Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Dec. 1st, 2022

[Valerie Gideon]

We do, in fact, work with first nations and listen to them in terms of their determination of their risk level. Also, we rely on first nations to also determine when their emergency plans are to be updated. The risk level informs funding decisions and our regional allocations of funding. In terms of risk, we look at indicators of the cost of various emergencies that they face—

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

I'm sorry. My time is limited, so I need to interrupt you.

The Auditor General says that Indigenous Services Canada did not use information about the risk faced by first nations and the capacity of first nations to respond to emergencies. Can you explain why you did not do that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Please answer very quickly.

[Valerie Gideon]

We did not have documentation on every single community's risk level, because we work with specific communities in their identification of their risk level.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Ms. Idlout.

We'll now go to Mr. Vidal for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Ms. Gideon, for joining us. You and I have had a number of conversations over the years. I always appreciate the opportunity.

You didn't catch all the conversation earlier today, so I'll just quickly preamble a bit with the idea of saying that we need to shift to mitigation. We need to shift to prevention and mitigation from the reactionary. That was pretty clear in the conversations we had last week at public accounts.

I want to drill into that a bit with you and just say that the department has had the report for longer than we've seen it in public, so to speak. Could you tell me of any kinds of specific actions and what's been going on inside the department that shows you understand we're making that shift, that there are some clear strategies, clear goals and clear steps in making that shift from reaction to being proactive, so to speak?

[Valerie Gideon]

We certainly have been working with our regional offices and our headquarters on the management action plan. This is what you would have. What we tabled last Friday was the first version. We are certainly looking at a more comprehensive approach. That has been a clear priority we have had.

I'll turn to Joanne to see if she has other concrete examples that she would like to give you. It's her team.

[Joanne Wilkinson]

Absolutely.

We talked a little earlier around Peguis and the advance payments we've used there. Also, if you look at the indigenous community support fund—that was the COVID-specific fund—we had a funding model there whereby the bulk of the funding went to communities as direct allocations so that leadership could make decisions around what they needed to prevent, mitigate and deal with the COVID situation. We had some needs-based funding that we kept back. We did not require full proposals. We worked on a request basis, so there wasn't a lot of burdensome paperwork. However, it was held back for particularly acute situations where additional support was needed.

We're certainly working, as we said earlier, and looking to put first nations partners equally at the table when we're having those discussions with provinces when emergencies are upon us, but also looking at non-structural as well as structural mitigation projects. Those could be radio systems going in. The First Nations' Emergency Services Society in British Columbia, for example, has incredible mapping capability now that it didn't have prior to the last wildfire season. All of those pieces are going into place. We are not done yet. We have lots of opportunities to invest further, but certainly—

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

I'm sorry, but I'm going to need to stop you there. I want to get one more question in, and my time is limited.

Thank you for that. I don't mean to be rude.

There's another discussion I wanted to drill into today as we follow up on the discussions from the last few days, when we had the Auditor General both at public accounts and here at INAN. It's this idea of that change from the risk-based system to the proposal-based system.

We talk about 112 unfunded projects. That's had a great deal of discussion. We all know what we're talking about—74 of them have been out there for more than five years, and four for a decade. There are 72 more projects out there that haven't been assessed yet.

Is there something being done in the department to concretely move to that risk-based assessment program from the proposal-based? It seems from the report that this proposal-based system is failing. It's been a challenge for many years. I'm not pointing fingers; it's been a problem for us.

I don't mean this to be rude, but who can best play the Indian Act administration game? We're working with a system that has been there for many years, and it is flawed.

Is there a way that you're working within the department to really concretely make that change? I get that it requires funding and a change in models and getting some of that upfront stuff, but is that being done? What does that look like, please?

[Joanne Wilkinson]

There are a few things. We're certainly trying to work with our staff to make sure they are navigating and pathfinding for nations, so that they can assist in that proposal process. We are also, as I mentioned, with the ICSF funding, moving away from burdens and proposals and moving more to a request-based system.

We can talk further about the 112 proposals that were mentioned in the report. We certainly don't require that all of the time, when we're looking at emergency situations—

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

Sorry, but I have only a few.... You're talking about other application processes. You're making that.... Are we actually going out and doing risk assessments and evaluating the project based on priority?

[Joanne Wilkinson]

Yes. We are absolutely evaluating projects based on priority, and with communities telling us what their priorities are.

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

I think that's my time.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

You had four seconds left. Thank you, Mr. Vidal.

We'll now go to Mr. McLeod for five minutes.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the presenters today. It's a very interesting discussion.

