Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 28th, 2022

[Glenn Wheeler]

Mr. Chair, it's an interesting question. I think we go back to the legislative base for the provision of emergency management services. The Department of Indigenous Services Act sets out specifically that it's ISC that's responsible for emergency management on reserves, and we can even go back to the Indian Act. Your point about a whole-of-government approach is a good one, but the accountability rests with Indigenous Services Canada. It can ask other departments for help, and it can collaborate with other departments, but at the end of the day, Indigenous Services Canada bears full responsibility.

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

If you're looking at the Winnipeg River system, though, which is a massive system that involves both indigenous and non-indigenous communities, and you're saying, well, it starts and ends with Indigenous Services, I would have thought if you're going to have an effective response, you have to look at the whole system, rather than picking out little parts and saying, well, you have to deal with this and this. Maybe the government would be better off approaching a whole system, and that's a more effective approach than a piecemeal approach looking at individual communities.

[Glenn Wheeler]

That's an excellent point and it goes to another observation in our report about the fact that ISC has not signed emergency services agreements with all the provinces. The Province of Manitoba is an excellent example. If there were an agreement in place, I think it would allow for a more coordinated approach to dealing with those particular emergencies.

You raise an important point, which is the fact that it happens year after year. I think that's another reason multiple jurisdictions need to be working together to better prepare for and mitigate against such emergencies.

Your point is a very good one.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mr. Powlowski.

Colleagues, we'll now start a fourth round. Thank you to our witnesses for their forbearance with us as we begin this last round. We may not be able to complete it, but we'd like to start.

We'll begin with a Conservative member. We'll go to Mr. Badawey.

I beg your pardon. It's Mr. Schmale. You have five minutes.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Thank you.

I get mistaken for Vance all the time. I appreciate that.

To the Auditor General's team, thank you again for this amazing testimony that you're coming through with today.

We continue to hear about challenges that have been held within the department itself and some challenges with pre-existing legislation that enable the department's failures to almost continue year after year, as we've seen outlined in your report many times, over and over again.

I asked you a bit about this in the last round.

Do you see us moving away from the status quo and really relying on a bottom-up approach, where communities are telling the government what they need and seeing more responsiveness and more reaction from actual departments at that point, rather than the cookie-cutter approach that we seem to be doing over and over again? I don't know if it was you or your colleague who said it.

[Karen Hogan]

That is why we made a few recommendations about doing it differently or getting a more comprehensive picture. The two programs that we looked at here are really application-based programs. These are waiting for the bottom to drive it up and not coming together and working on it collaboratively.

These solutions are not only solutions that first nations communities need to come up with, with the federal government joining in. It requires the provinces, territories and third parties in order to ensure that there's good preparedness and a mutual understanding of what is needed should an emergency occur and responses are needed.

I would argue that repeating what's been done is not the right way. Doing it in collaboration with so many others going forward is hopefully going to result in a better outcome than what we've been seeing over the last few years.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

Did I hear correctly when you mentioned—and I know it's in your report—that the department is not signing the agreements fast enough in terms of...? I believe it was you who said the province and the Department of Indigenous Services have yet to sign any sort of meaningful agreement to outline who would deal with a potential emergency if one should happen.

[Karen Hogan]

I would point to two things in our audit report. We have a little chart with a map that talks about where there are some existing agreements signed with provinces and territories. Those are really bilateral agreements.

What you're referring to is a multilateral agreement. The department, as of April 2022, had spent $790,000, which had been devoted toward signing these multilateral agreements, where the federal government, other layers of government, third parties and indigenous communities would come together. That's where no agreements have been signed since that approach was taken.

We highlight that in B.C. there is a memorandum of understanding, which is a good step in the right direction, but there is not a multilateral agreement signed yet.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

In terms of following up on those needs in those exact areas that you just outlined, it seems that with the department itself—when we've looked at even the departmental plan and their failure to meet targets—the goalposts just keep getting moved every time we meet with them.

I remember asking the deputy minister.... There were all these strategies and all these meetings taking place, but there were really no actual outcomes. It just means that they didn't get to it and they'll do it next time or next year.

I just can't imagine this being accepted in the private sector. This would be a complete failure.

[Karen Hogan]

What I could say in response to that is we've seen that a lot and it's a recommendation or a comment I've made throughout many of the COVID response programs. When things have been identified and commitments are made to take action, it isn't enough to just have a commitment and an action plan. It's really about the follow-through. What we've seen here—and we've talked about it over the course of the last little while in this hearing—is that there is a will within the department and a desire to really help and support communities, but the follow-through is just not there. We're seeing good action plans but a lack of follow-through. I would argue that we see that in many areas in the federal public service. It's not unique to this department and this issue. That is really one that needs to change. That's where it's no longer the words, but concrete actions that will drive meaningful change.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I think my colleague, Gary Vidal, is going to take the rest of my time, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mr. Schmale.

We're at the time. There might be a minute or two left at the end. We'll see.

We'll now go to Mr. Badawey, the real Mr. Badawey, for five minutes.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr. Schmale. I appreciate those questions.

