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

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Good morning.

I would like to call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 42 of the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs.

We are gathered today on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe nation.

I would like to welcome the Office of the Auditor General of Canada officials who are joining us today.

We have Ms. Karen Hogan, Auditor General of Canada. With her are Mr. Glenn Wheeler, principal, and Doreen Deveen, director.

To ensure an orderly meeting, I'd like to outline a few rules that we have to follow at each of these meetings.

Members or witnesses may speak in the official language of their choice. Interpretation services in English, French and Inuktitut are available for the entire meeting today. Please be patient with the interpretation. There may be a delay, especially since the Inuktitut has to be translated into English before it can be translated into French and vice versa.

For those here by video conference, I think you know the drill. I'm not going to repeat it.

Before speaking, of course, please wait until I recognize you by name. When speaking, please speak slowly and clearly so that the interpreters have a chance to translate. When you're not speaking, please mute your microphone.

All comments should be addressed through the chair.

The Auditor General has been invited to make an opening statement of five minutes in length, which will then be followed by questions from members of the committee.

Without further ado, thank you to the witnesses for being here today. Your testimony will help inform us on our study with respect to Arctic sovereignty, security and the emergency preparedness of indigenous peoples, which is currently under way.

Auditor General, the floor is yours.

[Karen Hogan, Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General]

Mr. Chair, thank you for this opportunity to discuss our report titled “Emergency Management in First Nations Communities”, which was tabled in the House of Commons on November 15, 2022.

I would like to acknowledge that this meeting is taking place on the traditional unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

Joining me today are Glenn Wheeler and Doreen Deveen, who led this audit.

Emergencies such as floods and wildfires are happening more often and with greater intensity across Canada. These emergencies disproportionately affect many first nations communities because of their relative remoteness and socio-economic circumstances. Over the last 13 years, more than 1,300 emergencies have occurred in first nations communities, causing more than 130,000 people to be evacuated and displaced.

Echoing our 2013 audit in this area, we concluded that Indigenous Services Canada had not provided first nations communities with the support they needed to manage natural emergencies.

Over the last four years, the department has spent about $828 million on emergency management for first nations communities. We found that the department’s actions were more reactive than preventative. Although first nations communities had identified many infrastructure projects to mitigate the impact of emergencies, the department had a backlog of 112 of these projects that it had approved but not funded.

Indigenous Services Canada was spending three and a half times more money on responding to and recovering from emergencies than on supporting communities to prepare for and mitigate impacts. According to Public Safety Canada, for every $1 invested in preparedness and mitigation, $6 can be saved in emergency response and recovery costs.

Despite our 2013 recommendation, Indigenous Services Canada still had not identified which first nations communities most needed support to increase their capacity to prepare for emergencies. If the department identified these communities, it could target investments accordingly.

For example, building culverts and dikes to prevent seasonal floods would help minimize the impact on people and reduce the cost of responding to and recovering from emergencies. Until the department shifts its focus to prevention and invests in infrastructure, communities are likely to continue experiencing greater effects from emergencies.

We also found that the capacity needs of first nations were not identified. For example, although the department provided funding to first nations for about 190 full-time and part-time emergency management coordinators, it did not know how many more were needed for first nations to have the capacity to manage emergencies.

Since 2009, 268 communities have been evacuated, some more than once. While the majority of these evacuations lasted less than a month, 90 were more than three months long, and some lasted multiple years. One has been ongoing for over 10 years.

Indigenous Services Canada did not ensure that emergency services were culturally appropriate and comparable to services provided in municipalities of similar size and circumstances. The department did not define comparable services. It also did not consistently monitor the services provided to first nations communities by the provinces and other service providers.

In 2011, at the end of her mandate as Auditor General of Canada, Sheila Fraser summed up her impression of the government's actions after 10 years of audits and related recommendations on first nations issues with the word “unacceptable”. Five years later, my predecessor, Michael Ferguson, used the words “beyond unacceptable”.

We are now into decades of audits of programs and government commitments that have repeatedly failed to effectively serve Canada's indigenous peoples. It is clear to me that strong words are not driving change. Concrete actions are needed to address these long-standing issues, and government needs to be held accountable.

Mr. Chair, this concludes my opening remarks. We would be pleased to answer any questions the committee may have.

Thank you. Nakurmiik.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you very much, Auditor General.

We will start with questions.

The first round is six minutes each, beginning with Mr. Vidal.

[Gary Vidal, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Auditor General Hogan and your team, for being here today.

For the record, I had the privilege on Friday of spending a couple of hours with the folks at the table here and officials from ISC at the public accounts committee, so we have had some preliminary conversations already, which I will be referring to, just so the context is clear.

Ms. Hogan, in your opening comments way back in November, when you first introduced the whole group of audits, and in your opening comments both on Friday and today, you spoke about a level of frustration that almost a decade later there has been little or no improvement. We had a lot of conversation on Friday about that.

