Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on May 22nd, 2024

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Vandal, the first nations housing crisis is due in part to inadequate access to capital, which is the result of Indian Act restrictions on the use of land for loan security. The fact that all housing-related resources and responsibilities are tied to government-assisted housing solutions leaves little room for individual initiatives. It's a mutually reinforcing situation that perpetuates the problem.

At the committee's March 20 meeting, I spoke with a number of ministers about the possibility of letting indigenous financial corporations issue housing loans to individuals. Such a tool would help pave the way for reduced spending and less reliance on federal funding. It would contribute to reducing the housing gap in a meaningful way.

The government hinted that it would respond favourably to initiatives such as the Yänonhchia’ initiative, a housing finance network led by and for indigenous people.

In terms of budget funding, how much can we reasonably expect the Yänonhchia’ initiative to be allocated this year, to establish a housing loan portfolio, thereby giving people an alternative? That could fix part of the problem and serve as a way to increase the number of housing units for indigenous people.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

That's a very good question.

When I was consulting with stakeholders across the north, affordable and sustainable residential housing was the thing people wanted to talk about most. In this budget, we've allocated $900 million to first nations, Métis and Inuit housing. In the 2023‑24 budget, at least $4 billion was allocated to urban, rural and northern housing.

However, we have to keep working, and thinking about new models. The need is so great that we could never address it all in a year or two. That's why we have to examine different models like the one you just mentioned. It's important to do that in co-operation with the departments responsible for housing.

I'd be open to talking to you more about your ideas and setting up a working group.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

That would be wonderful. Indigenous financial corporations are certainly in need of capacity building, so they can operate in communities deemed too risky by financial institutions. Indigenous communities are seen as having a high risk of mortgage defaults.

Against that backdrop, the Yänonhchia’ initiative is based on the success of the Aboriginal Savings Corporation of Canada and a proven network of indigenous financial corporations.

When can we expect to see a real change thanks to an initiative that is bringing communities together and having a structural impact in Quebec? A solution already exists. A pilot project has had excellent results. We want these people to have the opportunity to get to work.

What you said partly answered the question I was about to ask you. I take your comments to mean that you're willing to work together, and I'm interested in doing that.

I'd also like to talk to you about the First Nations Finance Authority, whose bond rating is currently on a par with Ontario's and Alberta's. That shows you how strong its internal controls and safeguards are, not to mention how financially sound its members are.

Can we seize this opportunity to expand the authority's work so that indigenous communities can benefit and more “by and for indigenous” initiatives can be established? I'm talking about developing that infrastructure specifically.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

Yes, absolutely. That's important. We all want to work in support of self-determination, and that's our plan.

We are truly interested in any model that proposes to build partnerships and houses, whether in Quebec or elsewhere in Canada. I can tell you that clearly aligns with the mandate of the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations, Gary Anandasangaree. That's a good question to ask him next week.

That doesn't mean that we can't start planning or meeting with stakeholders to discuss the project's potential, but it's more important than ever to attract private investment in support of that as well.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

At this rate, it would take more than a hundred years to eliminate the infrastructure deficit. The Crown has the ability to transfer funds to first nations to support loans and attract capital to financial markets for the benefit of indigenous communities, in particular those who belong to the First Nations Finance Authority.

They were asking for $200 million in funding a year. Do you think it would be possible to implement any parts of their master plan right away?

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

We're out of time, but I'll give you time for a brief response and then we'll move to the next questioner.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

Potentially, yes, but we would have to discuss it at greater length. We can start talking about it when we meet, and then, we can invite the other departments to participate in the discussion.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you for being so open-minded.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thank you.

Now we'll go to Ms. Idlout. Whenever you're ready, Ms. Idlout, the floor is yours for six minutes.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

You mentioned that climate change is a threat and happening very fast. Reducing diesel and carbon is also a problem.

In Kivalliq region, they had a plan to reduce emissions, but what happens is that you fund those annually, so it's not a long-term plan with annual funding. If the Kivalliq hydro-fibre link is going to happen, when will there be adequate money for the Kivalliq hydro project so that they can proceed with the work they want to do and reduce diesel and carbon emissions?

We need to be more mindful of our climate. When are you going to give them enough funding to address some of the carbon and diesel issues?

[English]

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

Thank you for that great question.

Kivalliq is a very important region in Canada. It's immediately north of Manitoba and about 300 kilometres from Churchill.