Again, I want to preface my comments by saying this. I appreciate the efforts by the whole committee, because we are looking at the business of good government. This is the business of good politics, and I truly appreciate that. This is only a part of the process of achieving the outcomes that we all expect within indigenous communities, and quite frankly even beyond that, in all communities. As Mr. Powlowski was referring to, we have geographically many who can benefit, not just indigenous communities but our additional communities that surround those communities, especially with respect to infrastructure and the capacities that may in fact be shared, as well as mutual aids in terms of a preparedness plan.

My question to Ms. Hogan, as well as Mr. Wheeler, is related to the fact that you did not look at a wider, whole-of-government approach, and I want to drill down on that, because I think it's relevant. I think it's relevant because we are looking at embarking on and finalizing a study on this. We want to ensure we utilize what you've presented to us as part of a bigger picture with respect to what we're going to present to the minister based on this study and the additional testimony we received.

Considering that you did not look at a wider, whole-of-government approach, such as other government departments—Infrastructure, Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Environment and Climate Change—are currently embarking on, do you feel a report from this committee needs to include what is being embarked on by these departments to complement your report and therefore form a more accurate basis for additional proactive mapping of next steps? I think you get the gist of what I'm asking for here.

Mr. Wheeler, I'll ask you that question, because you were drilling down a bit further with Mr. Powlowski on that. It's all about getting to the outcomes, and how best we can do that.

Ms. Hogan, I'm sure that's the whole premise of why you did this and the recommendations you've brought forward. We want to get to those outcomes. Beyond the talk, beyond the words, let's roll up our sleeves and get to that.

To my question, do you think that to achieve a more accurate basis for additional proactive mapping of next steps, it should include those areas you didn't, in fact, look at?

Mr. Wheeler.

[Karen Hogan]

I think I will start, and Glenn will absolutely add to it.

My comments will be more high level, about having a horizontal initiative across the government, and what I have seen over the last couple of years, which is that when there is a horizontal initiative, you need one department or one deputy minister to be accountable for achieving that, and that deputy needs to have the ability to compel other deputies to do the jobs they need to do in order to support the achievement of outcomes. All too often, when we look at horizontal initiatives, we see exactly that as the reason they don't achieve the outcomes they want. That is, no one feels they can compel other departments, and no one really feels like they are the lead.

If the government goes that way, or if your report makes that recommendation, I would still make it clear there needs to be an accountable party.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

On that—that's a great point—by having a discussion with the other departments, you may, in fact, find out that it is happening. That goes to my point.

With that, and I want to get granular on that, and that's the basis of my question, when we look at that involvement from other departments, that, quite frankly, isn't happening based on the leadership of the minister.

I go back to my question, then. Do you find that for us to map in the next steps, that dialogue with those departments, that information, can be injected into this committee, and then, therefore, the final recommendations of this report? Do you feel that would be advantageous to advancing the mapping over and above what you've recommended within your report?

[Glenn Wheeler]

To reiterate what the Auditor General has said, ultimately accountability rests with Indigenous Services Canada. To get a bit more granular, because I think that's where we want to go, an organization like Public Safety Canada, which is responsible for the Emergency Management Act, would no doubt have some advice and perspective that Indigenous Services Canada, provinces and first nations should consider as they're looking to address the weaknesses we've identified. That's an example of where another department could be brought into the fold and its expertise could be relied on.

Other examples I think you've alluded to are Environment and Climate Change Canada and Natural Resources Canada, organizations that have expertise in environmental issues.

Good government involves whichever department is accountable nevertheless reaching out to other departments, and that gets around one of the long-standing issues that we have identified in a lot of our audits, and that's the whole issue of stovepiping. It doesn't make sense for people to always look inward, even within a department or actually between departments.

The more collaboration that can be done, the better, and that would also extend to the provinces and territories as well. Your point is an important one.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mr. Badawey.

We'll conclude with Ms. Gill and Ms. Idlout for two and a half minutes.

Go ahead, Mrs. Gill.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In light of your findings and recommendations, I would like to ask you a question about departments.

We know that the work is immense for each of the departments involved in indigenous affairs. In the wake of the tabling of the final report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada in 2015, I would imagine that there are even more demands.

To your knowledge, do those departments have sufficient human, material or financial resources to do their job well? They have been given a mandate, but do they have everything they need?

[Karen Hogan]

In our audit, we did not look at the resources available to departments to meet the needs of all the programs they must manage and to properly fulfill their mandates. That is beyond the scope of our audit. Ideally, I think that question should be put to the deputy minister of Indigenous Services Canada.

That said, we did find in our audit that there was a lack of financial resources to be able to meet the infrastructure needs. So I would say that there is a lack of resources, but to know the extent of that, you would have to ask the department itself.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

My second question was along the same lines, so I will put it to the department.

As you mentioned, the number of emergency situations is bound to increase. The mandates are that much larger and expanding from year to year. Yet, right now, departments are not even able to meet the minimum needs, even if just to identify basic needs.