Just for context, I would suggest there should be a deep level of frustration for anyone who takes time to read this report. To be frank and honest, this is an unmitigated disaster—pardon the pun.

What I said on Friday, and I want to say it again to get it on the record, is that this is not just a frustration that should be experienced in what we call the Ottawa bubble—the members of Parliament here and the people here. The frustration is for the people on the ground. The frustration is for the people in my riding in northern Saskatchewan, because their quality of life is affected by the inaction and by the decisions not being made to make a difference in this approach to emergency response and emergencies in our country.

My concern in the context of all that, or my question, maybe, becomes, are the right people upset or embarrassed? Is there an acknowledgement of what we need to acknowledge? We talked on Friday a bit about the minister's response two weeks ago in the House of Commons, when she said Indigenous Services Canada was doing a great job. I asked you on Friday if I had missed something in the report, where you identified ISC as doing a great job, and you assured me that, no, that wasn't in the report anywhere. Ultimately, it comes down to the fact that issues are not going to get fixed if we won't acknowledge the reality that they exist.

I have a number of questions in that context. Did you hear anything on Friday in the testimony from the ISC officials that would assure you that we won't be talking about these same things 10 years from now?

[Karen Hogan]

I'm not sure I can provide you with that assurance. Only the departmental officials can provide you with assurance that they will take action. Many of our recommendations in this audit report were very similar to the recommendations we provided in 2013. In fact, even Indigenous Services Canada had two internal audits, one in 2013 and one in 2017, that found the same issues.

I would point to identifying capacity needs and addressing those. I would point to not having enough funding to address the mitigation needs that are identified. Where I would say it starts is by identifying those most in need and having a comprehensive understanding of all the communities that are impacted and all the communities that need support. It's not just about funding but also about creating capacity to help prepare and mitigate emergencies instead of just focusing on responding to them.

[Gary Vidal, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, just for your information, I forgot to start my clock.

I have a follow-up question, and you've alluded to it a bit, but I want to ask it anyway. Were there any concrete measures? We've talked a lot about the importance of concrete measures and actions and outcomes instead of outputs, I think you said.

Did you hear anything on Friday that you went home feeling good about, a concrete commitment on some kind of concrete action that's going to be taken?

[Karen Hogan]

Well, I definitely heard on Friday some acknowledgement from the officials that they accepted our recommendations, and I had spent some time with the deputy minister of Indigenous Services Canada before the report was released to help ensure that they understood what we meant by identifying those most in need. When you have limited resources, you need to know that.

[Gary Vidal, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

I'm going to stop you right there, because there's a question I wanted to ask you on Friday, and you triggered it for me. You spent time with the deputy minister before the report was issued, because obviously the department gets to respond that it agrees and that it is going to fix these things.

How long ago was that, when the department officials received those and had a chance to respond? Have you seen anything in the meantime that would create concrete action items that have started in the meantime? In fairness, none of these are surprises, because the vast majority of them have been there since 2013 and in the two internal audits in the meantime. Have you seen any action since the conversation around their agreeing to accept your recommendations and around change taking place?

[Karen Hogan]

Your first question was how long ago I had the conversations. Our audit would have started about a little over a year ago, so the department would have been engaged with the audit team all that time. I spoke with the deputy twice, once at the beginning and then about a month before the report was tabled.

Do we see action while we're auditing? We see that in every department, but I would point to the action plan that Indigenous Services Canada provided to the public accounts committee. I would say it's a good start. I don't believe it was a good, comprehensive action plan. It was missing clear accountabilities and some concrete deliverables with clear deadlines. I think they're getting there, but continued focus and pressure will definitely be needed.

[Gary Vidal, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mr. Vidal.

We'll now go to Mr. Weiler for six minutes.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

I'd also like to thank the witnesses for being here today and for your very important work on the report we're talking about today.

I'm joining you today from British Columbia. It's quite jarring, looking at the charts of projects where structural needs are unmet. B.C. is very much disproportionately represented here, and of course, over the last couple of years we've been through some very major events like atmospheric rivers, wildfires and droughts. There are even droughts continuing today. Just last week we announced the national adaptation strategy, which leaves out some really important actions that all orders of government are going to need to take to ensure that people can be safe in a changing climate.

I very much agree with your overall idea that investing in prevention is much more effective than just response. Some of the figures I've seen circulating are that every dollar invested can lead to up to $15 in savings.

With that in mind and in the British Columbia context, we have had some successful stories in coordination here, in large part thanks to the tripartite agreements in B.C. I noticed that recommendation 46 in your report seems to agree with this. I was hoping you could speak a little more to how you might see multilateral agreements such as this being helpful in having the provinces at the table.

[Karen Hogan]

Absolutely.

What we saw throughout the audit was a shift in the department's focus from bilateral agreements between provinces, third parties and the federal government to multilateral agreements. That's where the first nations communities also need to be at the table in order to ensure that it's clear what the roles and responsibilities are of each party during an emergency, and that the communities have an expectation of the services they should receive. What we found in our audit is while money and time were devoted to that, no multilateral agreements have been established at this point.