We have worked well with Kivalliq on the Kivalliq hydro-fibre project. Through some of our programs, we have funded upwards of $15 million to date to get some of the preliminary work done. It's a very important project.

There are a couple of things that are important. We've had a change of government in Manitoba, and the new government is much more interested in being a partner with Kivalliq than the previous one was, which is really no surprise to me. They're interested in being at the table. They're interested in being a source of hydroelectricity for Kivalliq, but it's very preliminary, and those discussions are ongoing.

The second thing is that I've been talking to the Premier of Nunavut, who sees the benefit of that hydro-fibre link. There are a couple more projects in Nunavut that are equally important. These are long-term projects, which are going to bring incredible benefit once they're done.

In budget 2024, there are ongoing discussions about investment tax credits, which, in an ideal world, we hope Kivalliq will be able to benefit from.

It's an important file. It's a long-term file and a long-term investment, but we were elected to think long term in order to solve some of the large problems that Canada and the world are facing.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]

Thank you.

Earlier you mentioned infrastructure money, which will be $918 million toward housing. We know that it's not enough for housing. We know that, in Inuit lands, they need $75.1 billion to adequately house the population.

Before the 2024 budget was released, the three premiers of Yukon, N.W.T. and Nunavut wrote a letter—ahead of time—that they required $600 million. They gave you adequate notice before the budget, while you were doing the budget preparation.

You said that you were working with the premiers very well. Why is it that when they requested $600 million, you did not allow for that in the budget?

[English]

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

That is a very important question. We know affordable and safe housing is a priority in the north.

We are working well with the premiers. They've made requests. They haven't always received everything they've requested. However, in the last eight years, our government has spent more than any other government in the history of Canada on housing in the north. There's still a lot of work to do.

The problem is, of course, that the gaps are so large from previous governments not investing what they should have in the north for housing and infrastructure. I say previous governments of all stripes. I'm not trying to be partisan here. It'll take us a long time to catch up, but we're committed to doing it.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]

Thank you for your reply.

I will remind you to remember your response. In the future, when you reply this way, that you've already spent a lot of money, and that you've spent a major amount of money, remember that many have no homes. Many are homeless and have no safe homes. Children go to school after sleeping in overcrowded houses that are mouldy and old.

What your response is saying is that you've spent a lot of money, but it hasn't made any changes to our social and housing problems.

Don't respond by saying how much money you've spent. Remember how much money you said you have spent. Is it enough? Is it addressing the needs?

[English]

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

We are out of time on this one, but Minister, if you would like to offer a brief response, I'll give you the floor for that.

[Dan Vandal, Liberal, Saint Boniface—Saint Vital, MB]

I agree that we need to do a lot more in Nunavut, Northwest Territories, and Yukon. I'm not disagreeing with the member. I'm saying that we've made progress. There's a lot of work to do, and we will continue to work on investments in the north and the Arctic. We will continue to work in partnership.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Thank you.

I understand, Minister, that you also have a time restriction of 6:30.

Colleagues, I need a bit of direction before the minister goes. Because these are mains, and we're able to report them back to the House by May 31, I'm looking for some direction.

Normally, at the end of the hearing, we would do the call on whether various votes shall carry. We have received confirmation that Minister Anandasangaree will come to meet us on May 29, which will be prior to the reporting back period. We can wait to do the voting on the votes until after we hear from the minister.

Minister Hajdu's team has come back with a reply. She is scheduled to come on June 3 to discuss housing in response to the Auditor General's report. She'll be here with Minister Fraser on housing. Her team has said she could stay for the extra half hour to finish off today's discussion on mains.

The issue is that June 3 is after the reporting back period. Do we want to hold back the votes reporting back to the House until we hear from Minister Anandasangaree, but not Minister Hajdu? If we wait for her, we don't report the mains back. The mains just go back as simply studied. I'm looking for direction from the committee on that.

There is another piece that I was asking about at the beginning. For May 29, do we want to have Minister Anandasangaree on top of the two panels for the taxation study for a third hour that day, or do you want me to bump the second panel, or the first panel, whichever one it is—when he can come, and stay with the resources we have for the two hours on May 29? Could I get input from the committee on those?

Minister, I know that you don't need to be here for this. I was told you need to leave at 6:30.

Colleagues, I don't know if we want to go with a round of questions with officials, after the minister's gone, if they're able to stay.