While we don't have all the data on this, I think the department needs to be strengthened so that it can fulfill its mandate.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mrs. Gill.

To wrap up this round of questions, I give the floor to Ms. Idlout for two and a half minutes.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut as follows:]

ᐋ, ᖁᔭᓐᓇᒦᒃ, ᐋ, ᐅᕙᓂ ᐅᖃᓕᒫᒐᖅ, ᐋ, ᒪᒃᐱᖅᑐᒐᖓᓐᓂ 18, ᐋ, 8.63 ᐃᓗᐊᓂ ᑎᑎᕋᖅᓯᒪᒻᒪᑦ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊᒎᖅ, ᐋ, ᐅᖃᓚᐅᕐᒪᑕ ᐃᑦᑎᔾᔨᓇᔅ ᓲᕕᓯ˙ᔅ ᑲᓇᑕᒃᑯᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᓇᓱᓐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕᒎᖅ, ᐋ, ᓲᕐᓗᖃᐃ ᐊᓯᖏᓐᓂᒃ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ, ᐋ, ᐊᔾᔨᐸᓗᖏᓐᓂᒡᓘᓐᓃᑦ, ᐋ, ᐋ, ᐱᓕᕆᓇᓱᓐᓂᐊᕐᒪᑕᒎᖅ, ᑭᓯᐊᓂ ᑖᓐᓇ ᐅᖃᓕᒫᒐᖅ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᕆᑦᓯᐊᖅᓯᒪᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ ᑖᓐᓇ, ᐋ, ᐅᑉᔨᒃᑎᑉᖓ, ᑐᕌᕈᑎᖓ ᑎᑭᓐᓇᓱᓐᓂᐊᕐᓂᖓᓐᓂᒃ, ᐋ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᐅᓂᒃᑲᐅᑎᒃᑲᓐᓂᕈᓐᓇᖅᐱᓯᐅᒃ ᐋ, ᖃᓄᖅ, ᐋᒻ, ᐋ, ᐊᑐᖅ, ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᑦᓯᐊᕐᒪᖔᖅ ᑖᓐᓇ ᑖᒃᓱᒥᖓ.

[Inuktitut text interpreted as follows:]

Thank you. In the report, on page 18, item 8.63 states,

One of Indigenous Services Canada’s objectives is to ensure that First Nations have access to emergency services comparable to those available in municipalities of similar size and circumstance in their respective province.

You don't state how it's going to meet this objective and how you will arrive at services that are comparable. How are the services comparable, in what ways?

[English]

[Karen Hogan]

One of our findings was that Indigenous Services Canada had not defined what were comparable services. In order to state that you want to ensure that every community has access to services comparable to those of a community with like size or situation, you need to first identify what that means.

It isn't just about the response, having first responders come in or having individuals help you evacuate. It's about thinking about the services once a community has been relocated, whether they be mental health services, culturally appropriate health services or schooling for children. The department needs to start with identifying those in order to be able to establish the agreements that set up access to those comparable services. That's exactly what our recommendation to Indigenous Services Canada is about.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

[Member spoke in Inuktitut as follows:]

ᐋ, ᑭᖑᓪᓕᕐᒥᒃ, ᐋ, ᑖᓐᓇ ᑐᑭᓯᐊᓂᒃᓯᒪᓐᖏᑎᒡᓗᑎᒍ, ᐱᖁᔨᕗᖔᓕᐊᕆᓯᒪᔫᔭᓐᖏᒻᒪᑦ, ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᖃᓄᖅ, ᐋ, ᐅᖃᐅᑎᖃᑕᐅᓇᔭᖅᐱᒋᑦ, ᓲᕐᓗ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᐱᒡᐅᐊᔅ ᐳᕐᔅᓇᐃᓴᔅ, ᐋ, ᐊᕐᕌᒍᓂᒃ 10-ᓂᒃ, ᐋ, ᐋ, ᕿᒪᐃᓯᒪᔭᕆᐊᖃᖅᑎᒡᓗᒋᑦ, ᐋ, ᐃᓱᒪᒋᓪᓗᒍ ᖃᓄᖅ ᑖᒃᑯᐊ ᓇᓕᒧᖓᓐᓂᒃ ᐅᓂᒃᑳᒐᖅᑕᖃᖅᐹ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔫᓐᖏᑦᑐᓂᒃ.

[Inuktitut text interpreted as follows:]

Finally, we do not understand the comparative. It's a wish list that you have. How would you stress to them that Peguis First Nation has been in evacuation for 10 years? We want to ensure that it doesn't happen.

As well, do you have any other extreme stories like that, other than Peguis First Nation?

[English]

[Karen Hogan]

During our audit, we didn't identify a community other than Peguis that had been gone that long. That is the most extreme situation we have seen, but we've noted that there are some communities, as you mentioned in a previous round, that have been gone for years as well.

I don't know if it's necessarily the length that we should always be worried about; sometimes it's the frequency. Neither is good. It really is about finding a sustainable solution for communities going forward.