety and integrity that was addressed a few months later in the Auditor General's report. It's something that I'm glad we're moving forward on. There's still more work to do, but at least in terms of financial support and telling communities that the Government of Canada is there for them, that funding is there and it just has to be rolled out over the coming months.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bob Bratina]

Thanks, Minister.

Thanks, Rachel.

Now we go to five-minute questions with Arnold Viersen.

Arnold, please go ahead.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I as well want to thank the minister for being here. I appreciate his time today.

Back in 2019, only nine boil water advisories were eliminated. At that rate, it would take seven more years to eliminate all the remaining water advisories—hoping that no more were established. There were 13 new advisories in that year, so we actually went backwards, yet the department's plan for 2020-21 claimed that you would be able to eliminate all of them by March.

Why was that target not updated earlier?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

I'm looking at some of the time frames you're referencing, MP Viersen. Clearly, going into COVID, or just prior to, we were confident we would be able to hit that date of March 2021. There are always challenges with infrastructure and building critical assets in communities, as well as relationships that have to be maintained during COVID.

When COVID hit, we did see a slowdown; there's absolutely no question about it. Your question has to do with updating the numbers. As a minister, in the first three or four months of going into a global pandemic, we wanted to be in a position to assess what the impact of COVID was on ensuring that critical assets were built. What did we need?

More important than assessing the challenge is actually moving to fund and support communities through a historic pandemic, not really knowing how different waves will hit. As well, there is what I addressed to the committee in an answer to MP Blaney on the other issues in and around lifting long-term water advisories that touch on water security in communities.

In order to give Canadians a portrait of what was going on, we wanted to get a sense of what the delays were, what the causes were and how we could move quickly to address them. I think you'll see in the updated website that for each community with a long-term water advisory still in place, there's a work plan and an ETA on a number of these.

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

I met with a number of new Canadians over the summer. They supported the Liberals in the last election because, as they said, “We moved to Canada. Canada's a great country.” That was one of the reasons they supported the Liberals. Canada's given them a lot but they were concerned about the water advisories.

Would you say to those new Canadians who supported you that the failure to remove those water advisories is because of COVID?

[Marc Miller, Liberal, Ville-Marie—Le Sud-Ouest—Île-des-Soeurs, QC]

If you look at where we were in 2015, MP Viersen, there were 105 long-term water advisories in effect with no plan to remove them. We are now at 102 as of Thursday of last week. That is real, significant progress for thousands of indigenous households.

There is no question there have been challenges that were due to COVID. I could name them. You and I could sit together and I could walk through every community that has challenges. There's no question that those communities and those that have remaining water advisories want additional assurances as to where we will be in the long term. This is why I asked my team in March or April to sit down and get a sense of where we're going and how we'll navigate through a global pandemic to ensure that we're with communities every step of the way, plus address some of those issues that I've talked about in previous answers around addressing a failed funding model or a model that wasn't meeting communities' expectations.

Every person that you've spoken to should know that there's a plan for each long-term water advisory to be lifted and the investment is there to support it. I think that's the confidence that the backing of the Government of Canada would give communities to lift their water advisories.

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

Where is the pressure point on the lifting of the advisories? Is that placed on you and your ministry, or is that placed on local communities? Where's the pressure point? Where's the piece that we're waiting for?