I turn to the committee for your direction.

Okay, we'll keep the officials.

We'll send the minister on his way.

Minister Vandal, thank you for being here.

Ms. Idlout, the floor is yours.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut, interpreted as follows:]

Thank you.

I'm very unhappy. I'm not pleased. If I had been told that Minister Vandal was going to leave early, I would have asked my partner beside me from the NDP to ask his question.

I'm upset because the Liberal ministers say that indigenous people are very important, that the north is very important and that northerners are very important, but as much as they say how important we are, they do not make time for us. They leave early. We are trying to resolve some of our issues. They do not reply to our questions. They are discounting us and our issues by leaving early. We are not a priority for them.

Thank you.

[English]

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

We did have the minister booked for an hour. Votes have disrupted things today—that's the reality of it—and we were 15 minutes late starting with this panel.

[An hon. member]

Why isn't he staying for the full hour, then?

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

I was told he has to stop at 6:30—I don't control his calendar—so he needs to go. However, we have the officials, who have said they're able to stay.

Mr. Desjarlais, please go ahead.

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

This kind of relationship between our democratic institutions and the ministers they're supposed to hold accountable is exactly why Canadians and, most particularly, indigenous people can't trust these institutions.

We have credible questions about the main estimates, which are the financial resources for the capital projects of indigenous communities. We have members of Parliament present in this committee who represent indigenous nations and constituents concerned about outcomes for indigenous people in this country, and they find themselves at a loss when we have ministers—not just Minister Vandal, but, from what I understand, Ms. Patty Hajdu as well—who have declined to stay for the entire hour.

I'm not a regular member of this committee, but in the public accounts committee—I recognize that my former clerk is here—we would force the government members to stay.

When it comes to the issues most vital to the outcomes of indigenous people, this is simply unacceptable, Chair. Should you wish to represent this institution, which you do as the chair of this committee, it is your obligation to ensure that a credible amount of time and effort is put into answering the questions that members, who are democratically elected to this place, have an opportunity to ask.

Without that, Chair, it affects both our ability to hold the government accountable and that of the government members to speak to the benefits of indigenous communities. It defeats the mandate of this committee and prevents it from doing either if the minister is not present.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

Mr. Desjarlais, if I might—

[Blake Desjarlais, NDP, Edmonton Griesbach, AB]

I find this to be incredibly challenging, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, John Aldag]

I know you're a guest here. I don't know if you saw the notice of meeting, but what was published for today was that the first hour, from 4:30 to 5:30, would be with Minister Hajdu. That's what we had booked. She had committed to an hour with us. As we know, there were bells that prevented us from starting at 4:30. That created a crunch right from the start. We actually started 10 minutes earlier than we should have through the unanimous consent of the committee. The votes caused this crunch. For the second hour, Minister Vandal had agreed to be here from 5:30 to 6:30—for the full hour—but because of votes.... He'd planned his day and I don't control his calendar. We were told we had him until 6:30. Then he had other commitments that he had made.

It's through the unfortunate circumstances of votes disrupting our meeting. Usually, on Wednesdays, there are votes after question period. Then we're able to start at 4:30 and go through our two hours. Today is one of those unusual days. We've done the best we can. The ministers committed to being here for the time they could, with a hard stop. I believe I did my job by setting up the meeting with the resources we had for the time we had and in response to the motion, which was to have all three ministers here for the two hours.

We've now already agreed to have a third minister—Minister Anandasangaree—come for a third hour, as well as Minister Hajdu. Because she had to leave early, she has agreed to come back for the remainder of the time we were supposed to spend with her. She can't get back to us before May 31. We'll still hear from her then. We'll still have a chance to interact with her. However, if there's going to be a vote on the mains, minus the amounts that were passed through the interim supply period, that has to be done by May 31.

That's where we're at. We have resources until 6:45 with this panel. If we want to go into the next round, it would be 15 minutes—five for the Conservatives, five for the Liberals, two and a half for the Bloc, and two and a half for the NDP. We will run out of time at 6:45.

I also asked for some direction on two items. One is for May 29. Do we want to have a third hour with the minister, or displace one of the two panels we have already booked for the taxation study? Also, do we want to do the reporting back on the voting on mains at the end of that meeting, as opposed to waiting for Minister Hajdu's final appearance?

I have a speaking order here. Mr. Melillo is first, then Mr. Desjarlais.

It's over to you.