We noted some progress in British Columbia, as you mentioned, where a memorandum of understanding has been established with the province. That is just the first step.

Again, it is about having clear roles during emergencies, so that communities know what they can expect, should they need to reach out for support.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you for that.

We're talking about these tripartite agreements. We have a broad diversity of indigenous communities right across the country. There are 203 in B.C. alone. I think there are over 600 across Canada.

How do you see those types of agreements being developed so that they're fit for purpose for the diverse needs of communities across provinces?

[Karen Hogan]

That's a really difficult one. In fact, I think Indigenous Services Canada recognizes some of the complexities. They have separate regions across the department, recognizing the uniqueness of different regions and what a region might be exposed to. Flooding or forest fires, for example, may be more prevalent in some locations than in others.

That's why we noted in our report that making sure every community is included or considered in these multilateral agreements is important. What we've seen is that there are many communities that haven't been included in some of the historical agreements, so you don't have a good, comprehensive picture of what the needs are in a specific region. That is the fundamental place to start.

That's why it's important to bring everyone to the table, recognizing that first nations communities begin to respond on their own and when they can't, they need to reach out for help. You don't want confusion so that things are forgotten. That's the importance of having these multilateral agreements in place.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you.

This is also a very timely study in that we've just completed having witnesses and hearings on this for several months, covering many of these issues that we're talking about today. In our study, we heard from many remote communities that roads and highways are critical to safety during emergencies. In many cases, there is only one road in and out, which really exacerbates much of the risk that's there. When a tree falls on the highway that connects a community that's 300 kilometres away, in many cases the province has to fix that road that connects the community.

I'm wondering if you think it's helpful if the provinces also ensure that these highways and roads are safe when responding to emergencies.

[Karen Hogan]

Absolutely. I don't think the onus is only on the federal government and the indigenous communities. That's why it's so important for the federal government to play that role of bringing together all parties that need to be there, whether they be the provinces, territories or third parties. In some instances, it is third parties, like the Red Cross, that might support responses. That's why it is important to know what everybody's role is.

You mentioned when there's only one road.... I would even highlight that when it's a fly-in community, it's even more critical to get help there in an effective and timely way in which everyone knows their responsibilities.

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Thank you.

One of the other aspects we heard throughout the study was how it's important to have culturally appropriate programs in place. I was wondering if you had any recommendations coming out of your work that also referenced such a need.

[Karen Hogan]

That's exactly where indigenous communities play a big role in ensuring not only that services are comparable to those in communities of similar size and circumstances, but that they are culturally appropriate.

In our report, we highlighted one community, Kashechewan, in northern Ontario, which took a different approach. I would encourage Indigenous Services Canada to think that way about different approaches.

During flooding season, that community asked to move to higher ground, which is their traditional hunting ground. They were able to stay on their own land. That ensured that the response to the emergency was much more culturally sensitive than it could have been if they had been flown out to another community.

It really is about defining that up front and not trying to respond and adapt during an emergency. There's some thought that's needed to make sure that cultural sensitivity is incorporated into responses by third parties, provinces and territories.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mr. Weiler.

Mrs. Gill, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Hogan, Mr. Wheeler and Ms. Deveen, thank you for being with us today and for making yourselves available, on such short notice, to inform our study, which addresses, among other things, first nations' emergency preparedness in the north.

I read your report with great interest. I would like to ask you a question that may seem very simple, but it will give us some context.

You mentioned reports produced in 2011 and 2013. Do you know when the first report specifically on emergency preparedness was tabled? Was it in 2013 or were there others before that?

[Karen Hogan]

We tabled our report on emergency management on reserves in 2013. The department also produced internal audit reports in 2013 and 2017.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

Did the Office of the Auditor General report on this issue prior to 2013?

[Karen Hogan]

I don't think any reports were produced on the specific issue of emergency management, but a lot of reports were produced on the challenges faced by indigenous communities. There have been reports on drinking water, on education and on many other issues. I alluded to my predecessors and their concerns on those issues, as well.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Manicouagan, QC]

I was talking about reports that dealt exclusively with this issue; I wanted to know if there had been any others before that. You answered my question. So the reports have been saying pretty much the same thing for almost 20 years.

I have several questions for you.

In particular, I'd like to go back to the things that you said were critical. Obviously, we talked about wildfires, flooding and extreme weather events, which are becoming more frequent. I know this is not addressed in your report, but I was wondering if the issue of health emergencies had been considered. That is something we have experienced over the last few years. It is not exclusive to my riding, where I am now. In fact, I am speaking to you from the North Shore. Here, as elsewhere in Quebec, first nations have been talking to us about it.

The study you are doing is already very broad, but I wanted to know if this was a topic of interest. We know that Nunavut is currently hit by tuberculosis, for example. So, I was wondering if that was something that could be looked at in the future because it sounds like it's adding, unfortunately, to the emergencies that we're currently experiencing.