In my previous life as an MLA with the Government of the Northwest Territories, I was a minister for a number of years, and one of my portfolios was emergency management. We dealt with many disasters in those days—floods and fires—and we had very little in terms of a relationship with the federal government of the day, which was the Conservative government. It was practically non-existent, so it's very exciting to see the involvement of the federal government when it comes to disasters that deal with indigenous people.

This past year we had quite a few floods in the Northwest Territories. I found it very refreshing to have the Minister of Indigenous Services, the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations, the Minister of National Defence, the Minister of Public Safety, the regional director general for the Northwest Territories, and the Red Cross all reach out to the communities and offer their services and provide support. It was really comforting to know that everyone was there, working together.

We know there are going to be more disasters. We talk to the indigenous people in our communities. We have some reserves, but we mostly have public communities. A lot of the indigenous people say that some of the communities may have to move.

Historically, our people were nomadic and communities were built where there were flood zones. When you ask an indigenous person why they are located there, they say that this was their summer area. They never used to stay there in the winter, but the church set up there, or the government set up there, so they had to move there.

Anyway, now that there's more concern over disasters, are you listening to the indigenous people? Are you talking to them about traditional knowledge, about areas that are known by them to be flood zones? Even for forest fires, historically, indigenous people would use fires as a tool to burn fields where geese would land and burn brush where there was a threat of fire.

My question is this: Is that part of the discussion when you talk to indigenous governments, indigenous people, about disaster protection and preparedness?

[Valerie Gideon]

Yes, absolutely. This is a core component of making sure mitigation plans are developed by communities. We support that process.

I was referring to the program. We have one part of this program. Northern Affairs has another. It's the same type of program, but we fund it differently because of the differences between south of 60 and the north. Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs funds northern indigenous communities to have plans and discussions with respect to climate change and health adaptation, and to bring in traditional knowledge. It's absolutely an essential component of preventing future disasters, as well as improving the response.

We spoke about some of the innovation that happened in communities that wanted to go on the land when they were evacuated, instead of to a municipality. I remember when the former regional chief in NWT called me at the beginning of the pandemic and said, “Val, we would like to go on the land.” He was part of a call. Our regional office was able to work with the territorial government in order to ensure there would be funding available for them to isolate on the land instead of in their homes for months at a time. It was definitely, from what I've heard, a much better and more rewarding experience than it was in other communities that didn't have the same opportunity.

In the context of the full continuum of emergency management, we absolutely have to ensure these are culturally based—that traditional approaches are considered.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

My next question is specific to the Northwest Territories.

We have public communities and reserves, and then we have communities that are self-governing. It gets to be a bit blurry when it comes to who's responsible for what. We have 15 tables set up, all having discussions and negotiations. A lot of these are about self-governance. At some point, we're going to have quite a few nations in the Northwest Territories that are self-governing. They have land tenure and areas of responsibility that include emergency management.

How does the department stay engaged with them, or is that a responsibility dealt with by another department?

[Valerie Gideon]

I would say that for sure, our responsibilities in NWT are limited to the two on-reserve communities. I think these are Hay River and Salt River.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

Yes, that's right.

[Valerie Gideon]

We have a bilateral service agreement with the territorial government. It expires in March 2023. That's one area we need to look at, in terms of how to have first nations engaged in that process and in public safety. There would be other federal departments engaging more broadly with the territorial government and indigenous partners in looking at how to advance. This also links to the national adaptation strategy on climate change and so forth.

Thank you for bringing it to us. We'll definitely look at that as an important relationship we need to build upon.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Thank you, Mr. McLeod.

Colleagues, I'm proposing that we start a fourth round, but a truncated one. Is that all right with everybody? Each party will get to have one person ask, then we'll call it a day. We have a couple of things to discuss.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Marc Garneau]

Very good. I'm going to start with Mr. Melillo for five minutes.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for being here with us today, for quite some time. Obviously, it's a very important discussion. We appreciate your time on this.

I want to go to the part of the report that states:

The department's preparedness and mitigation programs are proposal-based. This approach allows First Nations to identify the activities that they believe are the most impactful. However, this approach does not ensure that First Nations at the highest risk of experiencing emergencies receive funding, since not all First Nations communities have the capacity to apply for funding.

That last line around not all communities having “the capacity to apply for funding” is, I think, a very important point. It's something we see in my area in Kenora. I have spoken with the minister about this privately as well. There isn't only the capacity aspect. Oftentimes we find there are many communities and community leaders who aren't aware of all the programs available.

I'm wondering whether you can provide information on what sorts of outreach opportunities and capacity-building exercises the department is doing to ensure communities are aware of all the programs available to them.